Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
Are you sure he wasn't a High 5th?
Last edited:
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!
WR Gabriel Davis, BUF (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Zyphros
- Start date
I did. The owner dropped him after week 1 and I scooped him up but never used him until his week 6 & 7 duds because Im an idiot.
Just checked. That owner drafted him in the 9th
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
That's good, it backs his calms and it also affirms that I did see him on the WW between Weeks 1 and 2, always overreaction 1st M/T after Week 1
Good post Joba, thanks
Lansdowne
Footballguy
Please forgive me as I keep using baseball analogies around here, but I think Gabe Davis is like the football equivalent of a guy like Joey Gallo. Hits home runs at an elite clip (5th all-time in MLB at AB per HR behind only Mark McGwire, Aaron Judge, Babe Ruth, and Barry Bonds). That’s pretty select company there, and you’d think he’s a Hall of Fame shoo-in. But he’s also batting below .200 for his career, strikes out a ton, doesn’t draw walks consistently, doesn’t drive in enough runs, doesn’t steal bases, etc. His value is strictly in his ability to score instantly with one swing.
Going back to Davis, his value is tied to his ability to score TDs at a high rate. He’s 14th in the NFL with TD receptions since 2020:
www.statmuse.com
Look at the names around him and notice how much Davis stands out compared to the rest of them in terms of targets, receptions, and yards. With Davis you’re going to strike out more often than you’re going to hit, but it’s going to be a big hit when he does. The less you need to depend on him the more value he’ll carry to your team, that’s the way I see it.
Going back to Davis, his value is tied to his ability to score TDs at a high rate. He’s 14th in the NFL with TD receptions since 2020:
Most Td Receptions Since 2020 | StatMuse
Since 2020, Davante Adams has the most receiving touchdowns, with 65 touchdowns.
Look at the names around him and notice how much Davis stands out compared to the rest of them in terms of targets, receptions, and yards. With Davis you’re going to strike out more often than you’re going to hit, but it’s going to be a big hit when he does. The less you need to depend on him the more value he’ll carry to your team, that’s the way I see it.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
David was on a go route, and was blanketed. There was no way on god’s green earth that Allen should have thrown that ball.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
I’m 3rd in points in an IDP with a 3-6 record and I don’t have Davis on that team.Tell me you have Gabe on your team without telling me you have Gabe on your team.
I’m second in points overall but have a 3-6 record.
I do have Ekeler, Higgins, LJax, and James Cook.
Sometimes it’s just not your year.
rockaction
Footballguy
This is Gabe Davis in a nutshell for head-to-head. Somebody drafts him, either asks "What have I done?" or gets sick of him, dumps him, and he blows up on a bench.
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
Price check on Davis now in dynasty? I see someone people saying they just dropped him, but I think he is worth more than a 3rd which is the line I start dropping people. It seems the mighty has fallen....or the hype has really died down since his 4 TD playoff game. I still think I am interested for a 3rd now, but would struggle to give up a 2nd at this point.
The Gator
Footballguy
I just gave (full ppr) Gabe, Jaleel McLaughlin, and a mid/late 2nd for Dionte Johnson.
Feel like I’ve raised the floor of my teams scoring.
smbkrypt24
Footballguy
I love that price for Di Johnson. But I am a big fan of his
barackdhouse
Footballguy
He wasn't blanketed, Davis had a step up and to the outside, but agreed that it shouldn't have been thrown. Not short like that anyway.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Sorry - "blanketed" wasn't a good term, I agree.
He was indeed ahead of the defender, running along the sideline.
But there was zero space between the defender & Davis to fit a ball. Allen essentially threw it short and directly into the defender's breadbasket.
Judge Smails
Footballguy
Dropped. Meaning he’ll likely go off.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Right but look at the WRs going around him. A few hits for sure but lots of disappointments. JSN, Cooks, Zay Flowers, Sutton, Michael Thomas, Toney, OBJ, Juju, Skyy Moore, Burks, Elijah Moore. The hit rate at WR in this area is awful. Gabe Davis is outperforming almost all those guys.
Last edited:
Ilov80s
Footballguy
It was probably poor strategy by the manager if they expected an 8th round WR to be a regular and consistent starting piece for them. Also, I think there is an argument to be made that spike week players are better than Mendoza line players. I am pretty sure I've seen/heard research that shows a guy who scores a consistent low end number is providing almost no value where a guy who spikes a few weeks is actually earning wins for teams.
