Best Budget Defenders
-
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 1945
- Joined: 13 Aug 2016, 07:49
Re: Best Budget Defenders
I suppose if he gets booked next week, then he'll miss the trip to Anfield where most would bench him anyway.
Watford have 3 home in the next 4, Bournemouth have 3 away in the next 4, so perhaps I'll go for Holebas.
WBA defenders look good again from GW12.
By GW12 a budget defence of Pieters, Holebas, Evans, Smith, Kingsley looks good to go. F the premiums
Watford have 3 home in the next 4, Bournemouth have 3 away in the next 4, so perhaps I'll go for Holebas.
WBA defenders look good again from GW12.
By GW12 a budget defence of Pieters, Holebas, Evans, Smith, Kingsley looks good to go. F the premiums
- matmutte
- FISOhead
- Posts: 681
- Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 15:51
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
I brought Holebas in my team when he already was on 4 YC, he has returned 26 points in 3 games since. Just saying, beware of focusing too much on this suspension stuff especiallu for cheap defenders
-
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 1945
- Joined: 13 Aug 2016, 07:49
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Holebas and Zuniga both look like rising tonight. Am I correct in thinking that Zuniga is only a placeholder until Janmaat is back in a couple of weeks?
- ZeroRemorse
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 2181
- Joined: 12 Aug 2016, 15:29
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Having shipped Friend out earlier in the season when he picked up an injury I think I'll be certainly bringing him back in. Boro were the best defensive outfit in the Championship division and made a similar run to Leicester, winning a lot of 1-0's.
- Weisenwolf
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 3804
- Joined: 01 Aug 2008, 13:25
- Location: An Oxfordshire market town; s'very pleasant
- FS Record: 2,234 points; back when this was considered a good score....
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Where are we with the budget defenders now?
-
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 3170
- Joined: 28 Aug 2015, 15:35
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Amat! Great option if you don't want to get any points
- Weisenwolf
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 3804
- Joined: 01 Aug 2008, 13:25
- Location: An Oxfordshire market town; s'very pleasant
- FS Record: 2,234 points; back when this was considered a good score....
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Therein lies the issue; little below £4.4M worth having
- Joccki_10
- Grumpy Old Joker
- Posts: 11429
- Joined: 26 Dec 2015, 11:20
- FS Record: 16/17: 55 OR, 1 FISO Forum, 1 NLD and FISO Cup Winner
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Amat is a permanent bench fodder. Bringing in a cheaper one when I've got a spare transfer. That's basically never.
- Vsz
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 2092
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:34
- Location: Spain
- FS Record: Won lots of cash leagues and was once, very briefly, top of TFF. Finished 15th too. Various top 5K and 10K FPL finishes
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Think with Amat is that even when he does play he doesn't seem to get any points!
I have him and imagine he'll stay.
I have him and imagine he'll stay.
- ctibbits
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 5628
- Joined: 01 Nov 2011, 15:49
- FS Record: Won "The Bet" 2014/15
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Fabio, and now Kingsley apparently going to get a shot again. Likely to be a major headache just like last time he was in everyones teams though.
- bigcliff2
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 6040
- Joined: 22 May 2008, 12:08
- Location: Nae business bein' in Yoker
- FS Record: Rubbish
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Pretty sure I've had Amat since GW1 and pretty sure I started him once
- Ruth_NZ
- Grumpy Old Gorilla
- Posts: 9156
- Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
I just don't get why, for the sake of 0.3m, people would rather have 14 players than 15.
- Rich2086
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 1163
- Joined: 21 Aug 2009, 14:27
- FS Record: 09/10--2235--49,014
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Dont know if this has been mentioned but Yoshida might be a good shout short term but Southamptons fixtures are decent.
- bigcliff2
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 6040
- Joined: 22 May 2008, 12:08
- Location: Nae business bein' in Yoker
- FS Record: Rubbish
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Sometimes less choice is easier. I basically have one decision to make every week. Bench one defender who isn't Cahill. Diomande and Amat on the bench permanently.Ruth_NZ wrote:I just don't get why, for the sake of 0.3m, people would rather have 14 players than 15.
- Weisenwolf
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 3804
- Joined: 01 Aug 2008, 13:25
- Location: An Oxfordshire market town; s'very pleasant
- FS Record: 2,234 points; back when this was considered a good score....
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
I'm beginning to come around to this way of thinking. I wouldn't have the problem I have now if I didn't have Holgate as a permanenchRuth_NZ wrote:I just don't get why, for the sake of 0.3m, people would rather have 14 players than 15.
-
- Wideboy
- Posts: 64
- Joined: 21 Aug 2013, 19:05
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
I've finally bitten the bullet and shipped out Amat for Chambers. The Boro fan opposite me thinks he'll be fine for clean sheets and stands as good a chance as anyone attacking corners as he always goes up for them.
