and besides, I'll always cling to my #2 Tiger Woods 2005 ranking in the nation as one of my most prized accomplishments! I had 20+ more hole in 1's than anyone else on Live.

My EA sporting abilities are outstanding.

I don't play in a yahoo public league.

You also don't have to "stream" to win.

If you draft a balanced team, streaming is unnecessary unless you are just trying to scrounge a few categories on Sunday.

Streaming allows you to basically concentrate on offense only...that's the point of it...you don't have to worry about pitching because you win 3/5 categories every week...

In a standard 5X5 H2H league...I generally draft offense for the first 6-8 rounds...then focus on closers or VALUE picks the next 3-4 rounds after that...and then back to offense for the rest of the draft until a few late round relievers (that could be the 2009 version of Soria last year) and established pitchers that had a rocky 2008 that may rebound in 2009...and then I focus on grabbing the one or two Edinson Volquez's that emerge as great starters no one had ever heard of.

That's why it's strategy.

Streaming in H2H allows you to ignore pitching on draft day and still win the pitching categories every week.

If you don't stream in H2H, you have to draft pitchers high, and then you can't focus on offense...so it means ONE mistake could be the end of your season.

People were drafting Jake Peavy like 8th overall last year. He had a great year. But instead of drafting Jake Peavy, you could watch a few games in April and notice some of the studs like Volquez and get Peavy value from a starter that isn't even drafted.

And that's why streaming is so important.

You can stack your offense and still dominate pitching every week...and if you're in a league where no one else is streaming, a lot of the times you can pick great matchups and win ERA/WHIP, too...especially since a lot of reliever heavy teams can have horrible weeks in both categories if one of their closers implodes a few times...since they won't have a lot of innings to offset a 1 IP 6 ER type of inning.

:duncan_idaho runs from thread in sheer terror of internet tough guy Hootie. He's the best at fantasy sports! He's the best at Madden! He was No. 2 in the world at Tiger Woods golf like five years ago!:

Seriously, man. If 8 of 10 guys in a league are streaming, what's the point? That really is a matter of "who can push the button the fastest."

Streaming is b.s. any way you cut it because it severely diminishes the importance of the draft.

A fantasy league in which an owner has to draft well, make smart waiver and FA adds, and pull off some trades to win it is something most people would call a "fun" league. A fantasy league where an owner has to beat someone to the button by 30 seconds every other day so he can two starts out of Mike Pelfrey this week is something most people would call stupid.

You're describing a roto league...which is fine. I love roto. It makes the draft SUPER important. H2H allows you to mess up a little on draft day...

Streaming is a big part of H2H...sorry if you guys can't acknowledge that.

It doesn't HAVE to be. And is becoming less of one.

Just because someone likes a weekly scoring format, to make things a little more interesting than a year-long race, doesn't mean that person only wants to play roto.

There's a difference between "messing up on draft day" and covering it with a few shrewd pickups or a good trade and what you've been portraying. The streaming strategy you've described is not "messing up on draft day." It is a purposeful strategy.

I would be interested to see what a 10-team draft with 8 teams that were going to stream would look. Doesn't that kind of blow the whole "draft nothing but offense early" strategy? Since other guys are still grabbing hitters when normally they'd be looking at starting pitchers?

I used to work at a mag that produced heavy fantasy content, and the entire fantasy staff (like 8-10 people) HATED streaming. In the leagues they ran (and thoser are pretty intense, don't you think?), nobody streamed players. The lone exception? That freaking tool Matthew Berry.

Yeah Berry is an ESPN guy and in ESPN pay leagues, you stream.

I'm sure Matthew Berry probably won that league, or at least made the playoffs, too.

If he was the only one streaming, that means he was winning more than he lost.

Yeah Berry is an ESPN guy and in ESPN pay leagues, you stream.

I'm sure Matthew Berry probably won that league, or at least made the playoffs, too.

If he was the only one streaming, that means he was winning more than he lost.

I am sure Berry won those leagues if he is abiding by his infinite wisdom like he spouts in the football season. I watched him on Sunday countdown on multiple occasions break the news that Peyton Manning and Reggie Wayne were "good starts" this week. F***ing great insight from that clown. Next thing you know he will be telling me I should target Pujols, Hanley, D. Wright and Santana.:clap:

Things that everyone(Hootie) who is touting about streaming players seems to be forgetting is the likelihood of negative points for bad outings and losses. We have a guy in one of my leagues that had over 300 transactions last year. Chasing the two start pitchers every week. It is a double edged sword, they sure can help you, but the opposite is also true. I personally prefer H2H point leagues over the roto format. Just me though.

If you don't get penalized for bad starts by SP, then I guess there is minimal downside to chasing the two starters.

Actually, it was before Berry was hired at ESPN, when he was still running the TMR site and was writing a weekly column for Sporting News (that's the fantasy staff he was competing against in the league I was talking about).

He failed to place in the money in any of the three years I was working there/around the fantasy guys. Best finish was sixth, as I recall (and this was a no-moves-limit league). It was quite the running joke that Berry couldn't win cash even when he was cheating.

Him getting hired at ESPN was funny; he was by far the least talented fantasy writer, and his performance against the other SN experts was lackluster at best no matter the sport. Shows that a good nickname is more important than substance sometimes, I guess.

He generally gives awful, awful advice.

I tried listening to one of that asshat's podcasts. I made it to about 3 minutes, then he started talking about his inability to pick up chicks and I was ****ing done.

hamas, Berry was by far the biggest dumbass at SN, and it really wasn't close. Wish I could have posted some of his unedited work on here. Horrible. Absolutely horrible.

I still don't understand how that guy gets hired at ESPN with so many better options out there...

It probably had far more to do with who he knew than what he knew. It's not like ESPN is full of brilliant sports minds. It's generally a cesspool for the LCD.