Pounds EQUAL Points

[This coin, worth approx. 4 million USD, was  stolen from a museum 

in Germany in 2017.]

It's a very simple and obvious equivalence - but, somehow, many FPL managers seem to overlook it.

Some of the most important implications of this are:

1)  It is wasteful to leave any budget unspent (especially at the start of the season)

You may sometimes want to keep just a little in hand (half a million or a million, say) to facilitate a planned transfer in a week or two. But you need to be careful not to do that too often - because it is potentially costing you points. 1 million pounds should be worth about 0.75 points per week. [I'll get to that calculation a little later...down at the botom of the post.]

2)  Leaving premium-price players on your bench can be very costly

If someone just has a slight knock (or a - hopefully! - brief dip in form, or a suspension), you might not want to waste transfers moving them out of your squad and then back in again within a short timeframe. But leaving a high-price player unused, for more than a week or two, can damage your points return. Leaving Haaland, for example, on the bench for a month because of injury, or Salah because of AFCON (every other year) is a big risk. 

Based on the above ideal points-per-pound value, you might theoretically be bleeding 8 or 10 pts per week if you do that. In fact, it's not quite that bad, because at least some of your bench places are redundnant; you can afford to leave one or two slots empty because you'll hardly ever use them - and thus they have no direct value. In fact, you're only measuring the difference in price between your unused premium player on the bench and the player you're replacing him with in the starting eleven. (And because premium-price players tend to have low points-per-pound returns anyway, the drop in points might not be as bad as all that.)

You may well have what you think is reasonable back-up for your missing 'star' - maybe even the best available alternative - without needing to spend money and use a transfer (so, you might not be suffering any avoidable points loss at all; but it is a danger you should be wary of). And transfers themselves have a value, which you don't want to 'spend' unless you have to.... 

3)  Transfers also have a points value (and hence a pounds-equivalent value)

The FPL gnomes price additional transfers at 4 points each. And they're pretty shrewd about the game's dynamics: they want to make you think twice about paying points for an extra transfer. (Although, you hope to get at least 5 or 6 points per game - on average - from all of your starting players; so, actually a transfer should be worth rather more than that.)

Hence, it is reasonable to apply that same points-value to your Free Transfers. The FTs are extremely useful: they can strengthen your squad and increase your points return. And you really don't want to be caught without one (or two - or even more this year, since we're now allowed to hoard up to 5 at one time) when a sudden need arises to replace someone. So, keep in mind that nominal points value - and don't use them frivolously. 

And if you can get 6 points in the next game from a player you've transferred in, that is equivalent to an optimum use of 8 million of your budget (as against a zero use, if you're replacing someone who's out injured).

4)  The points-per-pound return from your squad is of paramount importance (but it's not everything)

Now, in theory, you should be able to assemble an optimally successful squad by picking all the players with the highest 'Value (season)' figures on the FPL stats page. (Keep in mind that at the start of the new football year, this stat is using last season's points returns divided by this season's prices. So, it's useful for assessing a player's likely value this year, but doesn't show how good they were on this metric last year.)

In practice, it's not quite that simple because... for one thing, that probably wouldn't use up all your budget! You also need to make sure you're getting the highest overall points-scorers (with the best points-per-pound returns) that you can afford.  

But then there's a further complication. The size of a player's overall points haul, their differential advantage (their excess of points over the next best player, and over the average 'good score' for their position and/or price category), their reliability of returns (how confident can you be that they will again return somewhere near their theoretical best?), and their consistency over the season (how many blank spells might you have to suffer with them?) are all factors which can justify spending a huge sum on a Haaland or a Salah.... even though their points-per-pound returns are very poor.

An effective squad usually contains a number of the highest total points-scorers (even if some of them represent very poor points-per-pound value), balanced with several cheaper players who offer excellent points-per-pound.

5)  You need to pay attention to boosting, or at least maintaining squad value

A lot of people dismiss squad value as an 'irrelevance', and disdain to take any notice of it. It's perhaps got a bad reputation in the FPL community because there is a bizarre side-game where a small minority of players focus all their attention on transfer trading, trying to grow squad value rather than earn points.

However, squad value is important because it translates directly into your points potential. If you can grow your squad value by 4 or 5 million over the opening months of the season, you give yourself the opportunity to bring in one or two more premium players that you couldn't initially afford, and that should boost your points returns.

It may be getting harder now to achieve these sorts of profits. (I believe the algorthms have been heavily tweaked over the last year or two, and price change thresholds seem to be reached very rarely now, compared to a few years back. Almost all of my overall gain in squad value last year came from Cole Palmer - who remained a strictly paper 'profit', since I didn't want to cash him in to try to upgrade other positions!)  But you should still be wary of shrinking squad value. Players who pick up a serious injury, or fall out of favour with their gaffer, or suffer a serious slump in form.... need to be jettisoned very promptly (before a general sell-off triggers a price dip).

And finally....  THE FUNDAMENTAL CALCULATION:

You get a 100-million pound budget at the start of the season. You have to spend at least 17 million on your bench (some might spend a little more). 

You might grow your squad value by 5 million pounds or more over the season. But then again, you might not (as I just noted above, the game dynamics seem to have shifted recently towards making it much more difficult to generate any significant profit on transfer trading). And most of that growth in value might be spent on bolstering an initially weak or half-empty bench, or simply tied up in a player you don't want to sell. There's unlikely to be a major change in the effective value of your starting eleven over the season, probably not more than a few million, at best.

Hence, it's reasonable to suppose that  the value of your starting eleven across most of the season is a little over 80 million.

In recent years, the global leaders have regularly been getting over 2.600 points, and occasionally 2,700+ or even 2,800+. And it is widely accepted that 2,500 points is an excellent score that we should all strive for....

Sure, you can in theory get double points for one of your best players through judicious use of captaincy picks - but, in practice, you have to be very lucky to get more than about a 10% boost on your basic team score from that; and usually it's a lot less than 10%.

That means you really want to be earning very nearly 30 points across the season for every million pounds invested in that starting eleven.

And that translates to a little over 0.75 points per million per week...  It really is worth keeping that in mind. (Although, in practice, you should settle for a little bit less than that - because those sorts of numbers would get you up around the very top of the global rankings, an unreasonable thing to aim at.)

[Momentous revelation: Almost NO PLAYER ever breaches that 30-points-per-million-of-cost number, and only a handful get anywhere near it. You cannot achieve a top-of-the-rankings score with a stable squad; you have to be constantly rotating the most in-form players in and out to try to maximise your returns.... so that the average returns for each slot in your squad are greater than the average returns produced by any one player over the season.]

How to get BETTER at FPL

Yes - a lot of these points are going to be basically the opposite of what I said last week in my post about the most common reasons 'Why people are BAD at FPL'. But I'll try to put a bit of a different spin on some things. And I hope this will still prove useful.

1)  Watch more football

There really is no substitute for it. Watch as many full games as you can (including other competitions, like the European games and domestic Cup rounds); watch good round-up shows with some solid punditry (BBC's Match of the Day is my oxygen....).  Learn what you can from the games themselves - before you start thinking about looking for advice or stats or whatever; all those other possible inputs should only ever be supplements to your own understanding of how the season is unfolding.

2)  Watch some tactical analysis

However shrewd you are at observing the finer details of the game, there are always going to be things you miss because of the limitations of TV coverage (limited view, limited replays,.. often inept, distracting commentary...) - especially if you're only able to watch brief highlights. I think it's incredibly useful to try to gain additional insights from experts in football - rather than 'experts' in FPL (see my third point, below).

There are some excellent tactical analysts on Youtube now. My favourite is Adam Clery of the FourFourTwo channel (only a year old, but it rapidly established itself as essential viewing for me during the past season). I also really like JJ Bull of The Athletic, Football Meta, and Football Made Simple. But Adam is The King - accessible, breezy, funny, but very, very perceptive in his breakdowns of team set-up and performance.

