The Bills would be wise to discard Tony Dungy’s advice shared during SNF’s haltime show to establish the run game here in this spot. Besides, their pass-blocking lines up decently with the Saints front and I expect the speed and route-running precision of their receiving corps to ultimately win out – Lattimore is a fantastic cornerback but he’s shown throughout his career to be best suited for locking down bigger, more physical alpha receivers (e.g., Mike Evans). Also, at least on early downs, Dennis Allen’s Cover 3 scheme is centered around stopping the run. One of its most glaring weaknesses is against 4 and 5 wide sets, an alignment the Bills could and should utilize frequently if Brian Daboll is as sharp as we give him credit for. If Josh Allen is able to consistently avoid 3rd-and-long situations, that should effectively neutralize the Saints preferred method of attack (heavy blitz rate on 3rd down).
His salary of just $2.6k has him in my player pool. Yes, it’s a new offensive scheme and there’s a little more competition for looks with Metcalf now in the picture but those are the scores he was putting up before Pete Carroll in all of his infinite wisdom decided to convert him to being their main blocking TE – the kid is just 25 years old and likely has plenty in the tank (not to mention some motivation to prove himself as a capable reciever in the NFL). Wilson in the red zone is a lot like Aaron Rodgers – he looks for his guys. Lockett is there obviously and I’m not sure DK is quite yet. Maybe sentimentality will come calling back to ol’ Russ? I’m sure as hell willing to find out!
One thing about last week’s game as it pertains to the Bucs backfield that I believe is worth mentioning is the baffling usage of Jones and Fournette following their second quarter turnovers. First, Ronald Jones gets the ball fiercely punched out of his grasp by DeMarcus Lawrence to turn it over in their own territory. On the very next play they run following a Dallas touchdown, again in their own territory, Fournette lets a beautifully-designed dink-and-dunk screen pass bounce off of his facemask and into the hands of Trevon Diggs that ultimately gave Dallas their first lead of the game.
Excluding the handful of snaps taken by Gio late in the 4th quarter, Lenny played the rest of the game over RoJo. While one can question the underlying significance of forced turnovers vs. unforced turnovers, it’s imperative we at least take notice of this suspicious activity. Is RoJo in the same doghouse Lenny was in last season?
I only dug into this because it feels dirty to play two Browns pass catchers in cash but here’s how KC fared against bonafide slot men on the season…
All Targets are to WRs (RB/TE Targets not included)
W2: Keenan – 10 of 16 Targets
W6: Beasley – 7 of 21 Targets (Diggs had 8, Smokey played full game)
W12: Godwin – 9 of 22 Targets
Landry is viable in cash on the four-game main slate, especially if you’re already comfortable with Hooper. I’m expecting these two to soak up 85-90% of the targets not going to the running backs.
More – Swift, QBs/WRs/TEs (if Stafford plays)
ss –
CORE – HENRY
tw –
Floor –
Using Football Outsider’s line data for inputs I got a little crazy last week and made an intense spreadsheet. While I was at it I developed a statistical model that weights offensive run tendencies vs. the strengths/weaknesses against the D-Line of the opponent, and I’m terming it Weighted Directional Advantage (WDA). All running plays are not created equal. In a nutshell, this metric provides you a quantifiable answer to the question “If the offense runs the ball with the same directional frequencies they have up to this point in the season, how does that matchup look against this defense’s performances stopping the run?”. Well over half of all running plays are characterized as Middle/Guard, so it stands to reason that if a team holds a significant advantage on those types of runs over a given defense it should be considered more valuable than having an advantage when running around the ends. What’s more, if that same offense runs plays in the specific direction where they hold an advantage more frequently than average, it is also captured by this WDA formula.
Derrick Henry Behind the TEN O-Line…
Advantage Rank for the Main Slate (22 Offensive/Defensive Matchups):
Adjusted Line Yards – 1st (66% higher mark than 2nd-Saints)
RB Yards – 1st (15% higher mark than 2nd-Eagles)
Power Success Rating – 3rd
Open Field Yds – 5th
2nd Level Yds – 1st (13% higher mark than 2nd-Eagles)
Stuff Rtg. – 3rd
Weighted Directional Advantage – 1st (>10% higher mark than 2nd-Vikings)
So yeah, the matchup is pristine and the game environment sets up quite well for him, especially is Stafford is inactive.
Play Henry in cash if you feel like you have to have him. With news that Brees is playing and Michael Thomas is out, I’ll be prioritizing Kamara before Henry. If I’m able to put something together that I really like with cheaper running backs (like Fournette and Taylor), I’ll be fine fading Henry again in cash, assuming his ownership isn’t projected to be outlandish.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
141.96 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
More – Metcalf, Russ
ss –
CORE – HAWKS D/ST
tw – F1
Floor –
Tourney plays only for me at this point but I admittedly haven’t played around with cash construction enough to get a feel for how the WTF pieces would balance out a roster. Stay tuned!
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
141.96 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Lineup Breakdown
Week 14: DAL @ CIN
More –
ss –
CORE – DALLAS
tw – Zeke
Floor –
Using Football Outsider’s line data for inputs I got a little crazy early in the week and made an intense spreadsheet. While I was at it I developed a statistical model that weights offensive run tendencies vs. the strengths/weaknesses against the D-Line of the opponent, and I’m terming it Weighted Directional Advantage (WDA). All running plays are not created equal. In a nutshell, it provides you a quantifiable answer to the question “If the offense runs the ball with the same directional frequencies they have up to this point in the season, how does that matchup look against this defense’s performances stopping the run?”. Well over half of all running plays are characterized as Middle/Guard, so it stands to reason that if a team holds a significant advantage on those types of runs over a given defense it should be considered more valuable than having an advantage when running around the ends. What’s more, if that same offense runs plays in the specific direction where they hold an advantage more frequently than average, it is also captured by this WDA formula.
I went into the week being drawn to Zeke at his price and now that I’ve had a chance to look at the metrics, I’m even more eager to roster him this Sunday.
Advantage Rank for the Main Slate (26 Offensive/Defensive Matchups):
Everyone is aware that Elliott has not been utilized to the extent he was in prior seasons and earlier this year, but his drop in price down to just $6,600 and his still rock-solid role in this matchup are too hard to pass up. The floor is reinforced knowing that the Bengals offense is slowly encroaching a level of futility that only the Jets have had to themselves most of the year.
Couple those tidbits with those put forth by HiLow in his Edge write-up regarding the recency bias skewing the public’s perception of how this offense wants to operate and it’s hard to not grab the piece of this game that stands head and shoulders above the rest.
Zeke does not appear to be necessary for cash this week but I will have some exposure to him in tournaments – unless the salary savings opens up something that I could otherwise not gain access to, I will not be pairing him with the Cowboys D as they are the pay-down defense in cash this weekend, so that pairing is going to be way over-owned.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
141.62 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Lineup Breakdown
Week 13: CLE @ TEN
More – Henry, Chubb, Hunt
ss –
CORE –
tw –
Floor –
My favorite play from this game is Hunt. Whenever two run-heavy teams with backs square off against one another, there’s a tendency to think in binary builds. Hunt will be under-owned because of it along with his lower-end result from last week. He’s just too cheap for his range of outcomes in this setup.
_ _ _ _ _
I’M BEEEAAAAACCCCKKKKK!!!
Life kind of got in the way the past few weeks and after starting the season with six consecutive weeks of beating the cashline, I’m in the throws of a six-week COOLER where I’ve failed to cash (not to mention five straight weeks of failing to crack 140 points..) – OUCH!
Obviously I’ve had an ample amount of time to review my process and ruminate over the “what ifs” and suffice it to say I’ve come away with a litany of observations, but I’ll spare you the ones more specific to my style of play and rather share those that the handful of Collective Comrades (trademark pending) that read my posts may find valuable…
1) Building around condensed offenses and utilizing player blocks doesn’t just make sense for tournaments – it makes a helluva lot of sense for cash games, provided you marry the two concepts.
JM has been leading this charge for quite some time in his “one big roster spread across 19” mini multi-entry approach to building for tournaments – bankable fantasy goodness is bred from offenses that predictably feed just a few skill position players each week. Now, in tournaments there are two methods by which we can harness the power of this edge and they are as follows (for the sake of example, I’ll be referencing the Vikings offense as they’re my favorite team and they conveniently serve as the poster child for this very subject):
– For ceiling, we target only a portion of said concentrated offense in hopes of capturing the expected “spike” of points using as few roster spots as possible.
e.g., Dalvin Cook in a smash spot vs. an inferior opponent with a middling to terrible run defense
As we all know by now, the resulting tributaries we would then build around should have one of Thielen or Jefferson (and you could pair them with Cousins if feeling really saucey).
– For floor/savings/differentiation, we roster player “blocks” in hopes of reaping all of the scoring output generated by a condensed offense whose parts are relatively cheaper than their counterparts with similar roles on offenses that prefer to spread things out.
e.g., the Buffalo Bills at the tail-end of the 2018 season – The Collective’s own son, Josh Allen with receivers Zay Jones, Robert Foster, and Isiah McKenzie.
This is key because this is now where I’ve embarrassingly finally connected the dots…
The effectiveness of this latter concept inevitably brings about the obvious questions – “Wait – why aren’t we using player blocks from the best offenses with the best studs?” First, the cost of doing so is usually quite prohibitive and secondly, doing so kind of defeats the purpose of playing those studs. Whereas rostering the 2018 Bills player block allowed you to access the incredible ceiling of Christian McCaffrey without sacrificing leverage, simply playing teammates DJ Moore, Jarius Wright, and Curtis Samuel would have hurt you b/c when you play CMC in tournaments, it’s typically the case that they ARE the offense. There is no +EV leverage accomplished in playing all of the Panthers with CMC b/c if he duds, there is scant evidence of anyone else going off (again, in 2018). You aren’t betting on superb efficiency from the overall unit – you want the cog that eats up 90% of the volume because they can put the slate out of reach.
Boom. Done. Open and shut case.
Well, not so fast.
Week 12 of 2020 happened and it helped me see the light.
Provided there is enough value to field an otherwise balanced roster, you can absolutely roster the big guns from a high-powered offense (as many did, including myself with Mahomes/Kelce/Hill against a young, talented, but still vulnerable Tampa secondary). And not only can you do it in tournaments, you can do it in CASH.
Leverage, differentiation, ownership be damned – we don’t care about those elements in cash game play so the “player block” with one too many expensive pieces is just fine – we still get our guaranteed points and the higher cost we pay is rooted in the overall higher ceiling we then gain access to. Tyreek Hill went put up a 60-burger – a score that amounted to a 7.8x salary multiplier… let that sink in for a moment.
There’s an astounding predonderance of FEAR amongst cash game players – fear of correlation, fear of not having a piece of that higher total game, a fear that if a knowledgeable bet made on your roster goes wrong, it will go so wrong that it’s destined to backfire on you. What most fail to recognize is that clicking the name of any player into a spot on your roster is a bet. Keenan Allen, Davante Adams, Austin Ekeler, etc. – no matter how warm and fuzzy you may feel when landing on these players in cash, it’s an illusion. Are they fantastic players? Yes. Can they dissapoint? Absolutely.
Here’s what my cash game roster looked like ten minutes before lock this past Sunday:
My gut was telling me lots of things – the Chiefs would be perfectly content to throw the ball around the yard as they had the past few games and the banged up Tampa pass d was the path of least resistance. We have all come to realize this season that low-floor/insane-ceiling Tyreek Hill is actually solid floor/insance ceiling Tyreek Hill. The issue has been his salary.
Now all of this sudden I was on this Chiefs stack of Mahomes|Kelce|Hill and the Chiefs D as a hedge just in case there was a repeat of what happened in Denver earlier this year – I also just thought they were fairly priced at $2,700 and expected them to be rushing all day as Brady and Co. were chasing points.
But then the version of me from recent weeks started to doubt myself… No one on discord was doing this in cash. Projections didn’t say it was optimal, either. So I tried to convince myself it was OK to trust my instincts but then recent performance and the scared version of myself took over…
In regards to playing Hill in cash
W7-12 ME
“What if I was also on Kelce?”
W1-6 ME
“OK. So you’re locking in the two most explosive players at their respective positions in the game with the most talented quarterback this generation has ever seen? IN FACT, roster Mahomes and just complete the player block because salary allows us to this week. That way if he happens to run one in or dink and dunk one in to Watkins on accident you’ll still get something for it.
What’s the issue?”
W7-12 ME
“Well, what if Mahomes gets injured? It’s not like he’s impervious to that happening! Then your roster is basically dead!”
W1-6 ME
“STFU, no it’s not. Last year in Denver… Mahomes broke his kneecap on a brilliant QB sneak call near the goalline. Who went on to catch a long TD pass from backup Matt Moore (who was coaching a high school team during the entire preseason)? Tyreek Hill.
It’s not like Hill and Kelce are going to stop running routes and the Chiefs are going to go all Adam Gase with LeVeon Bell the remainder of the contest if that occurs. Man, do you always play this scared?”
W7-12 ME
“Not to start the year – just lately because variance has me second-guessing myself.”
W1-6 ME
“Do me a favor, take a breather. How about you sit out the last few here and let me finish this out for us? You know, end on a good note?
W7-12 ME
“Fine. Just be sure to stay focused when you’re in there.”
W1-6 ME
“Don’t even go there with me. If you hadn’t crumbled like the spineless coward you are I wouldn’t have to be bailing us out now, would I?
Hold on – who even took me out in the first place?!”
The end of this story is sad.
I subbed Parker in for Tyreek, played Olamide Zaccheus (because I just HAD to have a piece of that game?!, this is so painful to write out) instead of Isabella, and that helped me jump from the Chiefs to the Saints for my defense. I scored two rushing yards short of the bubble in most double ups and it cost me hundreds of dollars.
I digress…
Do we have to eat chalk in cash? Yes.
Does that mean we have to side with ownership on every single roster spot? No. Far from it, actually.
This isn’t a black and white thing. We need to be creative when building for tournaments. BUT, that does not exclude us from creativity in cash, either.
I forgot this was a list of lessons learned, HOLY COW! Um, here’s another one that’ll wrap it all up.
2) Don’t start spending every Monday-Thursday playing best ball mid-season and expect to feel calm as you begin cramming for weekend play after TNF kicks off.
That’s it. Go do.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
140.92 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 9: SEA @ BUF
More – Diggs (SE/3M), Allen (SE/3M), Metcalf (LE)
tw –
CORE – RUSS, DEEJAY, LOCKETT
ss –
Floor –
Russell Wilson’s two lowest DK scores this year came in back-to-back games – Week 4 @ Miami and Week 5 hosting the Vikings in the rain. Both scores are above the 3x salary multiplier we’re aiming for in cash game builds. Read that again…
We’re not talking about his average game here – if we were (32.0 DK Pts / game) his multiplier sits at an astonishing 4.21! But no, we’re talking less-than-ideal scenarios here. And it still comes out looking like a typo. It is not.
All things considered I believe Russ is the best cash game play on the slate. Take this immense value for what it is. If you believe in this game taking off as much as I do then perhaps I can interest you in some other involved actors?
I present Tyler Lockett and Deejay Dallas. Both are going to be the most utilized weapons that Russ will lean on when he’s not balling out like he owns the joint. The Bills’ struggles defending the slot are very real and Russ and Tyler have about as good of a connection between a QB/WR combo in the league. Buffalo’s run defense presents another path of least resistance which we can take advantage of through Dallas now that both Carson and Hyde are officially out. He has receiving chops out of the backfield and at just $5,000 he rounds out a solid player block for capturing as much of the inevitable scoring as possible.
I love Diggs and Allen in tournaments because I think people will ultimately side with recency bias and jump to the safer Seattle side. Metcalf’s price keeps him out of my tighter player pool this week but I don’t mind him if multi-entering and want the leverage off of Lockett.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
145.19 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 9: NE @ NYJ (Thu-Mon Slate)
More – Cam (LE), Patriots Def/St (MME)
tw –
CORE –
ss –
Floor –
Horpe, horpe – excuse me… I think I just threw up a little bit.
We continue our string of wonderful MNF matchups, this one featuring a perennial champ that’s mightily struggling to win games coming down from New England to square off against a perennial dumpster fire commonly referred to as the New York Jets. It’d be one thing if either team was in good form given their ugly styles of play but that just isn’t in the cards this time.
I’m going to skip the Jets because they blow and focus on the Patriots side of the ball for my quick-hitting DFS analysis…
From what I can see on film, Cam is out of rhythym right now with this offense. Attribute it to his having had COVID, the multitude of injuries sustained by his receiving corps., or that he’s feeling the pressure of expectations and trying to do too much – whatever it is, his footwork is wonky and it’s led to his passes being even more inaccurate than usual in his three games since coming off the COVID-19 list.
He’s still an incredibly gifted quarterback and I do think he’ll find his form before this disappointing season comes to a close. Priced at just $5900, I think this is a fantastic time to take some shots on him in tournaments at the tail-end of a week in a game I suspect will be eschewed by many for the sheer grossness alluded to earlier.
Depending on who is available to play for the Pats Defense, I think this unit makes for an intriguing tournament stab as their priced just above the Chiefs, Bucs, Ravens, Colts, Bears, and other stout defenses. I’ll have a share or two if we get some news later in the week that their cornerbacks are healthy enough to strap it up for this one.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
145.19 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 9: NO @ TB (Thu-Mon Slate)
More – Kamara, Brady (both MME)
tw –
CORE –
ss –
Floor –
This Sunday Night Football bout betweem two well-coached teams with Super Bowl aspirations is going to be a battle in the trenches. While clearly not devoid of talent in the skill positions, these squads possess both strong offensive and defensive lines. There is little here for DFS purposes, though. If the Saints took to the air further downfield I would be interested but they don’t really have a burner that can school the overly-agressive Jamel Dean on a double-move. I don’t hate Kamara in tournaments given that his ceiling is still solid in this matchup that is slightly less imposing with the season-ending injury to Vita Vea. I’d say he’s worth a share in GPP’s if you’re unphased by the Tampa D. Brady is also interesting given the weapons at his disposal and the Saints likely tilting Tampa towards the passing game – a 4-5 touchdown game is attainable here. For me personally, I’m just going to watch this as a fan of football. The Saints need a victory, the Bucs will be looking to get Antonio Brown acclimated, just so many good storylines to follow in this one.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
145.19 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 9: GB @ SF (Thu-Mon Slate)
More – Dwelley / Reed (MME)
tw –
CORE –
ss –
Floor –
I’m going to be leaving this game alone but I won’t argue with anyone that wants to take a shot on Nick Mullens continuing his trend of heavily targeting the TE position as he struggles to keep his head above water. If Reed weren’t coming off of IR or if Dwelley was otherwise not involved I’d be more intrigued but it would be a sheer bet on volume piling up.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
145.19 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
More – Mike Evans (MME), Slayton (MME)
tw – Bucs D/ST (SE/3M)
CORE –
ss – Scotty Miller (mME)
Floor –
Week 8’s Monday Night Football matchup leaves much to be desired – I’m setting my “bedtime at halftime” likelihood at 95%. The Bucs D will not be a sneaky play on this slate so while I encourage some exposure as they offer such a nice floor and ceiling combo going up against Danny Dimes, I’ll aim to be under the field.
Slayton can pop on anyone. In games that are projected to be a potential blowout, I look for explosive players that can take advantage of garbage time. Sterling Shepard can get there but it would require more volume, and if we’re going to take on this kind of risk it’s more optimal to play the perennial talent that can get there on a single play.
Mike Evans is cheap on DK at only $5,700 but he’ll be shadowed by James Bradberry, who is having himself an impressive year. This makes me interested in Scotty Miller – he’ll be on the field a lot in this one with Godwin being out and his price of $4,000 makes him a very intriguing salary saver, one that’s better-suited for tournaments than cash games with the Bucs not in line to throw that much.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
148.86 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 8: DAL @ PHI (Thu-Mon Slate)
More – Fulgham (SE/3M), Cowboys WRs (mME-MME) whoever suits your fancy
tw –
CORE – WENTZ
ss –
Floor –
Dallas is reeling and has been for quite some time. As every week unfolds it’s becoming more and more evident how much Dak Prescott meant to the Cowboys having any kind of playoff aspirations coming into the 2020 season. This isn’t the first time this franchise has “bombed” early in a season – but given the overabundance of talent on one side of the ball and an obscene lack of it on the other, this particular Cowboy squad is certainly leaving an impression. It would be hard to not notice the trainwreck of stepping onto a rebuilding division rival’s home turf and getting thoroughly waxed 25-3, with your once-vaunted offensive attack coming away with its lowest total net yards gained (142) since 2001. Granted, injuries have been sustained by the starting and back-up quarterbacks as well as the best offensive lineman, but at what point do we stop clamoring praise over the talent that’s been assembled and instead inquire about the very fundamental concept developing depth within an organization?
Rant over. We smelled blood last week (it was cute how early week projections had the WFT’s D pegged at 0.3% ownership – literal LOL), and perhaps it took a few days for the scent to reveal itself to everyone else but we had all gotten there by in large this past Sunday. I suspect the Eagles D/ST to be grossly over-owned, and at a price of $3,500 I’m happy to let that be as it may.
Both of these teams are in the top five in pass play rate and Philly does rate in the top ten in most pace metrics (we already know Dallas is 1st in almost every single one). This sets up well for volume for the pass catchers of both teams, though I’ll save any shots on the Cowboys for tournaments where they should be a bit under-owned, especially is Dalton is ruled out before TNF kickoff.
Especially if Miles Sanders is held out of action (Philly’s has a bye next week), I’m more drawn to Fulgham as Wentz has really leaned on him as the injuries to the receiving corps. have mounted. I still need to play around with roster construction, so Wentz may end up as a “More” and Fulgham a “CORE”, but these are definitely the two players I’ll be focusing on as we sand down our player pool throughout the week.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
148.86 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 8: ATL @ CAR (Thu-Mon Slate)
More – Robby, Moore, Gurley, Julio, Ridley (All mME)
tw –
CORE – DAVIS (Cash Only)
ss –
Floor – Bridgewater, Ryan
FINAL FINAL UPDATE: WE’RE BACK ON DAVIS!!! Gio and JWills don’t really have the same kind of pt/dollar with their new prices. It’s crazy what a $1500-$2000 hike in salary can do! Davis in CASH. Sorry for the flip-flopping. Let’s take the points!
LAST UPDATE: Value running backs look real promising to play this week (JWill, Gio) and after building some more lineups we’re going to need those savings. Hunt is a stronger play than Davis so I’m rolling with him.
UPDATE: CMAC is not suiting up for this one and the weather forecast doesn’t appear as grim as it did earlier in the week. That can’t be said, unfortunately, for several of the games on Sunday, and a few of which we would normally gravitate to for DFS purposes. We’re talking sustained winds of ~25 mph with gusts up to 40 throughout the duration of the games in Cleveland, Green Bay, Chicago and “nicer” conditions of 15-25 in Cincinnati and Buffalo – oh yeah, wet in Buffalo and cold at Lambeau, too.
If that wasn’t enough, there are key injuries that will impact our preferred player pools in this slate that need a good amount of clarity to emerge from Thursday practice reports for me to change my outlook on things for tonight’s game. My current line of thinking is that for cash game purposes, I’m always a proponent of “taking what the defense gives you” (many have phrased it similarly as “taking what the slate gives you” or letting the slate dictate your builds) but FWIW we are rostering eight offensive players so let’s call it what it is. The Atlanta defense GIVES opposing offenses (and us) locked-in floor on pass-catching running backs. What’s more, this tendency is strong and Davis’s usage can be classified as “workhorse” status.
Tonight’s game may get a little wet and winds may pick up if a second system hits Charlotte in-game but the outlook right now is promising. With game totals for this weekend’s contents continuing to fall and this game featuring two defenses with almost non-existent pass rushes (why I removed them from the ss category) and concentrated offenses with safe quarterback play behind them, Thu-Mon cash rosters should have a piece of this game. I think the two leading receivers for each side and Gurley are strong tournament plays without accounting for ownership, and I’m locking in Davis as the RB2 on this occasion – he checks all of the boxes and at the end of the day is only $300 more than what he was for this same matchup in Week 5. The Atlanta D is giving us production from Mike Davis – let’s take it.
For tournaments, I’m likely going to let this game go altogether as the DFS community gets wind of what lay in wait for Sunday – see what I did there? Let this be just another opportunity for us to embrace the uncertainty that’s swirling around the weekend games and build sharper rosters with players outside of tonight’s game who will probably go over-owned as everyone scrambles for that “safe” feeling.
_ _ _ _ _ _
While it’d be nice to play the Davis/Robby/Moore block as we did in Week 5, pricing has caught up a bit as the Panthers offense has shown some staying power and relative consistency after facing off against a couple of the strongest defenses they’ll see this year. The predictable dropoff in production for Davis against those stout run D’s has kept his price at a palatable $6,700. It’s still early in the week but with these divison rivals meeting for the second time in just a handful of weeks I don’t expect as much scoring. The game will be played outside in cooler weather, as well, and we all remember how the Falcons looked at Lambeau in Week 4. They won’t put up an egg here, but I’ll tread lightly on my cash exposure to this game. As of right now the forecast is looking like the remnants of Zeta will be moving through Charlotte on Thursday and into the evening, so wet and windy. If it looks this iffy as we near TNF, I’ll likely steer clear of this game entirely as it is a front-runner to go over-owned on this slate.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
148.86 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: CLE @ CIN
More – Burrow (SE/3M), Higgins (SE/3M) > Green (SE/3M) > Boyd (MME), Hooper (mME)
tw – Hunt (designation explained below)
CORE – BERNARD (CASH ONLY)
ss – see core above
Floor –
UPDATE: Joe Mixon has been ruled OUT
Drafting write-up as you read this.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
163.67 AVG per Main Slate
161.13 AVG per Week
161.91 AVG per Slate
141.88 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: CAR @ NO
More – Murray (mME)
tw –
CORE – KAMARA
ss –
Floor –
UPDATE: Emmanuel Sanders is OUT with COVID-19. Thomas is OUT with the ankle and hamstring that can’t seem to get better…
Nothing like spending a good chunk of your day playing out a game in your mind only to find out the player you’ve pumped up is no longer expected to play. I’ll get over it. Anyways, Kamara is a cash game lock and is now in the territory where it’s scary to fade him in SE-3M tourneys. Sean Payton may have some plays drawn up where Kamara throws himself the ball at this point. In all seriousness, my time may be better spent brainstorming angles for other games. This one is so straightforward that it’s best left that way.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Much attention will be paid to Friday’s practice reports and injury designations this afternoon but none will have a bigger impact on the slate as a whole as those for New Orleans. Alvin Kamara and Michael Thomas are volume monsters that cut into eachother’s expectations when on the field together. If one of them doesn’t suit up, the other usually becomes a no-brainer play in cash games barring an exorbitant price tag or the even more unlikely scenario where the defensive matchup is too imposing.
Latavius has been a great point of leverage when rostering Saints on any given slate but the player I’m most drawn to here is Emmanuel Sanders. JM spoke to this earlier in the year, that Sanders is fully capable of assuming an alpha role and thriving in it. After some initial growing pains, he definitely seems to be settling into Sean Payton’s offensive scheme. Sanders would be my point of emphasis if looking to go overweight on anyone from this game. Contrary to Michael Thomas, Sanders is explosive after the catch and does not need volume to go his way in order to smash. Because of this, I think it’s viable to roster Sanders along with Kamara. I’m not sure that it the optimal way to go given the lower amount of snaps this game is projected to have, but it is far less -EV than rolling out a Thomas/Kamara block in this spot.
