Like Olsen a lot both cash and GPP for week 1. Have Miller just a tad over Forsett but will likely have some exposure to both. Like Landry a fair amount better than Matthews and may stack him and Miller for cash games. Gut feel I like Lacy over Anderson but just finished my projections and they say Anderson over Lacy so I may go Anderson for cash and play my gut for GPP.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
2015 Fanduel -- Week 1 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter karmarooster
- Start date
Shaun Hill isn't good. But 4 out of 8 isn't completely disastrous for a cheap QB. The idea in 50/50s isn't to win all of them. It's to win around 60% them. (More is better, but much more than 60% is really hard.) So while 4 out of 8 is not what we want, 5 out of 8 would be acceptable.
And if we look at cheap QBs in general -- not just Shaun Hill -- I believe those who were projected to hit 2x their salary did so most of the time. There were some obvious fails (e.g., Manziel), but there always will be.
Cheap QBs are risky (otherwise they wouldn't be cheap). And risk should be minimized in cash games. But there's such a thing as being too risk-averse even in cash games, IMO.
If Tyrod Taylor is a great value, and I definitely think he is, I'm starting him in cash games as well as tournaments. Value, after all, is what drives success in cash games in the long run.
Last edited by a moderator:
karmarooster
Footballguy
Nice responses and good discussion.
I'm really warming up to the Dolphins, and think they will be somewhat under-owned. Tannehill, Miller and Landry have all looked solid and are going against a defense with no teeth. I think the Miller "no more than 15 carries" BS is finally over. Hurry up offense in place too. Landry was solid in PPR last year and figures to get more redzone looks. All reports and preseason play for all 3 have been glowing. I don't think there's much doubt as to who's featured here with Parker still out, and no meaningful backup RB, plus no Clay to steal looks from Landry.
My initial looks at the player prices back a month ago focused on Anderson and Forsett, and now I'm favoring Lacy and Miller. But will probably try to get about 70/30 exposure on both sets. Just a little hesitant due to Anderson's o-line, Ronnie Hillman, and for Forsett due to the Bronco's defense. But he should be solid with receptions (would not be surprised if he put up 8 catches).
I love Olsen as a target sponge but think he's probably the highest owned TE now. Fine for cash, not as much tourneys. I'll probably throw a 40/30/30 split at all 3 since it's such a crap shoot. I think Bennett has the best upside for GPP due to likely lowest ownership. I'm also eyeing Reed at TE for tourneys given the 5k and Cousins had a few nice games throwing to TEs: https://www.reddit.com/r/fantasyfootball/comments/3jhgx5/jordan_reed_te_here_are_the_numbers_for_kirk/
Last edited by a moderator:
Tennessee_ATO
Footballguy
Oh, don't get me wrong, I went with the cheap ($5000) starting QB a lot more than most I imagine. But I think it's a higher-risk proposition than some are saying because I just don't think you can survive a sub-10 point entry at the QB position, even if you only have $5000 invested at the spot. As someone pointed out, perhaps early in the season the QB distribution will be wider but at least by mid-season I think well over half of every contest is scoring in the 20's at that slot.
I love the Google Sheets on the player performances -- they alone are worth the price of the FBG subscription. I haven't had the time to cull through all of that data (or even most of it), but I will note that there were 66 player weeks in which a QB had a $5000 (or less salary) and scored some points. Of those 66, a quick scan shows that ~21 of those were starts that didn't end very quickly due to injury (removing Hill's week 1 debacle from the analysis) (1 or 2 might be long relief appearances but I haven't had the time to drill down into that). Of those 21 "starts without injuries to the starter" you have these breakdowns for each salary point:
$4700 salary -- 1 start -- 9.4 points (Austin Davis)
$5000 salary -- 20 starts total:
9 of those 20 hit 10 or more points, with Fitzpatrick being the monster outlier at 39.32.
11 of those 20 hit less than 10 points.
That's 45% of the $5000 salary guys "hitting value" in a cash game, with 30% "hitting value" in GPP plays. That's a -EV in the cash games, +EV in GPPs assuming a 15-20% cash rate (admittedly the GPP is tougher to measure but I'm making very simplistic assumptions for this discussion).
But if we assume that the numbers skewed a little friendlier towards the cheap guys, I'm still not sure how impactful, say, Hill's week 11 13.3 performance (on a $5000 salary) was in the cash context. Sure, he was the 8th best "value" at QB that week, but only if we assume that we used that cost savings to obtain more points than we would have obtained with a more expensive QB who scored more absolute points at a lower "value" scored. This is the analysis I don't know. I mean, in week 11 Cam scored 20.68 on $7800 salary. That's ever so slightly a lower "value" than Hill (0.01), but it seems like it might be more valuable to me.