3)  Don't pay any attention to so-called FPL 'experts'

There are so many self-promoted, self-important would-be 'gurus' out there - the best of whom are no more insightful or persuasive than any of the rest of us who've been taking the game fairly seriously for a number of years; the worst of them are just idiots. Anyhow, you should always....

4)  Trust your own judgement

This is not a game you should play in pursuit of glorious prizes (because, with so many millions of players, your chances of ever winning anything are almost zero; and the prizes are SHIT, anyway....); nor for achieving a 'high ranking' (because - shock, horror! - finishing in the top 100,000 requires more luck than skill, and isn't much evidence of anything). 

You should only play to see how well you can do, to test yourself against self-set targets.... and to see how good a judge of a player you really are.

Relying on the recommendations of 'FPL experts', or asking online for help with your team.... is just cheating, really. And it's self-harming. Most of these guys don't know any better than you. And you'll never get any better if you don't make the effort to make your own choices.

5)  Learn how to use stats

Above all, be a bit more careful and thorough about how you use them. I see so many people on the online forums who grasp at one or two metrics to try to justify a pick, and convince themselves that these figures represent an unassailable argument in their favour; and oh so often, these stats are the wrong ones, or their 'positive' indication crumbles to nothing when compared with other, more relevant figures.

If you're not mathematically inclined, stats can just be bewildering and confusing, and it might be better to steer away from them altogether. I don't think they're nearly as helpful as paying close attention to the actual game action each week. But they can be very useful, if you use them appropriately: DON'T assume that they provide any easy or clear-cut answers - they do not.

6)  Be self-critical, and open to change

One of the biggest faults in all FPL managers (because it's a universal and deep-seated human fault) is a need to believe that we are right, and a consequent reluctance to acknowledge when we might have been wrong.

Even before you make a pick, you should take a break - for an hour, or a day - to pause and reflect on it; to try to think of other possible perspectives on the decision, to explore reasons why you might be wrong to want this player.

And every week, you should be asking yourself very carefully what isn't working out in your squad, and why. 

There are some players you get very fond of; some players that you are absolutely convinced are going to turn their form around at any moment and start producing big points in the next game. Those players you feel most confident in.... are probably the ones you need to think hardest about letting go.

That's more than enough for one post.  I daresay some other 'tips' may occur to me in the future; but I think this is a pretty solid starting point.

GOOD LUCK FOR THE NEW SEASON, EVERYONE!!!

[And by the way... I've said this already on the blog, and no doubt I'll say it again - often - but I do not claim to be any sort of FPL 'expert' myself. I am a smart guy with a lot of football knowledge and a lot of experience of FPL; so, I think my observations and insights are probably worth something. But I do not pretend that they are at all 'authoritative' - or necessarily and invariably 'correct'. They are just ideas that I hope people may find it interesting to ponder... even if they then decide that they don't agree with them.

And, while I might sometimes give examples of players I think are worth considering - or avoiding - I won't ever share my whole team, and I'll generally avoid making any specific player recommendations.

My aim with all my commentary on Fantasy Premier League - whether here on the blog, or on various forums where I sometimes contribute - is to try to show people not who to pick, but how to make picks.]

Community Shield - What did we learn?

Well, unfortunately, not very much. I had optimistically suggested a couple of days ago that this match has usually been much more competitive over the past several seasons, and has thus often been a useful pointer to early season form for the teams involved - but this year, with so many injuries (already!) and so many players late back from the summer's international tournaments, we had two pretty makeshift line-ups that probably don't really tell us much at all.

I would say the BIG questions to emerge from this year's game are:

How does ITV win the rights to any sporting event - when their streaming service is so utterly, utterly CRAP??

ITVx has been notoriously dreadful for years now. They waste money on naff rebranding efforts every two or three years, but never seem to do anything about sorting out their massive infrastructure deficit. The service just doesn't have the capacity to maintain an uninterrupted stream for high-demand programmes (even in the early hours of the morning?!): it's often completely unwatchable.  As soon as I see that ITV has exclusive rights to a match, I shrug in despair and resign myself to having to make do with highlights on Youtube.

Well, that was my main question, anyway. I suppose the question that seems to be getting asked most often online in the wake of yesterday's game is....

Is Haaland rubbish?

To which the answer is, obviously, NO.  Sure, he had a very subdued game; that happens with any striker sometimes. But it wasn't as if he missed loads of chances; he just wasn't able to get on the ball much. And with a starting midfield of Lewis, O'Reilly, and McAtee, that's hardly a surprise. He'll be his old goal-machine self once the season starts.

A more pertinent question for many to ponder might be....

Is Gvardiol rubbish?

Again, obviously NO. But he is the lowest-rated starting player in the game on the BBC's match report. And that may give some pause to all the FPL managers who have splashed 6 million on him for their starting squads (usually alongside one or two other premium defenders - which really is crazy).

They should, I think, take comfort from the fact that at least he started, and he did play at left-back. That won't always happen: he's bound to get rotated out occasionally, and he's almost certain to play at least a few games in the centre of defence.

But the real problem with Gvardiol is that, even when he does start as the left-back, most of the time he's likely to be inverting into midfield to form a double-pivot alongside Rodri - to help City build out from the back, and to provide a screen for the back line if the opposition turn over possession. He's likely to be much less productive - little or no chance of attacking returns - when playing like that.

Now, Ederson often steps up between the two centre-backs to form the 'back three', allowing both full-backs to play further forward - and one of them usually to get much further forward down the flank. But that attacking option is almost invariably Kyle Walker (not only because that's his natural game, but more importantly, because he's proven unable to fulfill the demands of the slotting-into-midfield role). The only hope for Gvardiol owners is that Walker may fall from favour this year, and with Stones or Akanji starting at right-back, the left-back may be allowed the more attacking role. But even then, that's mostly going to be linking with Doku or Savinho or Bobb or Grealish down the touchline; he won't very often enjoy either the licence or the opportunity to break into the box himself. (He might well have scored more goals in those three or four games at the end of last season than he will in the whole of this season. He's still a very good defender; but people who think he's going to be one of this year's top goalscorers are delusional.)

Why hasn't Bernardo Silva done any penalty prep?

Really - that was astonishing. He's first in the order, but he takes an absolutely dreadful penalty. Doesn't pause long enough to settle himself, takes a short and almost dead-straight run-up, telegraphs where he's putting it, and then hits a soft side-foot chip only a yard-and-a-half from the keeper...  He did absolutely everything wrong: one of the worst penalties I've ever seen. And, in the modern game, that just shouldn't be happening - ever.

Does Ten Hag not trust Zirkzee??

I don't know, maybe he's not even in training with the club yet. But since the Netherlands came home from the Euros four-and-a-half weeks ago, and Zirkzee didn't even get on the pitch for them... it doesn't really seem like he needed that much rest.

Zirkzee looks to me like an outstanding talent - perhaps the most promising acquisition so far of this transfer window, by any club. And wth a long-term injury to Hojlund, and Rashford still not back from Outer Space, surely this high-profile game would have been an ideal opportunity to at least give him an introduction to the team, to prepare him for a possible starting place as early in the season as possible?

What has happened to Marcus Rashford?

He's always struggled with blowing hot and cold; but for well over a year now, that wind seems to have ceased to blow at all. When he hit a spell of sustained, consistent red-hot form through the second half of the 2022-23 season, we were starting to hope that he'd finally matured into the player we'd all hoped he could be. But since then - in about 95% of his appearances anyway - he's looked completely clueless: not just 'disappointing' or 'below-par' but outright BAD. I fear it's starting to look as though his top-flight career might be effectively 'over' at the age of 26. I do hope not: but he needs to find the way to turn things around very dramatically, and he needs to do it soon. I wonder if moving away from United might help with that...