If going this route, I don’t think you’d be committing yourself to the angle of this week being one of the unpredictable “Saints Defense letdown” variety and thus forcing the bring-it-back with Panthers – in fact, I think a lineup with a Kamara/Sanders block devoid of any Panthers is a sharp approach to this game those most will either go all-in on or avoid altogether.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
163.67 AVG per Main Slate
161.13 AVG per Week
161.91 AVG per Slate
141.88 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: SEA @ ARI
More – Carson (mME)
tw – Russ
CORE – KYLER
ss –
Floor –
As JM alluded to in his Edge write-up and what I harkened to in my last update before Thursday Night Football kicked off, I feel the best way to play this game in both tournaments and cash is thru Kyler. This set-up is all too familiar in the same attention it rendered last year when Russ & Lockett were highly owned in what turned out to be a 20-3 beatdown at the hands of Chris Carson and Jadaveon Clowney. I’m not saying Russ can’t “cook” here – Russ can do whatever is asked of him and then some. But this game environment that can play out in so many ways (the vast majority of which have Kyler putting up points) and the field’s perception being fixated on a shootout having me steering clear outside of trolling with Carson in tournaments.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
161.91 AVG per Slate
161.13 AVG by Week
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: CHI @ LAR (THU-MON SLATE)
More –
tw –
CORE –
ss –
Floor – Rams Def/St (mME) pure pricing play, should be lower-owned.
Along with the SF/NE contest, this game may play itself out rather quickly with both teams burning clock, preferring to lean on the run (the Rams quite heavily) and being easier to attack on the ground. If rostering Montgomery last week took a fair amount of convincing, I’m apt to leave him alone as the Bears could easily be chasing points here as six point dogs against a Rams squad that has been very effective at limiting the number of opponent possessions each game. The receiving work is there for him but I can’t bring myself to roster a player that has demonstrated a dismal ceiling when they are averaging only a 2.2x DK pt. multiplier of there price – a range like that is seen more for backs that are splitting time or have played a partial game due to injury, which isn’t the case here – HARD PASS.
Speaking of chasing points, I’ll be grabbing a share of the Rams D/ST unit in tourneys as I believe the field will see the lack of offensive appeal in this game (along with the run tendencies of both teams) and scratch it off altogether. Chicago will have to abandon their putrid run game (28th in DVOA rank & Yds per carry) at some point, and if it happens to be earlier in this battle in the trenches, the Rams will have the opportunity to capitalize.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
161.91 AVG per Slate
161.13 AVG by Week
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: TB @ OAK
More – Ronald Jones
tw –
CORE –
ss –
Floor – Bucs Def/ST (mME)
A lot of people will write off Jones with Leonard Fournette on track to return this week, and I think that is a big mistake. Sure, Lenny could vulture some touches and goalline work but I’m optimistic for a couple of reasons. If you dig into the how the Bucs have been using these two backs (SharpFootballStats.com – Off/Def Production by Direction), you’ll notice that Fournette is mainly used as an up-the-gut runner. This makes sense given the physical prowess to his running style and his decent speed in the open field should he happen to bust one through. In fact, now that I’m thinking about it, almost every highlight reel run I can recall of his has been one of this nature (there may be one that was more off-tackle last year when he shredded Denver at Mile High but don’t quote me on that).
Jones, on the other hand, is clearly deployed as a workhorse back, with Arians showing a slight but noticeable preference to run to the right side of his offensive line. This sets up quite well as they’ll be aiming their attack at the weaker side of the Raider defense (and it’s not even close). Maxx Crosby (LDE), Maliek Collins (LDT), and strong-side LB Nicholas Morrow have an overall avg. PFF player grade of 44.7 – Hankins, Ferrell, and Kwiatkoski on the weak side? 75.4… What’s more is that the Raider run D rates better defending over the center. Did I mention that Jones also has a decent receiving expectation? He’s averaged a little over 4 targets per contest AND showed us some ceiling in that regard when he caught 6 of 9 targets against Denver in Mile High (what a coincadink!).
The other point that favors Jones here is that Fournette missed Weeks 4 and 6 and played only one snap in Week 5. Not to read too much into the tea leaves here but to me that appears to have been a situation where Leonard thought he was healthy enough to play but soon came to realize he clearly wasn’t. This leads me to believe the Bucs will err on the side of caution here with his utilization with that fresh in their minds.
I’ll especially be overweight on him in the Thu-Mon tourneys given the latest COVID news spiraling around this game even playing. For cash purposes, I think the value that has opened up keeps Jones out of the discussion. Hunt is only $600 more expensive and will be playing in an offense far easier to project in their approach and with a tighter distribution of touches.
I think the Bucs Defense is a fine play that won’t go as overlooked by the field here, especially with their breakout performance against Rodgers & Co. – I’ll have a share but will aim to be under the field on them.
Quick Note: There’s been such an obsession with correlation in recent years that I’ve found it to be more contrarian to not roster the good defense of a core running back. Particularly in a game like this, the Raiders play a certain style of offense that caps the upside of the opposing defense. That’s why I’ve listed the Bucs as a “Floor” rather than a “More” play – good ol’ game environment.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
161.91 AVG per Slate
161.13 AVG by Week
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: BUF @ NYJ
More – Diggs (mME)
tw – {Josh Allen, Bills Def/St (au contraire)} (MME)
CORE – GABRIEL DAVIS (IF J.BROWN IS OUT)
ss –
Floor –
Not a lot here from a cash perspective. I think an interesting narrative one might consider about this game in its relation to the slate is to think of it as a “get right” spot for Josh Allen, after two consecutive back-to-earth performances on national television. There are few teams as good as the Jets at playing the punching bag role – just ask the DOLPHINS. Allen is surrounded in price by several QB’s in very appealing matchups with far more shootout potential than this game. Along with the Bills Defense being priced up out of the stratosphere, these are plays to be made in isolation and with minimal exposure. Out of 150 lineups, I might game stack the more compelling spots but replace the QB with Allen on a handful of them.
The Bills defense is more to just be contrarian more than anything (again, three to four lineups out of 150) – I think their upside is capped by the “hurry up and run” approach Adam Gase takes to lose games as quickly as possible.
Again, these are THIN plays but I’m trying to provide amusing content here, people.
OH, SNAP! WAIT A SEC!
I’ve played DFS long enough to know that you play Diggs when nobody else is talking about him – I expect that to be the case this week. I’d look to be higher than the field on him and use him as a one-off on 10-20/150 builds.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
161.91 AVG per Slate
161.13 AVG by Week
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: DAL @ WAS
More – Gallup (only b/c of his price, MME)
tw –
CORE – MCLAURIN
ss – WFT? Def/St, Kyle Allen, Logan Thomas
Floor –
For anyone that happened to watch Monday Night Football that capped off Week 6, Mike McCarthy owes you an apology. His team is in such disarray that video clips of grown men in attendance being consoled by their significant others near the game’s end have already surfaced online to help fuel the inevitable discussion… Did Dallas pull out the rug from under Jason Garrett prematurely? If not, well then was Mike McCarthy really the best candidate for the position moving forward? Sure, he took the time from his year of unemployment to study high school and college offenses but what good is that if it was a year off from him having to think about fielding a competent defense? SKIP IF ONLY READING FOR ANALYSIS – Whatever the answers may be, I don’t particularly care b/c I’ve long had a healthy hatred of “America’s” team ever since they crushed my grandfather’s soul by sending his Bills to their third and fourth consecutive super bowl losses in the early 90’s. True story: I dressed up as Cris Carter (BFF’s with him and Randy Moss) for Halloween one of those years and after his wife gave me a kit kat bar, a man asked me why I hadn’t gone as Troy Aikman – I immediately began questioning my father’s decision to move our family from Minneapolis to Topeka, KS. I’m notoriously hyper-sensitive so all the five-year old version of me could think was “Cool, dude. Tell you what? How about you and your bandwagon ass keep nursing that Keystone and get back to me in thirty years when you’re a diehard Chiefs fan and I’m making fun of you from behind a screen via a passive-aggressive article that’s seldom read?” But, yeah… The Cowboy love was EVERYWHERE. We were only in that hell hole for a couple of years but now I have family down in Oklahoma by way of marriage so I still get my ample fill of this country’s chosen franchise. UNSKIP
There are plenty of ways to spend salary this week. I think a popular approach will be locking in the Washington Defense priced at just $2,500. With the scent of blood in the water, I’m excited to see what this young defensive line can do against a banged-up Dallas team that hasn’t played on the road in almost a month. Not that crowd noise is a thing anymore but being outdoors on a different type of playing surface sure is. Lock them in as my favorite unit for this week’s “bottom-up” build (henceforth “BUB”).
F1 has been targeted at least 7 times in every game this year. This game may not be as up-tempo as we projected earlier in they year before Dak’s injury and the resulting death of the Cowboys offense, but there will be enough more snaps that I’m quite comfortable rolling him out against this defense that has thus far looked as lost as a tourist every Sunday afternoon.
The salary savers of Kyle Allen and Logan Thomas qualify from a BUB perspective but their inconsistency keep them far away from being CORE status. We know the floor here but aren’t exactly sure on ceiling, and if you have an otherwise balanced lineup that you love and are hellbent on finding out what that ceiling looks like against a pourous defense, I will not talk you off of it. I’ll stick with F1 in cash as he’s a known value that has a locked-and-loaded target share.
On Gallup, this is a YOLO play if there ever was one. He’s so freaking cheap for the upside in a matchup that is not at all daunting. I’m projecting depressed Cowboy ownership, but may be more than what is warranted. Gallup is the most affordable access point to that leverage angle if you want to play that this week. Amari or Lamb could get there on volume based on sheer talent but their prices have pretty much remained the same since Dak’s unfortunate injury, and what I watched live on Monday night and by replay again Tuesday morning didn’t exactly give me a warm fuzzy feeling about rostering any of these guys in cash games.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
161.91 AVG per Slate
161.13 AVG by Week
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
More – Wentz (SE/3M), Danny Dimes (MME), Slayton (MME)
tw –
CORE – R.RODGERS
ss –
Floor –
*UPDATE: Only DJax is returning which doesn’t change how I feel about Wentz. What that does change is how I feel about punting at TE this week. Lock in Richard Rodgers for $3,700 – he’s going to be on the field a LOT this evening and his cost opens things up considerably for the rest of our rosters.
Much like everything else with 2020, TE sucks and this week is no different. I like Wentz a lot but have a feeling I’ll be using the QB slot as my creative way to gain exposure to the more appealing games where I don’t feel like picking a correct receiver. Instead, I’m going to vouch for my confidence in Wentz by playing Rodgers. It’s weird to list him in all CAPS but that’s been the standard the first six weeks of the season – no reason to expect it to change now.
Another reason I’m liking this path is that McLaurin is very much in the mix for landing on my cash roster and there ain’t no way in hell I’m going to play two Redskins in cash, so I’ve accounted for why I’m not spending $200 less on Logan Thomas!
_ _ _ _ _ _
With this being my first CFM analysis for a Thursday night game, I thought I’d share my takes on Thursday-Monday slates because I strongly believe this is where our edge at OWS is most amplified – for cash games and tournaments alike. Obviously I have several reasons to back up such a bold statement, and those are as follows:
1) First and foremost in regards to game theory, more games being available on a slate means more opportunity for value to present itself. If we think we have an advantage over the field at identifying value and/or pricing errors, general roster construction, and promising game environments then it goes to reason that we’d prefer to play larger slates. Likewise, more games provides more opportunity for the field to “slip up” and latch onto bad chalk, mistake bad game environments for good ones, you know, the things that in the long run make us more profitable.
2) Secondly (and this benefits us more for tournaments), there is still a surprising amount of dead money given away by casual players that want to play the Thu-Mon slate because they like any of the three night games and think it’s going to go overlooked. What typically happens is the players competing during primetime end up going grossly overowned, creating ample leverage for us to work with when building our rosters.
3) Third, and I think most importantly, we discuss frequently on OWS the concept of embracing uncertainty in our approach to DFS. While most attribute this directly to their approach in roster construction (as the conversation intends to), I’d like to turn this idea on its head a bit – bear with me. I promise this is going somewhere.
I used to be that guy. With Point #1 above being ever-present in my mind, I spent my early years in DFS playing cash games only on Thu-Mon slates and tournaments only on the main slate (b/c it’s far easier to project ownership). I used to read The Edge frantically Wednesday night and throughout the workday Thursday during breaks in my desperate hopes of putting a cash game roster together that JM would approve of. Hell, I even think I left a couple of “What do you think of this guy in cash?” questions on the comments section when he was still with RG if he hadn’t gotten all of the writeups done by the time TNF was set to kick off. I would take any form of validation just to confirm that I wasn’t doing anything with incomplete information!
Chalk it up to sheer ignorance (of which I have plenty) or that most epiphanies in the DFS arena result from painful experiential journeys – I suddenly came to realize that I was going about this whole Thu-Mon slate thing the wrong way. You see, I’m not the only one who plays this slate. I’m not the only one that suffers from analysis paralysis from time to time. I’m not the only one who is hellbent on finding someone to tell them that everything is going to be OK. Rather, if I embrace the unknown that is presented by a Thu-Mon slate and actually utilize it in my roster builds for both cash and tournaments, maybe even trust the vast amount of knowledge I’ve accumulated over the years, I could actually look forward to playing expanded slates!
The allure of the Thursday-Monday slate is a combination of the primetime games and there being more players to choose from when building your lineups. The true beauty though, resides in the vast amount of unknowns that exist at the time the slate begins because final injury designations are not made until after Friday practices. Along with changing weather forecasts (which I’ll concede are overblown/misinterpreted most of the time but nonetheless become far more worth considering as we delve deep into these winter months), which players are active or inactive can drastically affect game environments and the general approach of highly adaptable teams. If you are with OWS any decent amount of time, you’ll become much more comfortable with breaking down these unknown elements and relish the edge it gives you over the field, who is still doing everything in their power to keep uncertainty at bay – making lineups mostly out of fear rather than out of confidence. With that, let’s get after it and break down the first game of this Week 7 THU-MON slate!
I FINALLY present to you my thoughts on this tilt between two fierce rivals, the New York Giants and the Philadelphia Eagles.
And I’ll start it off with a quick short story…
I have to attribute one of the funniest sports-related commentaries ever to my older brother. Hearing him describe how bipolar sports radio is in Chicago (where he moved from the KC area for work), particularly for the Bears, really does make me laugh every time I’m reminded of it.
Following any kind of victory, regardless of opponent.
“Have you seen this team play? I’m telling you, there’s something special with this group. Without a doubt at least a 12-4 record playoff contender!”
The next week, following a defeat at the hands of any opponent.
“They’re terrible! Tell me – how could this team be any worse? Looks like another year lost with a decent draft pick as our consolation prize!”
He’s since moved back to KC but I can only imagine how fantastic the Bears coverage was to listen to during the Trubisky era.
Anyways, the delusional expectations with which Bears fans come into every year are strikingly similar for supporters of the Giants and Eagles (although the Eagles have been very good in recent years with a title under their belt in 2017-18). Daniel Jones and Carson Wentz are easily two of the most scrutinized players in the NFL. It comes with the territory of being the starting quarterback for a storied franchise with rabid fanbases. The old adage of QBs getting far too much blame when their teams perform poorly holds true for both of these guys. I mean, just look at the matchups they have had to face to start this season…
What clearly stands out is that Wentz has performed markedly better than Jones while facing the same average defenses as him. There are several considerations that need to be made, however.
1) Jones only had Saquon Barkley for the first week (no coincidence there that he put up his highest point total against the stingiest defense he’s seen to this point).
2) The receiving corps. Jones has to work with is talented but still quite raw in their own right and their availability on a game-by-game basis has been a revolving door. Jones hardly gets to throw to the same targets, and when he does they are almost certain to be playing thru some kind of nagging injury (case in point: Engram this entire season).
3) He’s in a completely new system than he was in his rookie year previous and he is still in what is his first season as an NFL starting quarterback.
Aha! You see that’s why his numbers don’t look so good! Welp, not exactly…
Carson Wentz has had even WORSE luck when it comes to having healthy skills players to throw to. His bellcow counterpart in Sanders has played consistently (though as was the case in Week 1, it looks like they’ll be without him for this particular game), and Boston Scott is no slouch (whereas Devonta Freeman is), so he has his something to hang his hat on at least.
The case for Wentz this week is simple – against almost impossible circumstances, he has still managed to generate points at a 3.68x multiplier of his Week 7 price (this is really good if we’re hoping to get at least 3x in cash and are shooting for 4-5x in tournaments).
With Dallas Goedert, Desean Jackson and possibly Alshon Jeffery returning, and facing a Giants defense without Sanders that is easier to attack through the air anyways (23rd, 15th, 12th in the same ranks used earlier), I’m sure Doug Pederson is eager to give Wentz an opportunity to perform with more familiar weapons around him and table any discussions on the Jalen Hurts show for Week 8, barring some epic collapse during the first half. I am marking Wentz as a More play for now (as early as single-entry for tourney builds) as I need to tinker with lineup construction more to get a feel for how loose salary is this week (if the savings he presents from the QBs priced above him make an impact he’ll be making his case for “CORE” status) and I hope this isn’t just my morning caffeine rush getting the best of me.
Now, onto Mr. Dimes…
I’m not here to pump anyone up that I don’t believe in – I’ve picked on Jones way more than most DFS’ers. In fact, it really wasn’t until I watched the film from last week’s game against WFT? that I finally understood what practically everyone had insisted with this kid – that’s he’s athletic. The way he constantly operates the pocket like an awkard goober led me to believe that all this time it was just noise perpetrated by those crazy Giants fans and DFS players alike that are dying for something good to happen to this team that might return them to glory. It took Jason Garrett long enough it appears that he may have come to the same realization just a few days before me!
Jones had the longest run of his career (49 yds.) on a designed run play (RPO, to be exact) that was executed well enough that even the cameraman was initially fooled. As the play unfolded I got to see Daniel Jones gallup along the sideline, keeping ground with defensive backs. Another designed play for Jones to run followed. Nothing earth-shattering, but whenever anything sticks out to me when I watch all of the condensed games on Monday, I write it down. Doing so landed me on Trey Burton this past week (it looked to me that Rivers was absolutely glued to him the game prior and figured volume would likely be there if MAC was inactive). When you get in the habit of watching games for the purposes of research, you absolutely start to notice the little things that “pop”. This is crucial to lean on as you build throughout the week. So, for Danny, I’m not jumping at the bit to roster him myself, but given this glimmer of hope and QB run plays being more effective against man coverage (which Jim Schwartz implements), I’d strongly consider putting him on one of my rosters if I were entering 20+ lineups. He’s shown to have a tremendous ceiling and he’s priced above Kyle Allen who may garner ownership going up against Dallas in an up-tempo game (even though Allen himself has shown no ceiling, at least that I’m aware of).
The Eagles and Giants defenses are going to go overowned in the Thu-Mon slate due to the constant narratives of struggle for the two quarterbacks. Rostering either of the QBs (preferably Wentz) is one of my favorite leverage angles on the slate.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
161.91 AVG per Slate
161.13 AVG by Week
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6: ATL @ MIN
More – Ridley, Cousins, Thielen, Jefferson
tw –
CORE – MATTISON
ss – Zaccheaus
Floor –
DK tried their hardest to not repeat the same mistake. After starting Mike Davis’s Week 3 (when he took over full-time duties) salary at $5,700 vs. the $10,000 you had to pay for CMC the first two weeks of the season (it’s now at $7,000 vs. CMC’s $8,500), better minds seemingly prevailed this time around in pricing Alexander Mattison at $7,200 – exactly a 10% discount from the $8,000 we’d be looking to pay for Dalvin Cook in this drool-worthy matchup vs. Atlanta had he not strained an abductor in Sunday night’s tilt against the Seahawks. Wow – that was a long, drawn out sentence!
Dalvin Cook is a special player and he’s very talented in many respects. Being a diehard Vikes fan my whole life, I’ve obviously watched a ton of their recent games, even before getting into film review last season. Cook is undoubtedly the better runner of the two. Mattison has proven to be the better receiver out of the backfield. He also passed the eye test when assuming lead back duties after Cook’s exit in Seattle – several chunk gains including FOUR carries of ten yards or more against a top-ten run defense in adjusted line yards. Given that performance, DK’s full PPR scoring, the Vikes O-Line ranking 2nd in ALY, AND the Falcons’ propensity for funneling targets to opposing running backs, I’m having a really difficult time accounting for the 10% gap in pricing. Looks like some chalk I’m eager to eat!
After being a no-show on a week the entire DFS community had to entertain the idea of rostering him, Olamide Zaccheaus sure has some explaining to do. Instead, I think it’d be better if he trolled us by resurfacing the very next game (if Julio again misses) against a young secondary that is improving (as evidenced by their play against Russell Wilson in the first half) but still has a ways to go before Mike Zimmer will claim them as his own (as evidenced by their play against Wilson in the 2nd half). It enables us to build some crazy tournament rosters, so why not?!
Ridley is really good and he’s going to have to be if the Falcons hope to win a single game this year. If you are able to fit him onto a balanced roster, I have no qualms rostering him in cash – maybe as a block with Zaccheus? Just a thought…
Because the Vikings run an offense with such a concentrated distribution of touches, lots of attention is always given to the top dog on a week where they set up well to do damage. I understand how tantalizingly convenient it is to hit the lock button on their stud running back in a juicy matchup at home in which they’re projected to lead throughout the contest. It’s the Vikings – good or bad, it hardly ever goes as planned. The other big dogs and to a lesser extent ancillary pieces are chronically overlooked because what the DFS public fails to fully comprehend is that on any half-decent offense with a narrow distribution of touches, the touches are worth more. And what’s more, a picture-perfect matchup on the ground doesn’t exclude a decent matchup through the air from also being present. Over the past couple of years you likely picked up on the trend that when Thielen was supposed to smash, Diggs would, when Cook was supposed to smash Thielen would. When either Thielen or Cook were supposed to smash this year against the Titans, Jefferson did! I guess my point is this: when it comes to my Vikes, don’t match the field. Have an imagination, be creative, but please do not just match the field.
And that’s how I feel about that.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose.
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6: BLT @ PHI
More –
tw – Lamar, BLT Def/ST
CORE –
ss –
Floor –
Lamar and Ravens D/ST are the only pieces we can ever really consider from this team in cash games, but with Ravens cost now joining Lamar’s as being quite prohibitive, they are left in this “tw” range. The regression pendulum has swung back hard on Lamar, and I want to be on him when there’s another correction in his favor. I’ll be pouncing if projected ownership holds at under 10% – his floor his solid enough to consider him as early as single-entry and 3-max builds.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose.
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6: CLE @ PIT
More – Ebron
tw –
CORE – DIONTAE, PIT DST
ss –
Floor –
As tilting as it was to see Diontae Johnson sustain another injury very early in the contest and then watch Claypool score four times against the Eagles, it just goes to show how sharp of a play it actually was. For whatever reason, DK decided to drop his price $1,000. Even with the emergence of Claypool, I see no reason to hop off this train. Assuming he’s healthy to strap it up on Sunday, Diontae strikes me as the best piece to roster from a game that has a fair chance of turning into a shootout. Should the Steelers (who lean towards the pass) jump out to an early lead, the Browns will eventually have to abandon their run-heavy tendency and rely more on Baker Mayfield – this puts the Pittsburgh defense firmly in play. Both teams are easier to attack through the air – and both teams possess explosive players that CAN get vertical.
HOWEVER, there are valid “shootout recipe” concerns/questions to consider on both sides… For Cleveland, the effectiveness of OC Kevin Stefanski’s passing scheme is predicated on play-action. Albeit far more nuanced, the “Run, Run, Run, PASSS!!!, Run, Run, Run, PASSS!!!” approach won’t be near as lethal if Pittsburgh doesn’t have to pay tribute to the run game. Cleveland is also running the ball on over half of their snaps when trailing by 7-14 points – this is a sharp coaching staff that understands it doesn’t stand a chance if they abandon the run game to chase points.
We know the Steelers passing attack is less vertical than it used to be – Claypool’s dominant performance may have instilled some confidence into the coaching staff that his presence on the field will allow them to open it up a bit more in hopes of further straining coverages. All in all, I’m cautious to play this angle as I think ownership will congregate around this game from those that feel they missed out last week.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose.
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6: HOU @ TEN
More – {Tannehill, A.J. Brown (but they’ll be popular in tourneys)}, Corey Davis? (Tourney only)
tw – Watson
CORE – HENRY
ss –
Floor –
It goes without saying but I can’t in good conscience leave it unsaid – If Derrick Henry is going to be chalky, you fade him. Particularly on a week where there is no shortage of pass-catching, similarly-priced running backs in decent to middling matchups, there are just so many ways to position yourself to overcome his ceiling score should he trounce the Texans D. In cash games, you play Henry if your style is to side with heavy ownership and pick your battles elsewhere. If you’re weird like me and love the thrill of going contrarian in cash, steer clear.
In the three meetings between these two teams since Vrabel took over the helm in Nashville, Watson is averaging 254 Pass Yds | 2.0 PTD | 1.0 INT | 49 Rush Yds. | 0.33 RTD – whereas in previous years we could depend on the Texan Defense to keep games close, we’ve now turned to Watson to fill that role. He’s a solid play but his salary of $7k keeps him out of cash consideration for what I’m seeing as the optimal cash build this week.
The public’s romance for Ryan Tannehill and A.J. Brown seems to have taken off again after their performances against the Bills on national TV. For those of you looking for leverage off of Henry (myself included), I’ll be the first to break it to you that rolling out these two is NOT going to overlooked by the masses – Tanny in the optimal build pricing tier for QBs (along with Cousins, Stafford, Fitz, etc.) and Brown’s price is still lower than what we’re used to seeing, but he remains as the lead dog in a highly efficient passing attack.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose.
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6 – WFT? @ NYG
Floor –
ss –
CORE – WFT? DST
tw –
More – Engram, A. Gibson, McLaurin, Slayton
I’m oddly drawn to Gibson this week and it’s probably because we’ve all been on pins and needles waiting for the blowup game we know is coming. You think it’d have to happen here, right? When nobody is really paying much attention and he’s squaring up against a middling defense? Slayton has been in the “always viable in tourneys” eschelon along with McLaurin for quite some time now, but I’d really love to see him develop more of a consistent floor even with spotty QB performance (F1 somehow managed to get there with Haskins throwing to him). Engram looked perfectly healthy to me against Dallas but the targets failed to be there, yet again. All is not lost, however! What CAN we count on when looking at this game environment through a cash game lens? Danny Dimes turnovers! He even let the putrid Cowboys Defense in on the action last week – such a generous dude. Anyways, while the Panthers stand out now as my “bottom-up-build” defensive unit where I’m fairly certain they won’t put up negative points (btw, thanks San Fran!), the upside to be had with the District’s Football Team priced at $3,300 is really solid value and what I’m currently hoping go get to for my cash game lineup. Washington’s Pass Rush is legit and they set up well here to give Danny plenty of opportunities to turn it over on Sunday.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose. This week’s example:
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6: DET @ JAC
More – James Robinson, Shenault Jr.
tw –
CORE – GOLLADAY
ss –
Floor –
I’ve had a soft spot for Robinson this entire season, likely because he was an undrafted rookie coming in and I’m a sucker for underdogs. Not only is the matchup against the Lions one of pure candy, but what I find most promising is his consistent involvement in the passing game, even when the Jags are trailing. While he seems $200-300 overpriced (probably a case of pricing psychology involving relative unknowns), he’s one of the only few running backs on the slate that: a) has a soft matchup, b) isn’t wholly dependent on yardage and TD’s (looking at you D. Henry, who I will now forever worship following his most glorious of stiff arms ever applied to Josh Norman on Tuesday night!), and c) is immune to gameflow (five games in, at least). The one chink in the armor though is how infrequently the Jags run the damn ball. In aggregate, they are the only team in the NFL to pass more frequently than the Cowboys (at a whopping 67% clip)! *As an aside, it’s interesting to note that the Jags are forming into the polar opposite approach as Adam Gase’s “let’s hurry up and run” Jets offense. Jacksonville is ranked dead last in situation-neutral pace of play, something you wouldn’t come to expect from the pass heaviest team in the league – perhaps a case of small sample size still needing to be teased out a bit – but if it holds, I’m hereby coining it the “Slow & Throw Show” (I’m lacking in creativity today)*. Ahem, salary is loose this week (provided you can get comfortable with a cheap TE) so I don’t see the need to get cute in cash when we have so many other featured backs in run-heavy offenses at our disposal. I’m still very interested in tourneys, though.