BladeRunner
Footballguy
Yep. I drafted him at the end of round 8 in my league, like an idiot.
Lansdowne
Footballguy
Give me the guy who’s giving me 9 points every time over the guy who’s giving me 0 points half the time. 18 points from your WR can win your matchup, 0 points can lose your matchup. 9 points from your WR will keep you in it at least and won’t be why you lose. Davis’ season totals are nice for someone in his ADP but only help weekly managers about 33% of the time or so. If this was a roto style one where there is no head to head and scoring is based entirely on total stats on the season, then Davis will likely be a net positive on touchdowns alone. He is the Owen Daniels of WR’s.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
I get that mindset but I believe statistically it bears out to be a losing mindset in the long run.
rockaction
Footballguy
I think that study was predicated on almost all of your receivers being boom/bust. Like a stock portfolio. Enough boom/bust stocks and your overall performance is better off than a bunch of middling performing ones. And it sounds like best ball, actually.
I know what you're talking about but don't think it applies perfectly, though it sounds close. This is one where we need a
rockaction
Footballguy
From Player Profiler, this exact question. Yes, player variance is sticky (year-to-year). No, it is not helpful in head-to-head to gain an edge.
www.playerprofiler.com
The Player Variance Manifesto: Week-to-Week Player Variance By Position
There are quite a few forces pushing quarterbacks towards their lower-variance profiles. Primarily, quarterbacks have an incredibly stable workload from week-to-week. They're almost never game-scripted out the way RBs can be in losing situations, or WRs can in difficult CB matchups. Instead...
www.playerprofiler.com
So when can we exploit player variance to gain an edge against our opponents?
Unfortunately, not often in traditional redraft leagues with head-to-head lineup setting. Don’t bank your hopes on a receiver like Scott Miller in your flex hitting his rare upside to win your week, or in any perceived running back who you believe has an “inherently higher upside” than a higher-scoring peer. Those players don’t exist, at least not from a player profile perspective.Matchup variables are the place to look when identifying potential boom weeks for lower-scoring players.
In deep best ball leagues, however, wide receiver where variance becomes a real differentiator between similarly scoring players; specifically on the lower end of the spectrum. Go for explosive depth receivers in offenses that produce an abundance of fantasy points through the air. Players like these don’t need an injury to a player above them on the depth chart to hit their theoretical upside. Field-stretching wide receivers have a chance to enter your lineup twice a season and return value at their ADP.
rockaction
Footballguy
A quick Google search (and I'm not really that interested in digging further than that) shows that the advantage of what we're talking about is all best ball, like most of us have sort of intoned. Now that makes intuitive sense, too.
It may very well be people saw that variance helps you in fantasy football somewhere, but for argument's sake, I'm sticking with that head-to-head is an entirely different ballgame, at least per the first page of Google. Those who wish to dig further than the pretty good study above done by Josh Larky of internet and Twitter fame for stuff like this are welcome to do so. I only seem to catch the banhammer over Gabe and his output.
It may very well be people saw that variance helps you in fantasy football somewhere, but for argument's sake, I'm sticking with that head-to-head is an entirely different ballgame, at least per the first page of Google. Those who wish to dig further than the pretty good study above done by Josh Larky of internet and Twitter fame for stuff like this are welcome to do so. I only seem to catch the banhammer over Gabe and his output.
rockaction
Footballguy
The money quote was this, about a high-variance player like Mecole Hardman. Guys, according to the study, who had over .8 or greater variation coefficients. (Their standard deviation divided by their average score).
"In non-best ball formats though, you’ll never realistically be able to guess when a player like Hardman will pop. In his one or two weeks of relevance, he will likely be wasting away on your bench." - Neel Gupta, Player Profiler
Now the question is to figure out whether Gabe Davis is indeed high variance, not whether high variance is bad for fantasy football.
"In non-best ball formats though, you’ll never realistically be able to guess when a player like Hardman will pop. In his one or two weeks of relevance, he will likely be wasting away on your bench." - Neel Gupta, Player Profiler
Now the question is to figure out whether Gabe Davis is indeed high variance, not whether high variance is bad for fantasy football.
Yenrub
Footballguy
He is definitely frustrating to have on a H2H team.