- Beerfuelledman
- FISO Knight
- Posts: 13220
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:26
- Location: In Norn Iron
- FS Record: FISO 17/18 FPL Cash Draft League Winner
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Papa Digitalbody is playing regularly for 4.3m...
- redcat1
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 1019
- Joined: 15 Aug 2012, 22:37
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Was thinking the same, I reckon Fonte has is out of the starting eleven now. Haven't heard many strong rumours of a defender coming in so can see Yoshida getting a run.Rich2086 wrote:Dont know if this has been mentioned but Yoshida might be a good shout short term but Southamptons fixtures are decent.
- Sutter Kane
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 7522
- Joined: 05 Aug 2010, 12:13
- FS Record: Unknown.
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Basically this. It's not worth a transfer to avail an additional cheap rotational option unless one is going spare.Joccki_10 wrote:Amat is a permanent bench fodder. Bringing in a cheaper one when I've got a spare transfer. That's basically never.
If Yoshida can cement a place, then he might be worth considering but again, it's a transfer. Most cheap defenders tick over averaging 3-4 points in a rotation unless you are lucky; it's not great but the amount you can gain with an attacking transfer far outweighs messing with the backline.
It's funny how you think your squad is nicely positioned/settled and it NEVER is - there never seems to be a spare transfer...maybe it's just me!
Also the less options thing, especially if you have attacking defenders. They can notch something in most games so are worth playing in all but the really tough games. eg. Brunt.
- MoSe
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 9550
- Joined: 10 Sep 2014, 12:25
- Location: next door S.Siro stadium
- FS Record: FISODAS CUP Winner Season 25
FISO H2H Winner: 15/16 Div2 - 16/17 Div1
FISO Mirror: 16/17 PL Winner
Re: Best Budget Defenders
It of course depends on:Ruth_NZ wrote:I just don't get why, for the sake of 0.3m, people would rather have 14 players than 15.
- how many times do you foresee that 15th man will actually make way into your XI, either starting or subbing on?
- which improved player(s) are you thinking you can afford with the spared 0.3m?
< expunged longwinded obvious explanations >
in short:
Q: "why, for the sake of 0.3m, people would rather have 14 players than 15"
A: OF COURSE because THEY THINK that the BENEFITS are greater than the COSTS
obvious Q, obvious A
- Turd Ferguson
- FISOhead
- Posts: 943
- Joined: 16 Aug 2015, 03:32
Re: Best Budget Defenders
This topic is probably worthy of its own thread. It's intimately related to the question of team value. How much is an extra .1 worth? If you take the extra .3 or .4 and put it in your first 11, you get that value every week of the season.Ruth_NZ wrote:I just don't get why, for the sake of 0.3m, people would rather have 14 players than 15.
Weigh that against how many times your 5th defender will actually play, and what their point expectations are in those games (probably less than 3 points a game).
This is a question that should be answered by math but it's a tricky analysis.
- Ruth_NZ
- Grumpy Old Gorilla
- Posts: 9156
- Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Well, yes. But essentially what I was implying was that I think it's a mistaken approach. Let's say you have Chambers, Pieters, Mee as your cheapest 3 defenders. That's 13.4m. You have 3 rotation options and can pick the best fixture every week. Your first sub defender may also have a decent fixture.MoSe wrote:It of course depends on:
- how many times do you foresee that 15th man will actually make way into your XI, either starting or subbing on?
- which improved player(s) are you thinking you can afford with the spared 0.3m?
In short:
Q: "Why, for the sake of 0.3m, people would rather have 14 players than 15?"
A: OF COURSE because THEY THINK that the BENEFITS are greater than the COSTS
By comparison you switch Chambers for Amat and spend 13.1m. You have saved 0.3m but now only have 2 rotation options and your first bench defender is more likely to have an atrocious fixture.
One way you have 13.4m providing options and benefits for you. The other way you have 9.0m doing that, 4.1m dead budget and 0.3m spare. That's why I don't get it. I think the underlying reasoning is flawed.
@ Turd Ferguson
Why do you need a "5th defender" though? That's what I am questioning. Why not just 5 defenders you can use in rotation? There doesn't need to be a specified 5th that you always bench.
It's different in midfield, for example, because the price gap between a playing bench midfielder (4.3m) and a playing starting midfielder (5.1m at least) is much bigger. In defence you are talking about a very small price gap.
- Ruth_NZ
- Grumpy Old Gorilla
- Posts: 9156
- Joined: 25 May 2015, 22:46
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Yeah. With the kind of TV you have it seems very unnecessary.Weisenwolf wrote:I'm beginning to come around to this way of thinking. I wouldn't have the problem I have now if I didn't have Holgate as a permanenchRuth_NZ wrote:I just don't get why, for the sake of 0.3m, people would rather have 14 players than 15.
