Question 1

Who has the stronger DEFCON rate: Scott or Timber?

Accepted Answer

Scott is the stronger DEFCON profile at 13.15 actions per 90 against 12.15 for Timber - a gap of 1.00 per 90. Over a 38-match season that difference works out to roughly 38 extra defensive contribution actions before any attacking upside is factored in.

Question 2

How do the raw defensive workloads of Scott and Timber compare?

Accepted Answer

Scott has logged 24 combined clearances, blocks, interceptions and tackles across 356 minutes (6.1 per 90). Timber has logged 13 across 163 minutes (7.2 per 90). Scott earned the +2pt DEFCON bonus in 2 of 4 appearances this season; Timber earned the +2pt DEFCON bonus in 1 of 2 appearances this season. Higher raw counts reflect a higher defensive workload; higher per-90 rates reflect efficiency at sustaining that workload.

Question 3

Does the Gameweek 6 fixture change the DEFCON case?

Accepted Answer

Scott is away at Chelsea (FDR 4) and Timber is at home to Nott'm Forest (FDR 3) in Gameweek 6. DEFCON output is action-based rather than result-based, so a tough fixture does not shrink the base rate the way it might reduce a clean sheet probability. That said, both players are more likely to see defensive volume in tougher matches - the DEFCON case can actually be marginally stronger against stronger opposition.

Question 4

Which midfielder should I pick for Gameweek 6 on DEFCON grounds?

Accepted Answer

Scott has the DEFCON edge at 13.15 per 90 versus 12.15. That advantage costs £1.1m if Scott is dearer - work out whether the edge is worth the outlay in your specific squad. On DEFCON grounds alone Scott is the better profile, but £1.1m spent elsewhere may return more depending on where you are stretched.

Alex Scott vs Quinten Timber DEFCON: Fantasy Premier League Gameweek 6

Alex Scott vs Quinten Timber: DEFCON Analysis

Scott vs Timber Gameweek 6

Scott has the DEFCON edge but costs £1.1m more than Timber. Where should the money go?