Now onto my boy Kenny G. – for the type of receiver that Golladay is (big, downfield threat that also happens to be his quarterback’s favorite red zone target), the floor always feels a tad bit lacking. Then I remind myself that Golladay is the GOAT. I also take into account his pristine matchup against a Jags defense that has a difficult time covering a corpse let alone an out-of-this-world athlete that could probably just hop over them if he needed to. The price still feels too cheap and it feels weird to not have Golladay as a “CORE” play if Detroit has an implied team total north of four TD’s, so “CORE” he is. My instinct is to go over the field on Golladay in tournaments (correlating with J. Robinson).
Laviska Shenault is a superb talent that the Jags have gone out of their way to utilize from the outset of the 2020 season. He’s seen a steady rise in touches and targets as the weeks have gone by and that’s with the established alpha DJ Chark back on the field following his Week 3 absence – this resembles a quick, but steady development arc the Jags are likely relishing at the moment, having drafted Laviska in the 2nd round of the 2020 draft (42nd overall) – as an aside, if you ever have some time to kill, read up on Shenault’s back story. It’s very inspiring and serves as a heartfelt reminder during a tumultuous year like 2020 of the incredible ability within us to overcome tragedy. Needless to say, it’ll leave you really rooting for him out there on the gridiron!!!
Now, the bit I’m MOST excited about is how Gardner Minshew has been kind enough to state precisely when Laviska becomes his primary focus on given pass play… when the defense is in man-to-man coverage. You’ll notice in film review that the Jags frequently send Shenault in motion before the snap to aid in Minshew’s determination of the man vs. zone coverage (USUALLY, if a defender is tracking with a receiver’s pre-snap motion, it’s a strong indicator of man coverage). However, this shouldn’t be too necessary against the Lions, who are well-established to be a man-heavy defense. Given the scheme, though, and the likelihood that this is a tightly contested game that does have some shootout potential, I see this as a prime spot for Shenault to blow up. Even if Chark ends up missing and Detroit activates by far their best cornerback in Justin Coleman from IR, Coleman primarily works out of the slot unless he’s called upon to shadow an alpha. In that scenario I don’t see him vacating his slot coverage of Keelan Cole to address the threat that Shenault poses, especially with the Detroit coaching staff insisting on their usual approach to business. I’m also tinkering with the idea of playing him but it feels way too early in the week to plant my flag on a rookie wideout in cash. Stay tuned for updates!
_ _ _ _ _ _
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose. This week’s example:
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6 – NYJ @ MIA
More – Gaskin, Fitzmagic (Tourney only for both)
tw –
CORE –
ss –
Floor –
On a general note, this is such an intriguing matchup in regards to game environment per se but because of the stark contrast in stories of coaching effectiveness for these two franchises. The green version of a dumpster fire from the Big Apple is set to visit this Dolphin squad that, despite its owner’s best efforts to sandbag on the field in hopes of collecting high draft picks, have really come to impress fans on a week-in, week-out basis with how competitive they are with such a talent-depleted roster. Yes – the 49ers are really banged up and they had just lost at home to the hapless Eagles and are evidently still without a healthy starting quarterback. The fashion in which Miami and their HC Brian Flores dismantled last year’s NFC champion was nonetheless impressive. After a few rough years, Flores, with his stellar acumen, and his cohorts are no longer over-shadowed by Miami’s front office (now that they have Tua, at least, I hope…). These kinds of teams are not only good for the game of football but are a lot of fun for fantasy purposes, which I’ll get into further below. And then there are the teams that are bad for the game of football and, ipso facto, bad for fantasy (unless you’re rostering the opposing defense)… Much like the old adage (in fantasy circles) used to go that “Wide receivers go to die in Chicago” because of the cumbersome, smashmouth offensive style paired with the quarterback play of a “game manager” (hint: think of “Dilfer”, rhymes with “Crow’s man” – I also think the freezing temps and hellacious winds coming off of Lake Michigan MAY have something to do with it), the New York Jets, under the tutelage of Adam Gase, have come to be well-known as the team talent goes to die. From what I can see on tape, it also appears to be the place where effort goes to die. It’s simply a steaming pile of toxicity that is best left alone for the time being. That is until we re-evaluate the carnage left following the inevitable firing of Gase which I’m hoping will come at the hands of these Miami Dolphins.
From a DFS perspective,
PROVIDED THAT Jordan Howard is again a healthy scratch, I really like the Fitzmagic/Gaskin player BLOCK in this matchup at their respective prices of $5,900 and $5,400. Our complaint all along with Gaskin has been his lack of involvement when the Dolphins get within the ten yard line. Well guess what? Jordan Howard was a healthy scratch against the 49ers, and Gaskin was given the goalline work, punching in a TD on one of his three opportunities that I can recall from watching the film. If Brian Flores has determined that Howard is indeed as useless as he appears with Gaskin able to shoulder the load, this sets up quite well for us. The Jets rank 7th in Run Def DVOA but 22nd in Yds allowed per carry. Their pass defense is right around that neighborhood (22nd in DVOA, 24th in yds allowed / pass) so this really boils down to what ends up being the path of least resistance.
Irrespective of salaries, here’s the scoring breakdown of every QB1/RB1 block against the Jets through the first five weeks of play:
W1) Allen 33.18 / Singletary 10.3 = 43.48 DK points
W2) Jimmy G 13.24 / Mostert 18.7 = 31.94 (both left game early due to injury)
W3) Rivers 12.68 / Taylor 13.2 = 25.88 (worst case “curb-stomp” scenario)
W4) Rypien 14.18 / MGIII 28.8 = 42.98
W5) Kyler 30.3 / Drake 13.2 = 43.5
AVG = 37.56 DK Pts
OK… So you’re telling me that for $11,300 I can roster a player block that’s LIKELY to get me over 35 points, good for over a 3x multiplier? And that’s after having gone through a sample that accounts for a worst case game flow and possible injury? And this block, if those doomsday scenarios don’t come to pass, averages over 42 DraftKings points, pushing closer to a 4x multiplier, in CASH? Sign me up! At this rate, I’m not even sure the Jordan Howard status matters. Plenty of RB timeshares exist in the cited sample and on top of that an active status doesn’t guarantee Flores will let him vulture GL touches! So, much like I did with rostering the Robby / Moore / Davis block last week (where we shoot for “guaranteed” points on concentrated offenses that set up well against a particular defense), I’m inclined to take the guesswork out of which side of the ‘Fins aggressive offense prevails and instead bet on them as a whole at prices that will not devastate your lineup should the Jets D play inspired football for the first time this year. And yes, if it feels like I’m picking on the Jets it’s because I am.
UPDATES: Spread of almost 10 points in favor of Miami. The beatdown scenario is more likely than I originally gave it credit for. I also didn’t realize until looking at the metrics how poor Miami’s O-Line is. With Gaskin the more affordable piece, I’m now leaning to him in tourneys over Fitzmagic :_(
_ _ _ _ _ _
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose. This week’s example:
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Floor –
ss –
CORE – Diontae, Steelers D
tw –
More – Ebron, *Ertz*
*Ertz is a pure volume hog play to reach his ceiling, so if you do want to chase this thin play make sure he’s the only eagle on your roster.*
Floor – Players with limited ceiling that are highly unlikely to crater an otherwise ambitious roster. This week’s example: Teddy Bridgewater
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented. This week’s example: Olamide Zaccheaus* (he’s a bit closer to CORE than your generic ss)
CORE – In all CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. We want our rosters to consist mostly of these players that offer us the best Floor and Ceiling combo, ideally price-considered (easiest on a full slate).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not appropriate for cash game play). These players typically carry higher floors than players under the “More” section. This week’s example: Travis Kelce
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two categories. These are the more aggressive plays in which a player carries a relatively low floor but also possesses a ceiling that can bring you a tournament win. They are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of binking DFS tourneys / GPP’s. If you ever hear the phrase “planting a flag” or “taking a stand”, those are referencing these kinds of plays. This week’s example: Darius Slayton
(denotations key): more to be added as the breakdown is refined
(GEO) = Game Environment only, not appropriate as an isolated play – for this week think of the ancillary Cowboys receivers against the Giants (i.e., think of it as kind of a rabbit hole – if you roster this player it means you are betting on the game playing out in a way that would result in it only making sense for you to bring it back with an opposing player).
(mME) = Mini Multi Entry, 7-20 lineups before introducing as isolated play
(MME) = Mass Multi Entry, 20+ lineups before introducing as isolated play
*It’s implied that everything else not in () is appropriate for SE to 3-5Max*
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup. The best example of its utility is one JM refers to frequently, and it involves a player we’re all familiar with – Tyreek Hill (2020’s corollary think Marquise Brown). Now granted, he’s been much more consistent as he’s matured as a route runner and has settled into Andy Reid’s offense, but Tyreek Hill USED to be a player you would almost always avoid building a core lineup around or consider playing in cash due to his volatility. The message went that if you were building tournament lineups, and you wanted to bank a roster on it being Tyreek blowup week, you would want to be absolutely sure it wouldn’t go to waste by not appropriately “balancing” it out with the remaining lineup slots. In this example, the most optimal way to “balance” the Tyreek play is to pair it with mostly CORE plays, or even a Floor play. I have found that this general approach has really sharpened my focus on proper roster construction. It took me a long time to understand how aggressive one needs to be depending on the contest they are competing in.
For cash games, you’d like your roster to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be at the middle of breakdown). GENERALLY speaking, for limited-entry tournaments, you want to still have your “CORE” lineup but begin adding weight to the “more” side by selecting players to roster that push the envelope a little bit, sliding your overall lineup slightly below the “CORE” in a balance sense. For mass multi-entry, you are shooting for about half of your lineup consisting of your “CORE” and the rest being made up of “more” players. This is a VERY loose explanation that is only intended to help complement the use of the table. Obviously there are rosters that are built around certain game environments and tributaries that may stray from these rough guidelines, but again – I’m only sharing this because it’s helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS player I profess to be.
AGAIN: This in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – it is practically derived from it and only serves as a quick snapshot of the players to be considered from a given game and in what DFS formats! This is only a tool I use throughout the week to assist in me in building balanced lineups. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me. Thanks!
Floor – Bridgewater
ss – Zaccheaus
CORE – Mike Davis, Robby Anderson
tw –
More – Hurst (mME)
Floor – Players with limited ceiling that are highly unlikely to crater an otherwise ambitious roster. This week’s example: Teddy Bridgewater
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented. This week’s example: Olamide Zaccheaus* (he’s a bit closer to CORE than your generic ss)
CORE – In all CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. We want our rosters to consist mostly of these players that offer us the best Floor and Ceiling combo, ideally price-considered (easiest on a full slate).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not appropriate for cash game play). These players typically carry higher floors than players under the “More” section. This week’s example: Travis Kelce
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two categories. These are the more aggressive plays in which a player carries a relatively low floor but also possesses a ceiling that can bring you a tournament win. They are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of binking DFS tourneys / GPP’s. If you ever hear the phrase “planting a flag” or “taking a stand”, those are referencing these kinds of plays. This week’s example: Darius Slayton
(denotations key): more to be added as the breakdown is refined
(GEO) = Game Environment only, not appropriate as an isolated play – for this week think of the ancillary Cowboys receivers against the Giants (i.e., think of it as kind of a rabbit hole – if you roster this player it means you are betting on the game playing out in a way that would result in it only making sense for you to bring it back with an opposing player).
(mME) = Mini Multi Entry, 7-20 lineups before introducing as isolated play
(MME) = Mass Multi Entry, 20+ lineups before introducing as isolated play
*It’s implied that everything else not in () is appropriate for SE to 3-5Max*
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup. The best example of its utility is one JM refers to frequently, and it involves a player in the grid above – Tyreek Hill (2020’s corollary think Marquise Brown). Now granted, he’s been much more consistent as he’s matured as a route runner and has settled into Andy Reid’s offense, but Tyreek Hill USED to be a player you would almost always avoid building a core lineup around or consider playing in cash due to his volatility. The message went that if you were building tournament lineups, and you wanted to bank a roster on it being Tyreek blowup week, you would want to be absolutely sure it wouldn’t go to waste by not appropriately “balancing” it out with the remaining lineup slots. In this example, the most optimal way to “balance” the Tyreek play is to pair it with mostly CORE plays, or even a Floor play. I have found that this general approach has really sharpened my focus on proper roster construction. It took me a long time to understand how aggressive one needs to be depending on the contest they are competing in.
For cash games, you’d like your roster to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be at the middle of breakdown). GENERALLY speaking, for limited-entry tournaments, you want to still have your “CORE” lineup but begin adding weight to the “more” side by selecting players to roster that push the envelope a little bit, sliding your overall lineup slightly below the “CORE” in a balance sense. For mass multi-entry, you are shooting for about half of your lineup consisting of your “CORE” and the rest being made up of “more” players. This is a VERY loose explanation that is only intended to help complement the use of the table. Obviously there are rosters that are built around certain game environments and tributaries that may stray from these rough guidelines, but again – I’m only sharing this because it’s helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS player I profess to be.
AGAIN: This in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – it is practically derived from it and only serves as a quick snapshot of the players to be considered from a given game and in what DFS formats! This is only a tool I use throughout the week to assist in me in building balanced lineups. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me. Thanks!
Floor – Players with limited ceiling that are highly unlikely to crater an otherwise ambitious roster. This week’s example: Teddy Bridgewater
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented. This week’s example: Olamide Zaccheaus* (he’s a bit closer to CORE than your generic ss)
CORE – In all CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. We want our rosters to consist mostly of these players that offer us the best Floor and Ceiling combo, ideally price-considered (easiest on a full slate).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not appropriate for cash game play). These players typically carry higher floors than players under the “More” section. This week’s example: Travis Kelce (shown above)
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two categories. These are the plays that are the more aggressive plays that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. If you ever hear the phrase “planting a flag” or “taking a stand”, those are referencing these kinds of plays. This week’s example: Tyreek Hill (shown above)
(denotations key): more to be added as the breakdown is refined
(GEO) = Game Environment only, not appropriate as an isolated play – for this week think of the ancillary Cowboys receivers against the Giants (i.e., think of it as kind of a rabbit hole – if you roster this player it means you are betting on the game playing out in a way that would result in it only making sense for you to bring it back with an opposing player).
(mME) = Mini Multi Entry, 7-20 lineups before introducing as isolated play
(MME) = Mass Multi Entry, 20+ lineups before introducing as isolated play
*It’s implied that everything else not in () is appropriate for SE to 3-5Max*
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup. The best example of its utility is one JM refers to frequently, and it involves a player in the grid above – Tyreek Hill (2020’s corollary think Marquise Brown). Now granted, he’s been much more consistent as he’s matured as a route runner and has settled into Andy Reid’s offense, but Tyreek Hill USED to be a player you would almost always avoid building a core lineup around or consider playing in cash due to his volatility. The message went that if you were building tournament lineups, and you wanted to bank a roster on it being Tyreek blowup week, you would want to be absolutely sure it wouldn’t go to waste by not appropriately “balancing” it out with the remaining lineup slots. In this example, the most optimal way to “balance” the Tyreek play is to pair it with mostly CORE plays, or even a Floor play. I have found that this general approach has really sharpened my focus on proper roster construction. It took me a long time to understand how aggressive one needs to be depending on the contest they are competing in.
For cash games, you’d like your roster to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be at the middle of breakdown). GENERALLY speaking, for limited-entry tournaments, you want to still have your “CORE” lineup but begin adding weight to the “more” side by selecting players to roster that push the envelope a little bit, sliding your overall lineup slightly below the “CORE” in a balance sense. For mass multi-entry, you are shooting for about half of your lineup consisting of your “CORE” and the rest being made up of “more” players. This is a VERY loose explanation that is only intended to help complement the use of the table. Obviously there are rosters that are built around certain game environments and tributaries that may stray from these rough guidelines, but again – I’m only sharing this because it’s helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS player I profess to be.
AGAIN: This in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – it is practically derived from it and only serves as a quick snapshot of the players to be considered from a given game and in what DFS formats! This is only a tool I use throughout the week to assist in me in building balanced lineups. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me. Thanks!
Floor –
ss – Jeff Smith
CORE – Kyler, *Herndon*
tw – Nuke
More –
All of this is obviously moot if the Cards / Jets game is ultimately postponed with reports surfacing of a supposed positive COVID-19 test result coming from the Jets camp early this morning…
I’m having a very difficult time getting off of Chris Herndon for my TE slot.
I understand the de facto cash game play has been Logan Thomas up to this point in the current season, but there are several reasons I’m leaning towards Herndon in this spot….
1) Kyle Allen – woof
2) Joe Flacco – let’s give the man at least some respect for:
a) winning a Super Bowl
b) throwing to his Tight Ends –
he’s had / made a lot of good
ones throughout his long
career.
c) that’s about it.
3) Despite WFT’s pace of play (does everyone else just think “WTF?” every time they see that like I do? Makes me giggle – um, anyways), I’m beginning to think the Rams may in fact succeed quite easily in keeping the football team’s possessions to an absolute minimum. They will also slow the game down tremendously on the backs of their relentless RBBC approach and as we know, the team likeliest to be ahead throughout is the one that will dictate how the game will unfold.
4) Whereas the Arizona / NYJ tilt is projected to have a significantly higher amount of snaps thanks to the pace with which BOTH teams operate regardless of gamescript.
5) While it’s well-documented how sub-par the NYJ O-Line is, the mismatch posed by the punchless Cardinals defensive front is not near as daunting as the one faced by the WFT when squaring up against Aaron Donald and Co.
And now that I’ve written out five reasons in this likely futile debate of Herndon vs. LT3, maybe I should consider finding a way up to Engram? What to do, what to do???
———-
Floor – Players with limited ceiling that are highly unlikely to crater an otherwise ambitious roster. This week’s example: Teddy Bridgewater
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented. This week’s example: Olamide Zaccheaus* (he’s a bit closer to CORE than your generic ss)
CORE – In all CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. We want our rosters to consist mostly of these players that offer us the best Floor and Ceiling combo, ideally price-considered (easiest on a full slate).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not appropriate for cash game play). These players typically carry higher floors than players under the “More” section. This week’s example: Travis Kelce
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two categories. These are the more aggressive plays in which a player carries a relatively low floor but also possesses a ceiling that can bring you a tournament win. They are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of binking DFS tourneys / GPP’s. If you ever hear the phrase “planting a flag” or “taking a stand”, those are referencing these kinds of plays. This week’s example: Darius Slayton
(denotations key): more to be added as the breakdown is refined
(GEO) = Game Environment only, not appropriate as an isolated play – for this week think of the ancillary Cowboys receivers against the Giants (i.e., think of it as kind of a rabbit hole – if you roster this player it means you are betting on the game playing out in a way that would result in it only making sense for you to bring it back with an opposing player).
(mME) = Mini Multi Entry, 7-20 lineups before introducing as isolated play
(MME) = Mass Multi Entry, 20+ lineups before introducing as isolated play
*It’s implied that everything else not in () is appropriate for SE to 3-5Max*
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup. The best example of its utility is one JM refers to frequently, and it involves a player in the grid above – Tyreek Hill (2020’s corollary think Marquise Brown). Now granted, he’s been much more consistent as he’s matured as a route runner and has settled into Andy Reid’s offense, but Tyreek Hill USED to be a player you would almost always avoid building a core lineup around or consider playing in cash due to his volatility. The message went that if you were building tournament lineups, and you wanted to bank a roster on it being Tyreek blowup week, you would want to be absolutely sure it wouldn’t go to waste by not appropriately “balancing” it out with the remaining lineup slots. In this example, the most optimal way to “balance” the Tyreek play is to pair it with mostly CORE plays, or even a Floor play. I have found that this general approach has really sharpened my focus on proper roster construction. It took me a long time to understand how aggressive one needs to be depending on the contest they are competing in.
For cash games, you’d like your roster to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be at the middle of breakdown). GENERALLY speaking, for limited-entry tournaments, you want to still have your “CORE” lineup but begin adding weight to the “more” side by selecting players to roster that push the envelope a little bit, sliding your overall lineup slightly below the “CORE” in a balance sense. For mass multi-entry, you are shooting for about half of your lineup consisting of your “CORE” and the rest being made up of “more” players. This is a VERY loose explanation that is only intended to help complement the use of the table. Obviously there are rosters that are built around certain game environments and tributaries that may stray from these rough guidelines, but again – I’m only sharing this because it’s helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS player I profess to be.
AGAIN: This in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – it is practically derived from it and only serves as a quick snapshot of the players to be considered from a given game and in what DFS formats! This is only a tool I use throughout the week to assist in me in building balanced lineups. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me. Thanks!
Do you remember the “Greatest Show on Turf”? Those were the days! There was nothing quite like targeting St. Louis’s 3rd WR in Az-Zahir Hakim in the early rounds of a season-long draft knowing he’d out-produce a vast majority of WR1’s. That would have been around my freshman year in high school so I was relegated to playing free online leagues through Yahoo!. I couldn’t see the looks on my competitors’ faces nor did I get to see any remarks (chats within a draft room weren’t a thing yet if my memory serves) but I could FEEL the judgement being cast upon me – the next pick taking far much longer than the typical one being made in an anonymous, free league. I digress…
This is not to start a debate about how this Dallas “quasi-air raid” attack matches up in terms of talent, speed, skillset, etc. against those Rams squads (with 3 HOF players) from a couple decades ago. Rather, I bring this up because many people ended up being too late to the show or missed it entirely – due to their rigidity and unwillingness to completely incorporate what was abundantly clear into their approach (hence, the Az Hakim example I provided – it was easy to draft Marshall Faulk #1 overall, then Bruce and Warner, but as you worked your way down the perceived pecking order, that’s when people’s comfort levels began being tested). I don’t want us to miss the early indicators that have now been teased out a bit more beyond that “first impression” we got from the first couple of weeks. Not to get too carried away, but I’m of the opinion that we need to approach each and every slate with the Cowboys always in the backdrop of our minds. Here’s why…
You MAY have noticed, but them Cowboys like to score some points – YeeHaw! I took a deep dive yesterday into this team’s offensive stats and came away with the following numerical factoids, each followed by my unparalleled analysis…
DK Pts per game: 135.7
That’s right – if you take the points per game of every player that has accounted for at least one TD (welcome to the club, Amari!), this offense basically gets you to the coveted cash line without a defense, and I mean that both literally and figuratively. This week, you can roster Dak | Zeke | Amari | Lamb | Gallup | Schultz | Wilson | Pollard and still have $4,100 in cap to spend on a top-notch defense to give you some breathing room and push for a score of 145-150 on your cash game lineup (which is what I tend to shoot for – or 2.8 to 3.0 pts. per $1k spent). I’m certain DK doesn’t allow you to roster players from just one team but the point is nonetheless made… The typical 55-90 DK pt. range of outcomes (pushing 100+ for shootouts) for an entire offense based on all the factors we consider is getting crushed by this outfit.
2.75 sec | 4.97 sec | N/A sec
The first number shown is how much quicker Dallas snaps the ball (situation neutral) than the 2nd fastest pace team (Arizona) in football. The second is how much quicker they snap the ball in the second half than the 2nd fastest pace team (Gase’s patented “hurry-up & ground-n-pound while down multiple scores” Jets). Finally, the third value is a very important reminder of the “unknown” that we have to acknowledge, particularly for this upcoming bout the ‘Boys have with the hapless New York Giants – we still do not know the pace to expect from this team if up by multiple scores. Under the same OC in Kellen Moore last year, they ranked 24th in pace of play when up by 7 or more points (while ranked 2nd in overall pace). Not a whole lot to glean from that but with Dallas favored by ~9.5 points, this is element is critical to understand when putting together our cash game roster this week.
4 of 9
The amount of this team’s TD receptions made by the “Big 3” of Amari | Lamb | Gallup.
3 of 7
The amount of this team’s rushing TD’s scored by Zeke.
You don’t need to be a Cowboy to know “that just ain’t raght”. In fact…
88.7%
That’s Zeke’s snap share – almost 15% higher than Derrick Henry’s and 17% higher than Dalvin Cook’s. Granted, those offenses lean much heavier on the run, but to which I would counter with this little nugget…
7.5 Targets / Game
Those other two dudes? 2.7 and 2.75, respectively. That’s impressive RB involvement in the pass game for a team with such a talented receiving corps. As an aside, for all of you Tony Pollard truthers out there, I’ll submit to the fact that Zeke needs to stop fumbling the ball – however, the complaint that he just drops too many balls is likely driven by occurences only, which he’ll have more of because he’s thrown the ball way more frequently. His receiving chops look far more palatable if comparing by catch rate… Zeke – 23/30 (76.6%), Henry – 5/8 (62.5%), Cook – 7/11 (63.6%), CEH – 14/19 (73.7%), Hunt & Conner – 8/11 (72.7%), and to really rub salt in that wound because I’m a petty person, Pollard – 5/7 (71.4%). Point made.
100.6 Rec Yds/game
Amari’s average output thus far four games into this still very young season. Averaging the 100 yd. bonus is also an impressive feat. It speaks not only to his talent but also underscores the commitment Dak has made to throwing him that there pigskin. This week he is projected to get shadow coverage from James Bradberry. While, it doesn’t scare me off of Amari from a ceiling perspective (this is the same guy who caught 7 of 8 targets for 57 yds vs. Jalen Ramsey in Week 1), the ease with which Dak should be able to get the ball to his other options vs. an otherwise weak secondary (ranked 24th in Pass D DVOA, whereas the Rams rate 7th) does have me a bit concerned about Cooper’s usually rock-solid floor, price-considered – and that’s on top of the pace / pass % uncertainty if Dallas jumps out to a comfortable lead. I’m reluctant to lock him into my cash game lineup despite the projected high ownership. I ain’t ‘fraid of no chalk, neither. Last week I spurned Zeke for Cook because I’ll always side with JM over protected ownership and I dumped DJ for OBJ because HiLow convinced me during his installment in the Run to Daylight pod that the Arizona defensive approach set up far better for Davis (I also just prefer more letters) even though they were very chalky. Nonetheless, this is something I will continue to chew on as the week unfolds. I’ve concocted what may be a better alternative.
