I was running out of time, but want ted to get this posted. Here are some of my thoughts:
Cobb and Jones are WAY underpriced with Davante Adams looking like he will scratch again. Rodgers is priced about right. All told the power stack comes at a giant discount. The SF secondary is beyond pathetic. Carson Palmer was able to torch them at will last week and would have done even more had the game script required it.
I am fading Julio Jones everywhere this week despite ranking him #1 on the site. HOU has been decent at keeping WRs out of the endzone and Julio is battling a multitude of ailments. I like ATL in a close here and am opting for Matt Bryant.
Derek Carr is the other QB situation I really like this week. Amari Cooper and Michael Crabtree are both solid options. Give me the more talented rookie that's being targeted a bit more here. CHI has given up 8 passing TDs in their 1st 3 games. Now that they gave up their pass rushers for two discount tickets at the fair, I think Carr may even have an easier time than the previous QBs who torched them
Oakland is awful at guarding TEs. The three previous starters against OAK have combined for 20 catches, 297 yards and 5 TDs. This is a copycat league. Until OAK has actually stops a TE, I am playing the one lined up against them.
I 100% understand the stack of GB @ SF, however that's a lot of risk to throw into cash games when you have a RB as talented as Eddie Lacy. I also have Rodgers/Cobb in a lot of Thursday lineups, but game script scared me off throwing James Jones in there too.
Certainly if this gets out of hand, Green Bay could resort to running more. But I suspect with SF giving up an average of 10 yard per pass attempt, the Green Bay game script is going to be to attack them through the air.
CHI has given up 7 TDs to WRs through the air this year. Cooper has an extremely high ceiling. STL has yielded just 2 TDs to WRs in their three games. Fitzgerald broke 100 yards once in their two meetings last year, but failed to score a TD in either game. In close situations like this, I prefer the guy with more upside.
Don't see any issues with that lineup. I think it is fine to stack when you have an expensive QB. With an expensive QB, you are basically saying that you need him to have a good game to cash, and if you think the value is there, don't have a problem with it. Not quite the same as taking Foles or another punt qb in a stack in cash. In that situation, he is cheap for a reason, and doubling down isn't a good idea, since you can survive a bad game when you only vest $5k anyway. While this particular stack lowers your floor, you are probably still in a situation where it hits value 50%+ of the time.
I actually think the big item people miss with the stacking in cash games in the percent of time they hit value. I recall that you had a simulation model for your projections, so I assume you have a distribution to work with. That gives you a huge advantage over the field assuming your simulation model is pretty good, which based on my years of using your projections, believe that to be the case.
This is a great post. I did stack Foles last week and this post has me rethinking that. There really is not much point of it in a cash game, because if the punt at QB does indeed hit, you don't need to double down on it. Conversely, YOU HAVE to hit when you target a top QB or you are in deep trouble. By that same reasoning, I think it makes sense to stack.
And by the way, you should explain the rest of your lineup sometime, because the way you put the high variance stack along with a lower variance play (Murray / Bennett / Cooper) is just as interesting. I like the combination of the safe high variance play you think is way undervalued with a negative correlation play that should have a high floor as a grouping, especially when you think the high variance play will hit a large percentage of the time.
- Chicago already was getting torched through the air when they decided to trade away two lineman for 6th round picks - Oakland should be able to choose their spots against CHI because the Bears are bad at rush and pass defense. Vegas favors Oakland so I expect Murray will get sufficient carries to hold value. - Bennett at $5,500 is among the safest plays at TE that I can remember. OAK has given up 297 yards and 5 TDs to TEs this year. Until Oakland shows they can defend the TE, I think this is a situation worth exploiting. - Although Murray and Cooper have negative variance, they are both are cheaply priced that I think they add much needed stability into this high variance lineup. Bennett is similar. He likely will have a big role in this contest regardless of game script.
David- I greatly appreciate you posting your thoughts here. You are the guy that I feel safe to turn to week in and week out for DFS. I often find great value with your projections. But, when you share your thoughts that is the bonus. Keep up the good work. My bankroll thanks you, LOL.
I appreciate the love. Going to try and blog a whole lot more going forward. It's been a challenge getting everything rolling with our DFS expansion, but we want to make these blogs extra special. I won't always be right on this stuff, but I am willing to post my thought processes, because we will all get better as the result of it.
You generally need 2X value in cash. At this $23,400 price, you need 46.8 points to be on target. I have Rodgers projected to get 22.7 FPs. My colleagues Maurile Tremblay and Sigmund Bloom are at 21.4 and 24.2. Our average is 22.8 FPs. If Rodgers performs well below that, this discussion does not matter. We will be in a hole that we doubled down on. For sake of analysis, let's say he delivers that 22.8 FPs. So now we need 24.0 from Cobb and Jones. That's 10-130-1 range. If they fail to score a TD, the line would be 14-170-0. So ask yourself in reverse, do you think Cobb and Jones will combine for 10 catches, 130 yards and 1 TD? Because that's all you are asking them to to do with this stack.
