I classify myself as a cash game player when it comes to Daily Fantasy Sports. I personally tend to stick to multiple head-to-head entries each week.
In my experience, I feel that playing head-to-head contests over 50/50 or double-up contests tends to yield a better return on investment in cases where my lineup in any given week does not perform well. When my lineup does not perform well, I would likely not win any 50/50 or double-up contest as my lineup would always fall under the 50th percentile of lineup scores. Head-to-head contests, on the other hand, I may run into a few lineups just as bad as mine and salvage a couple losses there. The flip side to playing like this: If my lineup does perform above the 50th percentile I would likely win 100 percent of 50/50 contests, whereas it is a guarantee that head-to-head contests would yield opponents that will score better and I would not take 100 percent of the contests I enter.
My goal here is to share my result with everyone. I will try to post this every week whether I win or lose (hopefully more win than lose).
In my experience, I feel that playing head-to-head contests over 50/50 or double-up contests tends to yield a better return on investment in cases where my lineup in any given week does not perform well. When my lineup does not perform well, I would likely not win any 50/50 or double-up contest as my lineup would always fall under the 50th percentile of lineup scores. Head-to-head contests, on the other hand, I may run into a few lineups just as bad as mine and salvage a couple losses there. The flip side to playing like this: If my lineup does perform above the 50th percentile I would likely win 100 percent of 50/50 contests, whereas it is a guarantee that head-to-head contests would yield opponents that will score better and I would not take 100 percent of the contests I enter.
My goal here is to share my result with everyone. I will try to post this every week whether I win or lose (hopefully more win than lose).
Every year, I find Week 1 of the NFL to be one of the hardest weeks to gauge. No matter how many conclusions can be drawn about usage projections or offense and defense upgrades we still have not seen how it translates to the playing field accurately (Yes, that is correct. I do not put much stock into the NFL Pre-Season). This particular week, I felt strongly enough about four lineup spots in particular. This made lineup construction this week a relatively simple process for me.
Lineup Core
It's no secret that Larry Fitzgerald is old in football years. We have seen the 34 year old Cardinals WR's prime come and go and his best years are certainly behind him. In DFS however, this does not mean he is a bad fantasy option, especially so early in the season. To start the 2016 season, Fitzgerald was one of the top performing receivers in football, before fading as the season progressed. His talent is undeniable, and expected to get a lot of looks from QB Carson Palmer making him a great volume play.
Like most people, especially in season long leagues, I was burned by Rams RB Todd Gurley in 2016. The Rams drawing a match-up against the Colts in Week 1 however, will make you re-think everything quick. I should start by saying, that looking at the Week 1 match-ups, the Colts visiting the Rams, in my opinion, was a great defensive match-up for the Rams. Colts QB Andrew Luck was ruled out for Week 1 and the Colts were starting Scott Tolzien who honestly, may be the worst QBs in the NFL. With Rams DEF being a must play, getting a great RB/DEF correlation play in Gurley fit perfectly with the 20+ touches opportunity.
Zach Ertz Week 1 price was favorable beyond words. For Ertz, it's always been about opportunity. Over the past couple seasons, Ertz has seen his fair share of injuries, lackluster QB play, and WRs taking the target share. The situation this week: $3,500 for a TE with great hands, finally a good QB who is predicted to have a breakout year, and the new top tier WR (Alshon Jeffery) being shadowed by shutdown CB Josh Norman. Remember what I said about opportunity?
Like most people, especially in season long leagues, I was burned by Rams RB Todd Gurley in 2016. The Rams drawing a match-up against the Colts in Week 1 however, will make you re-think everything quick. I should start by saying, that looking at the Week 1 match-ups, the Colts visiting the Rams, in my opinion, was a great defensive match-up for the Rams. Colts QB Andrew Luck was ruled out for Week 1 and the Colts were starting Scott Tolzien who honestly, may be the worst QBs in the NFL. With Rams DEF being a must play, getting a great RB/DEF correlation play in Gurley fit perfectly with the 20+ touches opportunity.
Zach Ertz Week 1 price was favorable beyond words. For Ertz, it's always been about opportunity. Over the past couple seasons, Ertz has seen his fair share of injuries, lackluster QB play, and WRs taking the target share. The situation this week: $3,500 for a TE with great hands, finally a good QB who is predicted to have a breakout year, and the new top tier WR (Alshon Jeffery) being shadowed by shutdown CB Josh Norman. Remember what I said about opportunity?