How are City going to start the season?

Well, it looks like DeBruyne and Silva should be starting in midfield. Bobb looks like more than adequate cover on the wing. And I would guess that Rodri, Foden, Doku and Kovacic should be OK to start too, although probably not fully match-fit after only a week's training at the club.

But yes, City were fairly poor yesterday. After McAtee's early effort hitting the post, United pretty much dominated the game, and could easily have won it about 3-0. Pep will not be happy, I think. It does seem probable they'll be a bit slow out of the blocks this year, somewhat below their best for at least the first two or three weeks. And Chelsea should fancy their chances a lot better now for that opening-weekend clash.

But most importantly of all, we must ASK....

What is that horrendous font City are using on the back of their shirts this year??

That is just an unfathomable, disgusting design choice. I hope they change it!

Addendum: I just found this rather goodl tactical analysis of the game on Youtube.

A new CHALLENGE...

 

Here's something new for you..... (Just in case you find the regular FPL game too EASY....!)

You'll need a 'second account' for this (you can only have one FPL account for any one email address), but that's not too difficult to sort out, if you're interested....

Last season I tried out a THRIFTY LEAGUE for ultra-low-budget teams, and found it a lot of fun. (I just did the same experiment with the Euros, and my cheapo team did surprisingly well there!)

My original budget cap was 75 million, but that's a bit awkward this year (with no starting keepers at 4 million.... and no cheap Cole Palmer!!), so I've upped it to 80 million.

The idea is that you always have to leave at least 20 million of your budget unspent. (If you've grown your total squad value to 105 million, you can then spend up to 85 million on your players, and so on.)

 GO ON, GIVE IT A TRY!

The join code is: tgombg

I've been thinking of adding a series to this blog called something like "Call me crazy, but...."  This might be the preliminary entry in that.  I have a lot of ideas for possible changes, improvements, innovations in FPL...

And one of them would be.... to offer (instead of the insufferably inane 'Fantasy Challenge' side-game they just initiated at the end of last season) some alternative game approaches, novel sub-competitions which could be separated off from the main game. 

I think a lot of people could potentially be interested in a game like this where you have to work with a very restricted budget - but it's not ideal to be lumped in with the main game, distorting the overall ranking figures for everyone else.  [But there are already so many 'unofficial competitions' evidently going on within the main game - chasing squad value, chasing low-score(??!!), chasing a weekly win, etc. - that I'm not going to feel too guilty about adding my tiny little side-project to the mix.]

The starting-gun...

 

The FA Community Shield is played tomorrow afternoon at Wembley between last year's Premier League Champions, Manchester City, and the FA Cup Winners, Manchester United.

Though long dismissed as a "glorified friendly", and not always played with the normal starting eleven or at a full competitive pace, in recent years most participants have been approaching the game much more seriously - seeing it as a valuable opportunity to kick their season off with a trophy win and perhaps gain a psychological edge over one of their closest rivals.  Thus, it is these days usually a better guide to form and line-ups (though still far from 100% reliable) than any of the other pre-season games.

Hence, it's well worth watching, if you can - to get a sense of where these clubs are at for the start of the new season.

And then, next week, you can begin thinking about picking your FPL squad....

[If you've been hard at it, drafting multiple preliminary squads already over the past month - you've not just been wasting your time, you've been actively harming your prospects.]

A little bit of Zen (2)

"Mistakes are always forgivable - if one has the courage to learn from them,"

Bruce Lee

So, you daren't argue with that....

Why people are BAD at FPL....

Forgive me if I may sometimes use the second person - you - in the following remarks. I don't want readers to feel that my tone is accusatory, that they are perhaps being individually exposed to censure. I think what I'm about to say applies to all of us. It is only human nature to be prone to these foibles. All of us are vulnerable to them, all of us have fallen prey to these errors at some point... and most of us continue to do so from time to time. Even the most successful FPL managers are not immune to the occasional lapse. There is a need for constant self-vigilance in order to steer clear of these faults.

1)  Personal loyalties (and enmities) towards particular clubs

You have to check your emotions at the door when you play FPL. If you start favouring picks from clubs you like, and avoiding clubs you dislike (such as the main traditional rivals of the team you support), you're shooting yourself in the foot.

I have a friend who is such a rabid Spurs fan that he automatically picks the maximum three players from them, regardless of merit. And that's not enough for him; frustrated by the club limit of three picks, he also usually goes for as many ex-Spurs players as he can find (Walker, Trippier, Walker-Peters... Doherty?). And of course, he absolutely refuses to consider ever taking any players from Arsenal. Or Liverpool - he particularly hates them too! Heck, it's only recently that I've been able to cajole him into occasionally taking a player from City or Chelsea or Man Utd.  He doesn't do very well at this game...

Of course, that's an extreme example - but you get the idea.

2)  Personal affection for (or aversion to) individual players

In addition to prejudices for or against certain clubs, many of us also have strong feelings about certain players. It might be because of the way they play, or their personality or public persona; or it might be specifically because of the way they've performed for you in FPL in the past.  You can't afford to dismiss a player from consideration for FPL just because you have formed a strong negative opinion that they are 'dirty' or 'lucky' or 'inconsistent' or 'overrated' or whatever (or because you disapprove of their private life...),  nor let yourself be swayed into automatically picking them because your fundamental opinion of them is highly positive.

Moreover, a player's value - or lack of it - in FPL isn't only dependent on his basic form or ability, but on the global context of all the other players you're comparing him against in the current season. Whether he did well or badly last season is only a small part of that. It is not a good idea to pick, e.g., Salah, just because he's always done well for you in FPL in the past, or because you think he is in general terms 'a great player'; you need a stronger rationale for the selection than that. (He is a great player: but how do you justify choosing him at his price-point this year, in comparison to Haaland or Watkins, or Palmer or Foden, etc.? That's what you have to think about; and the context for a selection like this is different every year.)  Similarly, you can't afford to write a player off just because he's 'let you down' in the past.

You have to start afresh each season, and give everyone fair consideration.

3)  Not watching enough (or any?!) football

I am amazed - and appalled - by how many people I see on FPL forums who clearly don't watch very much of the actual Premier League, if any at all. They must approach FPL as a form of pure gambling. (It seems insane to me. I likened it recently to 'driving on the highway blindfolded...')

There really is no substitute for watching the games. Following gurus, seeking tips from other fans, scanning pages of stats - that may all help, but it's barely scratching the surface; and without the context of some personal knowledge of what's going on in which to ground it, it's really not very likely to do you all that much good.

You need to watch as much football coverage each week as possible (including cup ties and European games): ideally, as many full games as possible - live, and with good commentary and post-match analysis in your native language. [This is my principal handicap in the game: living in SE Asia, I often struggle to catch many full games; and when I do, it's almost always with Thai or Vietnamese commentary, which is incomprehensible to me.]

4)  Not understanding stats

People who think they understand stats, and gleefully pounce on one or two metrics to justify a decision they already wanted to make anyway, are usually worse off than those who don't bother with stats at all. You need to know which stats to look at, and understand what they're telling you.

I recall someone on a forum once insisting that a player in a major points drought had 'good underlying numbers' because he was still getting a lot of shots on goal. I had to point out that he was getting a lot fewer shots on goal than at the same stage the previous season, and that his shot conversion rate had fallen almost to zero - which didn't look like very good 'underlying numbers' to me. (When you hear someone drop the phrase 'good underlying numbers' to justify a recommendation, be on your guard; it's generally a sign that they're talking out of their arse.)

