In July we published a sit-skill finding based on 1,875 resolved 2025 claims. Several readers pushed on it. Two questions came up repeatedly: will the edge hold with more data, and what does the position mix do to the numbers? Here is the answer.
All figures below come from scripts/base-rate-study.ts, run August 15 against the full graded corpus (SR-2026.4 bar, ruleset start_sit_v3). The script is committed and reproducible.
53.1% of all discussed players across the full corpus finished below the startable threshold, top-12 for QB and TE, top-24 for RB and WR. That is the blind-sit rate: what a strategy of calling "sit" on every player an analyst mentions would score.
By season:
| Season | Blind-sit | n (sits) | n (starts) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 51.2% | 710 | 3,395 |
| 2024 | 53.2% | 3,027 | 14,048 |
| 2025 | 53.3% | 3,098 | 15,804 |
| All | 53.1% | 6,835 | 33,247 |
The baseline is stable across seasons. A bit more than half the players analysts discuss do not have startable weeks. Calling sit on all of them gets you to 53%.
Real sit accuracy across all seasons is 62.9%. Against the 53.1% baseline, that is a +9.9-point edge.
By season:
| Season | Sit accuracy | Baseline | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 65.5% | 51.2% | +14.3 |
| 2024 | 63.2% | 53.2% | +10.0 |
| 2025 | 62.1% | 53.3% | +8.8 |
The edge was widest in 2023 (small sample, 710 calls). It narrowed as the corpus grew. With three full seasons it sits at roughly 9 to 10 points, not the 12.3 the July article reported for the early 2025 cohort. The July figure came from the smaller early-2025 window, and we said then the number would move as the corpus grew.
The sit edge survives the baseline test: analysts outperform the blind-sit baseline by 9.9 points, while start calls outperform the corresponding blind-start baseline by 2.0 points.
The July article called start-call accuracy "indistinguishable from noise." That was correct for the data at the time. With a larger corpus the picture clarifies.
Real start accuracy across all seasons is 49.0%. The blind-start baseline (the fraction of discussed players who do have startable weeks) is 46.9%. That is a +2.0-point edge.
By season:
| Season | Start accuracy | Blind-start | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 51.8% | 48.8% | +3.0 |
| 2024 | 48.9% | 46.8% | +2.2 |
| 2025 | 48.4% | 46.7% | +1.7 |
Start calls are not random. They are also not the skill center of this corpus. A 2-point edge on 33,000 calls is real but small. The sit edge at roughly 10 points is the story.
The blind-sit rate is not the same at every position. Players analysts discuss have different baseline rates of finishing below the startable threshold:
| Position | Blind-sit | Sit accuracy | Sit edge | n (sits) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| WR | 58.1% | 67.8% | +9.7 | 2,756 |
| TE | 55.0% | 66.6% | +11.6 | 814 |
| QB | 53.0% | 61.6% | +8.7 | 1,421 |
| RB | 45.1% | 55.0% | +9.9 | 1,844 |
WR discussions have the highest sit-failure rate (58.1% of discussed WRs do not have startable weeks). RB discussions have the lowest (45.1%). A show that mostly discusses RB start/sit decisions faces an easier blind-start environment and a harder blind-sit environment than one heavy on WR discussion.
The edge metric accounts for this. It compares each show's real accuracy against its own discussed-population baseline.
Shows with at least 30 resolvable sit calls in the corpus, sorted by name. The baseline column is each show's own discussed-population sit rate, not the corpus-wide figure.
| Show | Sit baseline | Sit accuracy | Sit edge | n (sits) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4for4 Football Podcast | 53.3% | 58.8% | +5.5 | 102 |
| ESPN Fantasy Focus Football | 48.3% | 59.4% | +11.1 | 69 |
| ETR Podcast (Establish The Run) | 43.3% | 59.0% | +15.7 | 61 |
| Fantasy Alarm Radio | 52.5% | 62.4% | +9.9 | 356 † |
| Fantasy Football Counselor | 49.0% | 63.2% | +14.2 | 133 |
| Fantasy Football Today | 53.4% | 62.5% | +9.0 | 2,974 |
| Fantasy Points Podcast | 53.4% | 59.9% | +6.4 | 675 |
| FantasyPros Podcast | 55.2% | 62.4% | +7.2 | 622 |
| Good Old Boys Fantasy Football | 49.3% | 54.9% | +5.6 | 82 |
| PFF Fantasy Football Podcast | 58.3% | 64.5% | +6.2 | 214 |
| Razzball Fantasy Football | 56.3% | 62.1% | +5.8 | 219 |
| RotoBaller Fantasy Football | 50.3% | 51.6% | +1.2 | 95 |
| RotoWire Fantasy Football | 54.0% | 68.2% | +14.1 | 176 |
| The Fantasy Footballers | 52.2% | 69.1% | +16.8 | 446 †† |
| The Ringer Fantasy Football Show | 50.5% | 70.9% | +20.4 | 79 |
| Underdog Fantasy Football | 48.0% | 71.0% | +23.0 | 69 |
| Yahoo Fantasy Football Podcast | 50.8% | 67.3% | +16.4 | 382 |
† Fantasy Alarm Radio has 30 past-season sit calls that have not yet resolved. Those calls are not reflected in the accuracy or edge figures above and could shift the numbers on resolution.
†† The Fantasy Footballers has 21 past-season sit calls that have not yet resolved.
The 2026 season kicks off September 9, and the first full Sunday slate is September 13. The 72 per-week thresholds are locked under SR-2026.4 through the season. No threshold changes, no retroactive regrading. When the season ends we will evaluate whether the startable-week bar warrants adjustment for SR-2027, and publish the proposed changes before any regrading happens.
The sit-edge finding is now on three seasons of data. We will report where it lands at the end of the 2026 season.
Subscribe to The Sunday Evidence Email for in-season updates as each week's claims resolve.
Every number in this article traces back to a receipt. See the live board, or how the bar is actually computed.