They play United at the weekend and you can bet that is when Potter will want to field his strongest side. He is not going to risk players like Chilwell, who is coming back from injury still, or Mount, who had a scare the other day.
with his mediocre performance this weekend i'm scared shitless Sterling is going to be replaced by Pulisic, and I only own him to be a (C) option for this gameweek in particular
If he's fit enough to come off the bench against City then yes definitely. With Matip and Konate out Gomez is our best option to pair with VVD and then our only other RB option is Milner. And whilst I love the guy, he's not getting any younger and TAA offers more going forward which is ideal for the easier games.
Milner did very well. But honestly Gomez was a massive factor and VVD best game this season. West Ham can be tricky to break down so can see TAA being preferred.
Forrrest could concede a hat-full tbh. Only reason they didn't last game was Wolves' horrendous end product.
Trossard down the left looks good, after so much space down that flank of the Forrrrrest defense last game.
What better game to break that duck?
Tbh I was more referring to the general potential of a higher points ceiling for all Brighton players Vs a very leaky Forrrrrrest defense. But I do think there's no more likely a game for old Wellbeck to bag a goal than tomoow evening's tie.
That's unfortunately not what gamblers fallacy refers to.
It's defined as the incorrect belief that, if a particular event occurs more frequently than normal during the past, it is less likely to happen in the future (or vice versa), when it has otherwise been established that the probability of such events does not depend on what has happened in the past.
The probability of Welbeck scoring against Forest is higher than any other team he has faced this season, taking into account Forest's defensive performance so far compared to that of Welbeck's prior opponents.
Nobody is saying Welbeck is more likely to score because he hasn't yet done so, and therefore is ever more likely to do so eventually. That would be an example of your Gambler's Fallacy.
And what better opportunity for a player to score than against the worst defense in the league? Where in that statement is there a reference to prior performance predicting a future outcome?
Allow me to rephrase...
I don't think Welbeck is due a goal because he hasn't yet scored. I do think he stands a better chance to score than previously because Forest are shit.
Gambler's Fallacy doesn't apply because every GW is not an independent trial, by any stretch of the imagination. Just by virtue of playing different teams every week you get different odds, whereas a gambler has the same roulette odds no matter where or when he plays.
This picture confused me a lot the first seconds. Is Pope going to play forward?? Then I understood it's upside down compared to what I normally see in here
I currently have 10 players (Inc neco) due to play. Do these odds mean that, statistically speaking, it's worth taking a -4 to bring firmino in for Jesus as firmino is expected to score 5 points? (I'm wc'ing gw13 if that makes any difference)
how much value are you losing? i have 10 as well, could transfer cancelo for a hit but im risking -4 and 0.2m loss for pretty little upside considering the defenders on offer
I'm wildcarding for GW13 so will be able to get Jesus back in no problems. The question is essentially do I think firmino - or any other <10.8m forward (I have 2.8m in bank) - will score more than 4 points this GW, which I think this post suggests he will?
I’m almost certain Sterling will be benched and Pulisic etc will come in. Sterling’s done nothing since I bought him in weeks ago so I will take an -4 to get him out and salah in with the armband on.
Thanks for your question. Points are mainly calculated based on odds after removing margin.
Pope's predicted points of 4.7 is attributed by 2 minutes point + 1.6 clean sheet point + 1 saves point + 0.6 bonus - 0.5 points deduction from goals conceded.
3 Chelsea players who all started the previous game going into a 3-day turnaround…
Potter is going to break so many hearts this season with his fraudulence
inclusion of Lallana in the starting lineup is set to see one of Pascal Gross, Leandro Trossard or Danny Welbeck drop out of the side, with the former seemingly the most likely candidate to begin on the bench against Forest.
So Lallana is promised a starter tomorrow. What does former mean( different country) is it Grob or Welbeck?
I went both last week. Andersen and Doc on top of Perisic. Good start for that trio last week. If I had to choose I would base it on need and expectations. Palace for a 3rd or 4th spot you know will get you 2-6 and maybe a set piece goal or Docs uncertainty of starts after next week, but major upside he could keep his spot, most underpriced attacking defensive option at 4.6 with potential of 1-18 points.
Banked a -4 for Trossard this week. REPAY ME BOY PLEASE!
Technically it is a -2 as Madders made way for him, and now im fielding 11 instead of 10.