- Turd Ferguson
- FISOhead
- Posts: 943
- Joined: 16 Aug 2015, 03:32
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Of course you can have 5 defenders in rotation. But one of the 5 will make fewer appearances than the rest because his expected points are the lowest.Ruth_NZ wrote:
@ Turd Ferguson
Why do you need a "5th defender" though? That's what I am questioning. Why not just 5 defenders you can use in rotation? There doesn't need to be a specified 5th that you always bench.
To boil it down to a simple thought experiment: pick 1 of 3 from three 4.5 defenders, or pick 1 of 2 from a 5.0 and a 4.5 defender with a 4.0 who never plays. There are of course more nuances. Maybe you have five 4.5's and try to rotate them all, or you're willing to rotate a 4.5 in for a premium given certain fixtures, or you like to play 4-4-2 at times. But at its simplest, the choice is to upgrade a 4.5 to a 5.0. I don't know what the answer is. I need to see some numbers before I decide.
- Beerfuelledman
- FISO Knight
- Posts: 13220
- Joined: 13 Oct 2005, 18:26
- Location: In Norn Iron
- FS Record: FISO 17/18 FPL Cash Draft League Winner
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Hmm. With Anichibie out, Ibrahimovic doubtful and now Bellerin red flagged I dont think I can afford to watch and see what happens with Ake as I face going into GW21 with 10 men
Might have to take Ake out for a hit just to field 11 Chambers/Yoshida potentially front runners...
Might have to take Ake out for a hit just to field 11 Chambers/Yoshida potentially front runners...
- Carlos Kickaball
- Dumbledore
- Posts: 7801
- Joined: 04 Sep 2013, 18:02
Re: Best Budget Defenders
I generally agree with Ruth, it's good to aim for 15 players all playing; cover for injuries and better rotation. The exception I would make is if you need to bring in someone cheaper to make a transfer, earlier in the season I wanted to get Hazard without losing Sánchez, and to do it I needed to buy 3.9 Lenihan, so I did it rather than take a hit and sell another player I wanted to keep.
- Stemania
- FISO Jedi Knight
- Posts: 20448
- Joined: 27 Aug 2006, 11:54
- Location: On the Iron Throne of xG, the seat of The Crown Prince of the Stat Perverts. Or if not, in the STC!
- FS Record: Best: TFF 321st. FPL 129th. FFS Career HoF Peak 2nd (Live 1st). Ability since lost.
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
It's only very recently (big sections of this season and parts of last) that there hasn't been a fairly decent selection of playing 4m defenders making them pretty much default choices for D5. It's just one of FPL's recent improvement on player pricing and one I quite like tbh, makes us have to think more about how the cash is best spend there.
If anyone is resigned to intentionally getting a non-player they may as well buy a 3.9m imo (though if possible it's probably worth waiting to see if Amat gets his place back before choosing to do so). But that's a full 0.5m below what I would say is the first decent playing 5th defender (Kelly, Nyom at 4.4m, say). I'm not sure I'd want to pay an extra 0.4m over a non-player just to have a Sunderland/Swansea/Hull defender fielded over a mediocre fixture from a decent defence every 6th week or so. (But perhaps Palace signing Schlupp will mean Ward to RB and Keppy out the team, so with Nyom still not cleared to play that whole 4.4m and below looks decidedly dicey to me).
One of those things where it surely depends on individual circumstances more than anything. My team has a relatively low spend in defence and a non-playing 5th mid so atm it's tough for me to bring in a non-player there. But, for example, there seems to be plenty of teams with two fairly hefty defenders atm (say Chelsea & Man United) and with the likes of Brunt/WBA available (and say Palace or the cheaper end of Everton with good fixtures too) as options for D3 - so the bench probably doesn't need to be so strong and the extra 0.4/0.5m may constitute a defensive overspend for those teams.
In fact, it looks to me like it's easier to get away without a defensive rotation system for spells than ever before, and just play good value defenders every week (or have one covering). It's one of the things that has suffered in recent years under FPLs repricing, in the same way that rotating goalkeepers has for example. Where they used to be default best strategies, now they are just strategy choices that might be better at different points of the season for different teams. Fun times, but perhaps that's a different conversation entirely.
If anyone is resigned to intentionally getting a non-player they may as well buy a 3.9m imo (though if possible it's probably worth waiting to see if Amat gets his place back before choosing to do so). But that's a full 0.5m below what I would say is the first decent playing 5th defender (Kelly, Nyom at 4.4m, say). I'm not sure I'd want to pay an extra 0.4m over a non-player just to have a Sunderland/Swansea/Hull defender fielded over a mediocre fixture from a decent defence every 6th week or so. (But perhaps Palace signing Schlupp will mean Ward to RB and Keppy out the team, so with Nyom still not cleared to play that whole 4.4m and below looks decidedly dicey to me).