Where is he spreading his 400 Yards and 3TD's to this week? Jeff Janis and TY Montgomery? Probably not. Adams? No I don't see him playing in a walking boot. Quarless? Maybe if he's on the hospital Gurney with Adams. Rich Rodgers? OK maybe he will get his 4 or so targets. RB's? Most definately. So who does that leave for the rest of the 20 plus passes to go to? Exactly!!! JJ and Cobb. That looks like 50 points at least for the trio. Some unknown guy? Sure some eligible lineman or deep depth that they seem to pull out of nowhere. Read the other comments about Variance and other. If Aaron Rodgers scores 1 point for some reason then you are probably not winning any of your cash games anyway no matter what team you put out there. I rather have this stack then Rodgers, Cooper and Cooks for almost the same cash.
I don't know if Rodgers will throw for 400 yards and 3 TDs, but it certainly looked like Carson Palmer could have done that. I will take my chance with the better offense and the better QB to reach value this week. And if Rodgers gets value, then Cobb and Jones should follow easily.
Although you state that this lineup is for cash game, I also feel that this lineup is relatively decent in GPP, except for the % owned. Do you think so? BTW, I used to follow your old blog last year every week. I look forward to stealing some of your cash game lineups in the future! (Do you give them out every week?)
I am not going to make the blog only about posting lineups. Everyone needs to do their own research. What I want this blog to become is one that teaches the readers to be successful. Challenge conventional thought...discuss and get better. So I will sometimes post my team as will other staffers. But it needs to be more about the process and discussion for me.
As for your question, I think the ownership percentage would halt it from winning any GPP, but it could certainly score a lot of points and be competitive.
Love your reasoning behind the lineup. My only question is with the dumpster fire known as the Chicago Bears and their bad OL, with the loss of their LT Bushrod, will Clausen have enough time to make throws down the field to Martellus Bennett? I know Oakland is not good at covering the TE, but they have been rotating Mack at OLB. He played LOLB in week 1 & 3 but ROLB in week 2.
I was running out of time, but want ted to get this posted. Here are some of my thoughts:
ReplyDeleteCobb and Jones are WAY underpriced with Davante Adams looking like he will scratch again. Rodgers is priced about right. All told the power stack comes at a giant discount. The SF secondary is beyond pathetic. Carson Palmer was able to torch them at will last week and would have done even more had the game script required it.
I am fading Julio Jones everywhere this week despite ranking him #1 on the site. HOU has been decent at keeping WRs out of the endzone and Julio is battling a multitude of ailments. I like ATL in a close here and am opting for Matt Bryant.
Derek Carr is the other QB situation I really like this week. Amari Cooper and Michael Crabtree are both solid options. Give me the more talented rookie that's being targeted a bit more here. CHI has given up 8 passing TDs in their 1st 3 games. Now that they gave up their pass rushers for two discount tickets at the fair, I think Carr may even have an easier time than the previous QBs who torched them
Oakland is awful at guarding TEs. The three previous starters against OAK have combined for 20 catches, 297 yards and 5 TDs. This is a copycat league. Until OAK has actually stops a TE, I am playing the one lined up against them.
I 100% understand the stack of GB @ SF, however that's a lot of risk to throw into cash games when you have a RB as talented as Eddie Lacy. I also have Rodgers/Cobb in a lot of Thursday lineups, but game script scared me off throwing James Jones in there too.
ReplyDeleteCertainly if this gets out of hand, Green Bay could resort to running more. But I suspect with SF giving up an average of 10 yard per pass attempt, the Green Bay game script is going to be to attack them through the air.
DeleteWhy not go Fitzgerald and Lambo who you project for more combined points than Cooper and Bryant? Just curious. Thanks. Love this lineup btw.
ReplyDeleteCHI has given up 7 TDs to WRs through the air this year. Cooper has an extremely high ceiling. STL has yielded just 2 TDs to WRs in their three games. Fitzgerald broke 100 yards once in their two meetings last year, but failed to score a TD in either game. In close situations like this, I prefer the guy with more upside.
DeleteDon't see any issues with that lineup. I think it is fine to stack when you have an expensive QB. With an expensive QB, you are basically saying that you need him to have a good game to cash, and if you think the value is there, don't have a problem with it. Not quite the same as taking Foles or another punt qb in a stack in cash. In that situation, he is cheap for a reason, and doubling down isn't a good idea, since you can survive a bad game when you only vest $5k anyway. While this particular stack lowers your floor, you are probably still in a situation where it hits value 50%+ of the time.
ReplyDeleteI actually think the big item people miss with the stacking in cash games in the percent of time they hit value. I recall that you had a simulation model for your projections, so I assume you have a distribution to work with. That gives you a huge advantage over the field assuming your simulation model is pretty good, which based on my years of using your projections, believe that to be the case.
Good luck.
This is a great post. I did stack Foles last week and this post has me rethinking that. There really is not much point of it in a cash game, because if the punt at QB does indeed hit, you don't need to double down on it. Conversely, YOU HAVE to hit when you target a top QB or you are in deep trouble. By that same reasoning, I think it makes sense to stack.