4.635 DK Pts/$1k spent
Dak’s average output thus far against his Week 5 salary. He’s a clear negative regression candidate but that number has a LONG way to go before encroaching on that 2.8-3.0 threshold. Especially if Josh Allen is unavailable with a postponement of the Bills/Titans tilt still on the table, I’m drawn to playing Dak as it gets me access to this passing attack in the most direct way as well as some consolation exposure to Amari should I ultimately choose to fade him and he blows up. But then there are those darn lingering doubts about this game environment and the uncertainty of how the Cowboys will play a game they are projected to play with a lead in the most likeliest of scenarios. How do we account for the distinct possibility they could pull away from the Giants and settle things down a bit? Maybe even rest some of their stars that have put in some major work to start the year? Well, in that case…
2.897 DK Pts/$1k spent
Zeke’s average output thus far against his Week 5 salary. A prohibitive positive regression candidate, it has been purely circumstantial that the rushing yardage and subsequent bonuses haven’t been there (as detailed though, his involvement in the pass game has buoyed his production). The touchdown count is just outright flukey given his equity within the Green Zone (58.3% according to The Collective’s IANDOUGLAS902). Without the gamescript that is most favorable to him having yet to appear, he’s still managed to maintain an output rate that would get you beyond the cash line. This got me to thinking, uh-oh…
3.766 DK Pts/$1k spent
This is the output you would have gotten from playing a Dak/Zeke block the past four weeks against their Week 5 salaries. Hypothetically, if the Cowboys do jump out to that early lead and hold onto it without much of a fight, it would take more than a 26% drop in production for this pairing to not meet the 140 point cash line minimum we are aiming at (28.3% drop to not meet the actual cash line of ~135).
56-60 snaps
According to their current rates of production, this is the snap range in which the Dak/Zeke block would have to fall around for us to be in danger of not keeping up with the cash line trajectory. Being that the average 79 plays per game AND the Giants land in the middle of the pack in terms of general pace (to our benefit they are ranked 7th fastest in the 2nd Half), this would equate to Dak/Zeke not playing the entire fourth quarter. This is where I will cease with numbers and begin persuading you with some detailed narratives surrounding this particular game environment that awaits us on Sunday…
This is where it gets so juicey – seriously.
Close your eyes and imagine you’re Mike McCarthy. You’re stubborn as I’ll get out, you know, like any true Cowboy would be. To absolutely no fault of your own, you’re off to a 1-3 record to kick off your inaugural season as the head coach of one of the most coveted positions known to modern man. That one game you did win? It was against an Atlanta team that is now 0-4 by a single point and it took a complete meltdown that only the likes of Dan Quinn would be capable of overseeing. Your team came roaring back in last week’s game against the Browns, only to fall short yet again. Gosh darn it – if there was just a few more minutes on that clock we’d be undefeated! Are you bored? Is spotting the opposition a double digit lead going into the fourth your cry out for attention? Through the first quarter of the 2020 regular season, you have yet to even lead in a game by more than seven points in spite of having what is widely regarding as one of the most promising and talent-rich offenses the sport has seen in several years. Do you feel the slightest bit incompetent? Over your head? No? OK… You keep telling yourself that.
Keep your eyes closed.
Imagine you’re Jason Garrett. You are about to embark on your first trip back to the “Big D” to play against this storied franchise that you used to be in charge – well, whatever Jerry would let you be in charge of. Nonetheless, your time there is widely regarded as a failure. You were never good enough to be their starting quarterback and now they’ve recently conveyed it to you that you can’t cut it as a head coach. Always the diplomatic one, you seemed to always parse your words carefully and not let the obvious optics of the situation prevail. Well, to hell with that! No longer your employer, you get this opportunity to seize the day, guns a blazing, to take your shot and make your statement. No better time than now when you can smell blood and they appear vulnerable! Are you yet again going to let them have the satisfaction of watching you leave Dallas feeling undeserving? No way, no how.
OK – now open your eyes.
The backdrop of this game environment that I just illustrated leads me to believe that Dak/Zeke will not be watching the fourth quarter from the sidelines…
1) McCarthy, forever clinging to his approach in the face of reality, will be over-compensating to make a point. I don’t believe he’s in any position to be letting his foot off the gas pedal. Sure, the numbers being put up by the offense are currently dominating the storylines. That by itself will only quench Jerry’s thirst for attention. The only thing he loves more? Winning. And on that front, McCarthy isn’t making a great first impression. This is a perfect time for McCarthy to set the record straight, even if it means playing his starters for the entire game.
2) I don’t expect Jason Garrett to relent in this situation. I see plenty of historical fodder there for him to feel jilted. This should carry out into his offensive play-calling. While he’s been known to err on the conservative side of things, the moving storyline, the Giants’ complete dearth of weapons, and their current record of 0-4 compells me to think he’ll be going into Sunday with more of a “Screw it, let’s do this – What have I got to lose?” mentality. This should hopefully keep the game from getting out of hand.
So yeah… That was a very long-winded way of saying that I like the Dak/Zeke block as the centerpiece of my cash game lineup for Week 5.
I’m still mulling over the Giants pieces from this game – I’m hoping the NFL suspends Golden Tate to make it a little more tempting to roster Slayton. Engram still looks to be recovering from his achilles rupture and he can’t touch Slayton’s ceiling so I’m off of him at the moment.
Something I just came across while researching this game that I definitely think is worth sharing…
CEH has seen an increased snap count each week thus far ( 46 || 48 || 52 ), but TEN of those in Week 3 were from the wideout position (zero in the first two weeks). I reviewed the game film to dig deeper into this utilization and here’s what I found…
1) His first snap lined out wide took place on the second play from scrimmage. The Chiefs lined up with WR trips right with CEH isolated on the left side pre-snap. The wideouts all ran post and go routes to purposefully clear out their vacated side of the field which allowed CEH to work in space against a single d-back. Mahomes’ pass was unfortunately batted down at the LOS so we weren’t able to see the intended result of the brilliant (albeit simple) play design. But this is why paying close attention to film gives us an edge – all that shows in the boxscore for this play is an incompletion for Patty.
2) CEH received the first GZ target coming out of the slot position (Mahomes threw a pretty bad ball by his standards and it fell incomplete but CEH was clearly his first read on the play).
3) 8 of these 10 snaps lined out wide occurred in the first half (It would have been 9 of 11 if not for a penalty) while the game was still competitive.
4) Backup RB Darrel Williams returned in Week 3 vs. BAL to join Darwin Thompson in spelling CEH and what they took in snaps ( 15 || 6, respectively) still left CEH with 38 snaps from the conventional backfield position.
Now, as I’m putting my cash game lineup together and looking for pieces with dependable usage in strong matchups and game environments, CEH is starting to emerge as a bit underpriced for his role in this high octane offense. Andy Reid is scheming to get him the ball out in space, much like he does with Tyreek. Aside from what I detailed in my observations above, what I’m most excited about from a cash game standpoint is the likelihood the Chiefs will have to rely on CEH even more given Belichick’s goal of limiting an offense’s best weapon(s). Instead of trying to guess which of Tyreek or Kelce is going to be the point of emphasis this week for New England (which I’m happy to do in tournaments), I’ll “settle” for the best price-considered option with a locked-in workload from this side of the ball, and that’s CEH.
*Update for Showdown*
Just wanted to affirm X’s feeling on Darwin Thompson over Darrel Williams as the preferred play behind CEH. In reviewing the game film vs. the Ravens, I noticed that Darwin was getting the snaps during CEH’s first breather. Also, and more importantly, the tendency seemed to be Darwin in when a pass route needed to be run and Williams in when the RB stayed home to help in pass protection.
Has 2020 got you down? Are you holed up inside looking for some excitement in your life? Look no further – you can roster a nice price-considered pass catcher from Washington on your upcoming cash game roster! As JM has alluded to in his weekly Edge write-ups, the floor for both Terry McLaurin and Logan Thomas is relatively safe given how heavily they are targeted by Dwayne Haskins. It is just so unnerving to watch, though!
There is no doubt in my mind the volume will be there this Week 4 matchup as they host their neighboring franchise that just got waxed by the Chiefs on MNF. Given the blitzing propensity of the Ravens I’m far more comfortable with putting Thomas on my cash game lineup – constant pressure and less time to sit in the pocket tends to result in quicker throws to the shorter areas of the field the blitzing LBs have vacated. He’s priced at $3,500 again and once more I see a clear drop-off below that mark, penciling him in at TE for our Week 4 bottom-up build.
Now, is Terry McLaurin always in the MME discussion? Absolutely. But in a week where we are looking for as much ceiling as possible (because there will be LOTS of impressive scores put up), we’ll also be looking for as much likelihood to hit ceiling. With so many other attractive options at the WR position (particularly in his price range), it’s really going to depend on expected ownership. If he’s projected to be over 4% owned, it’ll be a hard pass for me. The further below that benchmark, though, the more I’m interested in grabbing a share or two in 20+ entry tourneys.
The most interesting play from this game is obviously Lamar Jackson. Coming off of a poor performance against an established run funnel defense of Kansas City, being the highest-priced QB on the slate, and $300 more than Russell Freakin’ Wilson, I don’t foresee a ton of people spending whatever extra salary they stumble upon on Lamar. I’ll be even more excited about the Lamar play if Chase Young ends up sitting this one out due to the groin injury he sustained against the Browns in Week 3. If you aren’t as hyped on the Rams play as I am and insist on playing the Ravens D (a good play, but one I believe will be a chalky one) my recommendation is to pair them with Lamar in the hopes that this turns into an absolute stomp.
I hope everyone heeded my advice from my write-up last week and played the San Fran Defense against the steaming pile that is the New York Giants. While coming away with 12 points wouldn’t have won you a tourney given that so many defenses popped off in Week 3, the leverage that was attained at only 2% ownership (coupled with the Slayton ownership being well over 10%) put us in prime position to capitalize had things played out a little differently.
I saw nothing in my film review from Week 3 that leads me to believe streaming defenses against this dumpster fire of an offense will not continue to be a +EV move.
This week, in particular, with over half of the slate’s totals being > 50 points and many of those possessing ripe game environments, look for the chalk to be squeezing every dollar they can out of the offensive pieces in their lineups. Everyone will be talking about how high of a score will be necessary to win a tournament this week. While this is without a doubt true, realize that this presents an optimal time to be contrarian by paying up for a juicy defense like the Rams. Pricing was relatively soft the first three weeks of the season. Now that a few games have been played and these scoring bonanzas have led to salaries being hiked up, it doesn’t feel near as easy to simply “play whatever defense you like the most because you can afford them”. The Rams are an even more intriguing MME play as I expect ownership to congregate on the Ravens (priced just $100 more) as the “sharp” move with the narrative that they’ll play angry against a raw, mistake-prone quarterback. Early ownership projections have the Rams coming in at close to 20% owned and a couple points higher than the Ravens – it’s still relatively early in the week but I just don’t see them being THAT popular. Anything above 10% would really shock me.
Also of note, James Bradberry (the only Giants defender with a pulse) is projected to shadow Robert Woods. This should only drive Goff to look even more frequently in the direction of Cooper Kupp, with whom he has quite the established rapport. Kupp draws a very enticing matchup in the slot and carries a decent floor ($6,700 feels a bit rich though) and I think his ceiling is capped a bit with the real possibility that this game gets out of hand down the stretch, as the 13 point spread suggests. Not a play that is screaming out to me at the moment but certainly one for the MME file in our brainberries for later in the week.
After watching Week 2’s condensed game film for both of these teams, I’m left very excited to roster one play and one play only in this matchup, and that is the San Francisco DEF/ST. Here’s why:
In spite of losing their top two players in Nick Bosa & Soloman Thomas to injury (b/c that’s a thing now if you’re on this team) in the first quarter, the defense remained aggressive in its pursuit of Sam Darnold. Even with the game well in hand and Adam Gase trying to bleed in his ironic efforts to stave off embarrassment, the Niner D did not let off the gas pedal. And, according to PFF performance grades, three of the top four and six of the top eleven defensive players were not starters. They also managed to hold the only real weapon the Jets presented in Chris Herndon to just one catch of five yards on four targets. Now, with a week of staying on the east coast and gameplanning for how to attack the other wounded offense from the Empire State that is limping into this bout without its star running back, a similar situation presents itself – the key difference however being the aggressiveness with which the Giants like to conduct their business.
This leads me into what I was able to ascertain after reviewing just the first quarter of the Giants / Bears game this past Sunday – Danny Dimes is a turnover machine and it’s not because he’s just landing on the wrong side of variance as some would argue. Rather, he is incapable at this point in his developmental arc (sadly) of not telegraphing where he is going with the ball before and after the snap. This is not an exaggeration – watch the tape.
On the Giants’ first 3rd down conversion attempt (1Q – 06:15, where he’s stripped by Quinn), Jones doesn’t seem to look away from the defenders lined up across from his slot receivers just to the left before the ball is snapped. While not an example where it leads to the defenders being able to break up a pass easily (don’t worry, we’ll get to one of those), it serves to illustrate Jones’ tendency to lock onto a primary read without an escape plan should an open receiver fail to emerge. Before the snap on his very next pass attempt (1Q – 4:30), he pointedly stares to his right to see how close Fuller is playing Slayton. Seeing that he’s a comfortable 8-9 yards off the LOS, Danny Dimes has made up his mind that he likes the comeback route so why bother looking anywhere else? I’ll give him credit though – once he gets the snap he does pretend to focus over the middle of the field but only for a second so he wouldn’t forget where he had determined he was going with it.
Two plays later, in almost a deja-vu-like sequence of events, Jones refuses to scan the left side of the field after the snap before unleashing a throw towards Slayton that Fuller is happy to Mutombo once more. It’s important to note, too, these snaps are coming out of the shotgun formation – a set up that typically allows more time for the QB to dissect coverage and go to the appropriate target. Leads one to wonder… If he’s going up against a blitz-heavy San Fran defense that has far less reason to respect the play-action (when the rushing threat posed comes in the form of Wayne Gallman or newly-acquired Davonte Freeman…), what will that look like?
Now, I understand that Slayton, Shepard and Tate present a much tougher matchup than what the Jets rolled out there in Week 2. But remember also, we are not rostering defenses for the possibility they’ll get a shutout (it’s been well-documented in the OWS space for some time now how futile of a pursuit that can be) – instead, we are looking for an agressive defense that’s matching up against an inferior line (BTW, the only team to rate lower in Pass Block rating than the Jets two games into the season? The Giants) of an offense with an aggressive approach to scoring. A raw, mistake-prone prospect at quarterback that consistently lets the defense know what side of the field he’s honed in on to lead said offense is just the cherry on top. The second cherry on top is that virtually all possible gameflows have the Giants needing to throw in this game to keep them in it. Have I mentioned their DK price was lowered to $3,500? Let’s consider this the third cherry (or more chocolate sprinkles, if you’re allergic???) to put on this delicious Sunday (ok, I’ll stop now)!
Sign me up!
P.S. San Fran’s offense with Mullens under center looks discombobulated and out of sorts – so many labored snaps, like something you’d see in a junior high game b/c the QB isn’t used to how short the backup center is. It’s a good matchup but between the sketchy QB play and the guessing game that the rushing attack will inevitably turn into later in the week, the flag I’m planting for this game is firmly on this 49er defense.
This is still very much James Connor’s backfield. Any speculation on an increased timeshare going into Week 2 in light of Benny Snell’s impressive performance in spelling Connor vs. Giants following his injury was put to rest Sunday. While snaps fell Connor 50 / Snell 22 / Samuels 16 according to PFF, there were two plays in particular during the second half against the Broncos that I believe will throw snap rate back towards Connor in Week 3.
At around the 12:50 mark (3rd qtr), Snell got his number called with an orchestrated screen pass that looked to have some promise – that is until he let a D-lineman snag his arm just enough to completely throw off his route entrance and unravel the timing of the play. Snell looked lost and unsure of how to adjust to the inconvenience of a defender trying to disrupt his path. The ugly play resulted in a loss of four yards and provided a nagging reminder to Mike Tomlin that he already has Jaylen Samuels for such passes.
Then early in the fourth quarter (around the 10:00 mark), with Denver seizing more and more momentum as the second half continued to unwind, Snell was given a carry on the first play of a drive at midfield. He was promptly stripped of the ball and the Broncos took possession with great field position to begin what ended up being their final drive of the game, thanks to the hyper aggressive stand put together by the Steelers D. Connor then took the next few handoffs, even ripping one off for 59 yards before Big Ben ended it with a knee while in the Green Zone.
So long as Tomlin can rely on his workhorse to carry the load when it counts most and has Samuels at his disposal for specific passing situations, the argument for Benny Snell is a weak one, and that played itself out on the field against Denver.
When analyzing this upcoming tilt against the Texans, don’t let Week 1’s story cloud your judgement – Connor is the alpha in this backfield and Snell has a long road ahead if he hopes to unseat him. Sure, Connor will need his rest throughout any game – but there is no question when Pittsburgh gets into scoring position who they are rolling with at running back. None.
Keep in mind that the Vikes set a franchise record with 10 sacks against a banged up Stafford and Co. in this spot last year. They’ll need to stay aggressive in this one and are getting Linval Joseph back, as well. Something to account for in your lineup exposures this week.
Putting this up now so hopefully it’ll be acknowledged but can we please get JM’s notes on THIS game from the Thu-Mon slate perspective? They are provided for the Sun and Mon night games before Xandamere does his usual fantastic job analyzing them in his showdown breakdowns that are posted on Friday night. I don’t think it’s stepping on his feet in any way to give a quick take of the Thursday night game on the macro level. Particularly for weeks like this where there are only ten games on the main slate, those of us who primarily play cash games are more interested in the Thu-Mon slate as it inherently holds more value. Diatribe over – Thanks!
Any “Notes for those building Thursday-to-Monday rosters that include this game:” for the Thursday games? I’ve only seen those for the Sun/Mon Night games and for once we have a Thursday night bout with some usable pieces!
Bills at Saints, Week 12
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1dZRScCDjM0DZdpDkbGa-L8s8OiHUSXuRwvfsVE73SHE/edit?usp=sharing
The Bills would be wise to discard Tony Dungy’s advice shared during SNF’s haltime show to establish the run game here in this spot. Besides, their pass-blocking lines up decently with the Saints front and I expect the speed and route-running precision of their receiving corps to ultimately win out – Lattimore is a fantastic cornerback but he’s shown throughout his career to be best suited for locking down bigger, more physical alpha receivers (e.g., Mike Evans). Also, at least on early downs, Dennis Allen’s Cover 3 scheme is centered around stopping the run. One of its most glaring weaknesses is against 4 and 5 wide sets, an alignment the Bills could and should utilize frequently if Brian Daboll is as sharp as we give him credit for. If Josh Allen is able to consistently avoid 3rd-and-long situations, that should effectively neutralize the Saints preferred method of attack (heavy blitz rate on 3rd down).
Seahawks at 49ers, Week 4
Plays to consider for larger-field tournaments…
Will Dissly DraftKings Scores of Note:
2018 – 13.2, 22.5
2019 – 12.8, 18.2, 18.7, 22.0
His salary of just $2.6k has him in my player pool. Yes, it’s a new offensive scheme and there’s a little more competition for looks with Metcalf now in the picture but those are the scores he was putting up before Pete Carroll in all of his infinite wisdom decided to convert him to being their main blocking TE – the kid is just 25 years old and likely has plenty in the tank (not to mention some motivation to prove himself as a capable reciever in the NFL). Wilson in the red zone is a lot like Aaron Rodgers – he looks for his guys. Lockett is there obviously and I’m not sure DK is quite yet. Maybe sentimentality will come calling back to ol’ Russ? I’m sure as hell willing to find out!
Falcons at Buccaneers, Week 2
One thing about last week’s game as it pertains to the Bucs backfield that I believe is worth mentioning is the baffling usage of Jones and Fournette following their second quarter turnovers. First, Ronald Jones gets the ball fiercely punched out of his grasp by DeMarcus Lawrence to turn it over in their own territory. On the very next play they run following a Dallas touchdown, again in their own territory, Fournette lets a beautifully-designed dink-and-dunk screen pass bounce off of his facemask and into the hands of Trevon Diggs that ultimately gave Dallas their first lead of the game.
Excluding the handful of snaps taken by Gio late in the 4th quarter, Lenny played the rest of the game over RoJo. While one can question the underlying significance of forced turnovers vs. unforced turnovers, it’s imperative we at least take notice of this suspicious activity. Is RoJo in the same doghouse Lenny was in last season?
Browns at Chiefs, Divisional
I only dug into this because it feels dirty to play two Browns pass catchers in cash but here’s how KC fared against bonafide slot men on the season…
All Targets are to WRs (RB/TE Targets not included)
W2: Keenan – 10 of 16 Targets
W6: Beasley – 7 of 21 Targets (Diggs had 8, Smokey played full game)
W12: Godwin – 9 of 22 Targets
Landry is viable in cash on the four-game main slate, especially if you’re already comfortable with Hooper. I’m expecting these two to soak up 85-90% of the targets not going to the running backs.
Lions at Titans, Week 15
CORE-Floor-More Balanced Lineup Breakdown
Week 15: DET@TEN
More – Swift, QBs/WRs/TEs (if Stafford plays)
ss –
CORE – HENRY
tw –
Floor –
Using Football Outsider’s line data for inputs I got a little crazy last week and made an intense spreadsheet. While I was at it I developed a statistical model that weights offensive run tendencies vs. the strengths/weaknesses against the D-Line of the opponent, and I’m terming it Weighted Directional Advantage (WDA). All running plays are not created equal. In a nutshell, this metric provides you a quantifiable answer to the question “If the offense runs the ball with the same directional frequencies they have up to this point in the season, how does that matchup look against this defense’s performances stopping the run?”. Well over half of all running plays are characterized as Middle/Guard, so it stands to reason that if a team holds a significant advantage on those types of runs over a given defense it should be considered more valuable than having an advantage when running around the ends. What’s more, if that same offense runs plays in the specific direction where they hold an advantage more frequently than average, it is also captured by this WDA formula.
Derrick Henry Behind the TEN O-Line…
Advantage Rank for the Main Slate (22 Offensive/Defensive Matchups):
Adjusted Line Yards – 1st (66% higher mark than 2nd-Saints)
RB Yards – 1st (15% higher mark than 2nd-Eagles)
Power Success Rating – 3rd
Open Field Yds – 5th
2nd Level Yds – 1st (13% higher mark than 2nd-Eagles)
Stuff Rtg. – 3rd
Weighted Directional Advantage – 1st (>10% higher mark than 2nd-Vikings)
So yeah, the matchup is pristine and the game environment sets up quite well for him, especially is Stafford is inactive.
Play Henry in cash if you feel like you have to have him. With news that Brees is playing and Michael Thomas is out, I’ll be prioritizing Kamara before Henry. If I’m able to put something together that I really like with cheaper running backs (like Fournette and Taylor), I’ll be fine fading Henry again in cash, assuming his ownership isn’t projected to be outlandish.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
W7 211.50 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|KennyG|Berrios|Rodgers|JWills|WFT?)*
W7 190.70 (Kyler|JWills|Kamara|Adams|McLaurin|GDavis|Kelce|Gio|Browns)**
W7 184.00 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|GDavis|Berrios|Kelce|Gio|WFT?)
W8 143.84 (Russ|Davis|Gio|Allen|Fulgham|AJG|Sample|JWills|Eagles)*
W8 122.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Fulgham|Bourne|AJG|Jonnu|Henry|Eagles)**
W8 111.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Allen|Aiyuk|AJG|Sample|JWills|Saints)
W9 116.30 (Russ|Chase|JJax|Julio|Lockett|Patrick|Hurst|DJD|NYG)*| |**
10 99.70 (Kyler|Jones|Duke|CPatt|MT|Keenan|Goedert|Parker|CLE)*|**
10 102.20 (Kyler|Jones|Davis|MT|Keenan|Parker|Goedert|Duke|Rams)
11 139.82 (Hill|Cook|Davis|Diontae|Boyd|Cooks|LT3|Higgins|MIA)
12 131.38 (Mahomes|Cook|BHill|Parker|Olamide|Laviska|Kelce|Hines|NO)
13 162.50 (Rodgers|Ekeler|Cook|MT|Cooks|Coutee|Firkser|DMont|Lions)
14 115.80 (Rodgers|Jones|DWash|Adams|Jeffs|Thielen|OShnsy|Perriman|PHI)
146.09 Main Slate AVG
144.15 Levitan AVG (mad respect so I use him as a barometer)
144.54 Thu-Mon Slate AVG
132.24 Sun-Mon Slate AVG
146.74 AVG Weekly Score
143.35 AVG Slate Score
141.96 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Seahawks at WFT, Week 15
CORE-Floor-More Balanced Lineup Breakdown
Week 15: SEA @ WFT?
More – Metcalf, Russ
ss –
CORE – HAWKS D/ST
tw – F1
Floor –
Tourney plays only for me at this point but I admittedly haven’t played around with cash construction enough to get a feel for how the WTF pieces would balance out a roster. Stay tuned!
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
W7 211.50 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|KennyG|Berrios|Rodgers|JWills|WFT?)*
W7 190.70 (Kyler|JWills|Kamara|Adams|McLaurin|GDavis|Kelce|Gio|Browns)**
W7 184.00 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|GDavis|Berrios|Kelce|Gio|WFT?)
W8 143.84 (Russ|Davis|Gio|Allen|Fulgham|AJG|Sample|JWills|Eagles)*
W8 122.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Fulgham|Bourne|AJG|Jonnu|Henry|Eagles)**
W8 111.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Allen|Aiyuk|AJG|Sample|JWills|Saints)
W9 116.30 (Russ|Chase|JJax|Julio|Lockett|Patrick|Hurst|DJD|NYG)*| |**
10 99.70 (Kyler|Jones|Duke|CPatt|MT|Keenan|Goedert|Parker|CLE)*|**
10 102.20 (Kyler|Jones|Davis|MT|Keenan|Parker|Goedert|Duke|Rams)
11 139.82 (Hill|Cook|Davis|Diontae|Boyd|Cooks|LT3|Higgins|MIA)
12 131.38 (Mahomes|Cook|BHill|Parker|Olamide|Laviska|Kelce|Hines|NO)
13 162.50 (Rodgers|Ekeler|Cook|MT|Cooks|Coutee|Firkser|DMont|Lions)
14 115.80 (Rodgers|Jones|DWash|Adams|Jeffs|Thielen|OShnsy|Perriman|PHI)
146.09 Main Slate AVG
144.15 Levitan AVG (mad respect so I use him as a barometer)
144.54 Thu-Mon Slate AVG
132.24 Sun-Mon Slate AVG
146.74 AVG Weekly Score
143.35 AVG Slate Score
141.96 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Cowboys at Bengals, Week 14
CORE-Floor-More Cash Lineup Breakdown
Week 14: DAL @ CIN
More –
ss –
CORE – DALLAS
tw – Zeke
Floor –
Using Football Outsider’s line data for inputs I got a little crazy early in the week and made an intense spreadsheet. While I was at it I developed a statistical model that weights offensive run tendencies vs. the strengths/weaknesses against the D-Line of the opponent, and I’m terming it Weighted Directional Advantage (WDA). All running plays are not created equal. In a nutshell, it provides you a quantifiable answer to the question “If the offense runs the ball with the same directional frequencies they have up to this point in the season, how does that matchup look against this defense’s performances stopping the run?”. Well over half of all running plays are characterized as Middle/Guard, so it stands to reason that if a team holds a significant advantage on those types of runs over a given defense it should be considered more valuable than having an advantage when running around the ends. What’s more, if that same offense runs plays in the specific direction where they hold an advantage more frequently than average, it is also captured by this WDA formula.
I went into the week being drawn to Zeke at his price and now that I’ve had a chance to look at the metrics, I’m even more eager to roster him this Sunday.
Advantage Rank for the Main Slate (26 Offensive/Defensive Matchups):
Adjusted Line Yards – 2nd
RB Yards – 6th
2nd Level Yards – 2nd
Stuff Rtg. – 7th
Weighted Directional Advantage – 2nd
Everyone is aware that Elliott has not been utilized to the extent he was in prior seasons and earlier this year, but his drop in price down to just $6,600 and his still rock-solid role in this matchup are too hard to pass up. The floor is reinforced knowing that the Bengals offense is slowly encroaching a level of futility that only the Jets have had to themselves most of the year.