I guess my concern is that a sub-10 score seems nearly fatal to me and a score of 13.3 doesn't seem all that valuable to me. The goal of rostering a $5000 QB has to be simply to minimize damage because (Fitzpatrick notwithstanding), the performance of a $5000 QB isn't going to win money for you.
karmarooster
Footballguy
Nice analysis and thanks for digging up the data from last year. But I don't necessarily agree with the conclusions as they apply to Taylor due to the rushing yards. A $5k Austin Davis or Jimmy Clausen or Ryan Lindley being thrown to the wolves is one thing. A $5k Taylor or Pryor or Tebow is another entirely (...nevermind Manziel....
).Further the data last year of $5k guys were mostly these types of backups who started in spot duty, midseason, due to injury (Clausen, Davis, Hill, etc.). Taylor won this job over camp, with now a full share of starter reps and schemes. This will be the only week you get him at $5k, too, because by Week 2 he'll probably be $6,400-7,100 (somewhere in the Manuel to Mariota range). At that point, he's no longer a value.
Btw, I noticed that Taylor is currently cheaper than: Tebow, Christian Ponder, the aforementioned Clausen, and Ryan Nasib. That's too great a pricing error not to take advantage of.
Last edited by a moderator:
Fantasysports1
Footballguy
If you can use the savings to get an extra stud who has a high floor then it can be worth it. It is about creating as high a floor you can and you can do that by picking studs like Julio, Lacy, Calvin Johnson who will get many targets. In GPP you are going to need that cheap QB who goes off to get a top score.
karmarooster
Footballguy
Thursday Slate is up (finally). Feel like they were just waiting for the Brady decision?
Brown $9,300
Ben $8,600
Brady $8,400
Gronk $8,100
Dwill $7,600 (too much)
Wheaton $5,700 (risky but potential)
Amendola $5,600 (steal)
Brown $9,300
Ben $8,600
Brady $8,400
Gronk $8,100
Dwill $7,600 (too much)
Wheaton $5,700 (risky but potential)
Amendola $5,600 (steal)
Last edited by a moderator:
Fantasysports1
Footballguy
What are your opinions on Ameer if he doesn't start?
You can go two or even three cheap WRs with Adams, Steve Johnson, Royal and Agholor. However, Agholor might not get that much work right away.
1) WR is probably the most volatile position outside of TE in general. A WR can have those duds where they barely get any catches. It makes sense to pay up for a guy who will get a lot of work to minimize the chance the have a poor game. This is why it might be better to pay for a top stud like Julio/OBJ, Jordan Matthews and Adams.
2) If a cheap RB you know is going to get a lot of work in a good matchup it can be worth playing for that RB. If you knew Ameer was going to get a ton of work, why pay up for another stud RB?
You can go two or even three cheap WRs with Adams, Steve Johnson, Royal and Agholor. However, Agholor might not get that much work right away.
1) WR is probably the most volatile position outside of TE in general. A WR can have those duds where they barely get any catches. It makes sense to pay up for a guy who will get a lot of work to minimize the chance the have a poor game. This is why it might be better to pay for a top stud like Julio/OBJ, Jordan Matthews and Adams.
2) If a cheap RB you know is going to get a lot of work in a good matchup it can be worth playing for that RB. If you knew Ameer was going to get a ton of work, why pay up for another stud RB?
Tennessee_ATO
Footballguy
Obviously every player stands on his own, so the performance of any one $5000 QB has nothing to do with the performance of another $5000 QB. If Taylor is good, it doesn't matter what any other $5000 QB has ever done.karmarooster said:Nice analysis and thanks for digging up the data from last year. But I don't necessarily agree with the conclusions as they apply to Taylor due to the rushing yards. A $5k Austin Davis or Jimmy Clausen or Ryan Lindley being thrown to the wolves is one thing. A $5k Taylor or Pryor or Tebow is another entirely (...nevermind Manziel....
Further the data last year of $5k guys were mostly these types of backups who started in spot duty, midseason, due to injury (Clausen, Davis, Hill, etc.). Taylor won this job over camp, with now a full share of starter reps and schemes. This will be the only week you get him at $5k, too, because by Week 2 he'll probably be $6,400-7,100 (somewhere in the Manuel to Mariota range). At that point, he's no longer a value.