DeleteAnd by the way, you should explain the rest of your lineup sometime, because the way you put the high variance stack along with a lower variance play (Murray / Bennett / Cooper) is just as interesting. I like the combination of the safe high variance play you think is way undervalued with a negative correlation play that should have a high floor as a grouping, especially when you think the high variance play will hit a large percentage of the time.
ReplyDeleteMy logic with these selections are as follows:
Delete- Chicago already was getting torched through the air when they decided to trade away two lineman for 6th round picks
- Oakland should be able to choose their spots against CHI because the Bears are bad at rush and pass defense. Vegas favors Oakland so I expect Murray will get sufficient carries to hold value.
- Bennett at $5,500 is among the safest plays at TE that I can remember. OAK has given up 297 yards and 5 TDs to TEs this year. Until Oakland shows they can defend the TE, I think this is a situation worth exploiting.
- Although Murray and Cooper have negative variance, they are both are cheaply priced that I think they add much needed stability into this high variance lineup. Bennett is similar. He likely will have a big role in this contest regardless of game script.
Why is this lineup different then the one you have posted on "FANDUEL STAFF LINEUPS FOR CASH GAMES - WEEK 4"?
ReplyDeletebecause I am always changing projections and doing more research. These were my latest thoughts. I blogged about before the game started.
ReplyDeleteDavid- I greatly appreciate you posting your thoughts here. You are the guy that I feel safe to turn to week in and week out for DFS. I often find great value with your projections. But, when you share your thoughts that is the bonus. Keep up the good work. My bankroll thanks you, LOL.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the love. Going to try and blog a whole lot more going forward. It's been a challenge getting everything rolling with our DFS expansion, but we want to make these blogs extra special. I won't always be right on this stuff, but I am willing to post my thought processes, because we will all get better as the result of it.
DeleteAny concern with QB/WR/WR stack? ARod likes to spread it around a bit and with both JJ and Cobb it seems like there is a bit of risk there.
ReplyDeleteYou generally need 2X value in cash. At this $23,400 price, you need 46.8 points to be on target. I have Rodgers projected to get 22.7 FPs. My colleagues Maurile Tremblay and Sigmund Bloom are at 21.4 and 24.2. Our average is 22.8 FPs. If Rodgers performs well below that, this discussion does not matter. We will be in a hole that we doubled down on. For sake of analysis, let's say he delivers that 22.8 FPs. So now we need 24.0 from Cobb and Jones. That's 10-130-1 range. If they fail to score a TD, the line would be 14-170-0. So ask yourself in reverse, do you think Cobb and Jones will combine for 10 catches, 130 yards and 1 TD? Because that's all you are asking them to to do with this stack.
DeleteWhere is he spreading his 400 Yards and 3TD's to this week? Jeff Janis and TY Montgomery? Probably not. Adams? No I don't see him playing in a walking boot. Quarless? Maybe if he's on the hospital Gurney with Adams. Rich Rodgers? OK maybe he will get his 4 or so targets. RB's? Most definately. So who does that leave for the rest of the 20 plus passes to go to? Exactly!!! JJ and Cobb. That looks like 50 points at least for the trio. Some unknown guy? Sure some eligible lineman or deep depth that they seem to pull out of nowhere. Read the other comments about Variance and other. If Aaron Rodgers scores 1 point for some reason then you are probably not winning any of your cash games anyway no matter what team you put out there. I rather have this stack then Rodgers, Cooper and Cooks for almost the same cash.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if Rodgers will throw for 400 yards and 3 TDs, but it certainly looked like Carson Palmer could have done that. I will take my chance with the better offense and the better QB to reach value this week. And if Rodgers gets value, then Cobb and Jones should follow easily.
DeleteAlthough you state that this lineup is for cash game, I also feel that this lineup is relatively decent in GPP, except for the % owned. Do you think so? BTW, I used to follow your old blog last year every week. I look forward to stealing some of your cash game lineups in the future! (Do you give them out every week?)
ReplyDeleteI am not going to make the blog only about posting lineups. Everyone needs to do their own research. What I want this blog to become is one that teaches the readers to be successful. Challenge conventional thought...discuss and get better. So I will sometimes post my team as will other staffers. But it needs to be more about the process and discussion for me.
DeleteAs for your question, I think the ownership percentage would halt it from winning any GPP, but it could certainly score a lot of points and be competitive.
When I see you describing a "stack" I think of QB and WR, But a QB/WR/WR from the same team? Isn't that a double stack?
ReplyDeleteyes, or power stack
DeleteAre you still off Julio?
ReplyDeleteLove your reasoning behind the lineup. My only question is with the dumpster fire known as the Chicago Bears and their bad OL, with the loss of their LT Bushrod, will Clausen have enough time to make throws down the field to Martellus Bennett? I know Oakland is not good at covering the TE, but they have been rotating Mack at OLB. He played LOLB in week 1 & 3 but ROLB in week 2.
ReplyDeleteHow did this end up paying out?
ReplyDeleteI feel like this didn't go very well
ReplyDelete