Hi Everybody!
A very common topic in the Supercoach Blog-o-Podding-o-Sphere is PODs, meaning “Points of Difference.” The idea being to pick players that have low ownership as a way to set yourself apart from the pack, as opposed to because you think they are the best players to pick. The good news is that picking low ownership players for the sake of being different is indeed very likely to differentiate you from the pack. The bad news is that the difference is likely to be not in your favor.
The Iron Law of Pods: “The earlier and better a POD, the less time they remain a POD.”
If a player with low ownership starts doing really well, people are going to bring him in. The longer he does well the more people will bring him in, until he is no longer low owned.
This is especially true at the start of the season, when people make correctional trades. Let’s say you are convinced that Calum Mills and Buku Khamis are going to do great and be huge bargains. First, you should get them, because you are convinced they will do great and be huge bargains. The idea is to pick who you think are the best players, no matter what their ownership.
Gonna say that again, to be extra clear and make sure I don’t mislead anyone: Pick the players you think will be best without paying attention to their ownership %. This “don’t pick PODs” guidance is about not pickling players because of low ownership.
So you have Calum Mills and Buku Khamis. Let’s say they both do well. What happens?
In Mill’s case, if he does a little better than he is priced to score, only a few people will bring him in. People will first go for the players who are doing a lot better than they are priced to, so a he won;t be at the top of the list. And in that case, you are getting a small edge. Nice. Not thrilling, but nice. If he does a lot better then he is priced for right away, then a lot of people will likely bring him in and thus you no longer get the benefit of his being low owned. You do at least have him without spending a trade. So there is some upside but not a huge upside. If you believed in him, you were right and of course get to enjoy the benefits. Good calls add up. But if you just were taking a gamble, you won, but let’s think about the downside.
If he only does what he is priced for, that’s ok, but you missed the chance to get someone underpriced. Odds are you could have invested that money a lot better.
Is it different for Khamis? Well, if he turns out to score really well, people will be adding him like mad because of the big discount. If he turns out just a little better, nobody cares and you are only getting a little cash generation.
The Inverse Law of Pods: “The worse a POD performs, the longer he stays a POD.”
If your POD does poorly, and ends up doing worse than he is priced for, then you are hosed. You have to use a trade to get rid of him or put up with his poor scores. It might be that holding him is the best thing to do, but in that case he hurts you all season. You are at a disadvantage to all the people who spent the same money on bargains, and even with people who spent the same money on other correctly priced players, no matter what their ownership. Some other owners do trade him out and he is more of a POD in the wrong direction.
In Khamis’s case, you could have used half the cash to get a good cow, and the rest of the cash to get a better premium. So missing money and points! Extra bad! Going POD for cows is a terrible idea, as getting them right is so hard to begin with.
Is there a law for Anti-PODs you may ask? Well, not yet. Partly because not taking a really good player just to be different is so bad an idea I’m not sure anyone does it. Not taking a popular player because you think he is a bad choice, that’s just a basic good strategy. Do not take bad players. It is sadly easy to get sucked into taking a player because FOMO and then wishing you had listened to yourself. Early draft picks that cost a lot are known to fail, for example, and the players who finished first in the line the previous year are often overvalued.
A recent example, Sam Flanders was the top scoring defender in 2024 with a 119 average. He was my first player not picked. Never on my team, never near my team, even my hamster knew he was super likely to score below what he was priced for. But as the “best” defender he had high ownership….and I am now thinking I should just do a post on this and the whole regression to the mean thing….
I get that people on the hook for a ton of content and in need of views write/record about PODs, they are “easy” and a popular concept. I get having to come up with conent over and over every season can be a challenge, like, really! But, in my case, I’d rather explain the Iron Law of PODs every once and a while.
Anyways, always pick the bet player you can and never pick a player because of low ownership. No PODs. Only take low owned players if you would take even if they were highly owned.
Thanks for reading!