Btw, I noticed that Taylor is currently cheaper than: Tebow, Christian Ponder, the aforementioned Clausen, and Ryan Nasib. That's too great a pricing error not to take advantage of.
I'm just talking general concepts. I'll probably run a cash lineup with Taylor, almost certainly not my #1 lineup though. My point is just that a $5000 QB "hitting value" in a cash game at 10 points isn't really all that valuable.
karmarooster
Footballguy
I guess maybe he's worth a shot on a single GPP, but I've not strayed very far from the AP, Lacy, Miller, CJA, Forsett group so far. Earlier tournament ideas like Randle and AA don't seem as compelling now. Also I have zero interest in Blue on the Texans, just don't see much upside there. Would rather pay up at RB and get a cheap WR or two like the first 3 you mentioned. Also mixing in Julio/ODB/Dez on rosters with enough cash premium WR spot.
I didn't project AA very highly so I never really consider putting him in play even though I've seen a number of experts project him very highly. Blue is a cheap RB I projected pretty highly but just cant seem to put him in play. Just see his floor as too low and ceiling not high enough. The cheaper RB that I do like quite a bit is Chris Ivory. Barring injury I think is pretty good play both for cash games and GPP.
Last edited by a moderator:
karmarooster
Footballguy
Not for cash games, they are not positively correlated. It's more of a 'hedge' than a stack, because you could have exposure one way or another to GB TDs. Rushing TD (unless vultured, obviously), or would get a passing TD unless it goes to Cobb/TE/other WR.
QB-RB and RB-WR are 'hedges' for cash games. QB-WR or QB-TE are stacks for tourneys.
RB-Def also works well if the gamescript is for a win and grinding out the clock.
Pairing a QB or RB with his Kicker also gives some hedge because you should get points on most red zone trips one way or another.
Based on data from 2005-2014 (as analyzed by Doug Drinen), RB-WR combinations from the same team have a very slight negative correlation (correlation coefficient = -0.05). A negative correlation does mean a conflicting game script (which you should avoid in tournaments but not in cash games), but -0.05 isn't really worth getting concerned about. The largest negative correlations are between a QB and his opposing defense (-0.40) and between an RB and his opposing defense (-0.23).
Somewhat surprisingly (to me), there is actually no correlation between a QB and RB from the same team. I wrote in my little strategy guide (included in the IVCs) that there was a negative correlation, but that was before I got Doug's analysis. I need to change that...
Last edited by a moderator:
Tennessee_ATO
Footballguy
This is some good stuff right here.
I'll advertise for FBG again -- any one of these data collections/analyses for DFS makes FBG worth every penny of the subscription price if you are going to play daily.
Tennessee_ATO
Footballguy
This may have been answered elsewhere and if so I apologize for my inattention.
Will there be a FBG weekly 50/50 again this year? I thought I read that there would be again, but I can't seem to locate the details.
Will there be a FBG weekly 50/50 again this year? I thought I read that there would be again, but I can't seem to locate the details.
Tennessee_ATO
Footballguy
Fantasysports1
Footballguy
Another lineup I am thinking about if I use Taylor in cash:
Taylor
Lacy
Lamar Miller
OBJ
Julio Jones
Davante Adams
Olsen
Taylor
Lacy
CJ Anderson/Hill
OBJ
Davante
Calvin Johnson
Olsen
Taylor
Lacy
Lamar Miller
OBJ
Julio Jones
Davante Adams
Olsen
Taylor
Lacy
CJ Anderson/Hill
OBJ
Davante
Calvin Johnson
Olsen
Fantasysports1
Footballguy
I also have:
Bradford
Lacy, Lamar Miller
OBJ, Jordan Matthews, Davante Adams
Olsen
When looking at RB, you can either go low tier pricing with Ameer (5900), Doug Martin and Ivory (6400). If news comes out that Ameer is going to start/get a lot of work I think he is very viable. Ivory is solid but for a little more you can get a Stewart who is a workhorse where Ivory may lose a bit of work. Also you can get Lamar who will probably get most of the passing work and more scoring chances due to Dolphin's offense. Lamar to me offers a higher floor than the guys priced lower. Jordan Matthews is not as sure as the top tier players like Calvin, AJ Green but is in a prime position in a high scoring game and is the #1 option.