Couple those tidbits with those put forth by HiLow in his Edge write-up regarding the recency bias skewing the public’s perception of how this offense wants to operate and it’s hard to not grab the piece of this game that stands head and shoulders above the rest.
Zeke does not appear to be necessary for cash this week but I will have some exposure to him in tournaments – unless the salary savings opens up something that I could otherwise not gain access to, I will not be pairing him with the Cowboys D as they are the pay-down defense in cash this weekend, so that pairing is going to be way over-owned.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
W7 211.50 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|KennyG|Berrios|Rodgers|JWills|WFT?)*
W7 190.70 (Kyler|JWills|Kamara|Adams|McLaurin|GDavis|Kelce|Gio|Browns)**
W7 184.00 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|GDavis|Berrios|Kelce|Gio|WFT?)
W8 143.84 (Russ|Davis|Gio|Allen|Fulgham|AJG|Sample|JWills|Eagles)*
W8 122.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Fulgham|Bourne|AJG|Jonnu|Henry|Eagles)**
W8 111.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Allen|Aiyuk|AJG|Sample|JWills|Saints)
W9 116.30 (Russ|Chase|JJax|Julio|Lockett|Patrick|Hurst|DJD|NYG)*| |**
10 99.70 (Kyler|Jones|Duke|CPatt|MT|Keenan|Goedert|Parker|CLE)*|**
10 102.20 (Kyler|Jones|Davis|MT|Keenan|Parker|Goedert|Duke|Rams)
11 139.82 (Hill|Cook|Davis|Diontae|Boyd|Cooks|LT3|Higgins|MIA)
12 131.38 (Mahomes|Cook|BHill|Parker|Olamide|Laviska|Kelce|Hines|NO)
13 162.50 (Rodgers|Ekeler|Cook|MT|Cooks|Coutee|Firkser|DMont|Lions)
148.42 Main Slate AVG
144.10 Levitan AVG (mad respect so I use him as a barometer)
144.54 Thu-Mon Slate AVG
132.24 Sun-Mon Slate AVG
149.12 AVG Weekly Score
144.60 AVG Slate Score
141.62 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Browns at Titans, Week 13
CORE-Floor-More Cash Lineup Breakdown
Week 13: CLE @ TEN
More – Henry, Chubb, Hunt
ss –
CORE –
tw –
Floor –
My favorite play from this game is Hunt. Whenever two run-heavy teams with backs square off against one another, there’s a tendency to think in binary builds. Hunt will be under-owned because of it along with his lower-end result from last week. He’s just too cheap for his range of outcomes in this setup.
_ _ _ _ _
I’M BEEEAAAAACCCCKKKKK!!!
Life kind of got in the way the past few weeks and after starting the season with six consecutive weeks of beating the cashline, I’m in the throws of a six-week COOLER where I’ve failed to cash (not to mention five straight weeks of failing to crack 140 points..) – OUCH!
Obviously I’ve had an ample amount of time to review my process and ruminate over the “what ifs” and suffice it to say I’ve come away with a litany of observations, but I’ll spare you the ones more specific to my style of play and rather share those that the handful of Collective Comrades (trademark pending) that read my posts may find valuable…
1) Building around condensed offenses and utilizing player blocks doesn’t just make sense for tournaments – it makes a helluva lot of sense for cash games, provided you marry the two concepts.
JM has been leading this charge for quite some time in his “one big roster spread across 19” mini multi-entry approach to building for tournaments – bankable fantasy goodness is bred from offenses that predictably feed just a few skill position players each week. Now, in tournaments there are two methods by which we can harness the power of this edge and they are as follows (for the sake of example, I’ll be referencing the Vikings offense as they’re my favorite team and they conveniently serve as the poster child for this very subject):
– For ceiling, we target only a portion of said concentrated offense in hopes of capturing the expected “spike” of points using as few roster spots as possible.
e.g., Dalvin Cook in a smash spot vs. an inferior opponent with a middling to terrible run defense
As we all know by now, the resulting tributaries we would then build around should have one of Thielen or Jefferson (and you could pair them with Cousins if feeling really saucey).
– For floor/savings/differentiation, we roster player “blocks” in hopes of reaping all of the scoring output generated by a condensed offense whose parts are relatively cheaper than their counterparts with similar roles on offenses that prefer to spread things out.
e.g., the Buffalo Bills at the tail-end of the 2018 season – The Collective’s own son, Josh Allen with receivers Zay Jones, Robert Foster, and Isiah McKenzie.
This is key because this is now where I’ve embarrassingly finally connected the dots…
The effectiveness of this latter concept inevitably brings about the obvious questions – “Wait – why aren’t we using player blocks from the best offenses with the best studs?” First, the cost of doing so is usually quite prohibitive and secondly, doing so kind of defeats the purpose of playing those studs. Whereas rostering the 2018 Bills player block allowed you to access the incredible ceiling of Christian McCaffrey without sacrificing leverage, simply playing teammates DJ Moore, Jarius Wright, and Curtis Samuel would have hurt you b/c when you play CMC in tournaments, it’s typically the case that they ARE the offense. There is no +EV leverage accomplished in playing all of the Panthers with CMC b/c if he duds, there is scant evidence of anyone else going off (again, in 2018). You aren’t betting on superb efficiency from the overall unit – you want the cog that eats up 90% of the volume because they can put the slate out of reach.
Boom. Done. Open and shut case.
Well, not so fast.
Week 12 of 2020 happened and it helped me see the light.
Provided there is enough value to field an otherwise balanced roster, you can absolutely roster the big guns from a high-powered offense (as many did, including myself with Mahomes/Kelce/Hill against a young, talented, but still vulnerable Tampa secondary). And not only can you do it in tournaments, you can do it in CASH.
Leverage, differentiation, ownership be damned – we don’t care about those elements in cash game play so the “player block” with one too many expensive pieces is just fine – we still get our guaranteed points and the higher cost we pay is rooted in the overall higher ceiling we then gain access to. Tyreek Hill went put up a 60-burger – a score that amounted to a 7.8x salary multiplier… let that sink in for a moment.
There’s an astounding predonderance of FEAR amongst cash game players – fear of correlation, fear of not having a piece of that higher total game, a fear that if a knowledgeable bet made on your roster goes wrong, it will go so wrong that it’s destined to backfire on you. What most fail to recognize is that clicking the name of any player into a spot on your roster is a bet. Keenan Allen, Davante Adams, Austin Ekeler, etc. – no matter how warm and fuzzy you may feel when landing on these players in cash, it’s an illusion. Are they fantastic players? Yes. Can they dissapoint? Absolutely.
Here’s what my cash game roster looked like ten minutes before lock this past Sunday:
Mahomes, Cook, BHill, Tyreek, Shenault, Isabella, Kelce, Hines, Chiefs
My gut was telling me lots of things – the Chiefs would be perfectly content to throw the ball around the yard as they had the past few games and the banged up Tampa pass d was the path of least resistance. We have all come to realize this season that low-floor/insane-ceiling Tyreek Hill is actually solid floor/insance ceiling Tyreek Hill. The issue has been his salary.
Now all of this sudden I was on this Chiefs stack of Mahomes|Kelce|Hill and the Chiefs D as a hedge just in case there was a repeat of what happened in Denver earlier this year – I also just thought they were fairly priced at $2,700 and expected them to be rushing all day as Brady and Co. were chasing points.
But then the version of me from recent weeks started to doubt myself… No one on discord was doing this in cash. Projections didn’t say it was optimal, either. So I tried to convince myself it was OK to trust my instincts but then recent performance and the scared version of myself took over…
In regards to playing Hill in cash
W7-12 ME
“What if I was also on Kelce?”
W1-6 ME
“OK. So you’re locking in the two most explosive players at their respective positions in the game with the most talented quarterback this generation has ever seen? IN FACT, roster Mahomes and just complete the player block because salary allows us to this week. That way if he happens to run one in or dink and dunk one in to Watkins on accident you’ll still get something for it.
What’s the issue?”
W7-12 ME
“Well, what if Mahomes gets injured? It’s not like he’s impervious to that happening! Then your roster is basically dead!”
W1-6 ME
“STFU, no it’s not. Last year in Denver… Mahomes broke his kneecap on a brilliant QB sneak call near the goalline. Who went on to catch a long TD pass from backup Matt Moore (who was coaching a high school team during the entire preseason)? Tyreek Hill.
It’s not like Hill and Kelce are going to stop running routes and the Chiefs are going to go all Adam Gase with LeVeon Bell the remainder of the contest if that occurs. Man, do you always play this scared?”
W7-12 ME
“Not to start the year – just lately because variance has me second-guessing myself.”
W1-6 ME
“Do me a favor, take a breather. How about you sit out the last few here and let me finish this out for us? You know, end on a good note?
W7-12 ME
“Fine. Just be sure to stay focused when you’re in there.”
W1-6 ME
“Don’t even go there with me. If you hadn’t crumbled like the spineless coward you are I wouldn’t have to be bailing us out now, would I?
Hold on – who even took me out in the first place?!”
The end of this story is sad.
I subbed Parker in for Tyreek, played Olamide Zaccheus (because I just HAD to have a piece of that game?!, this is so painful to write out) instead of Isabella, and that helped me jump from the Chiefs to the Saints for my defense. I scored two rushing yards short of the bubble in most double ups and it cost me hundreds of dollars.
I digress…
Do we have to eat chalk in cash? Yes.
Does that mean we have to side with ownership on every single roster spot? No. Far from it, actually.
This isn’t a black and white thing. We need to be creative when building for tournaments. BUT, that does not exclude us from creativity in cash, either.
I forgot this was a list of lessons learned, HOLY COW! Um, here’s another one that’ll wrap it all up.
2) Don’t start spending every Monday-Thursday playing best ball mid-season and expect to feel calm as you begin cramming for weekend play after TNF kicks off.
That’s it. Go do.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
W7 211.50 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|KennyG|Berrios|Rodgers|JWills|WFT?)*
W7 190.70 (Kyler|JWills|Kamara|Adams|McLaurin|GDavis|Kelce|Gio|Browns)**
W7 184.00 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|GDavis|Berrios|Kelce|Gio|WFT?)
W8 143.84 (Russ|Davis|Gio|Allen|Fulgham|AJG|Sample|JWills|Eagles)*
W8 122.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Fulgham|Bourne|AJG|Jonnu|Henry|Eagles)**
W8 111.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Allen|Aiyuk|AJG|Sample|JWills|Saints)
W9 116.30 (Russ|Chase|JJax|Julio|Lockett|Patrick|Hurst|DJD|NYG)*| |**
10 99.70 (Kyler|Jones|Duke|CPatt|MT|Keenan|Goedert|Parker|CLE)*|**
10 102.20 (Kyler|Jones|Davis|MT|Keenan|Parker|Goedert|Duke|Rams)
11 139.82 (Hill|Cook|Davis|Diontae|Boyd|Cooks|LT3|Higgins|MIA)
12 131.38 (Mahomes|Cook|BHill|Parker|Olamide|Laviska|Kelce|Hines|NO)
147.25 Main Slate AVG
142.84 Levitan AVG (mad respect so I use him as a barometer)
144.54 Thu-Mon Slate AVG
132.24 Sun-Mon Slate AVG
148.00 AVG Weekly Score
143.74 AVG Slate Score
140.92 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Seahawks at Bills, Week 9
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 9: SEA @ BUF
More – Diggs (SE/3M), Allen (SE/3M), Metcalf (LE)
tw –
CORE – RUSS, DEEJAY, LOCKETT
ss –
Floor –
Russell Wilson’s two lowest DK scores this year came in back-to-back games – Week 4 @ Miami and Week 5 hosting the Vikings in the rain. Both scores are above the 3x salary multiplier we’re aiming for in cash game builds. Read that again…
We’re not talking about his average game here – if we were (32.0 DK Pts / game) his multiplier sits at an astonishing 4.21! But no, we’re talking less-than-ideal scenarios here. And it still comes out looking like a typo. It is not.
Russ’s Week 9 Salary = $7,600
WORST performances thus far…
W4@MIA 24.9 DK Pts = 3.28
W5vMIN 25.48 = 3.35
All things considered I believe Russ is the best cash game play on the slate. Take this immense value for what it is. If you believe in this game taking off as much as I do then perhaps I can interest you in some other involved actors?
I present Tyler Lockett and Deejay Dallas. Both are going to be the most utilized weapons that Russ will lean on when he’s not balling out like he owns the joint. The Bills’ struggles defending the slot are very real and Russ and Tyler have about as good of a connection between a QB/WR combo in the league. Buffalo’s run defense presents another path of least resistance which we can take advantage of through Dallas now that both Carson and Hyde are officially out. He has receiving chops out of the backfield and at just $5,000 he rounds out a solid player block for capturing as much of the inevitable scoring as possible.
I love Diggs and Allen in tournaments because I think people will ultimately side with recency bias and jump to the safer Seattle side. Metcalf’s price keeps him out of my tighter player pool this week but I don’t mind him if multi-entering and want the leverage off of Lockett.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
W7 211.50 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|KennyG|Berrios|Rodgers|JWills|WFT?)*
W7 190.70 (Kyler|JWills|Kamara|Adams|McLaurin|GDavis|Kelce|Gio|Browns)**
W7 184.00 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|GDavis|Berrios|Kelce|Gio|WFT?)
W8 143.84 (Russ|Davis|Gio|Allen|Fulgham|AJG|Sample|JWills|Eagles)*
W8 122.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Fulgham|Bourne|AJG|Jonnu|Henry|Eagles)**
W8 111.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Allen|Aiyuk|AJG|Sample|JWills|Saints)
159.66 Main Slate AVG
168.89 Thu-Mon Slate AVG
156.48 Sun-Mon Slate AVG
161.00 AVG Weekly Score
161.30 AVG Slate Score
145.19 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Patriots at Jets, Week 9
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 9: NE @ NYJ (Thu-Mon Slate)
More – Cam (LE), Patriots Def/St (MME)
tw –
CORE –
ss –
Floor –
Horpe, horpe – excuse me… I think I just threw up a little bit.
We continue our string of wonderful MNF matchups, this one featuring a perennial champ that’s mightily struggling to win games coming down from New England to square off against a perennial dumpster fire commonly referred to as the New York Jets. It’d be one thing if either team was in good form given their ugly styles of play but that just isn’t in the cards this time.
I’m going to skip the Jets because they blow and focus on the Patriots side of the ball for my quick-hitting DFS analysis…
From what I can see on film, Cam is out of rhythym right now with this offense. Attribute it to his having had COVID, the multitude of injuries sustained by his receiving corps., or that he’s feeling the pressure of expectations and trying to do too much – whatever it is, his footwork is wonky and it’s led to his passes being even more inaccurate than usual in his three games since coming off the COVID-19 list.
He’s still an incredibly gifted quarterback and I do think he’ll find his form before this disappointing season comes to a close. Priced at just $5900, I think this is a fantastic time to take some shots on him in tournaments at the tail-end of a week in a game I suspect will be eschewed by many for the sheer grossness alluded to earlier.
Depending on who is available to play for the Pats Defense, I think this unit makes for an intriguing tournament stab as their priced just above the Chiefs, Bucs, Ravens, Colts, Bears, and other stout defenses. I’ll have a share or two if we get some news later in the week that their cornerbacks are healthy enough to strap it up for this one.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
W7 211.50 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|KennyG|Berrios|Rodgers|JWills|WFT?)*
W7 190.70 (Kyler|JWills|Kamara|Adams|McLaurin|GDavis|Kelce|Gio|Browns)**
W7 184.00 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|GDavis|Berrios|Kelce|Gio|WFT?)
W8 143.84 (Russ|Davis|Gio|Allen|Fulgham|AJG|Sample|JWills|Eagles)*
W8 122.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Fulgham|Bourne|AJG|Jonnu|Henry|Eagles)**
W8 111.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Allen|Aiyuk|AJG|Sample|JWills|Saints)
159.66 Main Slate AVG
168.89 Thu-Mon Slate AVG
156.48 Sun-Mon Slate AVG
161.00 AVG Weekly Score
161.30 AVG Slate Score
145.19 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Saints at Buccaneers, Week 9
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 9: NO @ TB (Thu-Mon Slate)
More – Kamara, Brady (both MME)
tw –
CORE –
ss –
Floor –
This Sunday Night Football bout betweem two well-coached teams with Super Bowl aspirations is going to be a battle in the trenches. While clearly not devoid of talent in the skill positions, these squads possess both strong offensive and defensive lines. There is little here for DFS purposes, though. If the Saints took to the air further downfield I would be interested but they don’t really have a burner that can school the overly-agressive Jamel Dean on a double-move. I don’t hate Kamara in tournaments given that his ceiling is still solid in this matchup that is slightly less imposing with the season-ending injury to Vita Vea. I’d say he’s worth a share in GPP’s if you’re unphased by the Tampa D. Brady is also interesting given the weapons at his disposal and the Saints likely tilting Tampa towards the passing game – a 4-5 touchdown game is attainable here. For me personally, I’m just going to watch this as a fan of football. The Saints need a victory, the Bucs will be looking to get Antonio Brown acclimated, just so many good storylines to follow in this one.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
W7 211.50 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|KennyG|Berrios|Rodgers|JWills|WFT?)*
W7 190.70 (Kyler|JWills|Kamara|Adams|McLaurin|GDavis|Kelce|Gio|Browns)**
W7 184.00 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|GDavis|Berrios|Kelce|Gio|WFT?)
W8 143.84 (Russ|Davis|Gio|Allen|Fulgham|AJG|Sample|JWills|Eagles)*
W8 122.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Fulgham|Bourne|AJG|Jonnu|Henry|Eagles)**
W8 111.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Allen|Aiyuk|AJG|Sample|JWills|Saints)
159.66 Main Slate AVG
168.89 Thu-Mon Slate AVG
156.48 Sun-Mon Slate AVG
161.00 AVG Weekly Score
161.30 AVG Slate Score
145.19 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Packers at 49ers, Week 9
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 9: GB @ SF (Thu-Mon Slate)
More – Dwelley / Reed (MME)
tw –
CORE –
ss –
Floor –
I’m going to be leaving this game alone but I won’t argue with anyone that wants to take a shot on Nick Mullens continuing his trend of heavily targeting the TE position as he struggles to keep his head above water. If Reed weren’t coming off of IR or if Dwelley was otherwise not involved I’d be more intrigued but it would be a sheer bet on volume piling up.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *THU-MON SLATE, **SUN-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
W7 211.50 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|KennyG|Berrios|Rodgers|JWills|WFT?)*
W7 190.70 (Kyler|JWills|Kamara|Adams|McLaurin|GDavis|Kelce|Gio|Browns)**
W7 184.00 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|GDavis|Berrios|Kelce|Gio|WFT?)
W8 143.84 (Russ|Davis|Gio|Allen|Fulgham|AJG|Sample|JWills|Eagles)*
W8 122.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Fulgham|Bourne|AJG|Jonnu|Henry|Eagles)**
W8 111.26 (JimmyG|Kamara|Hunt|Allen|Aiyuk|AJG|Sample|JWills|Saints)
159.66 Main Slate AVG
168.89 Thu-Mon Slate AVG
156.48 Sun-Mon Slate AVG
161.00 AVG Weekly Score
161.30 AVG Slate Score
145.19 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Buccaneers at Giants, Week 8
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 8: TB @ NYG (Thu-Mon Slate)
More – Mike Evans (MME), Slayton (MME)
tw – Bucs D/ST (SE/3M)
CORE –
ss – Scotty Miller (mME)
Floor –
Week 8’s Monday Night Football matchup leaves much to be desired – I’m setting my “bedtime at halftime” likelihood at 95%. The Bucs D will not be a sneaky play on this slate so while I encourage some exposure as they offer such a nice floor and ceiling combo going up against Danny Dimes, I’ll aim to be under the field.
Slayton can pop on anyone. In games that are projected to be a potential blowout, I look for explosive players that can take advantage of garbage time. Sterling Shepard can get there but it would require more volume, and if we’re going to take on this kind of risk it’s more optimal to play the perennial talent that can get there on a single play.
Mike Evans is cheap on DK at only $5,700 but he’ll be shadowed by James Bradberry, who is having himself an impressive year. This makes me interested in Scotty Miller – he’ll be on the field a lot in this one with Godwin being out and his price of $4,000 makes him a very intriguing salary saver, one that’s better-suited for tournaments than cash games with the Bucs not in line to throw that much.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
W7 211.50 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|Golladay|Berrios|Rodgers|JWills|WFT?)*
W7 184.00 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|GDavis|Berrios|Kelce|Gio|WFT?)
166.58 Main Slate AVG
181.42 Thu-Mon Slate AVG
166.36 AVG Weekly Score
169.88 AVG Slate Score
148.86 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Cowboys at Eagles, Week 8
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 8: DAL @ PHI (Thu-Mon Slate)
More – Fulgham (SE/3M), Cowboys WRs (mME-MME) whoever suits your fancy
tw –
CORE – WENTZ
ss –
Floor –
Dallas is reeling and has been for quite some time. As every week unfolds it’s becoming more and more evident how much Dak Prescott meant to the Cowboys having any kind of playoff aspirations coming into the 2020 season. This isn’t the first time this franchise has “bombed” early in a season – but given the overabundance of talent on one side of the ball and an obscene lack of it on the other, this particular Cowboy squad is certainly leaving an impression. It would be hard to not notice the trainwreck of stepping onto a rebuilding division rival’s home turf and getting thoroughly waxed 25-3, with your once-vaunted offensive attack coming away with its lowest total net yards gained (142) since 2001. Granted, injuries have been sustained by the starting and back-up quarterbacks as well as the best offensive lineman, but at what point do we stop clamoring praise over the talent that’s been assembled and instead inquire about the very fundamental concept developing depth within an organization?
Rant over. We smelled blood last week (it was cute how early week projections had the WFT’s D pegged at 0.3% ownership – literal LOL), and perhaps it took a few days for the scent to reveal itself to everyone else but we had all gotten there by in large this past Sunday. I suspect the Eagles D/ST to be grossly over-owned, and at a price of $3,500 I’m happy to let that be as it may.
Both of these teams are in the top five in pass play rate and Philly does rate in the top ten in most pace metrics (we already know Dallas is 1st in almost every single one). This sets up well for volume for the pass catchers of both teams, though I’ll save any shots on the Cowboys for tournaments where they should be a bit under-owned, especially is Dalton is ruled out before TNF kickoff.
Especially if Miles Sanders is held out of action (Philly’s has a bye next week), I’m more drawn to Fulgham as Wentz has really leaned on him as the injuries to the receiving corps. have mounted. I still need to play around with roster construction, so Wentz may end up as a “More” and Fulgham a “CORE”, but these are definitely the two players I’ll be focusing on as we sand down our player pool throughout the week.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
W7 211.50 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|Golladay|Berrios|Rodgers|JWills|WFT?)*
W7 184.00 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|GDavis|Berrios|Kelce|Gio|WFT?)
166.58 Main Slate AVG
181.42 Thu-Mon Slate AVG
166.36 AVG Weekly Score
169.88 AVG Slate Score
148.86 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Falcons at Panthers, Week 8
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 8: ATL @ CAR (Thu-Mon Slate)
More – Robby, Moore, Gurley, Julio, Ridley (All mME)
tw –
CORE – DAVIS (Cash Only)
ss –
Floor – Bridgewater, Ryan
FINAL FINAL UPDATE: WE’RE BACK ON DAVIS!!! Gio and JWills don’t really have the same kind of pt/dollar with their new prices. It’s crazy what a $1500-$2000 hike in salary can do! Davis in CASH. Sorry for the flip-flopping. Let’s take the points!
LAST UPDATE: Value running backs look real promising to play this week (JWill, Gio) and after building some more lineups we’re going to need those savings. Hunt is a stronger play than Davis so I’m rolling with him.
UPDATE: CMAC is not suiting up for this one and the weather forecast doesn’t appear as grim as it did earlier in the week. That can’t be said, unfortunately, for several of the games on Sunday, and a few of which we would normally gravitate to for DFS purposes. We’re talking sustained winds of ~25 mph with gusts up to 40 throughout the duration of the games in Cleveland, Green Bay, Chicago and “nicer” conditions of 15-25 in Cincinnati and Buffalo – oh yeah, wet in Buffalo and cold at Lambeau, too.
If that wasn’t enough, there are key injuries that will impact our preferred player pools in this slate that need a good amount of clarity to emerge from Thursday practice reports for me to change my outlook on things for tonight’s game. My current line of thinking is that for cash game purposes, I’m always a proponent of “taking what the defense gives you” (many have phrased it similarly as “taking what the slate gives you” or letting the slate dictate your builds) but FWIW we are rostering eight offensive players so let’s call it what it is. The Atlanta defense GIVES opposing offenses (and us) locked-in floor on pass-catching running backs. What’s more, this tendency is strong and Davis’s usage can be classified as “workhorse” status.
Tonight’s game may get a little wet and winds may pick up if a second system hits Charlotte in-game but the outlook right now is promising. With game totals for this weekend’s contents continuing to fall and this game featuring two defenses with almost non-existent pass rushes (why I removed them from the ss category) and concentrated offenses with safe quarterback play behind them, Thu-Mon cash rosters should have a piece of this game. I think the two leading receivers for each side and Gurley are strong tournament plays without accounting for ownership, and I’m locking in Davis as the RB2 on this occasion – he checks all of the boxes and at the end of the day is only $300 more than what he was for this same matchup in Week 5. The Atlanta D is giving us production from Mike Davis – let’s take it.
For tournaments, I’m likely going to let this game go altogether as the DFS community gets wind of what lay in wait for Sunday – see what I did there? Let this be just another opportunity for us to embrace the uncertainty that’s swirling around the weekend games and build sharper rosters with players outside of tonight’s game who will probably go over-owned as everyone scrambles for that “safe” feeling.
_ _ _ _ _ _
While it’d be nice to play the Davis/Robby/Moore block as we did in Week 5, pricing has caught up a bit as the Panthers offense has shown some staying power and relative consistency after facing off against a couple of the strongest defenses they’ll see this year. The predictable dropoff in production for Davis against those stout run D’s has kept his price at a palatable $6,700. It’s still early in the week but with these divison rivals meeting for the second time in just a handful of weeks I don’t expect as much scoring. The game will be played outside in cooler weather, as well, and we all remember how the Falcons looked at Lambeau in Week 4. They won’t put up an egg here, but I’ll tread lightly on my cash exposure to this game. As of right now the forecast is looking like the remnants of Zeta will be moving through Charlotte on Thursday and into the evening, so wet and windy. If it looks this iffy as we near TNF, I’ll likely steer clear of this game entirely as it is a front-runner to go over-owned on this slate.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
W7 211.50 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|Golladay|Berrios|Rodgers|JWills|WFT?)*
W7 184.00 (Kyler|Kamara|Hunt|Adams|GDavis|Berrios|Kelce|Gio|WFT?)