I don't use stats a great deal myself, as I think they're a poor substitute for watching game action closely (there are always some details of a player's or a team's performance that stats are going to fail to capture). The ones I chiefly recommend paying attention to when you're considering a new pick are the 'expected' number for goals, assists, or goals conceded, and how they compare to the player's actual performance. Also, although I have all sorts of gripes about its transparency and fairness, the game's BPS ratings are a pretty good guide to general form (not the bonus points allocations themselves, but the credits for various individual game actions which are used to calculate who should receive the bonuses in each game; you can find this number in the 'Player Info' charts).

And you need to consider the returns-per-game (whether that's points, saves, goals, or whatever), as well as - in preference to! - the returns over the whole season (you might have to work this out for yourself - ugh, maths.!)... because a lot of players didn't play the whole of last season.

5)  Being lazy in how you use information to choose picks

A lot of FPL managers make quick, impulsive selections, without giving the matter sufficient thought. But then - even worse - they often look at just one piece of information to justify a selection, and convince themselves that this makes the choice incontrovertibly right.

I mentioned the other day how many managers were picking Turner as a back-up goalkeeper this year probably only because he's first on the list of keepers in the 4.0 price category (he started some games last year; he won't this year). Similarly, a lot have gone for Flekken as their starter - because he's top of the list of 4.5 keepers (but only because he's the only one who didn't miss any games last season). If you make picks for such superficial reasons, you must expect to get punished for them.

6)  Superstition

Related to the earlier points about allowing emotions about a player or a club to affect your picks, many of us also get traumatised by past bad experiences (or unduly elated by good ones), whether in following a favourite team in the real EPL, or in our FPL efforts. If particular players, or particular game strategies ('Always use WildCard in GW8...  Always use Triple Captain in a Double Gameweek.... Always use Bench Boost in GW34.... etc., etc., etc.), have worked out particularly well, or badly for you, it's easy to become convinced that they must inevitably always work out the same way in the future. It ain't so: you have to try to rid yourself of that kind of mystical thinking.

7)  Being too 'reactive'

A lot of FPL managers - especially, but not only the less experienced ones - fall prey to the 'emotional rollercoaster' of immediate responses to the Gameweek's events, making impulsive choices to move a player out because of one bad performance,.... or move a player in because of one good one. Now, sometimes, of course, that will be a valid response to a situation. But you always have to look for an underlying trend - is there a reason why this player's 'form' suddenly appeared to change, and is that likely to continue, or might it just be a very short-term phenomenon or a one-off aberration?

This kind of hyper-reactvity plays into the next point as well....

8)  Falling in with the flock

Unfortunately, far too many FPL managers spend a lot of time exchanging their anxieties on online forums, or following the dubious advice of self-styled 'influencers', or.... treating the vapid content churned out by FPL's The Scout seriously....  And this tends to engender a 'collective mindset' - it can create a huge momentum towards buying certain players (and ditching others). All too often, alas, this is not a collective wisdom but a collective stupidity. (And even if the choices might be justified, their value is diminished by so many people going for them at once...)

Now, I will often counsel that you shouldn;t avoid a pick just because it has become very popular; but you certainly should not choose any player just because they're a popular pick.  It's fine to go along with the sheep so long as you've thought about the decision carefully for yourself and are confident there's a good reason for it - rather than just lazily assuming that the majority must know what they're doing (oh, dear me - NO!) or timorously seeking comfort in the idea of 'safety in numbers'. 

9)  Stubbornness

We all prefer being 'right' to being 'wrong'; we all like to think we're right all the time. And it can be very, very difficult to acknowledge the hard truth that this isn't so - to accept that we've made a mistake and need to backtrack on it.

Possibly the No. 1 most damaging mistake that FPL managers fall prey to is not making a very bad pick, but obstinately refusing to change that bad pick even when it's become very apparent how bad it is.

Though perhaps even more difficult is letting go of a good pick when it ceases to be a good pick....

There are probably a few more I could write on another time, but I think these are the main ones. I hope we can all avoid them as far as possible this season.  GOOD LUCK, EVERYONE!

More BAD PICKS (some slightly less obvious ones!)

Following on from yesterday's post about some of the most egregious 'BAD Picks' I see a lot of FPL managers making at the moment, I present a few more examples.... that may seem more surprising or controversial to a lot of people.

Now, yesterday's examples weren't bad players (well, apart from Turner and Flekken!); but they were very conspicuously poor picks for their position and price-point.

This is how ruthless FPL rquires you to be. You only get 2, 3 or 5 picks in each position category; and across each of those positions, you probably have a particular amount of budget in mind, a range of just one or two price-points, for each individual selection. So, you're not just looking for 'one of the best' players for a certain position; you're looking for absolutely THE BEST, in FPL points potential, in that position, at that price-point - for every slot in your squad. (But you also have to consider filling each valuable squad slot not just in isolation, but in the global context of how many players you can take from each club, and how much more bang-for-your-buck you might get from taking a same-position player from another club, or perhaps a different-position player from the same club, or.... The combinations of factors you have to juggle are daunting.)

In order to achieve that, you have to look beyond merely superficial appeal (so many people are clearly just picking whoever happens to have scored the most points last season in each price/position category; that's so lazy - and deserves to be punished!).  You need to look deeper into the stats. 

In particular, you need to work out returns-per-game, not just look at the whole season numbers (a lot of players didn't play the whole season). It's also valuable to review the xG ('expected' goals), or xGC ('expected' goals conceded) for defenders and keepers, and to look at whether those numbers are lower or higher than the actual numbers of goals scored or conceded; this 'delta' factor (the difference between 'expected' and actual performance) is a key indicator of whether a player has been doing a good job.

You also need to try to recall the story of the season as a whole. Did a player play the whole season? Was he consistent across the whole season, or did he have peaks and troughs in form? Did he, overall, improve or decline across the course of the season? How did most of his points come about? What changes in tactics or personnel at the club contributed to his differing returns?  (If you don't watch much football, or can't remember, you should read up on some old match reports, or season summaries for the leading clubs - most clubs put out their own, and there are some good ones on Wikipedia too. And there are some good tactical analysts on Youtube who sometimes put together reviews of the season to explain how a top club achieved success. Adam Clery of FourFourTwo magazine had a particularly good one on Arsenal's so-near-and-yet-so-far-away season a couple of months ago.)

So, here are 5 players who look like very good picks - but AREN'T... for perhaps slightly non-obvious reasons.

Raya

Reason:  Arsenal were way ahead of the pack on clean sheets last season, and Raya conceded fewer goals than any other regular keeper. And he ended the season as the second-ranked FPL goalkeeper.

Yes, but... he was only a negligible amount ahead of Leno and Onana, and miles behind Pickford; so, not very convincingly one of the top few goalkeeper picks for FPL. (Onana, bouncing back after a dreadful start, looked the much better prospect in the latter stages of the season. And Leno has been consistently at the top end of the FPL goalkeeper rankings during his two seasons with Fulham.)

Moreover, his 24 goals conceded was actually slightly above his xGC - which suggests he is prone to the occasional lapse.

And he has a similar problem to Ederson at City over the last few seasons: the rest of the team dominates games so much, is so good defensively, that he rarely gets an opportunity to make a save. And saves - and the bonus points which can come from them when the keeper has a busy game - tend to be worth more than clean sheet points (that's why so many keepers from clubs at the lower end of the table manage to return decent FPL scores). His 'saves' total for the season of 46 was way the lowest of any keeper - barely a third of what Sa, Leno, Areola and Onana posted. And he managed a puny 6 Bonus Points for the entire season - compared to 15 for Leno and 22 for Pickford.

So, if you ponder the stats for a moment, Raya - despite his huge clean sheet potential - just isn't one of the more attractive goalkeeper options.

