Hilow is a game theory expert (courses at Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and Northwestern) and tournament champion who focuses on mid/high-stakes single-entry/three-entry max
Again, we’ll save a bit of time and effort in this section after I just wrote some words on the macro view of this slate in the Oracle: “This slate has a similar feel to the one we saw last week, with one key difference – we have a bunch of potential value pieces at running back in Week 11. But like last week, we don’t feel great about many game environments despite numerous games with elevated game totals. There are numerous players we want to be spending up for (particularly at wide receiver and tight end), but we don’t have clear paths to access multiple of them together on a roster, and we’re seeing some seriously fragile chalk develop. Also, like last week, this leaves us with an uncomfortable feeling when building rosters, as there aren’t many places for either projectable certainty (top tier point-per-dollar projections) or directional certainty (high likelihood of a team succeeding). As a game theorist, slates like this one are my favorite to build for (also like last week).”
Beyond that, and similar to last week, there aren’t many game environments that we feel great about, shifting my focus more towards focused team bets where we can gain access to a little bit more directional certainty.
Quick explanation :: Restrictive chalk is an expected highly owned piece that restricts the maneuverability of the remainder of your roster, while expansive chalk is an expected highly owned piece that allows for higher amounts of maneuverability on the remainder of your roster. Classifying various forms of chalk as either restrictive or expansive allows us to visualize what it means for roster construction on a given slate and how restrictive a certain player might be, meaning more of the field will look similar from a roster construction standpoint with that piece.
NEITHER RESTRICTIVE NOR EXPANSIVE CHALK. Warren and Brown project as the top values on DK this week, and their respective ownerships corroborate that tale. The problem, to me, is that both players are highly unlikely to return a score you could not win without, and both also have scary-low floors. The Bengals are averaging a league-low 18.8 rush attempts per game, so what, we’re expecting 16-18 carries and a handful of targets against a pass-funnel opponent? Warren has one game with more than 65% of the team’s offensive snaps, has gone over 100 yards once all season (sure, it came against this opponent), and has scored only three touchdowns all year while playing for a team that prioritizes Aaron Rodgers in the red zone. I’m sorry, but those profiles don’t have me jumping out of my seat at extreme ownership.
NEITHER RESTRICTIVE NOR EXPANSIVE CHALK. See: Jaylen Warren.
RESTRICTIVE CHALK. Jacoby Brissett has started four games for the Cardinals this season. In those games, McBride is averaging 11.5 targets per game while seeing nine or more targets each time out. Marvin Harrison Jr will be out this week after an emergency appendectomy, and Zay Jones was placed on injured reserve. The team’s top two running backs are also out. Michael Wilson has a 0.13 TPRR, 1.19 YPRR, and 0.21 FP/RR in the four games with Brissett under center. McBride carries an immense floor and elite ceiling here, with the clearest path to “failure” being missing out on the touchdowns. Hmmmmm.
RESTRICTIVE CHALK. Chase in four Flacco starts this season: 28.1 XFP/G, 0.36 TPRR, 40.8% air yards share, 2.64 YPRR, 0.59 FP/RR. That, my friends, is something I am jumping out of my seat to play, regardless of ownership. The cherry on top is the clear pass-funnel matchup against a Steelers team facing the most pass attempts per game this season.
RESTRICTIVE CHALK. The 49ers are averaging the fewest yards per carry in 2025. Furthermore, there are numerous backs in the mid-tier of player pricing at the position that carry significant cost-considered ceiling, and there also are numerous wide receivers that have a greater chance of returning true ceiling. It doesn’t add up as much as it has in previous weeks for CMC, at least to me.
EXPANSIVE CHALK. I mentioned Wilson’s splits with Brissett under center earlier. Suffice to say, the ceiling is not ideal this week, on a slate where we should again be embracing a bit of additional variance with our value plays. No, thank you.
