Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
FanDuel/Draftkings Week 5 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter jandyt
- Start date
dancingbones
Footballguy
2 bargain basement wideouts tonight for consideration:
Wright 4500
Adams 4500
Could be replaced by
Lafell 4500
Baldwin 4500
If you want to have guys going later in your contest. Choices, choices!
Wright 4500
Adams 4500
Could be replaced by
Lafell 4500
Baldwin 4500
If you want to have guys going later in your contest. Choices, choices!
I think I read somewhere that for all their issues this season, the Patriot's are #1 in the NFL in defending teams top wide receivers. I may be distorting the stat, but I seem to remember it being somewhere along those lines. Considering they have Revis, this makes sense to me. I don't feel that A.J. Green is a worthwhile substitute this week given that. I have the same concerns over Jordy regarding the weather and thus am hedging my bets, using him in half my lineups and finding a replacement in the other half despite his bargain cost relative to the other players of his caliber at the position. I can't seem to land on the player to replace with, however.
GoodLloydHaveMercy
Footballguy
This feels like a grind it out kind of game which I think favors Minnesota even with ponder... Not saying they're going to win but I like their chances of controlling the trenches when they're on offense and I believe Minnesota defense is a little bit under rated... Asiata just feels like a MUDDER and I think this is a MUDDERs game
GoodLloydHaveMercy
Footballguy
I think Bishop Sankey provides good value for DraftKings at 4700
Word is his footwork is "improving"
Word is his footwork is "improving"
I am going Murray and Jennings, don't trust any of the cheap RB's or like the matchups this week.
On DL I love Jennings at 5500 and with the values elsewhere I will be paying for Murray or Bell to go with him in most lineups.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think Nelson and GB passing does ok even in the rain. I do like GB DT as a cheap option against Ponder in the rain though.
JimmyJabroni
Footballguy
I like Bush this week for his price without Bell playing. Like Andre Johnson for the price. Feel like a bye week should give the Seahawks a gameplan to get Percy Harvin involved. I'm on board with the majority that R Jennings is great play this week. Hawkins might be nice play for his price and the targets and catches he gets....could snag a TD one of these weeks. I think Brees is gonna light it up against Tampa.
Last edited by a moderator:
Tennessee_ATO
Footballguy
Slopped together a couple of lineups for Thursday contests about 5 minutes before the deadline while trying to feed and give kids baths. Everyone I'm playing against in those contests: You're welcome. No clue what was going through my mind other than wanting to keep my streak of playing Jordy every week alive. I still think he's grossly underpriced in FD.
FantasyKings is down.
Last edited by a moderator:
Pantherz
Footballguy
Well I wasn't in love with any defenses this week, but you got me thinking about GB. Decided I liked the price and matchup, and put them in 16 of 28 Thursday line-ups. Nice idea, lol!
Your welcome. Used them in all my Thursday lineups. I ended not using Rogers at all though.
SYMPHONY X
Footballguy
This is my 2nd week playing at Draft Kings. Very easy, almost too easy, to field a strong lineup this week with the deflated player pricing. I heard that DK kept the player prices down this week (E. Sanders at $5100...really?) because they are expecting a HUGE field of 1st time players to be drawn in by the 1st million dollar prize of the year.
As a result of the deflated player pricing, the advice from one "daily expert" was to avoid the H2H/50-50 contests at DK this week, because it is so easy for anyone, beginner and expert alike, to field a strong lineup. I, for one, am taking that advice, and only entering a few GPP's.
Lots of good values at WR and TE. I am locked and loaded with the stud RB's in my lineups thus far. Will probably change them 100 times before the Sunday games start though!
As a result of the deflated player pricing, the advice from one "daily expert" was to avoid the H2H/50-50 contests at DK this week, because it is so easy for anyone, beginner and expert alike, to field a strong lineup. I, for one, am taking that advice, and only entering a few GPP's.
Lots of good values at WR and TE. I am locked and loaded with the stud RB's in my lineups thus far. Will probably change them 100 times before the Sunday games start though!
For what it's worth, I hold the opposite view. There is no such thing as a "strong" lineup in an absolute sense: in DFS, strength is strictly relative to that of your opponents.
You field a strong team relative to your opponents by making fewer mistakes than they do.
If players are efficiently priced, it's impossible to make a mistake. Any lineup that spends the full cap amount is as good as any other. This turns fantasy football into roulette.