But that's NOT the reason you shouldn't have him in your squad. The key reason is the differential advantage offered by other Arsenal players. Raya probably won't be the top-scoring keeper this season; and even if he is, he won't significantly outscore a raft of other goalkeepers who cost 0.5 or 1.0 million less. But last year, White, Saliba, and Gabriel massively outscored every other defender; and they almost certainly will do so again.

So, you probably want at least 1, more likely 2 players from the Arsenal defence. You also probably want 1 of their very potent attacking midfielders, Odegaard or Saka. You might even fancy Declan Rice as a more budget option for your 5th midfield spot. And you might also be interested in Gyokeres up front, if that transfer comes off. Or you might just want to keep one of your three Arsenal slots open for another player who might get a run of starts and hit some rich scoring form for a spell - Martinelli or Trossard or Havertz or Jesus, perhaps.

David Raya might be a 'Top 5' goalkeeper option -  but he's not a 'Top 5' pick from Arsenal.

If you don't consider the full range of relevant goalkeeper stats (saves, bonus points, and delta xGC) - you'll make bad choices. If you don't pay attention to the relative value that other players in other positions at the same club offer - you'll make bad choices.

Saliba

Reason:  He's the best defender in the League. And Arsenal were way the best defence in the League last year (miles ahead on clean sheets), and are almost certain to be so again.

Absolutely. But.... being 'the best' in your position in real life means very little for your value in FPL 

All members of the Arsenal defence get the same 4-pt bonus for the many, many clean sheets William Saliba helps them to earn; but they all offer more than him in the potential for further points. Gabriel presents a more consistent threat at attacking set-pieces (it's a fairly marginal advantage, and might not always translate to an actual points lift; but it is worth paying attention to); and Ben White, when he pushes forward to link up with Saka, provides a regular possibility of assists and even a few goals over the season. Calafiori - if he starts immediately, if he beds in well and lives up to his potential - should also become a major attacking force down the other flank this season, and could conceivably even out-score White.

(Also, there might be just a little bit of a worry about Saliba's physical resilience, because he did end up missing about a third of his debut season at The Emirates - with what had initially seemed to be a fairly innocuous back strain.)

So, paradoxical as it might seem, while Saliba is, by common consent, the best defender at Arsenal, he's the worst defender pick from Arsenal for FPL.

The exact same thing happened last year. Almost everyone went for Saliba, rather than White and Gabriel, at the start of the season. And the season started weirdly: Gabriel mysteriously out of favour and dropped for a few games, White moved back into central defence (where he's much less productive in FPL terms),... and then Saliba nabbing a couple of - extremely untypical - headed goals. So, the sheep who'd gone for Saliba because everyone else had gone for Saliba, felt smugly vindicated: Saliba was miles ahead of those other two after the opening handful of games. And his owners then felt it wasn't worth using a transfer to switch to one of his rivals later on, even when that started to change. But once things had settled down at Arsenal, Saliba's two clubmates did indeed outscore him during the remaining portion of the season, Gabriel fairly narrowly, but White very substantially. Saliba wasn't the best pick from the Arsenal defence last year either.

Ben White costs 0.5 million more than Saliba this year. Last year, despite missing a few starts at right-back, and having a fairly subdued opening phase to the season, he still ended up with nearly 20 pts more than him. And Saliba might not get on the scoresheet again this season so,.... there's a strong chance that White's advantage over him this year could be in the 30-50 pts range (and Calafiori's haul perhaps similar!). You look to earn, ideally, around 30 or so points for every million spent on your starting 11 (realistically, a little less than that for defenders); and there aren't actually many differential picks where you find that kind of potential advantage for an extra half-million or million spent. But Ben White is absolutely worth the extra half-million he costs this year - if you can afford it; he will almost certainly score quite a lot more points than Gabriel or Saliba.

If you focus on real world status rather than Fantasy points value - you'll make bad choices. If you don't properly consider the rival choices in the same position at the same club - you'll make bad choices.

Gvardiol

Reason:  He scored 4 goals in a handful of games at the end of last season!

Yes - but, as I remarked somewhere on this blog just a few days ago, when defenders score a few goals in quick succession, it's almost always a fleeting streak, not an emerging trend. A lot of the FPL managers piling in for Gvardiol are absolutely expecting this to to be a consistent trend, they think he's going to be rivalling Haaland's scoring figures. That won't happen. He might well not score a goal all season.  [We see the same thing, a little less strongly, with the popularity of Pedro Porro this season (see below). And we saw it with Pervis Estupinan, one of the great 'sheep picks' from the start of last season, who had likewise bagged a couple of spectacular - but extremely untypical (I don't think he'd ever scored in his career before; other than from the penalty spot for Ecuador) - goals towards the end of the previous campaign.... Remember how that worked out?]

He is primarily a central defender, and is likely to be used there rather than at left-back at least some of the time. And when he does play at left-back, it's extremely unlikely that the ultra-conservative Pep is going to sanction him playing in such a marauding style very often. (And if he does, it's likely that opponents will be much more alert to the danger now, and will try to make sure they don't allow him time and space with the ball around the edge of their penalty area.)  The prospects of him repeating last season's goal-spurt are, alas, very, very slim.

There's such squad depth in the defensive positions at City that no-one is likely to start every game. Despite his outstanding form at the end of last season, Gvardiol is not even a guaranteed starter for the beginning of this season - and he certainly won't be an invariable starter for the whole campaign. 6.0 million is a lot to pay for someone who might only get 25-30 starts. (And City haven't even been keeping that many clean sheets over the past season or two!)

Gvardiol, again, is not an outright terrible choice: he's obviously one of the strongest defensive options for the year. But he is a very extravagant choice, a profligate use of funds. There is little need to take any of the defenders priced at 6.0 million or more; and if you do, there are probably better picks at the premium price level than Gvardiol.

If you think 'black swan' events will start happening every week - you'll make bad choices. If you ignore the reality of 'Pep Roulette' - you'll make bad choices.

Porro

Reason:  He got 3 goals and 7 assists last season

Indeed he did. And he is a very talented player, with some good potential for attacking returns. However, it's probably wildly over-optimistic to think that he might equal or better last season's tally - because he doesn't play that high up the pitch most of the time. The majority of those attacking contributions came in a handful of games, where he was playing as a very advanced wingback... because all of the right-sided creative mdfielders were out with injury.

And Spurs have a pretty terrible defensive record. With Postecoglou insisting on a suicidally high line, and a keeper who's very flakey and ridiculously easy to bully at set-pieces, they are always likely to leak a lot of goals. Moreover, the BPS tweak this year, with defenders and keepers now being more heavily penalised for conceding a goal, means that Spurs defenders are much less likely to pick up many bonus points in games in which they don't keep a clean sheet. Thus, even if Porro does get some good attacking points over the year, he's still fairly unlikely to get near his last season's points total again.

Porro's not a terrible pick; but he is a bit of a 'sheep pick' - and that collective enthusiasm for him derives from unrealistic expectations. With so many very strong defensive options this year priced at only 4.5 and 5.0 million, it's very difficult to justify paying 5.5 million for someone with such doubtful clean-sheet potential.

If you allow yourself to be swayed by headline numbers, without looking at the pattern of the whole season - you'll make bad choices. If you go along with the sheep too easily - you'll make bad choices.

Gakpo

Reason:  He always impresses for the Netherlands; he was brilliant at the Euros.

Indeed, he's been great for the Dutch in the last three big tournaments. But club and country are completely different worlds. For the national team, he enjoys the confidence of being a guaranteed starter in his favoured position down the left side of attack; and, in the absence of an established central goalscorer, he's been free to cut inside as much as he likes... and take on the mantle of being the team's primary goal-threat. He'd love to be able to play like that at Liverpool as well - but it ain't going to happen.