166.58 Main Slate AVG
181.42 Thu-Mon Slate AVG
166.36 AVG Weekly Score
169.88 AVG Slate Score
148.86 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet. If there’s a player not listed in a breakdown that should be it’s likely that I think they’ll go over-owned in general or vs. other players I have listed and/or aren’t appropriate for cash.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Browns at Bengals, Week 7
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: CLE @ CIN
More – Burrow (SE/3M), Higgins (SE/3M) > Green (SE/3M) > Boyd (MME), Hooper (mME)
tw – Hunt (designation explained below)
CORE – BERNARD (CASH ONLY)
ss – see core above
Floor –
UPDATE: Joe Mixon has been ruled OUT
Drafting write-up as you read this.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
163.67 AVG per Main Slate
161.13 AVG per Week
161.91 AVG per Slate
141.88 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Panthers at Saints, Week 7
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: CAR @ NO
More – Murray (mME)
tw –
CORE – KAMARA
ss –
Floor –
UPDATE: Emmanuel Sanders is OUT with COVID-19. Thomas is OUT with the ankle and hamstring that can’t seem to get better…
Nothing like spending a good chunk of your day playing out a game in your mind only to find out the player you’ve pumped up is no longer expected to play. I’ll get over it. Anyways, Kamara is a cash game lock and is now in the territory where it’s scary to fade him in SE-3M tourneys. Sean Payton may have some plays drawn up where Kamara throws himself the ball at this point. In all seriousness, my time may be better spent brainstorming angles for other games. This one is so straightforward that it’s best left that way.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Much attention will be paid to Friday’s practice reports and injury designations this afternoon but none will have a bigger impact on the slate as a whole as those for New Orleans. Alvin Kamara and Michael Thomas are volume monsters that cut into eachother’s expectations when on the field together. If one of them doesn’t suit up, the other usually becomes a no-brainer play in cash games barring an exorbitant price tag or the even more unlikely scenario where the defensive matchup is too imposing.
Latavius has been a great point of leverage when rostering Saints on any given slate but the player I’m most drawn to here is Emmanuel Sanders. JM spoke to this earlier in the year, that Sanders is fully capable of assuming an alpha role and thriving in it. After some initial growing pains, he definitely seems to be settling into Sean Payton’s offensive scheme. Sanders would be my point of emphasis if looking to go overweight on anyone from this game. Contrary to Michael Thomas, Sanders is explosive after the catch and does not need volume to go his way in order to smash. Because of this, I think it’s viable to roster Sanders along with Kamara. I’m not sure that it the optimal way to go given the lower amount of snaps this game is projected to have, but it is far less -EV than rolling out a Thomas/Kamara block in this spot.
If going this route, I don’t think you’d be committing yourself to the angle of this week being one of the unpredictable “Saints Defense letdown” variety and thus forcing the bring-it-back with Panthers – in fact, I think a lineup with a Kamara/Sanders block devoid of any Panthers is a sharp approach to this game those most will either go all-in on or avoid altogether.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
163.67 AVG per Main Slate
161.13 AVG per Week
161.91 AVG per Slate
141.88 AVG Cash Line (Using DK’s $25 Single Entry MASSIVE)
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Seahawks at Cardinals, Week 7
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: SEA @ ARI
More – Carson (mME)
tw – Russ
CORE – KYLER
ss –
Floor –
As JM alluded to in his Edge write-up and what I harkened to in my last update before Thursday Night Football kicked off, I feel the best way to play this game in both tournaments and cash is thru Kyler. This set-up is all too familiar in the same attention it rendered last year when Russ & Lockett were highly owned in what turned out to be a 20-3 beatdown at the hands of Chris Carson and Jadaveon Clowney. I’m not saying Russ can’t “cook” here – Russ can do whatever is asked of him and then some. But this game environment that can play out in so many ways (the vast majority of which have Kyler putting up points) and the field’s perception being fixated on a shootout having me steering clear outside of trolling with Carson in tournaments.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
161.91 AVG per Slate
161.13 AVG by Week
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Bears at Rams, Week 7
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: CHI @ LAR (THU-MON SLATE)
More –
tw –
CORE –
ss –
Floor – Rams Def/St (mME) pure pricing play, should be lower-owned.
Along with the SF/NE contest, this game may play itself out rather quickly with both teams burning clock, preferring to lean on the run (the Rams quite heavily) and being easier to attack on the ground. If rostering Montgomery last week took a fair amount of convincing, I’m apt to leave him alone as the Bears could easily be chasing points here as six point dogs against a Rams squad that has been very effective at limiting the number of opponent possessions each game. The receiving work is there for him but I can’t bring myself to roster a player that has demonstrated a dismal ceiling when they are averaging only a 2.2x DK pt. multiplier of there price – a range like that is seen more for backs that are splitting time or have played a partial game due to injury, which isn’t the case here – HARD PASS.
Speaking of chasing points, I’ll be grabbing a share of the Rams D/ST unit in tourneys as I believe the field will see the lack of offensive appeal in this game (along with the run tendencies of both teams) and scratch it off altogether. Chicago will have to abandon their putrid run game (28th in DVOA rank & Yds per carry) at some point, and if it happens to be earlier in this battle in the trenches, the Rams will have the opportunity to capitalize.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
161.91 AVG per Slate
161.13 AVG by Week
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Buccaneers at Raiders, Week 7
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: TB @ OAK
More – Ronald Jones
tw –
CORE –
ss –
Floor – Bucs Def/ST (mME)
A lot of people will write off Jones with Leonard Fournette on track to return this week, and I think that is a big mistake. Sure, Lenny could vulture some touches and goalline work but I’m optimistic for a couple of reasons. If you dig into the how the Bucs have been using these two backs (SharpFootballStats.com – Off/Def Production by Direction), you’ll notice that Fournette is mainly used as an up-the-gut runner. This makes sense given the physical prowess to his running style and his decent speed in the open field should he happen to bust one through. In fact, now that I’m thinking about it, almost every highlight reel run I can recall of his has been one of this nature (there may be one that was more off-tackle last year when he shredded Denver at Mile High but don’t quote me on that).
Jones, on the other hand, is clearly deployed as a workhorse back, with Arians showing a slight but noticeable preference to run to the right side of his offensive line. This sets up quite well as they’ll be aiming their attack at the weaker side of the Raider defense (and it’s not even close). Maxx Crosby (LDE), Maliek Collins (LDT), and strong-side LB Nicholas Morrow have an overall avg. PFF player grade of 44.7 – Hankins, Ferrell, and Kwiatkoski on the weak side? 75.4… What’s more is that the Raider run D rates better defending over the center. Did I mention that Jones also has a decent receiving expectation? He’s averaged a little over 4 targets per contest AND showed us some ceiling in that regard when he caught 6 of 9 targets against Denver in Mile High (what a coincadink!).
The other point that favors Jones here is that Fournette missed Weeks 4 and 6 and played only one snap in Week 5. Not to read too much into the tea leaves here but to me that appears to have been a situation where Leonard thought he was healthy enough to play but soon came to realize he clearly wasn’t. This leads me to believe the Bucs will err on the side of caution here with his utilization with that fresh in their minds.
I’ll especially be overweight on him in the Thu-Mon tourneys given the latest COVID news spiraling around this game even playing. For cash purposes, I think the value that has opened up keeps Jones out of the discussion. Hunt is only $600 more expensive and will be playing in an offense far easier to project in their approach and with a tighter distribution of touches.
I think the Bucs Defense is a fine play that won’t go as overlooked by the field here, especially with their breakout performance against Rodgers & Co. – I’ll have a share but will aim to be under the field on them.
Quick Note: There’s been such an obsession with correlation in recent years that I’ve found it to be more contrarian to not roster the good defense of a core running back. Particularly in a game like this, the Raiders play a certain style of offense that caps the upside of the opposing defense. That’s why I’ve listed the Bucs as a “Floor” rather than a “More” play – good ol’ game environment.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each and every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is preferred is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there are no “CORE” pieces available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
161.91 AVG per Slate
161.13 AVG by Week
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Bills at Jets, Week 7
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: BUF @ NYJ
More – Diggs (mME)
tw – {Josh Allen, Bills Def/St (au contraire)} (MME)
CORE – GABRIEL DAVIS (IF J.BROWN IS OUT)
ss –
Floor –
Not a lot here from a cash perspective. I think an interesting narrative one might consider about this game in its relation to the slate is to think of it as a “get right” spot for Josh Allen, after two consecutive back-to-earth performances on national television. There are few teams as good as the Jets at playing the punching bag role – just ask the DOLPHINS. Allen is surrounded in price by several QB’s in very appealing matchups with far more shootout potential than this game. Along with the Bills Defense being priced up out of the stratosphere, these are plays to be made in isolation and with minimal exposure. Out of 150 lineups, I might game stack the more compelling spots but replace the QB with Allen on a handful of them.
The Bills defense is more to just be contrarian more than anything (again, three to four lineups out of 150) – I think their upside is capped by the “hurry up and run” approach Adam Gase takes to lose games as quickly as possible.
Again, these are THIN plays but I’m trying to provide amusing content here, people.
OH, SNAP! WAIT A SEC!
I’ve played DFS long enough to know that you play Diggs when nobody else is talking about him – I expect that to be the case this week. I’d look to be higher than the field on him and use him as a one-off on 10-20/150 builds.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
161.91 AVG per Slate
161.13 AVG by Week
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Cowboys at WFT, Week 7
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: DAL @ WAS
More – Gallup (only b/c of his price, MME)
tw –
CORE – MCLAURIN
ss – WFT? Def/St, Kyle Allen, Logan Thomas
Floor –
For anyone that happened to watch Monday Night Football that capped off Week 6, Mike McCarthy owes you an apology. His team is in such disarray that video clips of grown men in attendance being consoled by their significant others near the game’s end have already surfaced online to help fuel the inevitable discussion… Did Dallas pull out the rug from under Jason Garrett prematurely? If not, well then was Mike McCarthy really the best candidate for the position moving forward? Sure, he took the time from his year of unemployment to study high school and college offenses but what good is that if it was a year off from him having to think about fielding a competent defense? SKIP IF ONLY READING FOR ANALYSIS – Whatever the answers may be, I don’t particularly care b/c I’ve long had a healthy hatred of “America’s” team ever since they crushed my grandfather’s soul by sending his Bills to their third and fourth consecutive super bowl losses in the early 90’s. True story: I dressed up as Cris Carter (BFF’s with him and Randy Moss) for Halloween one of those years and after his wife gave me a kit kat bar, a man asked me why I hadn’t gone as Troy Aikman – I immediately began questioning my father’s decision to move our family from Minneapolis to Topeka, KS. I’m notoriously hyper-sensitive so all the five-year old version of me could think was “Cool, dude. Tell you what? How about you and your bandwagon ass keep nursing that Keystone and get back to me in thirty years when you’re a diehard Chiefs fan and I’m making fun of you from behind a screen via a passive-aggressive article that’s seldom read?” But, yeah… The Cowboy love was EVERYWHERE. We were only in that hell hole for a couple of years but now I have family down in Oklahoma by way of marriage so I still get my ample fill of this country’s chosen franchise. UNSKIP
There are plenty of ways to spend salary this week. I think a popular approach will be locking in the Washington Defense priced at just $2,500. With the scent of blood in the water, I’m excited to see what this young defensive line can do against a banged-up Dallas team that hasn’t played on the road in almost a month. Not that crowd noise is a thing anymore but being outdoors on a different type of playing surface sure is. Lock them in as my favorite unit for this week’s “bottom-up” build (henceforth “BUB”).
F1 has been targeted at least 7 times in every game this year. This game may not be as up-tempo as we projected earlier in they year before Dak’s injury and the resulting death of the Cowboys offense, but there will be enough more snaps that I’m quite comfortable rolling him out against this defense that has thus far looked as lost as a tourist every Sunday afternoon.
The salary savers of Kyle Allen and Logan Thomas qualify from a BUB perspective but their inconsistency keep them far away from being CORE status. We know the floor here but aren’t exactly sure on ceiling, and if you have an otherwise balanced lineup that you love and are hellbent on finding out what that ceiling looks like against a pourous defense, I will not talk you off of it. I’ll stick with F1 in cash as he’s a known value that has a locked-and-loaded target share.
On Gallup, this is a YOLO play if there ever was one. He’s so freaking cheap for the upside in a matchup that is not at all daunting. I’m projecting depressed Cowboy ownership, but may be more than what is warranted. Gallup is the most affordable access point to that leverage angle if you want to play that this week. Amari or Lamb could get there on volume based on sheer talent but their prices have pretty much remained the same since Dak’s unfortunate injury, and what I watched live on Monday night and by replay again Tuesday morning didn’t exactly give me a warm fuzzy feeling about rostering any of these guys in cash games.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
161.91 AVG per Slate
161.13 AVG by Week
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Giants at Eagles, Week 7
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 7: NYG @ PHI (THU-MON SLATE)
More – Wentz (SE/3M), Danny Dimes (MME), Slayton (MME)
tw –
CORE – R.RODGERS
ss –
Floor –
*UPDATE: Only DJax is returning which doesn’t change how I feel about Wentz. What that does change is how I feel about punting at TE this week. Lock in Richard Rodgers for $3,700 – he’s going to be on the field a LOT this evening and his cost opens things up considerably for the rest of our rosters.
Much like everything else with 2020, TE sucks and this week is no different. I like Wentz a lot but have a feeling I’ll be using the QB slot as my creative way to gain exposure to the more appealing games where I don’t feel like picking a correct receiver. Instead, I’m going to vouch for my confidence in Wentz by playing Rodgers. It’s weird to list him in all CAPS but that’s been the standard the first six weeks of the season – no reason to expect it to change now.
Another reason I’m liking this path is that McLaurin is very much in the mix for landing on my cash roster and there ain’t no way in hell I’m going to play two Redskins in cash, so I’ve accounted for why I’m not spending $200 less on Logan Thomas!
_ _ _ _ _ _
With this being my first CFM analysis for a Thursday night game, I thought I’d share my takes on Thursday-Monday slates because I strongly believe this is where our edge at OWS is most amplified – for cash games and tournaments alike. Obviously I have several reasons to back up such a bold statement, and those are as follows:
1) First and foremost in regards to game theory, more games being available on a slate means more opportunity for value to present itself. If we think we have an advantage over the field at identifying value and/or pricing errors, general roster construction, and promising game environments then it goes to reason that we’d prefer to play larger slates. Likewise, more games provides more opportunity for the field to “slip up” and latch onto bad chalk, mistake bad game environments for good ones, you know, the things that in the long run make us more profitable.
2) Secondly (and this benefits us more for tournaments), there is still a surprising amount of dead money given away by casual players that want to play the Thu-Mon slate because they like any of the three night games and think it’s going to go overlooked. What typically happens is the players competing during primetime end up going grossly overowned, creating ample leverage for us to work with when building our rosters.
3) Third, and I think most importantly, we discuss frequently on OWS the concept of embracing uncertainty in our approach to DFS. While most attribute this directly to their approach in roster construction (as the conversation intends to), I’d like to turn this idea on its head a bit – bear with me. I promise this is going somewhere.
I used to be that guy. With Point #1 above being ever-present in my mind, I spent my early years in DFS playing cash games only on Thu-Mon slates and tournaments only on the main slate (b/c it’s far easier to project ownership). I used to read The Edge frantically Wednesday night and throughout the workday Thursday during breaks in my desperate hopes of putting a cash game roster together that JM would approve of. Hell, I even think I left a couple of “What do you think of this guy in cash?” questions on the comments section when he was still with RG if he hadn’t gotten all of the writeups done by the time TNF was set to kick off. I would take any form of validation just to confirm that I wasn’t doing anything with incomplete information!
Chalk it up to sheer ignorance (of which I have plenty) or that most epiphanies in the DFS arena result from painful experiential journeys – I suddenly came to realize that I was going about this whole Thu-Mon slate thing the wrong way. You see, I’m not the only one who plays this slate. I’m not the only one that suffers from analysis paralysis from time to time. I’m not the only one who is hellbent on finding someone to tell them that everything is going to be OK. Rather, if I embrace the unknown that is presented by a Thu-Mon slate and actually utilize it in my roster builds for both cash and tournaments, maybe even trust the vast amount of knowledge I’ve accumulated over the years, I could actually look forward to playing expanded slates!
The allure of the Thursday-Monday slate is a combination of the primetime games and there being more players to choose from when building your lineups. The true beauty though, resides in the vast amount of unknowns that exist at the time the slate begins because final injury designations are not made until after Friday practices. Along with changing weather forecasts (which I’ll concede are overblown/misinterpreted most of the time but nonetheless become far more worth considering as we delve deep into these winter months), which players are active or inactive can drastically affect game environments and the general approach of highly adaptable teams. If you are with OWS any decent amount of time, you’ll become much more comfortable with breaking down these unknown elements and relish the edge it gives you over the field, who is still doing everything in their power to keep uncertainty at bay – making lineups mostly out of fear rather than out of confidence. With that, let’s get after it and break down the first game of this Week 7 THU-MON slate!
I FINALLY present to you my thoughts on this tilt between two fierce rivals, the New York Giants and the Philadelphia Eagles.
And I’ll start it off with a quick short story…
I have to attribute one of the funniest sports-related commentaries ever to my older brother. Hearing him describe how bipolar sports radio is in Chicago (where he moved from the KC area for work), particularly for the Bears, really does make me laugh every time I’m reminded of it.
Following any kind of victory, regardless of opponent.
“Have you seen this team play? I’m telling you, there’s something special with this group. Without a doubt at least a 12-4 record playoff contender!”
The next week, following a defeat at the hands of any opponent.
“They’re terrible! Tell me – how could this team be any worse? Looks like another year lost with a decent draft pick as our consolation prize!”
He’s since moved back to KC but I can only imagine how fantastic the Bears coverage was to listen to during the Trubisky era.
Anyways, the delusional expectations with which Bears fans come into every year are strikingly similar for supporters of the Giants and Eagles (although the Eagles have been very good in recent years with a title under their belt in 2017-18). Daniel Jones and Carson Wentz are easily two of the most scrutinized players in the NFL. It comes with the territory of being the starting quarterback for a storied franchise with rabid fanbases. The old adage of QBs getting far too much blame when their teams perform poorly holds true for both of these guys. I mean, just look at the matchups they have had to face to start this season…
Jones
Oppo (DVOA vs. Pass, ” ” vs. Run, Adj Sack Rate) DK Points
W1 PIT (8th, 1st, 1st) 19.36
W2 @CHI (2nd, 11th, 13th) 9.74
W3 SF (22nd, 7th, 23rd) 10.06
W4 @LAR (11th, 21st, 8th) 11.10
W5 @DAL (21st, 29th, 21st) 9.18
W6 WAS (6th, 17th, 3rd) 14.88
AVG. (12th, 12th, 10th) 12.40
Wentz
Oppo (DVOA vs. Pass, ” ” vs. Run, Adj Sack Rate) DK Points
W1 @WAS (6th, 17th, 3rd) 16.00
W2 LAR (11th, 21st, 8th) 14.38
W3 CIN (16th, 23rd, 25th) 23.50
W4 @SF (22nd, 7th, 23rd) 22.42
W5 @PIT (8th, 1st, 1st) 19.42
W6 BAL (7th, 2nd, 9th) 14.88
AVG. (12th, 12th, 10th) 21.00
What clearly stands out is that Wentz has performed markedly better than Jones while facing the same average defenses as him. There are several considerations that need to be made, however.
1) Jones only had Saquon Barkley for the first week (no coincidence there that he put up his highest point total against the stingiest defense he’s seen to this point).
2) The receiving corps. Jones has to work with is talented but still quite raw in their own right and their availability on a game-by-game basis has been a revolving door. Jones hardly gets to throw to the same targets, and when he does they are almost certain to be playing thru some kind of nagging injury (case in point: Engram this entire season).
3) He’s in a completely new system than he was in his rookie year previous and he is still in what is his first season as an NFL starting quarterback.
Aha! You see that’s why his numbers don’t look so good! Welp, not exactly…
Carson Wentz has had even WORSE luck when it comes to having healthy skills players to throw to. His bellcow counterpart in Sanders has played consistently (though as was the case in Week 1, it looks like they’ll be without him for this particular game), and Boston Scott is no slouch (whereas Devonta Freeman is), so he has his something to hang his hat on at least.
The case for Wentz this week is simple – against almost impossible circumstances, he has still managed to generate points at a 3.68x multiplier of his Week 7 price (this is really good if we’re hoping to get at least 3x in cash and are shooting for 4-5x in tournaments).
With Dallas Goedert, Desean Jackson and possibly Alshon Jeffery returning, and facing a Giants defense without Sanders that is easier to attack through the air anyways (23rd, 15th, 12th in the same ranks used earlier), I’m sure Doug Pederson is eager to give Wentz an opportunity to perform with more familiar weapons around him and table any discussions on the Jalen Hurts show for Week 8, barring some epic collapse during the first half. I am marking Wentz as a More play for now (as early as single-entry for tourney builds) as I need to tinker with lineup construction more to get a feel for how loose salary is this week (if the savings he presents from the QBs priced above him make an impact he’ll be making his case for “CORE” status) and I hope this isn’t just my morning caffeine rush getting the best of me.
Now, onto Mr. Dimes…
I’m not here to pump anyone up that I don’t believe in – I’ve picked on Jones way more than most DFS’ers. In fact, it really wasn’t until I watched the film from last week’s game against WFT? that I finally understood what practically everyone had insisted with this kid – that’s he’s athletic. The way he constantly operates the pocket like an awkard goober led me to believe that all this time it was just noise perpetrated by those crazy Giants fans and DFS players alike that are dying for something good to happen to this team that might return them to glory. It took Jason Garrett long enough it appears that he may have come to the same realization just a few days before me!
Jones had the longest run of his career (49 yds.) on a designed run play (RPO, to be exact) that was executed well enough that even the cameraman was initially fooled. As the play unfolded I got to see Daniel Jones gallup along the sideline, keeping ground with defensive backs. Another designed play for Jones to run followed. Nothing earth-shattering, but whenever anything sticks out to me when I watch all of the condensed games on Monday, I write it down. Doing so landed me on Trey Burton this past week (it looked to me that Rivers was absolutely glued to him the game prior and figured volume would likely be there if MAC was inactive). When you get in the habit of watching games for the purposes of research, you absolutely start to notice the little things that “pop”. This is crucial to lean on as you build throughout the week. So, for Danny, I’m not jumping at the bit to roster him myself, but given this glimmer of hope and QB run plays being more effective against man coverage (which Jim Schwartz implements), I’d strongly consider putting him on one of my rosters if I were entering 20+ lineups. He’s shown to have a tremendous ceiling and he’s priced above Kyle Allen who may garner ownership going up against Dallas in an up-tempo game (even though Allen himself has shown no ceiling, at least that I’m aware of).
The Eagles and Giants defenses are going to go overowned in the Thu-Mon slate due to the constant narratives of struggle for the two quarterbacks. Rostering either of the QBs (preferably Wentz) is one of my favorite leverage angles on the slate.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose (and IS aiming for just the cash line).
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
(SE/3M) – Valid as early as Single-Entry / 3-Max
(LE) – ” ” as 5-8 lineups
(mME) – ” ” as 10-16 lineups
(MME) – ” ” as 20+ lineups
*THESE ARE VERY ROUGH DESIGNATIONS ESPECIALLY AS YOU INCREASE THE NUMBER OF ENTRIES – DO NOT TAKE THEM AS GOSPEL! I play exclusively cash games and SE/3M tourneys so please do not let me be your go-to source for anything related to multi-entry roster allocation.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
_ _ _ _ _ _
MY 2020 CASH GAME LINEUP SCORES – *DENOTES THU-MON SLATE
W1 170.40 (Cam|Ekeler|Cook|Adams|A.Miller|MJIII|Goedert|Scott|Jets)
W2 172.84 (Kyler|Zeke|Taylor|Evans|Amari|Cephus|LTIII|Sanders|Pitt)
W3 161.90 (Wilson|Sanders|Singletary|Amari|Lamb|TY|Hurst|Gallup|Bucs)
W4 163.30 (Fitz|Kamara|Cook|Golladay|OBJ|Cooks|LTIII|Davis|Bucs)
W5 131.74 (Dak|Zeke|Davis|DJM|Robby|Zaccheaus|Engram|DJ-HOU|49ers)
W6 151.34 (Lamar|Mattison|Monty|Golladay|F1|Claypool|Burton|Davis|Pitt)*
W6 181.86 (Tanny|Henry|Davis|Adams|AJB|Claypool|Burton|Montgom|Cincy)
161.91 AVG per Slate
161.13 AVG by Week
_ _ _ _ _ _
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play OR I haven’t gotten to it yet – I have a two-year old daughter and a full-time job that both keep me very busy.
Also, I update my breakdowns on almost a daily basis as I piece through the puzzle of the week’s roster construction – so check back later in the week for my latest and greatest.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Falcons at Vikings, Week 6
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6: ATL @ MIN
More – Ridley, Cousins, Thielen, Jefferson
tw –
CORE – MATTISON
ss – Zaccheaus
Floor –
DK tried their hardest to not repeat the same mistake. After starting Mike Davis’s Week 3 (when he took over full-time duties) salary at $5,700 vs. the $10,000 you had to pay for CMC the first two weeks of the season (it’s now at $7,000 vs. CMC’s $8,500), better minds seemingly prevailed this time around in pricing Alexander Mattison at $7,200 – exactly a 10% discount from the $8,000 we’d be looking to pay for Dalvin Cook in this drool-worthy matchup vs. Atlanta had he not strained an abductor in Sunday night’s tilt against the Seahawks. Wow – that was a long, drawn out sentence!
Dalvin Cook is a special player and he’s very talented in many respects. Being a diehard Vikes fan my whole life, I’ve obviously watched a ton of their recent games, even before getting into film review last season. Cook is undoubtedly the better runner of the two. Mattison has proven to be the better receiver out of the backfield. He also passed the eye test when assuming lead back duties after Cook’s exit in Seattle – several chunk gains including FOUR carries of ten yards or more against a top-ten run defense in adjusted line yards. Given that performance, DK’s full PPR scoring, the Vikes O-Line ranking 2nd in ALY, AND the Falcons’ propensity for funneling targets to opposing running backs, I’m having a really difficult time accounting for the 10% gap in pricing. Looks like some chalk I’m eager to eat!
After being a no-show on a week the entire DFS community had to entertain the idea of rostering him, Olamide Zaccheaus sure has some explaining to do. Instead, I think it’d be better if he trolled us by resurfacing the very next game (if Julio again misses) against a young secondary that is improving (as evidenced by their play against Russell Wilson in the first half) but still has a ways to go before Mike Zimmer will claim them as his own (as evidenced by their play against Wilson in the 2nd half). It enables us to build some crazy tournament rosters, so why not?!
Ridley is really good and he’s going to have to be if the Falcons hope to win a single game this year. If you are able to fit him onto a balanced roster, I have no qualms rostering him in cash – maybe as a block with Zaccheus? Just a thought…
Because the Vikings run an offense with such a concentrated distribution of touches, lots of attention is always given to the top dog on a week where they set up well to do damage. I understand how tantalizingly convenient it is to hit the lock button on their stud running back in a juicy matchup at home in which they’re projected to lead throughout the contest. It’s the Vikings – good or bad, it hardly ever goes as planned. The other big dogs and to a lesser extent ancillary pieces are chronically overlooked because what the DFS public fails to fully comprehend is that on any half-decent offense with a narrow distribution of touches, the touches are worth more. And what’s more, a picture-perfect matchup on the ground doesn’t exclude a decent matchup through the air from also being present. Over the past couple of years you likely picked up on the trend that when Thielen was supposed to smash, Diggs would, when Cook was supposed to smash Thielen would. When either Thielen or Cook were supposed to smash this year against the Titans, Jefferson did! I guess my point is this: when it comes to my Vikes, don’t match the field. Have an imagination, be creative, but please do not just match the field.
And that’s how I feel about that.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose.