One of those things where it surely depends on individual circumstances more than anything. My team has a relatively low spend in defence and a non-playing 5th mid so atm it's tough for me to bring in a non-player there. But, for example, there seems to be plenty of teams with two fairly hefty defenders atm (say Chelsea & Man United) and with the likes of Brunt/WBA available (and say Palace or the cheaper end of Everton with good fixtures too) as options for D3 - so the bench probably doesn't need to be so strong and the extra 0.4/0.5m may constitute a defensive overspend for those teams.
In fact, it looks to me like it's easier to get away without a defensive rotation system for spells than ever before, and just play good value defenders every week (or have one covering). It's one of the things that has suffered in recent years under FPLs repricing, in the same way that rotating goalkeepers has for example. Where they used to be default best strategies, now they are just strategy choices that might be better at different points of the season for different teams. Fun times, but perhaps that's a different conversation entirely.
- Weisenwolf
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 3804
- Joined: 01 Aug 2008, 13:25
- Location: An Oxfordshire market town; s'very pleasant
- FS Record: 2,234 points; back when this was considered a good score....
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
Well quite, and similar to BFM I have Bellerin in red, Brunt & Ibra yellow along with Ake & Holgate doubtful starters. Even if I swap out Bellerin for someone who will play I still need Ibra and one of the other defenders to play otherwise I can't field 11. If Holgate were someone like Chambers I would only be depending on any one of Ibra, Brunt or Ake to play and that's a reasonable risk to take.Ruth_NZ wrote:Yeah. With the kind of TV you have it seems very unnecessary.Weisenwolf wrote:I'm beginning to come around to this way of thinking. I wouldn't have the problem I have now if I didn't have Holgate as a permanenchRuth_NZ wrote:I just don't get why, for the sake of 0.3m, people would rather have 14 players than 15.
As it is my sensible move is to do Bellerin & Holgate for 2 playing defenders (suggestions welcome) which will cost me a hit which surely goes some way to reinforcing Ruth's argument (which is fast becoming my argument too) and hope that gives me 11 players.
- Weisenwolf
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 3804
- Joined: 01 Aug 2008, 13:25
- Location: An Oxfordshire market town; s'very pleasant
- FS Record: 2,234 points; back when this was considered a good score....
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
And now Costa is out too!Weisenwolf wrote:Well quite, and similar to BFM I have Bellerin in red, Brunt & Ibra yellow along with Ake & Holgate doubtful starters. Even if I swap out Bellerin for someone who will play I still need Ibra and one of the other defenders to play otherwise I can't field 11. If Holgate were someone like Chambers I would only be depending on any one of Ibra, Brunt or Ake to play and that's a reasonable risk to take.Ruth_NZ wrote:Yeah. With the kind of TV you have it seems very unnecessary.Weisenwolf wrote:I'm beginning to come around to this way of thinking. I wouldn't have the problem I have now if I didn't have Holgate as a permanenchRuth_NZ wrote:I just don't get why, for the sake of 0.3m, people would rather have 14 players than 15.
As it is my sensible move is to do Bellerin & Holgate for 2 playing defenders (suggestions welcome) which will cost me a hit which surely goes some way to reinforcing Ruth's argument (which is fast becoming my argument too) and hope that gives me 11 players.
I'm really happy how this eff wildcard is turning out
-
- Grumpy Old Man
- Posts: 3427
- Joined: 02 Nov 2014, 16:36
- FPL:
Re: Best Budget Defenders
there is nothing wrong with Ibra, look at that interview I posted up in the presser thread, he's a picture of healthWeisenwolf wrote:Well quite, and similar to BFM I have Bellerin in red, Brunt & Ibra yellow along with Ake & Holgate doubtful starters. Even if I swap out Bellerin for someone who will play I still need Ibra and one of the other defenders to play otherwise I can't field 11. If Holgate were someone like Chambers I would only be depending on any one of Ibra, Brunt or Ake to play and that's a reasonable risk to take.Ruth_NZ wrote:Yeah. With the kind of TV you have it seems very unnecessary.Weisenwolf wrote:I'm beginning to come around to this way of thinking. I wouldn't have the problem I have now if I didn't have Holgate as a permanenchRuth_NZ wrote:I just don't get why, for the sake of 0.3m, people would rather have 14 players than 15.
As it is my sensible move is to do Bellerin & Holgate for 2 playing defenders (suggestions welcome) which will cost me a hit which surely goes some way to reinforcing Ruth's argument (which is fast becoming my argument too) and hope that gives me 11 players.
View Latest: 1 Day View Your posts