Bradford
Lacy, Lamar Miller
OBJ, Jordan Matthews, Davante Adams
Olsen
When looking at RB, you can either go low tier pricing with Ameer (5900), Doug Martin and Ivory (6400). If news comes out that Ameer is going to start/get a lot of work I think he is very viable. Ivory is solid but for a little more you can get a Stewart who is a workhorse where Ivory may lose a bit of work. Also you can get Lamar who will probably get most of the passing work and more scoring chances due to Dolphin's offense. Lamar to me offers a higher floor than the guys priced lower. Jordan Matthews is not as sure as the top tier players like Calvin, AJ Green but is in a prime position in a high scoring game and is the #1 option.
Last edited by a moderator:
andrewd173
Footballguy
Hi again to the gang! I've been looking for this thread for a few weeks before I noticed the new sub-forum, which was a great idea by FBG. Doesn't say as much about my awareness 
Major props on the grinder app, I got it working on my iphone.
All intros aside now, I tend to focus on cash games for 80% of my action, and to limit exposure on the first 4 weeks of the season. Obviously this makes me very conservative going into week 1 contests. However,it's very hard to resist some of the "pricing errors" from the insanely early salary listings.
While the first principle of the cash contest philosophy appears to be reduce risk or get good value, I fall back to Chip Kelly when asked about his game plan, "Score points." Again in a cash game, this is especially compounded at the QB position, where a decent showing is a critical component of your overall score, using historical figures. (Thanks to the Cracking series for the research.) I will take some risk at the higher variance positions like WR3 and TE, again for my cash games.
Therefore, I'm building around Romo, Palmer and Bradford as low risk, decent value QB's against poor pass defenses for my week 1 cash games.
In GPP's I'll toss in some Tyrod, but it's too risky for my blood in cash games at the QB position. (I also keep thinking about Geno Smith under Rex in the Miami game where he was allowed to pass a handful of times, paired with a Greg Roman who is also an ultra conservative on offense. Yeah I drafted Karlos Williams in season long fantasy leagues too.)
Still working on final RB choices, but favoring Hill, Miller, Stewart, Ivory, CJA, Martin and some Abdullah. I'm not thrilled with GB's OLine, even against Chicago, so no Lacy for me. Might consider some Ryan Mathews in GPP as I could see a game script where the Eagles get ahead and rest Murray, plus the snap count will be high regardless.
Still working on the rest ...
Major props on the grinder app, I got it working on my iphone.
All intros aside now, I tend to focus on cash games for 80% of my action, and to limit exposure on the first 4 weeks of the season. Obviously this makes me very conservative going into week 1 contests. However,it's very hard to resist some of the "pricing errors" from the insanely early salary listings.
While the first principle of the cash contest philosophy appears to be reduce risk or get good value, I fall back to Chip Kelly when asked about his game plan, "Score points." Again in a cash game, this is especially compounded at the QB position, where a decent showing is a critical component of your overall score, using historical figures. (Thanks to the Cracking series for the research.) I will take some risk at the higher variance positions like WR3 and TE, again for my cash games.
Therefore, I'm building around Romo, Palmer and Bradford as low risk, decent value QB's against poor pass defenses for my week 1 cash games.
In GPP's I'll toss in some Tyrod, but it's too risky for my blood in cash games at the QB position. (I also keep thinking about Geno Smith under Rex in the Miami game where he was allowed to pass a handful of times, paired with a Greg Roman who is also an ultra conservative on offense. Yeah I drafted Karlos Williams in season long fantasy leagues too.)
Still working on final RB choices, but favoring Hill, Miller, Stewart, Ivory, CJA, Martin and some Abdullah. I'm not thrilled with GB's OLine, even against Chicago, so no Lacy for me. Might consider some Ryan Mathews in GPP as I could see a game script where the Eagles get ahead and rest Murray, plus the snap count will be high regardless.
Still working on the rest ...
karmarooster
Footballguy
I have several lineups that are very close to this. In fact, starting to feel that I'm leaning pretty heavy on 3 QBs, 3 RBs, about 5 WRs, and 1 TE.
Im pretty much leaning on 2 QBs for cash and 2 others for GPP. Only using 2 TEs period. Bit more of a mix at RB/WR but 2 WRs are in almost all my lineups.
NixonMask
Footballguy
So its looking like Im going to see a nice windfall from the weekend college football slate. I was originally planning on keeping my GPP plays for opening weekend small, but with a substantially larger bankroll than expected I have a question about how people handle a larger number of entries (30-ish) that rotate players in and out from a small pool from each position. Is it higher EV to play them in a single multi-entry tournament, or spit them up among as many single entry GPPs as possible?