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Ravens at Eagles, Week 6
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6: BLT @ PHI
More –
tw – Lamar, BLT Def/ST
CORE –
ss –
Floor –
Lamar and Ravens D/ST are the only pieces we can ever really consider from this team in cash games, but with Ravens cost now joining Lamar’s as being quite prohibitive, they are left in this “tw” range. The regression pendulum has swung back hard on Lamar, and I want to be on him when there’s another correction in his favor. I’ll be pouncing if projected ownership holds at under 10% – his floor his solid enough to consider him as early as single-entry and 3-max builds.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose.
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Browns at Steelers, Week 6
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6: CLE @ PIT
More – Ebron
tw –
CORE – DIONTAE, PIT DST
ss –
Floor –
As tilting as it was to see Diontae Johnson sustain another injury very early in the contest and then watch Claypool score four times against the Eagles, it just goes to show how sharp of a play it actually was. For whatever reason, DK decided to drop his price $1,000. Even with the emergence of Claypool, I see no reason to hop off this train. Assuming he’s healthy to strap it up on Sunday, Diontae strikes me as the best piece to roster from a game that has a fair chance of turning into a shootout. Should the Steelers (who lean towards the pass) jump out to an early lead, the Browns will eventually have to abandon their run-heavy tendency and rely more on Baker Mayfield – this puts the Pittsburgh defense firmly in play. Both teams are easier to attack through the air – and both teams possess explosive players that CAN get vertical.
HOWEVER, there are valid “shootout recipe” concerns/questions to consider on both sides… For Cleveland, the effectiveness of OC Kevin Stefanski’s passing scheme is predicated on play-action. Albeit far more nuanced, the “Run, Run, Run, PASSS!!!, Run, Run, Run, PASSS!!!” approach won’t be near as lethal if Pittsburgh doesn’t have to pay tribute to the run game. Cleveland is also running the ball on over half of their snaps when trailing by 7-14 points – this is a sharp coaching staff that understands it doesn’t stand a chance if they abandon the run game to chase points.
We know the Steelers passing attack is less vertical than it used to be – Claypool’s dominant performance may have instilled some confidence into the coaching staff that his presence on the field will allow them to open it up a bit more in hopes of further straining coverages. All in all, I’m cautious to play this angle as I think ownership will congregate around this game from those that feel they missed out last week.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose.
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Texans at Titans, Week 6
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6: HOU @ TEN
More – {Tannehill, A.J. Brown (but they’ll be popular in tourneys)}, Corey Davis? (Tourney only)
tw – Watson
CORE – HENRY
ss –
Floor –
It goes without saying but I can’t in good conscience leave it unsaid – If Derrick Henry is going to be chalky, you fade him. Particularly on a week where there is no shortage of pass-catching, similarly-priced running backs in decent to middling matchups, there are just so many ways to position yourself to overcome his ceiling score should he trounce the Texans D. In cash games, you play Henry if your style is to side with heavy ownership and pick your battles elsewhere. If you’re weird like me and love the thrill of going contrarian in cash, steer clear.
In the three meetings between these two teams since Vrabel took over the helm in Nashville, Watson is averaging 254 Pass Yds | 2.0 PTD | 1.0 INT | 49 Rush Yds. | 0.33 RTD – whereas in previous years we could depend on the Texan Defense to keep games close, we’ve now turned to Watson to fill that role. He’s a solid play but his salary of $7k keeps him out of cash consideration for what I’m seeing as the optimal cash build this week.
The public’s romance for Ryan Tannehill and A.J. Brown seems to have taken off again after their performances against the Bills on national TV. For those of you looking for leverage off of Henry (myself included), I’ll be the first to break it to you that rolling out these two is NOT going to overlooked by the masses – Tanny in the optimal build pricing tier for QBs (along with Cousins, Stafford, Fitz, etc.) and Brown’s price is still lower than what we’re used to seeing, but he remains as the lead dog in a highly efficient passing attack.
_ _ _ _ _ _
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose.
The C-F-M order is intentional (and alphabetical) – One of the biggest edges I’ve gleaned from playing DFS cash games the past few years is that people side with the “sexier” play with a higher ceiling over the optimal “boring” play with a higher floor 9 times out of 10 if they view all other factors as a virtual toss-up. If we are striving to build a roster that is as bulletproof as possible, we need to be rostering the known quantities each an every time. The only instance where rostering the more volatile player is if it assists our roster in becoming more balanced. Repeat the mantra… CORE-Floor-More, CORE-Floor-More!
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
WFT at Giants, Week 6
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6 – WFT? @ NYG
Floor –
ss –
CORE – WFT? DST
tw –
More – Engram, A. Gibson, McLaurin, Slayton
I’m oddly drawn to Gibson this week and it’s probably because we’ve all been on pins and needles waiting for the blowup game we know is coming. You think it’d have to happen here, right? When nobody is really paying much attention and he’s squaring up against a middling defense? Slayton has been in the “always viable in tourneys” eschelon along with McLaurin for quite some time now, but I’d really love to see him develop more of a consistent floor even with spotty QB performance (F1 somehow managed to get there with Haskins throwing to him). Engram looked perfectly healthy to me against Dallas but the targets failed to be there, yet again. All is not lost, however! What CAN we count on when looking at this game environment through a cash game lens? Danny Dimes turnovers! He even let the putrid Cowboys Defense in on the action last week – such a generous dude. Anyways, while the Panthers stand out now as my “bottom-up-build” defensive unit where I’m fairly certain they won’t put up negative points (btw, thanks San Fran!), the upside to be had with the District’s Football Team priced at $3,300 is really solid value and what I’m currently hoping go get to for my cash game lineup. Washington’s Pass Rush is legit and they set up well here to give Danny plenty of opportunities to turn it over on Sunday.
_ _ _ _ _ _
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose. This week’s example:
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Lions at Jaguars, Week 6
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6: DET @ JAC
More – James Robinson, Shenault Jr.
tw –
CORE – GOLLADAY
ss –
Floor –
I’ve had a soft spot for Robinson this entire season, likely because he was an undrafted rookie coming in and I’m a sucker for underdogs. Not only is the matchup against the Lions one of pure candy, but what I find most promising is his consistent involvement in the passing game, even when the Jags are trailing. While he seems $200-300 overpriced (probably a case of pricing psychology involving relative unknowns), he’s one of the only few running backs on the slate that: a) has a soft matchup, b) isn’t wholly dependent on yardage and TD’s (looking at you D. Henry, who I will now forever worship following his most glorious of stiff arms ever applied to Josh Norman on Tuesday night!), and c) is immune to gameflow (five games in, at least). The one chink in the armor though is how infrequently the Jags run the damn ball. In aggregate, they are the only team in the NFL to pass more frequently than the Cowboys (at a whopping 67% clip)! *As an aside, it’s interesting to note that the Jags are forming into the polar opposite approach as Adam Gase’s “let’s hurry up and run” Jets offense. Jacksonville is ranked dead last in situation-neutral pace of play, something you wouldn’t come to expect from the pass heaviest team in the league – perhaps a case of small sample size still needing to be teased out a bit – but if it holds, I’m hereby coining it the “Slow & Throw Show” (I’m lacking in creativity today)*. Ahem, salary is loose this week (provided you can get comfortable with a cheap TE) so I don’t see the need to get cute in cash when we have so many other featured backs in run-heavy offenses at our disposal. I’m still very interested in tourneys, though.
Now onto my boy Kenny G. – for the type of receiver that Golladay is (big, downfield threat that also happens to be his quarterback’s favorite red zone target), the floor always feels a tad bit lacking. Then I remind myself that Golladay is the GOAT. I also take into account his pristine matchup against a Jags defense that has a difficult time covering a corpse let alone an out-of-this-world athlete that could probably just hop over them if he needed to. The price still feels too cheap and it feels weird to not have Golladay as a “CORE” play if Detroit has an implied team total north of four TD’s, so “CORE” he is. My instinct is to go over the field on Golladay in tournaments (correlating with J. Robinson).
Laviska Shenault is a superb talent that the Jags have gone out of their way to utilize from the outset of the 2020 season. He’s seen a steady rise in touches and targets as the weeks have gone by and that’s with the established alpha DJ Chark back on the field following his Week 3 absence – this resembles a quick, but steady development arc the Jags are likely relishing at the moment, having drafted Laviska in the 2nd round of the 2020 draft (42nd overall) – as an aside, if you ever have some time to kill, read up on Shenault’s back story. It’s very inspiring and serves as a heartfelt reminder during a tumultuous year like 2020 of the incredible ability within us to overcome tragedy. Needless to say, it’ll leave you really rooting for him out there on the gridiron!!!
Now, the bit I’m MOST excited about is how Gardner Minshew has been kind enough to state precisely when Laviska becomes his primary focus on given pass play… when the defense is in man-to-man coverage. You’ll notice in film review that the Jags frequently send Shenault in motion before the snap to aid in Minshew’s determination of the man vs. zone coverage (USUALLY, if a defender is tracking with a receiver’s pre-snap motion, it’s a strong indicator of man coverage). However, this shouldn’t be too necessary against the Lions, who are well-established to be a man-heavy defense. Given the scheme, though, and the likelihood that this is a tightly contested game that does have some shootout potential, I see this as a prime spot for Shenault to blow up. Even if Chark ends up missing and Detroit activates by far their best cornerback in Justin Coleman from IR, Coleman primarily works out of the slot unless he’s called upon to shadow an alpha. In that scenario I don’t see him vacating his slot coverage of Keelan Cole to address the threat that Shenault poses, especially with the Detroit coaching staff insisting on their usual approach to business. I’m also tinkering with the idea of playing him but it feels way too early in the week to plant my flag on a rookie wideout in cash. Stay tuned for updates!
_ _ _ _ _ _
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose. This week’s example:
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Jets at Dolphins, Week 6
CORE-Floor-More Cash Game Breakdown
Week 6 – NYJ @ MIA
More – Gaskin, Fitzmagic (Tourney only for both)
tw –
CORE –
ss –
Floor –
On a general note, this is such an intriguing matchup in regards to game environment per se but because of the stark contrast in stories of coaching effectiveness for these two franchises. The green version of a dumpster fire from the Big Apple is set to visit this Dolphin squad that, despite its owner’s best efforts to sandbag on the field in hopes of collecting high draft picks, have really come to impress fans on a week-in, week-out basis with how competitive they are with such a talent-depleted roster. Yes – the 49ers are really banged up and they had just lost at home to the hapless Eagles and are evidently still without a healthy starting quarterback. The fashion in which Miami and their HC Brian Flores dismantled last year’s NFC champion was nonetheless impressive. After a few rough years, Flores, with his stellar acumen, and his cohorts are no longer over-shadowed by Miami’s front office (now that they have Tua, at least, I hope…). These kinds of teams are not only good for the game of football but are a lot of fun for fantasy purposes, which I’ll get into further below. And then there are the teams that are bad for the game of football and, ipso facto, bad for fantasy (unless you’re rostering the opposing defense)… Much like the old adage (in fantasy circles) used to go that “Wide receivers go to die in Chicago” because of the cumbersome, smashmouth offensive style paired with the quarterback play of a “game manager” (hint: think of “Dilfer”, rhymes with “Crow’s man” – I also think the freezing temps and hellacious winds coming off of Lake Michigan MAY have something to do with it), the New York Jets, under the tutelage of Adam Gase, have come to be well-known as the team talent goes to die. From what I can see on tape, it also appears to be the place where effort goes to die. It’s simply a steaming pile of toxicity that is best left alone for the time being. That is until we re-evaluate the carnage left following the inevitable firing of Gase which I’m hoping will come at the hands of these Miami Dolphins.
From a DFS perspective,
PROVIDED THAT Jordan Howard is again a healthy scratch, I really like the Fitzmagic/Gaskin player BLOCK in this matchup at their respective prices of $5,900 and $5,400. Our complaint all along with Gaskin has been his lack of involvement when the Dolphins get within the ten yard line. Well guess what? Jordan Howard was a healthy scratch against the 49ers, and Gaskin was given the goalline work, punching in a TD on one of his three opportunities that I can recall from watching the film. If Brian Flores has determined that Howard is indeed as useless as he appears with Gaskin able to shoulder the load, this sets up quite well for us. The Jets rank 7th in Run Def DVOA but 22nd in Yds allowed per carry. Their pass defense is right around that neighborhood (22nd in DVOA, 24th in yds allowed / pass) so this really boils down to what ends up being the path of least resistance.
Irrespective of salaries, here’s the scoring breakdown of every QB1/RB1 block against the Jets through the first five weeks of play:
W1) Allen 33.18 / Singletary 10.3 = 43.48 DK points
W2) Jimmy G 13.24 / Mostert 18.7 = 31.94 (both left game early due to injury)
W3) Rivers 12.68 / Taylor 13.2 = 25.88 (worst case “curb-stomp” scenario)
W4) Rypien 14.18 / MGIII 28.8 = 42.98
W5) Kyler 30.3 / Drake 13.2 = 43.5
AVG = 37.56 DK Pts
OK… So you’re telling me that for $11,300 I can roster a player block that’s LIKELY to get me over 35 points, good for over a 3x multiplier? And that’s after having gone through a sample that accounts for a worst case game flow and possible injury? And this block, if those doomsday scenarios don’t come to pass, averages over 42 DraftKings points, pushing closer to a 4x multiplier, in CASH? Sign me up! At this rate, I’m not even sure the Jordan Howard status matters. Plenty of RB timeshares exist in the cited sample and on top of that an active status doesn’t guarantee Flores will let him vulture GL touches! So, much like I did with rostering the Robby / Moore / Davis block last week (where we shoot for “guaranteed” points on concentrated offenses that set up well against a particular defense), I’m inclined to take the guesswork out of which side of the ‘Fins aggressive offense prevails and instead bet on them as a whole at prices that will not devastate your lineup should the Jets D play inspired football for the first time this year. And yes, if it feels like I’m picking on the Jets it’s because I am.
UPDATES: Spread of almost 10 points in favor of Miami. The beatdown scenario is more likely than I originally gave it credit for. I also didn’t realize until looking at the metrics how poor Miami’s O-Line is. With Gaskin the more affordable piece, I’m now leaning to him in tourneys over Fitzmagic :_(
_ _ _ _ _ _
Floor – Players with a limited or capped ceiling that we roster to offset a “More” piece because the likelihood of dudding is very low – thus maintaining the overall balance of our lineup.
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented.
CORE – Emphasized in CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. On a perfect slate, we want our rosters to consist only of these players that offer us the best Floor and More combo, ideally price-considered (News Flash – the world is not perfect (e.g., 2020) and thus we have to make some decisions every week).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not technically appropriate for cash game play on ideal slates). These players almost always carry higher floors than players under the “More” section.
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two main categories. These are the more aggressive plays that carry lower floors that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. For cash games, “More” plays enable us to beat more than just half of the field – something we’ll need to have happen to be profitable over the long run. We don’t aim for the cash line of ~135 points. We aim for 150 points (or 3x player salary) to comfortably surpass it – this gives us some breathing room to account for variance AND to take out the bad chalk that is playing to not lose. This week’s example:
_ _ _ _ _ _
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown for cash game lineup construction. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup, something that is paramount for cash game play.
For cash games, we want our lineups to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be smack dab in the middle of breakdown). In most weeks, however, we are left with a couple of roster spots where there is no “CORE” piece available with the remaining salary we have left to spend (regardless of what pieces we switch back and forth trying to get it to work). This is where the art of creating a balanced lineup lives. Quite simply, we are left rostering pieces that fall in the other categories that best complement our “CORE” plays. This “CORE-Floor-More” approach has helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS cash game player I profess to be.
Most importantly, this in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – what I’m hoping to provide is a consistent augmentation of the analysis put forth by JM and the entire OWS community from the cash game perspective. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me.
*NOTES*:
If there is no C-F-M breakdown of a given game that means I do not find any pieces from the game (D/ST included) worth mentioning as viable considerations for cash game play.
Finally, any feedback on content and/or format is welcome. Thanks!
Eagles at Steelers, Week 5
CFM Breakdown
(Legend and background below)
Week 5 – PHI @ PIT
Floor –
ss –
CORE – Diontae, Steelers D
tw –
More – Ebron, *Ertz*
*Ertz is a pure volume hog play to reach his ceiling, so if you do want to chase this thin play make sure he’s the only eagle on your roster.*
Floor – Players with limited ceiling that are highly unlikely to crater an otherwise ambitious roster. This week’s example: Teddy Bridgewater
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented. This week’s example: Olamide Zaccheaus* (he’s a bit closer to CORE than your generic ss)
CORE – In all CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. We want our rosters to consist mostly of these players that offer us the best Floor and Ceiling combo, ideally price-considered (easiest on a full slate).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not appropriate for cash game play). These players typically carry higher floors than players under the “More” section. This week’s example: Travis Kelce
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two categories. These are the more aggressive plays in which a player carries a relatively low floor but also possesses a ceiling that can bring you a tournament win. They are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of binking DFS tourneys / GPP’s. If you ever hear the phrase “planting a flag” or “taking a stand”, those are referencing these kinds of plays. This week’s example: Darius Slayton
(denotations key): more to be added as the breakdown is refined
(GEO) = Game Environment only, not appropriate as an isolated play – for this week think of the ancillary Cowboys receivers against the Giants (i.e., think of it as kind of a rabbit hole – if you roster this player it means you are betting on the game playing out in a way that would result in it only making sense for you to bring it back with an opposing player).
(mME) = Mini Multi Entry, 7-20 lineups before introducing as isolated play
(MME) = Mass Multi Entry, 20+ lineups before introducing as isolated play
*It’s implied that everything else not in () is appropriate for SE to 3-5Max*
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup. The best example of its utility is one JM refers to frequently, and it involves a player we’re all familiar with – Tyreek Hill (2020’s corollary think Marquise Brown). Now granted, he’s been much more consistent as he’s matured as a route runner and has settled into Andy Reid’s offense, but Tyreek Hill USED to be a player you would almost always avoid building a core lineup around or consider playing in cash due to his volatility. The message went that if you were building tournament lineups, and you wanted to bank a roster on it being Tyreek blowup week, you would want to be absolutely sure it wouldn’t go to waste by not appropriately “balancing” it out with the remaining lineup slots. In this example, the most optimal way to “balance” the Tyreek play is to pair it with mostly CORE plays, or even a Floor play. I have found that this general approach has really sharpened my focus on proper roster construction. It took me a long time to understand how aggressive one needs to be depending on the contest they are competing in.
For cash games, you’d like your roster to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be at the middle of breakdown). GENERALLY speaking, for limited-entry tournaments, you want to still have your “CORE” lineup but begin adding weight to the “more” side by selecting players to roster that push the envelope a little bit, sliding your overall lineup slightly below the “CORE” in a balance sense. For mass multi-entry, you are shooting for about half of your lineup consisting of your “CORE” and the rest being made up of “more” players. This is a VERY loose explanation that is only intended to help complement the use of the table. Obviously there are rosters that are built around certain game environments and tributaries that may stray from these rough guidelines, but again – I’m only sharing this because it’s helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS player I profess to be.
AGAIN: This in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – it is practically derived from it and only serves as a quick snapshot of the players to be considered from a given game and in what DFS formats! This is only a tool I use throughout the week to assist in me in building balanced lineups. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me. Thanks!
Panthers at Falcons, Week 5
CFM Breakdown
(Legend and background below)
Week 5 – CAR @ ATL
Floor – Bridgewater
ss – Zaccheaus
CORE – Mike Davis, Robby Anderson
tw –
More – Hurst (mME)
Floor – Players with limited ceiling that are highly unlikely to crater an otherwise ambitious roster. This week’s example: Teddy Bridgewater
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented. This week’s example: Olamide Zaccheaus* (he’s a bit closer to CORE than your generic ss)
CORE – In all CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. We want our rosters to consist mostly of these players that offer us the best Floor and Ceiling combo, ideally price-considered (easiest on a full slate).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not appropriate for cash game play). These players typically carry higher floors than players under the “More” section. This week’s example: Travis Kelce
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two categories. These are the more aggressive plays in which a player carries a relatively low floor but also possesses a ceiling that can bring you a tournament win. They are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of binking DFS tourneys / GPP’s. If you ever hear the phrase “planting a flag” or “taking a stand”, those are referencing these kinds of plays. This week’s example: Darius Slayton
(denotations key): more to be added as the breakdown is refined
(GEO) = Game Environment only, not appropriate as an isolated play – for this week think of the ancillary Cowboys receivers against the Giants (i.e., think of it as kind of a rabbit hole – if you roster this player it means you are betting on the game playing out in a way that would result in it only making sense for you to bring it back with an opposing player).
(mME) = Mini Multi Entry, 7-20 lineups before introducing as isolated play
(MME) = Mass Multi Entry, 20+ lineups before introducing as isolated play
*It’s implied that everything else not in () is appropriate for SE to 3-5Max*
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup. The best example of its utility is one JM refers to frequently, and it involves a player in the grid above – Tyreek Hill (2020’s corollary think Marquise Brown). Now granted, he’s been much more consistent as he’s matured as a route runner and has settled into Andy Reid’s offense, but Tyreek Hill USED to be a player you would almost always avoid building a core lineup around or consider playing in cash due to his volatility. The message went that if you were building tournament lineups, and you wanted to bank a roster on it being Tyreek blowup week, you would want to be absolutely sure it wouldn’t go to waste by not appropriately “balancing” it out with the remaining lineup slots. In this example, the most optimal way to “balance” the Tyreek play is to pair it with mostly CORE plays, or even a Floor play. I have found that this general approach has really sharpened my focus on proper roster construction. It took me a long time to understand how aggressive one needs to be depending on the contest they are competing in.
For cash games, you’d like your roster to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be at the middle of breakdown). GENERALLY speaking, for limited-entry tournaments, you want to still have your “CORE” lineup but begin adding weight to the “more” side by selecting players to roster that push the envelope a little bit, sliding your overall lineup slightly below the “CORE” in a balance sense. For mass multi-entry, you are shooting for about half of your lineup consisting of your “CORE” and the rest being made up of “more” players. This is a VERY loose explanation that is only intended to help complement the use of the table. Obviously there are rosters that are built around certain game environments and tributaries that may stray from these rough guidelines, but again – I’m only sharing this because it’s helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS player I profess to be.
AGAIN: This in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – it is practically derived from it and only serves as a quick snapshot of the players to be considered from a given game and in what DFS formats! This is only a tool I use throughout the week to assist in me in building balanced lineups. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me. Thanks!
Raiders at Chiefs, Week 5
Tin8shusd PRESENTS… CFM Breakdown
(Legend and background below)
Week 5 – OAK @ KC
Floor –
ss –
CORE – CEH, Mahomes
tw – Kelce, Waller
More – Tyreek, Chiefs D, Hardman (mME), D.Robinson (MME)
Floor – Players with limited ceiling that are highly unlikely to crater an otherwise ambitious roster. This week’s example: Teddy Bridgewater
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented. This week’s example: Olamide Zaccheaus* (he’s a bit closer to CORE than your generic ss)
CORE – In all CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. We want our rosters to consist mostly of these players that offer us the best Floor and Ceiling combo, ideally price-considered (easiest on a full slate).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not appropriate for cash game play). These players typically carry higher floors than players under the “More” section. This week’s example: Travis Kelce (shown above)
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two categories. These are the plays that are the more aggressive plays that are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of winning DFS tourneys / GPP’s. If you ever hear the phrase “planting a flag” or “taking a stand”, those are referencing these kinds of plays. This week’s example: Tyreek Hill (shown above)
(denotations key): more to be added as the breakdown is refined
(GEO) = Game Environment only, not appropriate as an isolated play – for this week think of the ancillary Cowboys receivers against the Giants (i.e., think of it as kind of a rabbit hole – if you roster this player it means you are betting on the game playing out in a way that would result in it only making sense for you to bring it back with an opposing player).
(mME) = Mini Multi Entry, 7-20 lineups before introducing as isolated play
(MME) = Mass Multi Entry, 20+ lineups before introducing as isolated play
*It’s implied that everything else not in () is appropriate for SE to 3-5Max*
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup. The best example of its utility is one JM refers to frequently, and it involves a player in the grid above – Tyreek Hill (2020’s corollary think Marquise Brown). Now granted, he’s been much more consistent as he’s matured as a route runner and has settled into Andy Reid’s offense, but Tyreek Hill USED to be a player you would almost always avoid building a core lineup around or consider playing in cash due to his volatility. The message went that if you were building tournament lineups, and you wanted to bank a roster on it being Tyreek blowup week, you would want to be absolutely sure it wouldn’t go to waste by not appropriately “balancing” it out with the remaining lineup slots. In this example, the most optimal way to “balance” the Tyreek play is to pair it with mostly CORE plays, or even a Floor play. I have found that this general approach has really sharpened my focus on proper roster construction. It took me a long time to understand how aggressive one needs to be depending on the contest they are competing in.
For cash games, you’d like your roster to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be at the middle of breakdown). GENERALLY speaking, for limited-entry tournaments, you want to still have your “CORE” lineup but begin adding weight to the “more” side by selecting players to roster that push the envelope a little bit, sliding your overall lineup slightly below the “CORE” in a balance sense. For mass multi-entry, you are shooting for about half of your lineup consisting of your “CORE” and the rest being made up of “more” players. This is a VERY loose explanation that is only intended to help complement the use of the table. Obviously there are rosters that are built around certain game environments and tributaries that may stray from these rough guidelines, but again – I’m only sharing this because it’s helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS player I profess to be.
AGAIN: This in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – it is practically derived from it and only serves as a quick snapshot of the players to be considered from a given game and in what DFS formats! This is only a tool I use throughout the week to assist in me in building balanced lineups. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me. Thanks!
Cardinals at Jets, Week 5
CFM Breakdown
(Legend and background below)
Week 5 – ARI @ NYJ
Floor –
ss – Jeff Smith
CORE – Kyler, *Herndon*
tw – Nuke
More –
All of this is obviously moot if the Cards / Jets game is ultimately postponed with reports surfacing of a supposed positive COVID-19 test result coming from the Jets camp early this morning…
I’m having a very difficult time getting off of Chris Herndon for my TE slot.
I understand the de facto cash game play has been Logan Thomas up to this point in the current season, but there are several reasons I’m leaning towards Herndon in this spot….
1) Kyle Allen – woof
2) Joe Flacco – let’s give the man at least some respect for:
a) winning a Super Bowl
b) throwing to his Tight Ends –
he’s had / made a lot of good
ones throughout his long
career.
c) that’s about it.
3) Despite WFT’s pace of play (does everyone else just think “WTF?” every time they see that like I do? Makes me giggle – um, anyways), I’m beginning to think the Rams may in fact succeed quite easily in keeping the football team’s possessions to an absolute minimum. They will also slow the game down tremendously on the backs of their relentless RBBC approach and as we know, the team likeliest to be ahead throughout is the one that will dictate how the game will unfold.
4) Whereas the Arizona / NYJ tilt is projected to have a significantly higher amount of snaps thanks to the pace with which BOTH teams operate regardless of gamescript.
5) While it’s well-documented how sub-par the NYJ O-Line is, the mismatch posed by the punchless Cardinals defensive front is not near as daunting as the one faced by the WFT when squaring up against Aaron Donald and Co.
And now that I’ve written out five reasons in this likely futile debate of Herndon vs. LT3, maybe I should consider finding a way up to Engram? What to do, what to do???