But when certain players are substantially underpriced or overpriced, that gives people the opportunity to make mistakes. It's a mistake to miss out on the underpriced players, and it's also a mistake to play the overpriced players. When you give the general masses the chance to make mistakes, they will do so. Travis Kelce looks like an amazing value at $3,000, for example, but I guarantee you that at least 40% of the lineups you face in a 50/50 will lack Travis Kelce. You have an advantage over those lineups. The fact that Kelce is so underpriced therefore makes playing 50/50s more profitable than usual, not less profitable.
Last edited by a moderator:
Zyphros
Footballguy
Rough lineup that I've come up with for GPP's this week on Fanduel
Cam
Le'Veon, Marshawn
Benjamin, Michael Floyd, Quick
Kelce
New Orleans K and Def
Really like the Cam/Benjamin stack this week, which saved some money for more RB studs. Floyd off a bye seems like a no brainer at his price (6400) and Quick's floor seems to be ~10 points (60+ yds and a TD) and could easily keep blowing up. Not fond of the Kelce pick here b/c of the really tough match-up, just haven't found another TE yet I'm more willing to go with.
Cam
Le'Veon, Marshawn
Benjamin, Michael Floyd, Quick
Kelce
New Orleans K and Def
Really like the Cam/Benjamin stack this week, which saved some money for more RB studs. Floyd off a bye seems like a no brainer at his price (6400) and Quick's floor seems to be ~10 points (60+ yds and a TD) and could easily keep blowing up. Not fond of the Kelce pick here b/c of the really tough match-up, just haven't found another TE yet I'm more willing to go with.
John Lee
Footballguy
I respect your opinion, Maurile, but I could not disagree more with your rationale.
If players are dramatically underpriced, as they are on DraftKings this week, it is difficult for the novice player to make mistakes. If 40% of lineups will lack Kelce this weekend, that is because they will have Jimmy Graham in his place--they will be able to afford him due to Khiry Robinson being $3000 and E. Sanders being $5100. Going up against Jimmy Graham confers zero advantage to Kelce owners.
The overlap in cash games on DK this weekend will be dramatic. My conservative estimates are that Khiry will be 30+% owned, Jennings will be 25+% owned, Sanders will be 30+% owned, and Kelce will be 50% owned...after that, you can expect to see Rivers at 20% owned, Chris Ivory at 15+% owned, Kelvin Benjamin & Andrew Hawkins at 15% owned, and so forth. When this type of overlap occurs, the difference between winning and losing boils down to the selection a DFS gamer makes between DeMarco Murray and Le'Veon Bell...or Antonio Brown and Julio Jones...or Jimmy Graham and Julius Thomas--all of which are toss ups, in my opinion.
When I construct cash game lineups, I never worry about overlap because I want the most productive players at each position within my salary restrictions; however, when player salaries are so loose that the only tough decisions to make are "Should I roster DeMarco Murray or Le'Veon Bell?," any edge a sharp player has is gone--the game becomes a "Pick'em" format, which is no better than a 50-50 proposition, which equates to losing over the long-term when one accounts for 10% rake.
(HULK)
(Smash)
I don't know about Marshawn @ his price. Skins are not easy to run on. Passing on them is cake, but running is not easy.
I think I fall somewhere in the middle of the DK argument this week. I think it does reduce the number of choices as due to the underpriced players a lot of the middle ranged guys are probably completely off the possible lists of most players. The lesser number of players to pick from would seem to work against top players. But the choice left isn't just which studs to play but also which seemingly underpriced players to pick. Picking among the underpriced players is where I think the "sharks" can gain an advantage. For example I played 17 Thursday games on DK yesterday and the 2 most popular picks were both cheap picks. One the GB DT, which was more picked than I thought they would be at 30% in Cash and 20% in GPP, was a great pick as one of the cheapest DTs on the board. The other Matt Asainte, 35%+ cash and 25% GPP, was a clear misstep.
Of course Im far from a shark.
Of course Im far from a shark.
I agree with this. The edge for "sharks" is still there. It's just that the question has changed. It's no longer, at least this week, about finding the value. It's about avoiding the false value.
For example, Yes, Kelce is underpriced this week. But is he really underpriced by much? He's still only playing about 50% of the snaps. Realistically you can expect what 5 or 6 targets. He'll need to likely convert those into 4 or 5 receptions, against a defense that hasn't allowed more than 43 yards to TE's this year. I'm not saying that Kelce is a bad pick this week, as he has positives too (gained trust of Smith last week, big red zone presence), but I don't think he's an auto select as many think.