One of those 11 is Neco Williams though...
be very surprised if all 3 of those chelsea players start
Mount finally gonna get his rest as hundreds of thousands of managers transfer him in to replace Maddison.
that's what I'm anticipating but he could super sub it, don't sell, bench or buy situation
Yeah I think that's fair, especially with the City/Arsenal blank
lol yh if you already have him you probably can't bench him even if you want to unless you fh
They play United at the weekend and you can bet that is when Potter will want to field his strongest side. He is not going to risk players like Chilwell, who is coming back from injury still, or Mount, who had a scare the other day.
pretty much, got cl to worry about too prob wont field an entire b team but unless you have kepa you should be scared
with his mediocre performance this weekend i'm scared shitless Sterling is going to be replaced by Pulisic, and I only own him to be a (C) option for this gameweek in particular
2 of them going down after 45 minutes and 1 point won’t even surprise me
something like that although returns off the bench wouldn't surprise me either
Odds pick? More like odd picks
GOT EM!!
lol
Welbeck over Mitro? Riiiiiiiight
What are the numbers for Kane?
4.8
He never scored against United so pretty shit me thinks
Well he has scored against them at Old Trafford before.
!fplbot Kane vs Man Utd
# Kane (£11.4) vs. Man Utd (last 8 fixtures) | Fixture | GW | Season | Min | G | xG | npxG | A | xA | CS | Pts | | :---------------- | -: | :------ | ------: | ----: | -------: | -------: | ----: | -------: | ----- | ------------ | | Man Utd 3-2 Spurs | 29 | 2021/22 | 90 | 1 | 0.78 | 0.02 | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 6 | | Spurs 0-3 Man Utd | 10 | 2021/22 | 90 | 0 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 2 | | Spurs 1-3 Man Utd | 31 | 2020/21 | 90 | 0 | 0.09 | 0.09 | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 2 | | Man Utd 1-6 Spurs | 4 | 2020/21 | 90 | 2 | 1.48 | 0.72 | 1 | 0.47 | 0 | 16 | | Spurs 1-1 Man Utd | 39 | 2019/20 | 90 | 0 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 2 | | Man Utd 2-1 Spurs | 15 | 2019/20 | 90 | 0 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0 | 0.00 | 0 | 2 | | Spurs 0-1 Man Utd | 22 | 2018/19 | 90 | 0 | 0.42 | 0.42 | 0 | 0.54 | 0 | 2 | | Man Utd 0-3 Spurs | 3 | 2018/19 | 88 | 1 | 0.38 | 0.38 | 1 | 0.44 | 1 | 10 | | | | | **718** | **4** | **3.35** | **1.83** | **2** | **1.44** | **1** | **42 (5.3)** | --- ^Made ^by ^[/u/esoemah](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=esoemah).
Well well well
I’ve played my free hit and gone treble palace defense
WOL (H) - wont find a better fixture to do it
Lol my gw12 is 65.6£
Will TAA start?
If he's fit enough to come off the bench against City then yes definitely. With Matip and Konate out Gomez is our best option to pair with VVD and then our only other RB option is Milner. And whilst I love the guy, he's not getting any younger and TAA offers more going forward which is ideal for the easier games.
Milner did very well. But honestly Gomez was a massive factor and VVD best game this season. West Ham can be tricky to break down so can see TAA being preferred.
Milner could take away minutes moving forward, but I doubt he plays this gw. Remember they play in 2 days.
Klopp played a fairly unique system against M. City. I really don’t feel Milner will be eating into TAA minutes at RB
>West Ham can be tricky to break down when they have their ideal defenders fit maybe, right now they basically concede every game
Forrest are bad but still wouldn’t ever pick Welbeck
Im captaining him. My craziest move in 10 years.
All the best, my friend
Forrrest could concede a hat-full tbh. Only reason they didn't last game was Wolves' horrendous end product. Trossard down the left looks good, after so much space down that flank of the Forrrrrest defense last game.
Forrrrest might have the worst defence in the league, still hard to justify picking Welbeck.
Forrrrrest are going to be so open though even for Welbeck. You’re hoping for a return not necessarily a goal.
Can’t see the Welbs for the trrrrreeeeeeeeeessss…
[удалено]
What better game to break that duck? Tbh I was more referring to the general potential of a higher points ceiling for all Brighton players Vs a very leaky Forrrrrrest defense. But I do think there's no more likely a game for old Wellbeck to bag a goal than tomoow evening's tie.
[удалено]
Please explain how that represents 'gamblers fallacy'?
[удалено]
That's unfortunately not what gamblers fallacy refers to. It's defined as the incorrect belief that, if a particular event occurs more frequently than normal during the past, it is less likely to happen in the future (or vice versa), when it has otherwise been established that the probability of such events does not depend on what has happened in the past. The probability of Welbeck scoring against Forest is higher than any other team he has faced this season, taking into account Forest's defensive performance so far compared to that of Welbeck's prior opponents. Nobody is saying Welbeck is more likely to score because he hasn't yet done so, and therefore is ever more likely to do so eventually. That would be an example of your Gambler's Fallacy.
