chu sits at #1 after two weeks of just winning, full stop — 2-0, a league-best 15 all-play wins, and 330.57 points for, which is also tops in the league. all that with only 11.4 points a week stranded on the bench, so this isn't even a lineup-luck story. david and jordan round out the top three despite matching 1-1 records, which tells you the all-play math (11 and 7 wins, respectively) and points for (295.26 and 272.43) are doing the heavy lifting over the literal win column.
joe and boyer are the other 2-0 teams but land at #4 and #5, and their bench numbers explain some of the gap — joe's leaving 19.4 points a week on the bench and boyer an eye-watering 37.8, easily the worst mark in the league. boyer's also rostering the lowest average starter quality (87.0) of anyone above the bottom two, so 2-0 is currently propped up by matchups more than roster.
will, josh, and scott cluster in the middle mostly on the strength of raw point totals and all-play counts — scott in particular has 11 all-play wins, tying david for second-most, but a 1-1 record and 16.45 bench points a week suggest he's misallocating a decent team. brett and mike anchor the bottom at 0-2 each, and it's not just the record: mike's average starter rank (79.0) and bench waste (19.5) mirror the pack, but his $31 faab remaining is the most spent-down bankroll in the league. brett meanwhile has just 3 all-play wins, tied for fewest, and the lowest points for of anyone — a genuinely rough two weeks by any measure available.
no movement to report against last week since there isn't one — this is the season's first snapshot, so consider this the baseline everyone gets to complain about later.
| # | team | w | ovw | pts | opt | rr | faab | total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Chu | 8 | 10 | 10 | 7 | 9 | 0.67 | 44.67 |
| 2 | David | 4 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 8 | 0.5 | 32.5 |
| 3 | Jordan | 4 | 3 | 5 | 9 | 10 | 1.0 | 32.0 |
| 4 | Joe | 8 | 9 | 7 | 3 | 4 | 0.67 | 31.67 |
| 5 | Boyer | 8 | 8 | 9 | 1 | 1 | 1.33 | 28.33 |
| 6 | Will | 1 | 5 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 1.33 | 25.33 |
| 7 | Josh | 4 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 7 | 1.33 | 23.33 |
| 8 | Scott | 4 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 1.17 | 23.17 |
| 9 | Brett | 1 | 1 | 2 | 10 | 3 | 0.33 | 17.33 |
| 10 | Mike | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 0.17 | 10.17 |
w/ovw/pts/opt/rr/faab are 1–10 category scores (faab capped at 1.67); full methodology is Will's six-category formula.