I guess what I'm saying is that these value plays are there, but they aren't without warts. And this week it'll be more about avoiding the value plays that bust.
some guys I like this week:
QB: R Fitzpatrick, R Wilson, Big Ben, P Rivers
RB: R Jennings, L Bell, J Forsett, C Ivory, B Sankey, J Hill
WR: K Benjamin, D Baldwin, M Floyd, B Quick
TE: J Graham as always, G Olsen, A Sefarian-Jenkins if playing
I'm relatively new to FanDuel, what kind of contests are you guys doing? A lot of $5 entries, a couple of $25?
QB: R Fitzpatrick, R Wilson, Big Ben, P Rivers
RB: R Jennings, L Bell, J Forsett, C Ivory, B Sankey, J Hill
WR: K Benjamin, D Baldwin, M Floyd, B Quick
TE: J Graham as always, G Olsen, A Sefarian-Jenkins if playing
I'm relatively new to FanDuel, what kind of contests are you guys doing? A lot of $5 entries, a couple of $25?
Joe T
Footballguy
Thanks for getting us back on topic.
I like C Ivory this week. Having a difficult time coming up with a second value running back.
Why are people thinking Sankey will suddenly get carries this week?
(HULK)
(Smash)
I usually do a few tourney at $25 or less.
I always do the FBGs 50/50.
I do a handful of $109 50/50s typically.
If I do H2H, I do it at the $5 to $10 level and avoid people who have a lot of wins.
I agree that you can make a lineup with Jimmy Graham every bit as good as you can with Travis Kelce. But I don't think that means people aren't going to make mistakes.
I'm in a small Thursday 50-50 at DraftKings this week. I just went there to look at other people's lineups, but the site is down for me right now. (Is it down for everybody else? I'm getting a "temporarily unavailable" message from hostmonster.) I think it's either six teams or eight teams. When the site is back up, I'll plug all the lineups into the FBG DraftKings value chart to see the expected scores based on yesterday's average projections. I do expect to see some mistakes.
Last edited by a moderator:
Never mind. I'm an idiot. I was typing in "FantasyKings" instead of "DraftKings." Too many sites' names to remember.
DraftKings is up, so I'll do the exercise right now...
Okay, my memory was off. It's a 20-person triple-up rather than a six- or eight-person 50-50. And I'd forgotten that I can't see other people's full rosters until all the games have started.
But the very first team I looked at has Andrew Quarless at TE. I consider that a mistake since he has the same salary as Kelce, but by pretty much everyone's projections is expected (or I guess was expected) to score about half as many points.
I'll revisit this next Tuesday, using yesterday's projections, when everyone's rosters are available.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd be interested to see this...but I don't think it's fair to use Thursday contests, considering there is a pretty obvious bias for some toward picking players in the TNF game. So that's a normal mistake that people make week in and week out.
Zyphros
Footballguy
That's my biggest concern. I haven't had a chance to toy with it as much as I'd like, but I might swap him for a Jennings or something small and go with a top tier TE
This is a pretty interesting topic, by the way.
Cash games are most profitable for good players when the spread among teams' expected points is greatest. If everyone is expected to score around the same number of points, we're all losing money on average by paying the vigorish. But if my team is expected to score five points more than the median team and ten points more than the worst team, that's probably enough to give me a positive expectation even after accounting for the vigorish. So we need the teams' expectations to be spread out a bit.
The question is: what kind of pricing is likely to result in the first situation (where everyone is expected to score about the same amount), and what kind of pricing is likely to result in the second situation?
At one extreme, if all players are priced proportionally to their expected points (according to the best projections available), there will be no spread among teams.
At the other extreme, it is possible to come up with pricing that makes the best starting lineup so obvious that nearly everyone will choose it. With no vigorish, this becomes a profitable game if even one owner fails to submit the optimal lineup: the rest of the teams will split that owner's entry fee most of the time. But with the standard DraftKings vigorish, to expect a profit, you need at least 5.6% of the owners to fail to submit the optimal lineup.
In between those extremes, we have ordinary reality. Players will never be exactly priced in proportion to their expected points, and neither will there be only two sorts of lineups -- obviously awesome ones and obviously stupid ones -- for people to choose from. There will always be some spread, and there will always be people who make mistakes. It's possible that people will make fewer mistakes with "loose" pricing, but that each mistake will be more costly. How those factors balance out in the real world is an empirical question. This seems as good a week as any to start trying to collect some data on it.