I had to start him last week because C. Kirk was on a bye, I lost that game by less than a point
(auction league I paid $5 of $300 for him)
This week in a redraft league I will start him since Nico Collins in out and Waddle is on a bye, I drafted him in the 8th round.
I had to start him last week because C. Kirk was on a bye, I lost that game by less than a point
(auction league I paid $5 of $300 for him)This week in a redraft league I will start him since Nico Collins in out and Waddle is on a bye, I drafted him in the 8th round.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Which is why you just always start him if he's your best option. In 0.5 ppr Davis is currently averaging 9.9 ppg. You can start Curtis Samuel over him if you want. Samuel's worst game this year was 4.2. However, on average, doing that is losing you on average 1.1 points per week. You should start the player scoring more points every week, even if that result is volatile week to week.
and I appreciate the link. I am positive the info I got about this was from a podcast so I can't google it unfortunately.
rockaction
Footballguy
I think you're confused, actually. That's a best ball strategy, not a head-to-head one. You're still concentrating on total points being the end-all be-all. It's not. Variance is his problem. It makes him not the best option. You're defining best option with no regard for variance. You're basing it on total points per year.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
We might just have to agree to disagree here. I am never starting a player who averages less points just because he's more likely to get me 4 points than 0 points.
rockaction
Footballguy
I guess we'll have to disagree on optimal strategy then. I think you're really wrong, but we'll leave it there. This isn't something where you can just sub in numbers and proclaim it settled. I don't agree with the use of Samuel as your example, either. You have to examine the whole set or range of numbers that could disprove what you're saying, and I think using Samuel is a bad example.
rockaction
Footballguy
Whoops on that Strokes post.
They were a great band, though. That much is certain.
They were a great band, though. That much is certain.
Cowboysfan8
Footballguy
He’s a lock to go off this week. I’m facing him in the league I dropped him
SeniorVBDStudent
Footballguy
Subscriber contest, weekly scoring:
33% big game, 66% ok game, 33% doesn't show up. this week or next, he'll put up a good score.
| 5.20 | 21.20 | 10.30 | 15.10 | 22.00 | 5.10 | 1.60 | 23.70 | 0.00 |
33% big game, 66% ok game, 33% doesn't show up. this week or next, he'll put up a good score.
I count 33% big game, 22% ok game, 44% doesn't show up
Dude gives it 132% out there. How can you not put him in your lineup?
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
Benching him for Courtland Sutton
Hartliner
Footballguy
^
Gabe Davis is in PEAK fantasy football "Troll of the Year form"
and it appears you start Gabe when Home and Sit when they are away.
Gabe Davis is in PEAK fantasy football "Troll of the Year form"
and it appears you start Gabe when Home and Sit when they are away.
Alex P Keaton
Footballguy
My son is still laughing about this
That's what I said when he pulled a 1.1 and 0.0 (half ppr)...
Yenrub
Footballguy
I need him to get 69 yards OR a TD for a win this week. I don't feel good about it.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
He’s due
We'll see if he's laughing Tuesday morning.
GL to all Gabe Owners needing a pop!
rockaction
Footballguy
There are blackjack players that get a five of diamonds when they hit a hard sixteen into a dealer's six.
It happens.
It doesn't mean that was the right move.
Just food for thought.
foxco
Footballguy
He's due or poo, one of those two, tis true.He’s due
I don't need him at all now, which means he'll probably go ballistic.
barackdhouse
Footballguy
not necessarily the best analogy - there may not have been other options than Gabe whereas you can always stand in blackjack. nobody is making you hit whereas the FF system does require you to start someone. there is literally mathematically 0 risk if the only possible alternative is to start nobody and take a 0 anyway.
There are blackjack players that get a five of diamonds when they hit a hard sixteen into a dealer's six.
It happens.
It doesn't mean that was the right move.
Just food for thought.
there also may have been other players to choose, where blackjack is binary. hit or not that's it. if you came into the week and were told you needed 17 to win your matchup, you'd probably pick Gabe (presuming vs other options). it is the move for sure.
it's ok though there is no such thing as a perfect analogy we can all break them down. i ****ing hate gabe davis almost as much as his QB. I've never had more confidence with Gabe in my lineup as I did last week. my freaking god. yuk.
and so yes of course he is on my bench again this week. like most weeks frankly but I really thought if the stars were ever going to align it was last week. now I think all bets are off and wouldn't be surprised if he ships out next year.