Fill It In
When making cash lineups, I find it pretty necessary to have a top tier guy, usually in the form of Le'Veon Bell, David Johnson, or Antonio Brown. For this particular week, I wanted Le'Veon Bell. The Steelers were visiting the Browns and Bell has a good history against the Browns. I was willing to pay the salary to have him and figure out the savings elsewhere.
To fit Bell into my lineup, I needed savings. Initially, I wanted to play either Marcus Mariota or Derek Carr at QB to have exposure to the Raiders @ Titans game with a high expected game total. Because of that high expected game score, their salaries were justifiably elevated. With that said, something became increasingly obvious to me. Carson Wentz, as a starting QB, was incredibly under priced and created a great stack with TE Zach Ertz. Done!
Cue the value chalk play of the week: Kendall Wright. Cameron Meredith tore his ACL and was out for the season, Markus Wheaton broke a finger and wasn't playing, and Kevin White was the only other WR option in that offense. Wright was a pretty easy choice at $3,200 to receive a decent volume.
I still wanted a piece of the Raiders @ Titans game, at this point, with plenty of salary remaining. I liked the Raiders WR's more than the Titans because I feel like it is a much more concentrated game plan that flows through either Amari Cooper or Michael Crabtree. While I projected more targets for Cooper, Crabtree is a better red zone play and provided me with decent enough savings to afford a serviceable second RB.
Paying down to Crabtree allowed me to afford Falcons RB Devonta Freeman. The Falcons had a great projected team total and were facing a Chicago team that is no defensive gem.
To fit Bell into my lineup, I needed savings. Initially, I wanted to play either Marcus Mariota or Derek Carr at QB to have exposure to the Raiders @ Titans game with a high expected game total. Because of that high expected game score, their salaries were justifiably elevated. With that said, something became increasingly obvious to me. Carson Wentz, as a starting QB, was incredibly under priced and created a great stack with TE Zach Ertz. Done!
Cue the value chalk play of the week: Kendall Wright. Cameron Meredith tore his ACL and was out for the season, Markus Wheaton broke a finger and wasn't playing, and Kevin White was the only other WR option in that offense. Wright was a pretty easy choice at $3,200 to receive a decent volume.
I still wanted a piece of the Raiders @ Titans game, at this point, with plenty of salary remaining. I liked the Raiders WR's more than the Titans because I feel like it is a much more concentrated game plan that flows through either Amari Cooper or Michael Crabtree. While I projected more targets for Cooper, Crabtree is a better red zone play and provided me with decent enough savings to afford a serviceable second RB.
Paying down to Crabtree allowed me to afford Falcons RB Devonta Freeman. The Falcons had a great projected team total and were facing a Chicago team that is no defensive gem.
Results
Paying up for Bell for him to score single digit points; It hurts, but I'm not going to act like it wasn't the right move. Like I stated earlier: If your making a cash lineup without Bell, Johnson, or one or two top tier WRs, your doing things wrong (Not that I'm playing Johnson for a while after such an unfortunate injury). Double digit targets for Fitzgerald. While none of Ertz, Crabtree, or Fitzgerald found the end zone, their volume was enough to yield valuable points in receptions and yards in DraftKings full PPR format. Chicago hung in there against Atlanta enough where they didn't have to air it out the whole game and Wright wasn't as much of a factor as I was anticipating. For $3,500 though, his 6.40 fantasy points were good enough for my roster construction. Freeman found the end zone along with Gurley, who found the end zone plus more, which paired perfectly with the amazing defensive game from the Rams. Lastly, Wentz was a stud, throwing for a couple TDs and hitting the 300+ passing yard bonus in the process.
Total score for my lineup: 143.48 points. That was good enough in this particular week to win 86.96% of my head-to-head contests.
Overall, I feel like the cash line for this past week was slightly lower than average. I believe the winner of the highly advertised "Billion Dollar Perfect Lineup" contest won with a score in the 230 point range, where most weeks I feel like you need closer to 250 points to take down a large pool tournament.
Total score for my lineup: 143.48 points. That was good enough in this particular week to win 86.96% of my head-to-head contests.
Overall, I feel like the cash line for this past week was slightly lower than average. I believe the winner of the highly advertised "Billion Dollar Perfect Lineup" contest won with a score in the 230 point range, where most weeks I feel like you need closer to 250 points to take down a large pool tournament.
2017 Results
Week 1: 143.48 points, won 86.96% of head-to-heads