Gakpo's never really staked his claim at Anfield yet. Diaz (and Jota, when fit; and now maybe Carvalho too) has clearly been claiming priority on the left side of 'the trident', and both he and Jota can also usefully fill in through the middle, when Nunez is missing the sticks too often. Yes, Gakpo can play deeper in midfield as well, though that's not the best use of his talents; and there's probably even more competition for places there. 

He's more of a support player than an outright stiker anyway, so not a super-prolific source of goals. And it's difficult to see how he's ever going to become more than a handy utility player at Liverpool. There are so many forward options 1-2 million pounds cheaper who are primary goalscorers for their club and start every week.

If you let yourself be dazzled by someone's 'potential' rather than their likely prospects at their club - you'll make bad choices. If you get too impressed by someone's international form - you'll make bad choices.

How many of these guys do you have?  Maybe you should think about switching them out....

Not that any of these guys are dreadful picks, of course. They're all excellent players, and they will all very probably return very strong results in FPL this year. People who own them probably won't feel much remorse. But the objections I've raised above are mainly based on the context of the overall selection: to me, they look severely non-optimal when compared to other players you might pick instead - whether that's in their position category, their price category, or just across the range of choices at their club.

I'll try to remember to return to these guys a few times over the season to check how they're doing.

BAD PICKS (And why people make them)

I thought I'd go over some of the most obviously AWFUL picks that seem to be very popular in FPL at the moment, dissecting why it probably is that people are coming to make such poor choices.

Of course, the No. 1 'Bad Pick' of the moment, by a mile, is goalkeeper Matt Turner. He's the most popular GK currently, with nearly 25% ownership - that is just gob-smacking. 

Usually with a bad keeper pick, you make jokes like "He deserves to be 3rd or 4th choice at his club. They're probably going to demote him to the youth team soon - or sell him." But with Turner, the usual resources of humour fail. That is actually TRUE. He is nowhere near a start at Forest: already third-in-line, at best - and they're said to be looking to acquire Aaron Ramsdale as their new No. 1.

So, WHY has this happened? How have so many people come to pick a player who is so utterly and completely VALUE-LESS?

1)  Turner

Reason:  He is the highest-ranked 4.0-million-pound keeper, on last year's points returns.

Yep, he did actually get some starts last year; played nearly half the season in fact. But his points during that time were terrible. And he was deservedly dropped - twice. He now looks unlikely to feature in the Premier League again - not just for Forest, but for any club ever.

People lamely say, 'Oh, well, it doesn't matter - for a back-up keeper, you can take anyone.'  NO - it does matter. Even at that 4.0 level, there are some keepers who are first-in-line to take over if anything happens to their starter. Some of them are quite decent, and might even have a chance of being promoted to the No. 1 spot. They bring some value to your squad; Turner doesn't. In fact, he represents negative value - because there's likely to be a big sell-off when people start to realise how useless an asset he is, and his price will suddenly drop.

If you only look at one stat - you'll make bad choices.  If you look at a stat without understanding what it's showing you - you'll make bad choices.  You need to know something of the history of how last season unfolded as well.

2)  Flekken

Reason:  He's the top-ranked 4.5-million-pound keeper on last year's points returns. But that's not a full reflection of his ability and FPL points potential. And he has horrible opening fixtures.

Flekken was new to the League last season, and he struggled to settle in at first. He improved in the second half of the season; but many analysts still feel he might be at risk of being replaced.

Brentford were in relegation trouble for much of last season, and although that was largely because of a huge injury crisis in their defence and they might bounce back this year, they are essentially a side who are struggling to maintain a lower mid-table ranking.

Most of the other keepers priced at 4.5 million missed a few games to injury last year, or only came in part-way through the season. That's why Flekken ended up with more points than them overall (though he's only 3pts ahead of Areola). They almost all did much better than him on saves-per-game and points-per-game. Flekken conceded 63 goals in the league last season, the second highest of any keeper. He had a terrible delta too; he let in 9 more goals than his xGC of 54 - that's a sign of a poor keeper.

And Brentford have possibly the worst early run of fixtures of any team: even their home opener against Crystal Palace might be tough; and they then face away trips to Liverpool, City and Spurs in GWs 2, 4, and 5.  You really don't want any keeper starting for you in matches like those, where there's a high likelihood of conceding multiple goals.

If you don't carefully compare someone to all the rivals in his position - you'll make bad choices. If you don't work out their relative returns-per-game as well as over the whole season - you'll make bad choices. If you don't check the fixture list - you'll make bad choices.

3)  Konsa

Reason:  Name recognition; recency bias. Konsa got some attention for his performances with resurgent Aston Villa last season. And people remember that he appeared in the Euros (he played one game!).

There are 70 or so defenders available at 4.5 million; and about a third of them are more attractive FPL prospects than Konsa. Thus, his current ownership level of 17.3% is quite baffling, hugely inappropriate.

Villa's defensive record last season wasn't that great: they conceded around 1.6 goals per game. Palace, Everton, Fulham, and even Bournemouth kept more clean sheets. (And, as a central defender, Konsa offers minimal chance of any additional points for attacking contributions.)

If you don't carefully compare someone to all the rivals in his position - you'll make bad choices. If you just plump for a familiar name - you'll make bad choices.

4)  Mainoo

Reason:  Name recogntion, recency bias; club loyalty, patriotic pride, over-enthusiasm about emerging talent.

Yes, Kobbie Mainoo was outstanding for Manchester United in the latter part of last season, and showed a lot of promise for England in his performances at the Euros. He likes to carry the ball forward, and is even capable of getting the occasional goal. That's all very exciting - at least for Manchester United and England; not so much for Fantasy Premier League.

Mainoo is a defensive midfielder, and those just don't tend to produce that many points; not as many anyway, as players who provide plenty of goals and/or assists. Even at his low 5.5-million-pound price-point, there are some hard-working bonus point-magnets like Andreas Perreira, McGinn and Pape Sarr (who also get among the goals a bit more than most players of their type); there are very talented creative players like Smith Rowe, Barkley, Elliott and McNeil; there are numerous goalscoring wingers like Hudson-Odoi, Elanga, Iwobi, Sarabia, Adingra, Kluivert, Harrison and De Cordova-Reid; and even one outright forward, in the unfathomably reclassified Antoine Semenyo. Many - perhaps all - of those will outscore Kobbie Mainoo. So, it's very, very difficult to justify picking him, even if you need a 5.5-million midfielder.

If you choose someone based primarily on recent international performances - you'll make bad choices. If you don't think about how someone's position and style of play will limit their likely points return - you'll make bad choices.

5)  Havertz

Reason:  People see him ranked as the third highest-scoring 'forward' last year.

Very impressive, yes. Except that... perhaps they're forgetting that he was classified as a 'midfielder' in the game last year; so, he got 1 extra point for each of his 13 goals; and a lot more extra points for all of the team clean sheets that he was involved in; and quite possibly a few extra bonus points too. If you take that into consideration, he actually ranks only seventh. 

And a lot of his closest goalscoring rivals - like Isak, Cunha, and Mateta - missed big chunks of the season; most would agree that they look stronger attacking prospects than Havertz.

Admittedly, he didn't play every game either. And he played more as a midfielder for most of the first half of the season. So, it is reasonable to assume that if he continues in the 'false 9' role for the whole of this season, he might score a few more goals. But he'd need 7 or 8 more to equal his points tally of last year - does that really seem likely?

And Arteta, we know, loves to tweak things constantly. There can be no confidence that Havertz would remain in that role for the whole season, or that the team would continue to play in the same style they did last year. So, any projections of his goalscoring returns this year are very, very speculative - fraught with many uncertainties.

In fact, using Havertz as a 'false 9' always felt like an improvised solution, and the club was known to be seeking a new forward throughout the last year. Now, they appear to be close to completing the signing of Viktor Gyokeres from Sporting Lisbon - which will probably mean that Havertz drops back into midfield,... or maybe even ends up on the bench for much of the season.