Tennessee_ATO
Footballguy
I've entered my dummy lineup in this week's contests. I'm a little heavier than I wanted to be invested by about 20% so I may scale back somewhat. I'm also heavier in the GPP* action than my typical 80%-20% split, but that's be design since I think variance may be a little higher early in the season. My distribution percentages:
Thursday-Monday -- 16%
Sunday-Monday -- 84%
Cash (including triple-ups*) -- 66%
GPP (including quintuple-ups and big leagues*) -- 34%
I'm spreading action around a lot of different contest types because I want to try to get a handle on the actual scores needed to win something for each type.
*I've wrestled with how to designate triple-ups and leagues between "cash" and "GPP" for my internal accounting. Based on scores required to win from last year, I'm treating triple-ups and 20-team leagues (or lower) as cash games and quintuple-ups and larger leagues as GPP plays. Anyone else's insight into how they handle those types of contest in terms of bankroll management would be appreciated.
Thursday-Monday -- 16%
Sunday-Monday -- 84%
Cash (including triple-ups*) -- 66%
GPP (including quintuple-ups and big leagues*) -- 34%
I'm spreading action around a lot of different contest types because I want to try to get a handle on the actual scores needed to win something for each type.
*I've wrestled with how to designate triple-ups and leagues between "cash" and "GPP" for my internal accounting. Based on scores required to win from last year, I'm treating triple-ups and 20-team leagues (or lower) as cash games and quintuple-ups and larger leagues as GPP plays. Anyone else's insight into how they handle those types of contest in terms of bankroll management would be appreciated.
Tennessee_ATO
Footballguy
Will FBG have their "optimum lineups" again this year? I can brute force it based on the projections if need be, but it was really handy to have. I like building my rosters then comparing my projected scores to the "best" based on the various projections from the experts to see if I'm way off base.
andrewd173
Footballguy
If I remember correctly from Dodd's results, and supported by my own observations, the large field doubles and triples behave similar to cash games as far as construction and winning scores as expected vs the bell curve distribution.
The quads and quintiples etc I have always treated as a GPP, and in retrospect should have split my GPP bank roll into more of these contests due to their flat payout structure. (I can't say how many times I just edge into the payout zone and get 2 or 3 X my investment.)
Tennessee_ATO
Footballguy
That matches-up with my data.
I got onto the 3x and 5x bandwagons late last year. They really augmented my take because, for whatever reason, I straight-up sucked at building a "true" GPP lineup.
I don't really do smaller leagues much, but I think I probably should do more of them based on what I was seeing in (limited) results last year when I dabbled at the low dollar level.
Fantasysports1
Footballguy
I like the idea of starting Lacy and Hill. Though I think you should play Adams instead of Agholor because Adams ownership likely will be high. Also I would not go cheap at TE and just use Olsen.
A lineup I like is:
Taylor
Lacy
Hill
OBJ
Calvin Johnson
Davante
Olsen
You can play Cobb or AJ Green in place of Calvin but you might not want to have both Hill and AJ Green in cash games.
Last edited by a moderator:
snogger
Footballguy
Going to be a lot to look over each week.Sure hope work doesn't catch on and block the site
JoeSteeler
Footballguy
:reported:
Sure hope work doesn't catch on and block the site
snogger
Footballguy
why you little:reported:
Sure hope work doesn't catch on and block the site
Last edited by a moderator:
Steeler
Footballguy
Thank Maurile! But it looks like the 1PM and 4PM filters are not working correctly (and maybe the others too). For example, S. Bradford is listed in all contest types.
Yes, thanks, got it fixed now. (The weird MNF start times this week were confusing things.)
Mr. Bojangles
Footballguy
Is Fanduel running the FFFC in 2015?
EBF
Footballguy
I'm venturing into the DFS arena for the first time. Threw down a little bit of money on FanDuel and DraftKings and loaded up on week 1 teams. I'm going the low variance route and pouring almost all of my money into 50/50s and doubles while leaving just a small amount for the high variance tournaments with the big prizes. The way I see it, week one is where an avid FF player has the biggest advantage because it's the time when the difference between what you know and what everyone else knows about the player pool should be greatest. My hope is that I can springboard off a strong week 1 and have some decent cash to play with for the rest of the season, but almost everything hinges on a handful of players since my lineups are virtually identical everywhere.
Fantasysports1
Footballguy
I wouldn't play more than 20% of your bankroll in week 1. While you may have the biggest edge, things happen. Injuries or games that go against some of your players. Winning 60% of your cash games is considered great and what DFS players hope to maintain.