———-
Floor – Players with limited ceiling that are highly unlikely to crater an otherwise ambitious roster. This week’s example: Teddy Bridgewater
ss – Salary Savers, these are cheap players that may not have a clearly defined ceiling or floor that you roster because of the point per dollar expectations and the potential they unlock for the rest of your roster construction. These are usually players stepping into starting roles due to injury – the more we know about the player/coach/game the better we’ll be able to identify the floor/ceiling value presented. This week’s example: Olamide Zaccheaus* (he’s a bit closer to CORE than your generic ss)
CORE – In all CAPS to remind us that this is what we’re after each and every week. We want our rosters to consist mostly of these players that offer us the best Floor and Ceiling combo, ideally price-considered (easiest on a full slate).
tw – ‘tweeners. These are players that offer us the best Floor / Ceiling combo without price being considered (i.e., not appropriate for cash game play). These players typically carry higher floors than players under the “More” section. This week’s example: Travis Kelce
More – Just another word for “Ceiling” that happens to rhyme with the other two categories. These are the more aggressive plays in which a player carries a relatively low floor but also possesses a ceiling that can bring you a tournament win. They are essential in differentiating you from otherwise “chalky” lineups in your pursuit of binking DFS tourneys / GPP’s. If you ever hear the phrase “planting a flag” or “taking a stand”, those are referencing these kinds of plays. This week’s example: Darius Slayton
(denotations key): more to be added as the breakdown is refined
(GEO) = Game Environment only, not appropriate as an isolated play – for this week think of the ancillary Cowboys receivers against the Giants (i.e., think of it as kind of a rabbit hole – if you roster this player it means you are betting on the game playing out in a way that would result in it only making sense for you to bring it back with an opposing player).
(mME) = Mini Multi Entry, 7-20 lineups before introducing as isolated play
(MME) = Mass Multi Entry, 20+ lineups before introducing as isolated play
*It’s implied that everything else not in () is appropriate for SE to 3-5Max*
Background:
I wanted to provide some brief context as this is the first time I’m posting my CORE-Floor-More player breakdown. It will be strikingly similar to JM’s player grid (key differences will be marked with asterisks) but I believe the real value presented to The OWS Collective resides in it providing a visualization of creating a balanced lineup. The best example of its utility is one JM refers to frequently, and it involves a player in the grid above – Tyreek Hill (2020’s corollary think Marquise Brown). Now granted, he’s been much more consistent as he’s matured as a route runner and has settled into Andy Reid’s offense, but Tyreek Hill USED to be a player you would almost always avoid building a core lineup around or consider playing in cash due to his volatility. The message went that if you were building tournament lineups, and you wanted to bank a roster on it being Tyreek blowup week, you would want to be absolutely sure it wouldn’t go to waste by not appropriately “balancing” it out with the remaining lineup slots. In this example, the most optimal way to “balance” the Tyreek play is to pair it with mostly CORE plays, or even a Floor play. I have found that this general approach has really sharpened my focus on proper roster construction. It took me a long time to understand how aggressive one needs to be depending on the contest they are competing in.
For cash games, you’d like your roster to be comprised of mostly core players (aim to be at the middle of breakdown). GENERALLY speaking, for limited-entry tournaments, you want to still have your “CORE” lineup but begin adding weight to the “more” side by selecting players to roster that push the envelope a little bit, sliding your overall lineup slightly below the “CORE” in a balance sense. For mass multi-entry, you are shooting for about half of your lineup consisting of your “CORE” and the rest being made up of “more” players. This is a VERY loose explanation that is only intended to help complement the use of the table. Obviously there are rosters that are built around certain game environments and tributaries that may stray from these rough guidelines, but again – I’m only sharing this because it’s helped me grow tremendously into the now somewhat-competent DFS player I profess to be.
AGAIN: This in no way is meant to subplant The Edge or the Player Grid – it is practically derived from it and only serves as a quick snapshot of the players to be considered from a given game and in what DFS formats! This is only a tool I use throughout the week to assist in me in building balanced lineups. If it helps even just one member of OWS, that’s enough for me. Thanks!
Giants at Cowboys, Week 5
Do you remember the “Greatest Show on Turf”? Those were the days! There was nothing quite like targeting St. Louis’s 3rd WR in Az-Zahir Hakim in the early rounds of a season-long draft knowing he’d out-produce a vast majority of WR1’s. That would have been around my freshman year in high school so I was relegated to playing free online leagues through Yahoo!. I couldn’t see the looks on my competitors’ faces nor did I get to see any remarks (chats within a draft room weren’t a thing yet if my memory serves) but I could FEEL the judgement being cast upon me – the next pick taking far much longer than the typical one being made in an anonymous, free league. I digress…
This is not to start a debate about how this Dallas “quasi-air raid” attack matches up in terms of talent, speed, skillset, etc. against those Rams squads (with 3 HOF players) from a couple decades ago. Rather, I bring this up because many people ended up being too late to the show or missed it entirely – due to their rigidity and unwillingness to completely incorporate what was abundantly clear into their approach (hence, the Az Hakim example I provided – it was easy to draft Marshall Faulk #1 overall, then Bruce and Warner, but as you worked your way down the perceived pecking order, that’s when people’s comfort levels began being tested). I don’t want us to miss the early indicators that have now been teased out a bit more beyond that “first impression” we got from the first couple of weeks. Not to get too carried away, but I’m of the opinion that we need to approach each and every slate with the Cowboys always in the backdrop of our minds. Here’s why…
You MAY have noticed, but them Cowboys like to score some points – YeeHaw! I took a deep dive yesterday into this team’s offensive stats and came away with the following numerical factoids, each followed by my unparalleled analysis…
DK Pts per game: 135.7
That’s right – if you take the points per game of every player that has accounted for at least one TD (welcome to the club, Amari!), this offense basically gets you to the coveted cash line without a defense, and I mean that both literally and figuratively. This week, you can roster Dak | Zeke | Amari | Lamb | Gallup | Schultz | Wilson | Pollard and still have $4,100 in cap to spend on a top-notch defense to give you some breathing room and push for a score of 145-150 on your cash game lineup (which is what I tend to shoot for – or 2.8 to 3.0 pts. per $1k spent). I’m certain DK doesn’t allow you to roster players from just one team but the point is nonetheless made… The typical 55-90 DK pt. range of outcomes (pushing 100+ for shootouts) for an entire offense based on all the factors we consider is getting crushed by this outfit.
2.75 sec | 4.97 sec | N/A sec
The first number shown is how much quicker Dallas snaps the ball (situation neutral) than the 2nd fastest pace team (Arizona) in football. The second is how much quicker they snap the ball in the second half than the 2nd fastest pace team (Gase’s patented “hurry-up & ground-n-pound while down multiple scores” Jets). Finally, the third value is a very important reminder of the “unknown” that we have to acknowledge, particularly for this upcoming bout the ‘Boys have with the hapless New York Giants – we still do not know the pace to expect from this team if up by multiple scores. Under the same OC in Kellen Moore last year, they ranked 24th in pace of play when up by 7 or more points (while ranked 2nd in overall pace). Not a whole lot to glean from that but with Dallas favored by ~9.5 points, this is element is critical to understand when putting together our cash game roster this week.
4 of 9
The amount of this team’s TD receptions made by the “Big 3” of Amari | Lamb | Gallup.
3 of 7
The amount of this team’s rushing TD’s scored by Zeke.
You don’t need to be a Cowboy to know “that just ain’t raght”. In fact…
88.7%
That’s Zeke’s snap share – almost 15% higher than Derrick Henry’s and 17% higher than Dalvin Cook’s. Granted, those offenses lean much heavier on the run, but to which I would counter with this little nugget…
7.5 Targets / Game
Those other two dudes? 2.7 and 2.75, respectively. That’s impressive RB involvement in the pass game for a team with such a talented receiving corps. As an aside, for all of you Tony Pollard truthers out there, I’ll submit to the fact that Zeke needs to stop fumbling the ball – however, the complaint that he just drops too many balls is likely driven by occurences only, which he’ll have more of because he’s thrown the ball way more frequently. His receiving chops look far more palatable if comparing by catch rate… Zeke – 23/30 (76.6%), Henry – 5/8 (62.5%), Cook – 7/11 (63.6%), CEH – 14/19 (73.7%), Hunt & Conner – 8/11 (72.7%), and to really rub salt in that wound because I’m a petty person, Pollard – 5/7 (71.4%). Point made.
100.6 Rec Yds/game
Amari’s average output thus far four games into this still very young season. Averaging the 100 yd. bonus is also an impressive feat. It speaks not only to his talent but also underscores the commitment Dak has made to throwing him that there pigskin. This week he is projected to get shadow coverage from James Bradberry. While, it doesn’t scare me off of Amari from a ceiling perspective (this is the same guy who caught 7 of 8 targets for 57 yds vs. Jalen Ramsey in Week 1), the ease with which Dak should be able to get the ball to his other options vs. an otherwise weak secondary (ranked 24th in Pass D DVOA, whereas the Rams rate 7th) does have me a bit concerned about Cooper’s usually rock-solid floor, price-considered – and that’s on top of the pace / pass % uncertainty if Dallas jumps out to a comfortable lead. I’m reluctant to lock him into my cash game lineup despite the projected high ownership. I ain’t ‘fraid of no chalk, neither. Last week I spurned Zeke for Cook because I’ll always side with JM over protected ownership and I dumped DJ for OBJ because HiLow convinced me during his installment in the Run to Daylight pod that the Arizona defensive approach set up far better for Davis (I also just prefer more letters) even though they were very chalky. Nonetheless, this is something I will continue to chew on as the week unfolds. I’ve concocted what may be a better alternative.
4.635 DK Pts/$1k spent
Dak’s average output thus far against his Week 5 salary. He’s a clear negative regression candidate but that number has a LONG way to go before encroaching on that 2.8-3.0 threshold. Especially if Josh Allen is unavailable with a postponement of the Bills/Titans tilt still on the table, I’m drawn to playing Dak as it gets me access to this passing attack in the most direct way as well as some consolation exposure to Amari should I ultimately choose to fade him and he blows up. But then there are those darn lingering doubts about this game environment and the uncertainty of how the Cowboys will play a game they are projected to play with a lead in the most likeliest of scenarios. How do we account for the distinct possibility they could pull away from the Giants and settle things down a bit? Maybe even rest some of their stars that have put in some major work to start the year? Well, in that case…
2.897 DK Pts/$1k spent
Zeke’s average output thus far against his Week 5 salary. A prohibitive positive regression candidate, it has been purely circumstantial that the rushing yardage and subsequent bonuses haven’t been there (as detailed though, his involvement in the pass game has buoyed his production). The touchdown count is just outright flukey given his equity within the Green Zone (58.3% according to The Collective’s IANDOUGLAS902). Without the gamescript that is most favorable to him having yet to appear, he’s still managed to maintain an output rate that would get you beyond the cash line. This got me to thinking, uh-oh…
3.766 DK Pts/$1k spent
This is the output you would have gotten from playing a Dak/Zeke block the past four weeks against their Week 5 salaries. Hypothetically, if the Cowboys do jump out to that early lead and hold onto it without much of a fight, it would take more than a 26% drop in production for this pairing to not meet the 140 point cash line minimum we are aiming at (28.3% drop to not meet the actual cash line of ~135).
56-60 snaps
According to their current rates of production, this is the snap range in which the Dak/Zeke block would have to fall around for us to be in danger of not keeping up with the cash line trajectory. Being that the average 79 plays per game AND the Giants land in the middle of the pack in terms of general pace (to our benefit they are ranked 7th fastest in the 2nd Half), this would equate to Dak/Zeke not playing the entire fourth quarter. This is where I will cease with numbers and begin persuading you with some detailed narratives surrounding this particular game environment that awaits us on Sunday…
This is where it gets so juicey – seriously.
Close your eyes and imagine you’re Mike McCarthy. You’re stubborn as I’ll get out, you know, like any true Cowboy would be. To absolutely no fault of your own, you’re off to a 1-3 record to kick off your inaugural season as the head coach of one of the most coveted positions known to modern man. That one game you did win? It was against an Atlanta team that is now 0-4 by a single point and it took a complete meltdown that only the likes of Dan Quinn would be capable of overseeing. Your team came roaring back in last week’s game against the Browns, only to fall short yet again. Gosh darn it – if there was just a few more minutes on that clock we’d be undefeated! Are you bored? Is spotting the opposition a double digit lead going into the fourth your cry out for attention? Through the first quarter of the 2020 regular season, you have yet to even lead in a game by more than seven points in spite of having what is widely regarding as one of the most promising and talent-rich offenses the sport has seen in several years. Do you feel the slightest bit incompetent? Over your head? No? OK… You keep telling yourself that.
Keep your eyes closed.
Imagine you’re Jason Garrett. You are about to embark on your first trip back to the “Big D” to play against this storied franchise that you used to be in charge – well, whatever Jerry would let you be in charge of. Nonetheless, your time there is widely regarded as a failure. You were never good enough to be their starting quarterback and now they’ve recently conveyed it to you that you can’t cut it as a head coach. Always the diplomatic one, you seemed to always parse your words carefully and not let the obvious optics of the situation prevail. Well, to hell with that! No longer your employer, you get this opportunity to seize the day, guns a blazing, to take your shot and make your statement. No better time than now when you can smell blood and they appear vulnerable! Are you yet again going to let them have the satisfaction of watching you leave Dallas feeling undeserving? No way, no how.
OK – now open your eyes.
The backdrop of this game environment that I just illustrated leads me to believe that Dak/Zeke will not be watching the fourth quarter from the sidelines…
1) McCarthy, forever clinging to his approach in the face of reality, will be over-compensating to make a point. I don’t believe he’s in any position to be letting his foot off the gas pedal. Sure, the numbers being put up by the offense are currently dominating the storylines. That by itself will only quench Jerry’s thirst for attention. The only thing he loves more? Winning. And on that front, McCarthy isn’t making a great first impression. This is a perfect time for McCarthy to set the record straight, even if it means playing his starters for the entire game.
2) I don’t expect Jason Garrett to relent in this situation. I see plenty of historical fodder there for him to feel jilted. This should carry out into his offensive play-calling. While he’s been known to err on the conservative side of things, the moving storyline, the Giants’ complete dearth of weapons, and their current record of 0-4 compells me to think he’ll be going into Sunday with more of a “Screw it, let’s do this – What have I got to lose?” mentality. This should hopefully keep the game from getting out of hand.
So yeah… That was a very long-winded way of saying that I like the Dak/Zeke block as the centerpiece of my cash game lineup for Week 5.
I’m still mulling over the Giants pieces from this game – I’m hoping the NFL suspends Golden Tate to make it a little more tempting to roster Slayton. Engram still looks to be recovering from his achilles rupture and he can’t touch Slayton’s ceiling so I’m off of him at the moment.
Patriots at Chiefs, Week 4
Something I just came across while researching this game that I definitely think is worth sharing…
CEH has seen an increased snap count each week thus far ( 46 || 48 || 52 ), but TEN of those in Week 3 were from the wideout position (zero in the first two weeks). I reviewed the game film to dig deeper into this utilization and here’s what I found…
1) His first snap lined out wide took place on the second play from scrimmage. The Chiefs lined up with WR trips right with CEH isolated on the left side pre-snap. The wideouts all ran post and go routes to purposefully clear out their vacated side of the field which allowed CEH to work in space against a single d-back. Mahomes’ pass was unfortunately batted down at the LOS so we weren’t able to see the intended result of the brilliant (albeit simple) play design. But this is why paying close attention to film gives us an edge – all that shows in the boxscore for this play is an incompletion for Patty.
2) CEH received the first GZ target coming out of the slot position (Mahomes threw a pretty bad ball by his standards and it fell incomplete but CEH was clearly his first read on the play).
3) 8 of these 10 snaps lined out wide occurred in the first half (It would have been 9 of 11 if not for a penalty) while the game was still competitive.
4) Backup RB Darrel Williams returned in Week 3 vs. BAL to join Darwin Thompson in spelling CEH and what they took in snaps ( 15 || 6, respectively) still left CEH with 38 snaps from the conventional backfield position.
Now, as I’m putting my cash game lineup together and looking for pieces with dependable usage in strong matchups and game environments, CEH is starting to emerge as a bit underpriced for his role in this high octane offense. Andy Reid is scheming to get him the ball out in space, much like he does with Tyreek. Aside from what I detailed in my observations above, what I’m most excited about from a cash game standpoint is the likelihood the Chiefs will have to rely on CEH even more given Belichick’s goal of limiting an offense’s best weapon(s). Instead of trying to guess which of Tyreek or Kelce is going to be the point of emphasis this week for New England (which I’m happy to do in tournaments), I’ll “settle” for the best price-considered option with a locked-in workload from this side of the ball, and that’s CEH.
*Update for Showdown*
Just wanted to affirm X’s feeling on Darwin Thompson over Darrel Williams as the preferred play behind CEH. In reviewing the game film vs. the Ravens, I noticed that Darwin was getting the snaps during CEH’s first breather. Also, and more importantly, the tendency seemed to be Darwin in when a pass route needed to be run and Williams in when the RB stayed home to help in pass protection.
Ravens at Washington, Week 4
Tale of the Tape – BAL @ WFT
Has 2020 got you down? Are you holed up inside looking for some excitement in your life? Look no further – you can roster a nice price-considered pass catcher from Washington on your upcoming cash game roster! As JM has alluded to in his weekly Edge write-ups, the floor for both Terry McLaurin and Logan Thomas is relatively safe given how heavily they are targeted by Dwayne Haskins. It is just so unnerving to watch, though!
There is no doubt in my mind the volume will be there this Week 4 matchup as they host their neighboring franchise that just got waxed by the Chiefs on MNF. Given the blitzing propensity of the Ravens I’m far more comfortable with putting Thomas on my cash game lineup – constant pressure and less time to sit in the pocket tends to result in quicker throws to the shorter areas of the field the blitzing LBs have vacated. He’s priced at $3,500 again and once more I see a clear drop-off below that mark, penciling him in at TE for our Week 4 bottom-up build.
Now, is Terry McLaurin always in the MME discussion? Absolutely. But in a week where we are looking for as much ceiling as possible (because there will be LOTS of impressive scores put up), we’ll also be looking for as much likelihood to hit ceiling. With so many other attractive options at the WR position (particularly in his price range), it’s really going to depend on expected ownership. If he’s projected to be over 4% owned, it’ll be a hard pass for me. The further below that benchmark, though, the more I’m interested in grabbing a share or two in 20+ entry tourneys.
The most interesting play from this game is obviously Lamar Jackson. Coming off of a poor performance against an established run funnel defense of Kansas City, being the highest-priced QB on the slate, and $300 more than Russell Freakin’ Wilson, I don’t foresee a ton of people spending whatever extra salary they stumble upon on Lamar. I’ll be even more excited about the Lamar play if Chase Young ends up sitting this one out due to the groin injury he sustained against the Browns in Week 3. If you aren’t as hyped on the Rams play as I am and insist on playing the Ravens D (a good play, but one I believe will be a chalky one) my recommendation is to pair them with Lamar in the hopes that this turns into an absolute stomp.
Giants at Rams, Week 4
Tale of the Tape – NYG @ LAR
I hope everyone heeded my advice from my write-up last week and played the San Fran Defense against the steaming pile that is the New York Giants. While coming away with 12 points wouldn’t have won you a tourney given that so many defenses popped off in Week 3, the leverage that was attained at only 2% ownership (coupled with the Slayton ownership being well over 10%) put us in prime position to capitalize had things played out a little differently.
I saw nothing in my film review from Week 3 that leads me to believe streaming defenses against this dumpster fire of an offense will not continue to be a +EV move.
This week, in particular, with over half of the slate’s totals being > 50 points and many of those possessing ripe game environments, look for the chalk to be squeezing every dollar they can out of the offensive pieces in their lineups. Everyone will be talking about how high of a score will be necessary to win a tournament this week. While this is without a doubt true, realize that this presents an optimal time to be contrarian by paying up for a juicy defense like the Rams. Pricing was relatively soft the first three weeks of the season. Now that a few games have been played and these scoring bonanzas have led to salaries being hiked up, it doesn’t feel near as easy to simply “play whatever defense you like the most because you can afford them”. The Rams are an even more intriguing MME play as I expect ownership to congregate on the Ravens (priced just $100 more) as the “sharp” move with the narrative that they’ll play angry against a raw, mistake-prone quarterback. Early ownership projections have the Rams coming in at close to 20% owned and a couple points higher than the Ravens – it’s still relatively early in the week but I just don’t see them being THAT popular. Anything above 10% would really shock me.
Also of note, James Bradberry (the only Giants defender with a pulse) is projected to shadow Robert Woods. This should only drive Goff to look even more frequently in the direction of Cooper Kupp, with whom he has quite the established rapport. Kupp draws a very enticing matchup in the slot and carries a decent floor ($6,700 feels a bit rich though) and I think his ceiling is capped a bit with the real possibility that this game gets out of hand down the stretch, as the 13 point spread suggests. Not a play that is screaming out to me at the moment but certainly one for the MME file in our brainberries for later in the week.
49ers at Giants, Week 3
After watching Week 2’s condensed game film for both of these teams, I’m left very excited to roster one play and one play only in this matchup, and that is the San Francisco DEF/ST. Here’s why:
In spite of losing their top two players in Nick Bosa & Soloman Thomas to injury (b/c that’s a thing now if you’re on this team) in the first quarter, the defense remained aggressive in its pursuit of Sam Darnold. Even with the game well in hand and Adam Gase trying to bleed in his ironic efforts to stave off embarrassment, the Niner D did not let off the gas pedal. And, according to PFF performance grades, three of the top four and six of the top eleven defensive players were not starters. They also managed to hold the only real weapon the Jets presented in Chris Herndon to just one catch of five yards on four targets. Now, with a week of staying on the east coast and gameplanning for how to attack the other wounded offense from the Empire State that is limping into this bout without its star running back, a similar situation presents itself – the key difference however being the aggressiveness with which the Giants like to conduct their business.
This leads me into what I was able to ascertain after reviewing just the first quarter of the Giants / Bears game this past Sunday – Danny Dimes is a turnover machine and it’s not because he’s just landing on the wrong side of variance as some would argue. Rather, he is incapable at this point in his developmental arc (sadly) of not telegraphing where he is going with the ball before and after the snap. This is not an exaggeration – watch the tape.
On the Giants’ first 3rd down conversion attempt (1Q – 06:15, where he’s stripped by Quinn), Jones doesn’t seem to look away from the defenders lined up across from his slot receivers just to the left before the ball is snapped. While not an example where it leads to the defenders being able to break up a pass easily (don’t worry, we’ll get to one of those), it serves to illustrate Jones’ tendency to lock onto a primary read without an escape plan should an open receiver fail to emerge. Before the snap on his very next pass attempt (1Q – 4:30), he pointedly stares to his right to see how close Fuller is playing Slayton. Seeing that he’s a comfortable 8-9 yards off the LOS, Danny Dimes has made up his mind that he likes the comeback route so why bother looking anywhere else? I’ll give him credit though – once he gets the snap he does pretend to focus over the middle of the field but only for a second so he wouldn’t forget where he had determined he was going with it.
Two plays later, in almost a deja-vu-like sequence of events, Jones refuses to scan the left side of the field after the snap before unleashing a throw towards Slayton that Fuller is happy to Mutombo once more. It’s important to note, too, these snaps are coming out of the shotgun formation – a set up that typically allows more time for the QB to dissect coverage and go to the appropriate target. Leads one to wonder… If he’s going up against a blitz-heavy San Fran defense that has far less reason to respect the play-action (when the rushing threat posed comes in the form of Wayne Gallman or newly-acquired Davonte Freeman…), what will that look like?
Now, I understand that Slayton, Shepard and Tate present a much tougher matchup than what the Jets rolled out there in Week 2. But remember also, we are not rostering defenses for the possibility they’ll get a shutout (it’s been well-documented in the OWS space for some time now how futile of a pursuit that can be) – instead, we are looking for an agressive defense that’s matching up against an inferior line (BTW, the only team to rate lower in Pass Block rating than the Jets two games into the season? The Giants) of an offense with an aggressive approach to scoring. A raw, mistake-prone prospect at quarterback that consistently lets the defense know what side of the field he’s honed in on to lead said offense is just the cherry on top. The second cherry on top is that virtually all possible gameflows have the Giants needing to throw in this game to keep them in it. Have I mentioned their DK price was lowered to $3,500? Let’s consider this the third cherry (or more chocolate sprinkles, if you’re allergic???) to put on this delicious Sunday (ok, I’ll stop now)!
Sign me up!
P.S. San Fran’s offense with Mullens under center looks discombobulated and out of sorts – so many labored snaps, like something you’d see in a junior high game b/c the QB isn’t used to how short the backup center is. It’s a good matchup but between the sketchy QB play and the guessing game that the rushing attack will inevitably turn into later in the week, the flag I’m planting for this game is firmly on this 49er defense.
Texans at Steelers, Week 3
Tale of the Tape (PIT)
This is still very much James Connor’s backfield. Any speculation on an increased timeshare going into Week 2 in light of Benny Snell’s impressive performance in spelling Connor vs. Giants following his injury was put to rest Sunday. While snaps fell Connor 50 / Snell 22 / Samuels 16 according to PFF, there were two plays in particular during the second half against the Broncos that I believe will throw snap rate back towards Connor in Week 3.
At around the 12:50 mark (3rd qtr), Snell got his number called with an orchestrated screen pass that looked to have some promise – that is until he let a D-lineman snag his arm just enough to completely throw off his route entrance and unravel the timing of the play. Snell looked lost and unsure of how to adjust to the inconvenience of a defender trying to disrupt his path. The ugly play resulted in a loss of four yards and provided a nagging reminder to Mike Tomlin that he already has Jaylen Samuels for such passes.
Then early in the fourth quarter (around the 10:00 mark), with Denver seizing more and more momentum as the second half continued to unwind, Snell was given a carry on the first play of a drive at midfield. He was promptly stripped of the ball and the Broncos took possession with great field position to begin what ended up being their final drive of the game, thanks to the hyper aggressive stand put together by the Steelers D. Connor then took the next few handoffs, even ripping one off for 59 yards before Big Ben ended it with a knee while in the Green Zone.
So long as Tomlin can rely on his workhorse to carry the load when it counts most and has Samuels at his disposal for specific passing situations, the argument for Benny Snell is a weak one, and that played itself out on the field against Denver.
When analyzing this upcoming tilt against the Texans, don’t let Week 1’s story cloud your judgement – Connor is the alpha in this backfield and Snell has a long road ahead if he hopes to unseat him. Sure, Connor will need his rest throughout any game – but there is no question when Pittsburgh gets into scoring position who they are rolling with at running back. None.
Lions at Vikings, Week 14
Keep in mind that the Vikes set a franchise record with 10 sacks against a banged up Stafford and Co. in this spot last year. They’ll need to stay aggressive in this one and are getting Linval Joseph back, as well. Something to account for in your lineup exposures this week.
Giants at Patriots, Week 6
Putting this up now so hopefully it’ll be acknowledged but can we please get JM’s notes on THIS game from the Thu-Mon slate perspective? They are provided for the Sun and Mon night games before Xandamere does his usual fantastic job analyzing them in his showdown breakdowns that are posted on Friday night. I don’t think it’s stepping on his feet in any way to give a quick take of the Thursday night game on the macro level. Particularly for weeks like this where there are only ten games on the main slate, those of us who primarily play cash games are more interested in the Thu-Mon slate as it inherently holds more value. Diatribe over – Thanks!
Colts at Chiefs, Week 5
These Thursday-Monday slate notes would be much appreciated for the Thursday night tilt every week.
Browns at 49ers, Week 5
These Thursday-Monday slate notes would be much appreciated for the Thursday night tilt every week.
Rams at Seahawks, Week 5
JM, Can you please provide your Thu-Mon slate notes for the LAR/SEA matchup?
Eagles at Packers, Week 4
Any “Notes for those building Thursday-to-Monday rosters that include this game:” for the Thursday games? I’ve only seen those for the Sun/Mon Night games and for once we have a Thursday night bout with some usable pieces!