Cash games are most profitable for good players when the spread among teams' expected points is greatest. If everyone is expected to score around the same number of points, we're all losing money on average by paying the vigorish. But if my team is expected to score five points more than the median team and ten points more than the worst team, that's probably enough to give me a positive expectation even after accounting for the vigorish. So we need the teams' expectations to be spread out a bit.
The question is: what kind of pricing is likely to result in the first situation (where everyone is expected to score about the same amount), and what kind of pricing is likely to result in the second situation?
At one extreme, if all players are priced proportionally to their expected points (according to the best projections available), there will be no spread among teams.
At the other extreme, it is possible to come up with pricing that makes the best starting lineup so obvious that nearly everyone will choose it. With no vigorish, this becomes a profitable game if even one owner fails to submit the optimal lineup: the rest of the teams will split that owner's entry fee most of the time. But with the standard DraftKings vigorish, to expect a profit, you need at least 5.6% of the owners to fail to submit the optimal lineup.
In between those extremes, we have ordinary reality. Players will never be exactly priced in proportion to their expected points, and neither will there be only two sorts of lineups -- obviously awesome ones and obviously stupid ones -- for people to choose from. There will always be some spread, and there will always be people who make mistakes. It's possible that people will make fewer mistakes with "loose" pricing, but that each mistake will be more costly. How those factors balance out in the real world is an empirical question. This seems as good a week as any to start trying to collect some data on it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Good point. I'll use a Sunday contest. A twenty-person contest seems like the right size. It's enough to get a decent sample, but not so much that entering all the lineups into the value chart will consume too much time.
FlipsideRM
Footballguy
Has anyone actually cashed out on draft kings? How easy was the process/how long did it take if so?
John Lee
Footballguy
Well, for the second straight week I got caught up with work/life and missed my window to enter Thursday games.
Jordy would have been in my lineup, which would have been OK, but 1 catch?!
Last week the same thing happened and I had a great week, so I'm shaking off the bad Thursday juju and going straight to Sunday again this week
Jordy would have been in my lineup, which would have been OK, but 1 catch?!
Last week the same thing happened and I had a great week, so I'm shaking off the bad Thursday juju and going straight to Sunday again this week
FlipsideRM
Footballguy
Cool, thanks. I deposited a measly 10$ for the hell of it at the beginning of the season and have ran it up to a couple hundred.
Heres to hitting big in the millionaire maker
FlipsideRM
Footballguy
ragnarok628
Footballguy
What's to like about Colin Kaepernick this week? Seems like a suspect play but MT, DD seem to like his value at $7800.
FlipsideRM
Footballguy
Anyone see any decent tight end options on draft kings below 5k? I don't feel comfortable with Kelcee or Gates this week..
Walker is another option under 5K. If he plays ASJ is also a option especially in GPP.
Caesar
Footballguy
I am going with a bit of a super sleeper at TE this week in a lot of formats. For only 3K on DK, Clay Harbor doesn't need much to have 2x or 3x value. Facing a depleted Steelers D and with a rookie QB using him in the Witten-like safety valve role, I love this play. He looked very good in his first game of the season against a decent Chargers Defense. I didn't look at the stats as far as targets, but I don't remember him missing a catch and he had 8 for 70. With Marcedes Lewis hurt, I think he is the guy that will get the underneath targets the most. I have him penciled in at 7-10 catches for 75-90 yards with a chance at a TD.
Then again, I don't fare too well in the GPPs, but I do hold my own in the 50/50s
Last edited by a moderator:
FlipsideRM
Footballguy
Im leaning towards Sefarian Jenkins if healthy. Guy had 7 targets last week and should have caught a TD. Glennon could be throwing the ball 40+ times this week vs New Orleans, the opportunities will be there, and he's only 3k$ on DK
Pantherz
Footballguy
I just can't see a big problem with rolling out Bortles against the aforementioned depleted Steeler D. He's at home, has looked very good in limited action this year, and is certainly not afraid to let it fly. I think Robinson, Hurns, and Harbor are values also with Lee and Shorts likely out. It's risky with a rookie QB but I'm taking that chance this week. Just $6400 on FanDuel.
I also like Bortles a lot this week as well as Robinson as he is cheaper than Hurns. Hurns more of a GPP play.