If you want to stay in the game you have to keep your bankroll in tact.
EBF
Footballguy
Well my "bankroll" isn't really my bankroll at this point. I can rebuy next week if so inclined.
I hear what you're saying, but basically if I think the play is +EV then I'm gonna push the edge even if there's a huge chance of going busto. And week 1 has some fat bargains out there IMO due to player valuations that are out of sync with reality.
Last edited by a moderator:
Rhythmdoctor
Footballguy
Nice post.
OT - I was contemplating this dilemma when I realized I drafted both Doug Martin and Mike Evans in a redraft. I've been putting out trade feelers because I don't want the conflicting game script, but thanks to your post, I'll probably reconsider or at least have less adamance about trading one or the other.
Rhythmdoctor
Footballguy
Regarding my favorite tournament, the FanDuel $10 Million FFFC.... I emailed FD about 3 weeks ago and asked them if they'll be offering this again to which they replied "You're in luck! We will be having the FFFC Tournament this season, but details have yet to be determined. Keep an eye out on the link below as time passes." So I'm wondering, with Sunday games starting in less than 5 days, why is this not available yet? Does anyone remember when they kicked it out last year? I know it was week 1.
karmarooster
Footballguy
Nice, I like the attitude to put some chips on the table to see what you could hit in week 1, for a bigger bank to use for the rest of the season. I would also recommend some triples if you want to keep it fairly conservative but build in some boost.
What's your thinking on Devante Adams?
EBF
Footballguy
Thought about Adams. Not a bad play IMO, but my team is already stocked up on young breakout types and there are others whose talent I rate higher.
Fantasysports1
Footballguy
That isn't your bankroll of you can just reload. BR is the disposable money you have that once you lose it you won't be able to easily reload.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr. Bojangles
Footballguy
Just chatted with a live fanduel customer support representative. Apparently the FFFC is slated for Dec 13th, but there are no plans for a week 1 qualifier at this time. Weird.
Rhythmdoctor
Footballguy
Thanks for the update. Pretty weird since it's usually weeks 1-12. Maybe they want the value of players to be more accurate so they're waiting for week 1 to play out? Another possibility, maybe they run weeks 4-12 (or some other range) and allow more than 1 qualifier per tournament?
karmarooster
Footballguy
Been thinking about TNF, and that there's more reason to avoid Taylor and to a lesser extent Bradford. Ben and Brady are two top 5-10 QBs, and will figure to have reasonably higher ownership percentages because of the kickoff. Either one could blow up for a nice game. With 2 more QBs who will score more than Taylor and Bradford, it's more difficult to scratch out enough points with Taylor's rushing yards or Bradford's volume, whereas both are much better plays on Sunday.
I like Bradford in the system and against the Falcons in a high O/U, but realistically he's much riskier right now than he should be in a few weeks if everything goes planned in Kelley's offense. Also think Kelley tries to run with Murray and Matthews at speed 2.0 with the defense easier to gas than in a few weeks when defenses are back in football shape (thinking of the Eagles Skins opener a few years back). And this protects Bradford from having to come out and chuck it 40 times (which he's more likely to do after he's knocked some rust off).
I like Bradford in the system and against the Falcons in a high O/U, but realistically he's much riskier right now than he should be in a few weeks if everything goes planned in Kelley's offense. Also think Kelley tries to run with Murray and Matthews at speed 2.0 with the defense easier to gas than in a few weeks when defenses are back in football shape (thinking of the Eagles Skins opener a few years back). And this protects Bradford from having to come out and chuck it 40 times (which he's more likely to do after he's knocked some rust off).
Last edited by a moderator:
Joe T
Footballguy
Good points on Bradford. Just to add a few more thoughts on not playing Bradford in week 1 also tieing into your point on the Eagles running game:
The Atlanta defense was awful last season. In terms of points allowed per game, they were the 26th ranked defense in the league. But the touchdowns Atlanta gave up last year were against the run, where they were the worst in the league giving up 21 rushing TDs (Dallas was second worst giving up 18 TDs on the ground). Atlanta only gave up 20 passing touchdowns last year (just over one per game) which was actually 5th best in the league.
I expect the Eagles to score a lot of points, but there is a good chance a lot of them will be on the ground. Murray and Mathews are really good plays this week (especially Mathews given his price $5,900). Mathews is actually my #1 RB value start of the week. But both of them should have nice weeks.
Maybe start them both?