If you don't take into account how changes in position classification can affect the points return - you'll make bad choices. If you don't take into account possible changes of personnel or tactics at the club - you'll make bad choices.

So, there we have it: my current  Top Five AWFUL Picks in FPL.  I'll share a few other - slightly more surprising - examples soon.

How should you judge if your squad is any GOOD?

A little while ago, I took a moment to diss an online gizmo that claims to be using some sort of 'AI algorithm' to evaluate people's FPL squads. (It is - unsurprisingly - utter nonsense: not even bad, just fake.)

One of my main gripes was that it does not divulge any hint of the criteria on which it supposedly bases its ratings.

So... that got me to thinking, on what sort of factors should we try to assess how good our squad is looking for the start of the season?

I would suggest the following:

1)  Is the squad balanced for budget?

Do you have a good spread of player prices, some shrewd picks in all positions and across the low, middle and upper portions of the price spectrum? Having too many players from any one of those strata is probably not going to work.

2) Have you maximised your value-for-money?

As I said the other day in my post on picking a squad [link again below], you are not so constrained by budget for your top-end picks; but the further down the roster you go - money running very short as you approach the last half dozen or so selections - making sure you have good points-per-pound potential from every player is vital.

A related point I think I omitted then (which probably deserves its own post sometime) is that it's also worth considering overall price differential patterns - asking yourself not just 'Have I got a player with an excellent points-per-pound potential?' but 'Have I got the best points-per-pound player for the money I have left to spend here?'  This isn't entirely straightforward, because you find that the distribution of points return is uneven between different position categories and across different segments of the price spectrum: sometimes a particular price increment makes very little difference to the points returns available in a particular position category; elsewhere, you may find that the same price increment can make a substantial difference. You may well be surprised to discover on closer examination that it's a mid-priced midfielder or a semi-premium defender who will actually give you the biggest lift in points for an extra half-million or million pounds spent.

3)  Have you avoided 'false economies'?

I warned in my long post last week on 'How to pick the initial squad' that going for 'enablers' just because they're super-cheap tends to be a destructive strategy: players who never actually get on the pitch - or are terrible when they do - will soon disillusion their original ownership, and drop in price as a sell-off begins, leaching away your precious squad value  Even at the lowest price-points, there are some players who are nevertheless likely to start, occasionally even some who are quite good; and even if they're not yet starters, they might have a good prospect of getting at least a few first-team games fairly soon. Make sure your low-budget picks are players like this, not perpetual reserves.

(And if you take a chance on going with a non-starting back-up goalkeeper - which I wouldn't recommend! - make sure you get the best one possible, and one who is definitely first-in-line to take over if his starter should get injured or dropped.)

4)  Do you have some favourable rotation prospects for goalkeeper and defence?

Again, in the big 'How to....' post, I pointed out that keepers and defenders are best avoided in games where they might concede heavily; while, of course, there will also be games when they look likely to have much better prospects of a coveted clean sheet (and perhaps even an attacking contribution of some sort from the more progressive defenders); and in general, defending teams tend to do much better at home.  It is therefore very valuable to have a pair of keepers who largely alternate their home and away fixtures with each other.

And, since you'll generally only be starting 3 or 4 defenders, you have the option on your bench to rotate some of the defenders as well as your two keepers, trying to have the chance of optimising the fixtures of your starters each week. So, effectively spreading your defensive picks across clubs according to their pattern of home and away fixtures (and, if possible, their harder and easier fixtures as well) is a strong sign of a really well-chosen squad.

5)  Have you paid close attention to other possible impications of the fixtures?

Some clubs - even the leading ones - may have a dauntingly tough run of fixtures near the start of the season. Some are plunging into European competition after only a month, raising the prospect of fatigue and possible rotation for key players. Other clubs have particularly inviting fixture lists for the start of the season (Chelsea and Liverpool seem to have been particularly blessed this year!). So, while it's especially important to be able to steer your goalkeeeper and defenders away from particularly rough fixtures - and towards the ones where they may have a better chance of clean sheets - keeping an eye on the possible impact of shifting fixture difficulty is important across the whole team, and the whole squad.

6)  Have you spread risk?

Doubling or trebling up on teams, particularly in one area of the pitch, can be hugely risky, and is usually better avoided - at least at the start of the season, where there are so many uncertainties about what line-ups and tactics may be adopted, and what individual and team form is going to look like coming out of the summer break. So, it's better not to have too many players from one team - and definitely no more than one in the same position on the field.

And although promoted teams may offer some promising selections, particularly at the more budget end, most of us aren't really able to follow Championship football very much - so, we don't have a clear idea of what these players might be like until they've played their first few matches of this Premier League season. Moreover - sad as it is to say - in recent years most of the promoted sides have suffered from the huge gulf in class between the two leagues, haven't been able to adapt to the elevated intensity of the top flight, and have just served as punchbags for most of the established teams. So, again, it's probably best to steer clear of anyone from the promoted sides until we've seen some form from them - until they've reassured us that they're not going to be spanked every week and go sraight back down.

Backing players from teams with new managers is also a big gamble, and one probably best avoided, as far as possible. It is likely that it may take Liverpool, Chelsea, Brighton, West Ham, and Leicester a month or two to find their feet this season.

7)  Have you taken some smart, carefully calculated gambles?

Although you generally want to avoid making too many big bets on unknown quantities (like whether Salah will immediately thrive again under Arne Slot, or whether Calafiori will be instantly integrated into the Arsenal back-four), it is worth taking a few calculated risks here and there. In particular, it's usually worth going for one or two players who might not look like surefire sensations - or perhaps not even guaranteed starters (although you really don't want to have more than one or two players who are at any risk of not being a regular first-pick) - but who offer a huge upside if they hit form (do they have the fixtures that will help with that??).

In addition to one or two such prospects in your main 11 - slightly less-fancied players, perhaps, that you have faith in to produce - you should also try to look out for one or two outright 'investment picks': players at the cheaper end of the scale who are only just emerging as prospects, and appear to be currently under-valued in the FPL pricing because they're not expected to get a regular start. If you believe that they are good enough to deserve some decent game time, even if it isn't a full 90 minutes every week, or, better, you can see that form and injury issues at their club make it very likely that they will soon get a run of starts, buy them - and enjoy watching their price go up as lots of other FPL managers come a little late to the party.

8)  Have you avoided obvious foot-shootings??

We all far too easily make some of our selection decisions... hastily, impulsively, without due thought or research... perhaps allowing ourselves to be influenced by peer pressure, the tide of modern social media, the 'sheep instinct' - if we see a lot of people making the same pick, we may assume they must be on to something and get tempted to follow along. That's almost always a bad idea.

Just to give one quick example, there has been a rush of Fantasy managers recently plumping for Brentford's Mark Flekken as their first-choice keeper. And that is kind of baffling - because there is nothing in his team's or his own form last year or in his stats to justify that choice; and he has the worst run of opening fixtures of any keeper this year. [I think I'll write one or two quick posts on classic examples of Bad Picks over the next week or so.]

There are a fair few more picks I see commonly on the forums at the moment that are obviously - or sometimes, not so obviously - BAD. If you're confident you've dodged any of those.... you're good to go.

In fact, if you've pondered all of the above considerations, and you can honestly say that you've ticked all the boxes - then, congratulations.  You probably do have a pretty damn good squad!

But you shouldn't have one YET (this first posted on... 3rd August, two weeks before the season gets underway), it's way too soon.  Remember what I said yesterday about the wisdom of keeping away from FPL, not giving it any thought.... until just before the Big Kick-Off.

'Rank your team?' ('No thanks, HAL...')

I've noticed some of the FPL forums being awash with posts over the past couple of weeks about this online widget that purports to assess the strength of your preliminary FPL squad - giving it a score out of 100.