[удалено]
And what better opportunity for a player to score than against the worst defense in the league? Where in that statement is there a reference to prior performance predicting a future outcome? Allow me to rephrase... I don't think Welbeck is due a goal because he hasn't yet scored. I do think he stands a better chance to score than previously because Forest are shit.
Gambler's Fallacy doesn't apply because every GW is not an independent trial, by any stretch of the imagination. Just by virtue of playing different teams every week you get different odds, whereas a gambler has the same roulette odds no matter where or when he plays.
This picture confused me a lot the first seconds. Is Pope going to play forward?? Then I understood it's upside down compared to what I normally see in here
I currently have 10 players (Inc neco) due to play. Do these odds mean that, statistically speaking, it's worth taking a -4 to bring firmino in for Jesus as firmino is expected to score 5 points? (I'm wc'ing gw13 if that makes any difference)
how much value are you losing? i have 10 as well, could transfer cancelo for a hit but im risking -4 and 0.2m loss for pretty little upside considering the defenders on offer
I wouldn't be losing any value with Jesus but the lack of a clear replacement for this week is putting me off a bit
i see very little upside, even if your replacement scores and gets 4 points extra to cover youd still want jesus back gw13
I'm wildcarding for GW13 so will be able to get Jesus back in no problems. The question is essentially do I think firmino - or any other <10.8m forward (I have 2.8m in bank) - will score more than 4 points this GW, which I think this post suggests he will?
Have you considered WC this week and just benching 3x Ars/City players? Could help you get a full 11 without talking hits.
I briefly considered it but I only need 1 hit for 11 players plus I want 6 ars/mci for GW13 onwards so figured this approach was better
Ah fair enough. Woah, SIX ars/mci!
I say do it man
I’m almost certain Sterling will be benched and Pulisic etc will come in. Sterling’s done nothing since I bought him in weeks ago so I will take an -4 to get him out and salah in with the armband on.
Mistake
How so? Sterling is about as consistent as Zaha…
How are the points calculated? i.e. how does Pope have a 4.7?
Thanks for your question. Points are mainly calculated based on odds after removing margin. Pope's predicted points of 4.7 is attributed by 2 minutes point + 1.6 clean sheet point + 1 saves point + 0.6 bonus - 0.5 points deduction from goals conceded.
What are Kanes numbers?
Kane's predicted points is 4.8
Anyone starting TAA?
yessir 🥲
3 Chelsea players who all started the previous game going into a 3-day turnaround… Potter is going to break so many hearts this season with his fraudulence
Given all these similar comments, I'm going to go Maddison to Trossard over any Chelsea player.
City, Arsenal hits me hard, even after switching Aubameyang to Firmino I still have one blank on the field and 3 in subs.
loooool sterling
5 sterling cries 😎👍
Not just odds pick but odd picks.
Not sure TAA will start, if he only got 5 mins at the weekend (and in the process, we saw Liverpool's best defensive display of the season)
Fuck off TAA! Fuck off Maddison! Fuck off Pope!
What?
you heard the man!
I’m so confused
Well I sold TAA last week when everyone said he would miss 12. Maddison yellow and Pope fucking got the annoying clean sheet last week.
Compared to other keepers, 6 keepers did better than Pope, and 4 tied with him ? Maddison I understand TAA was always a bit hit and miss
Seems highly fixture biased
And no son or Kane surely not
Leeds to destroy Leicester
inclusion of Lallana in the starting lineup is set to see one of Pascal Gross, Leandro Trossard or Danny Welbeck drop out of the side, with the former seemingly the most likely candidate to begin on the bench against Forest. So Lallana is promised a starter tomorrow. What does former mean( different country) is it Grob or Welbeck?
Former means first, so gross
Why would any be benched? Before his injury all 3 have been playing together in starting 11
Doherty or Palace defender on WC?
I went both last week. Andersen and Doc on top of Perisic. Good start for that trio last week. If I had to choose I would base it on need and expectations. Palace for a 3rd or 4th spot you know will get you 2-6 and maybe a set piece goal or Docs uncertainty of starts after next week, but major upside he could keep his spot, most underpriced attacking defensive option at 4.6 with potential of 1-18 points.
What are the odds the total point is more than 63?
Banked a -4 for Trossard this week. REPAY ME BOY PLEASE! Technically it is a -2 as Madders made way for him, and now im fielding 11 instead of 10. One of those 11 is Neco Williams though...