With a month to go before the real game gets under way, people seem to have been going crazy over this as a surrogate distraction, seeming to find it a worthwhile challenge to see if they can push their score higher and higher, to see if it's possible to edge it up to a perfect 100.

Such A LOT of problems with this gizmo. Here are the main ones, as I see it:

1)  It says it rates your 'team' - but it actually expects you to submit your whole squad (in the form of a screenshot of your FPL 'Team' page). So, it's not clear if it's rating the full 15, or just your starting 11. It also doesn't tell you if your initial captain and vice-captain picks are considered relevant to its 'judgement' on you. And it doesn't tell you if it's offering a prediction of your likely success over the whole season... or the first month... or just the opening gameweek.

2) It doesn't explain its criteria, or what its rating scale is supposed to mean. What would a score of 100 actually signify? That you're absolutely certain to be this year's Global Winner?? Or that you're fairly sure to be among the top 10,000, 50,000, 100,000??  Or just that you're likely to have a very good Gameweek 1???

If you were to try to assess your own squad on a 100-pt scale, or asked one of your more knowledgeable and objective friends to do so, you wouldn't expect anything like a 100% answer; even mid-90s would be very, very good. Heck, even if you gave yourself an unlimited budget, you wouldn't seriously expect perfection: you'd know that some of your picks were a little bit of a gamble, a hopeful hunch; while maybe some others that seem like 'bankers' will, in fact, turn out to disappoint. I think, however you define 'success', no team/squad can really be said to give you more than an 80-90% prospect of achieving it.

3)  It doesn't give you any meaningful feedback, doesn't explain WHY it has rated your squad as it has, or identify the weakest members you should consider replacing. It just endlessly trots out the same infuriating glib cliché about needing to 'find some transfers to improve'. [It's probably still having a problem with the pod-bay doors too...]

So, as a tool for helping you pick your squad, it's utterly USELESS.

4)  I had a little fun the other week, quickly testing it with about 20 or so squads randomly generated by FPL's 'Auto-Pick' facility.  

Three things quickly stood out: a) They ALL scored in the high 80s to mid-90s; there was very little variation.  b) The squads that were most conspicuously a bit weak, or downright dreadful, tended to score higher!  c) It was possible to get a different score for the same squad resubmitted within quite a short space of time.

Now, I had been hoping that there might be something to this gimmick.... that a careful observation of its prognostications might enable us to deduce something about its algorithm, to divine what factors it was considering in its assessment.

I had thought, that at the very least, it might be aggregating the points scored by your chosen players last season (which of course we already know; but it might have been handy to have the calculation done instantly for us), or perhaps even be producing a slightly more subtle and complex rating of expected 'form' based on a combination of factors.

But, alas, no - it's pretty obviously just spiting out random numbers... and jeering at how seriously some people take the results!  Thank you, HAL, you condescending bastard!

DON'T jump the gun!

The Fantasy Premier League official website (and accompanying Facebook page) started getting active again even while EURO 2024 was still in progress, gradually teasing selected new player pricings during the last few days of the tournament... and then relaunching the game for the new season only two or three days after Spain's triumph in the Final.

And immediately the FPL forums were flooded with people anxiously obsessing over every little snippet of leaked information... AND sharing endless variations of DRAFT SQUADS. More than FOUR WEEKS before the season kicks off!!!  [The opening game this year is an evening kick-off between Manchester United and Fulham on Friday 16th August; the main programme gets under way on Saturday 17th.]

I know I'm not exactly modelling the best example here, with the amount of time I've spent writing for this blog over the last week, but.... there is such a thing as an  FPL/Life Balance, people! And spending hours and hours fretting about the game in pre-season is not conducive to maintaining that.

So much might yet happen before the Big Kick-Off - valuable hints about form and tactics and likely team selections  (not many, perhaps, but some...) emerging in the pre-season friendlies, players arriving or leaving in the summer transfer window, and, unfortunately, INJURIES. There really is no point in trying to select a squad - even provisionally - when we really have no idea who's going to be playing (and for which team!) on the GW1 weekend in mid-August. There is no point in even thinking about it.

It's not just a WASTE OF TIME - it's positively a BAD IDEA, something that will almost certainly lead to you making WORSE DECISONS about your selections.

Because of the way the human brain works... if you start looking at the player options, and allowing yourself to think, even vaguely, about possible squads, you will inevitably start making some decisions about your likely squad: decisions based on inadequate, incomplete, soon-to-be-outdated information; hence, in many cases at least, WRONG decisions. You probably won't be very self-aware about this; well, if you're even a little aware of it at the time, you'll almost certainly forget about it very quickly. But these proto-decisions - not always outright selections, but foundatioinal preferences and prejudices and assumuptions that will have a massive influence on selections - are mostly forming deep in your subconscious; and once they're there, they're very difficult to displace. The deep-rooted cognitive bias in favour of self-consistency means that once you've made a choice like this, it's very, very difficult for you to change your mind about it (especially if you don't realise you've made that choice, and/or don't know why you've made it!). There's a similar, very dangerous phenomenon called the 'anchoring bias' - which means you're very likely to make decisions based on the first one or two pieces of information you look at.

Anyone who's picked a squad two or three or four weeks out from the start of the season is VERY unlikely to have picked a good one. And they're also much less likely to be able to pick a good one later on... than someone who only starts pondering the options after the Community Shield.  [This year, the season's traditional curtain-raiser is being played between Manchester City and Manchester United on Saturday 10th August.]

I know I put out a BIG POST about 'How to pick the initial squad' just a few days ago...  I'm SORRY: I just wanted to get it out there in plenty of time before the start of the season, to give people a chance to discover it. I did not mean to encourage anyone to start trying to pick their squad straight away. (Bookmark that link, and come back to it in a week or two!)

The best time - the ONLY sensible time - to pick a squad for the new FPL season is.... on the afternoon of Friday 16th August.

Really, that is absolutely a TOP TIP!!  Try it next year.

A little bit of Zen (1)

"So long as there are more fools than wise men, the majority is never likely to recognise its best interests."

Now, I haven't been able to find an attribution for this quote. I'm sure my old high school history teacher once ascribed it to Richelieu, but I can't find any authority for that online. Rabelais wrote something similar, so maybe it derives from that. 

More simply....

"A wise man makes his own decisions, an ignorant man follows the public opinion."

This one from Grantland Rice, a distinguished American sportswriter of the early 20th century.

No, this isn't really Zen, but it is wise and relevant - to the mad, often lemming-like world of Fantasy Premier League. You know what I'm getting at.

My policy for COMMENTS

I'm still a little unsure how to proceed on this, so I might well amend this later when I have a clearer idea if allowing commenting here might be productive for anyone. (All moot at the moment, since I have no readers yet anyway!)

However, I think I will allow comments only on selected posts - where a variety of opinions from other Fantasy Premier League enthusiasts might be illuminating.

And I will ask for, and strictly enforce, basic standards of coherence, relevance, and civility.

Unfortunately, the community of FPL managers does seem to attract an awful lot of dingbats, berserkers, and haters; and I don't want people like that running amok around here.

 And, alas, I fear the modern obsession with ultra-short-format social media exchanges is wrecking everyone's literacy levels and attention span!

Sorry, but I am only going to allow comments that have something useful and relevant to say, give clear reasons for their positions, and use reasonably full and correct sentence structure. Anything else will be deleted.

So, readers (if I ever get any) will be welcome to contribute from time to time in the 'Comments' (on certain posts, at least) - but please make the effort to write properly.

And any kind of abuse or disparagement - of me, or anyone else - is, of course, not going to be tolerated. 

You are all welcome to disagree with me. But please express your dissenting opinions politely, and give reasons.

That is all...