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 entires 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).
Each week in NFL DFS has its own unique story. This week featured two games in particular that had shootout potential in the Patriots@Saints and Packers@Falcons. On top of that, we had some seemingly great stackable games that can create a lot of distinctive lineups in GPP's.
For me, I wanted to see how much exposure I could get to those projected shootouts and high scoring team totals as hard as it would be to stack the high salaries.
For me, I wanted to see how much exposure I could get to those projected shootouts and high scoring team totals as hard as it would be to stack the high salaries.
Lineup Core
Looking at the shootout match-ups first, the salaries of the Patriots, Saints, Packers, and Falcons were significantly elevated. I mean, where else would we see someone like Brandin Cooks, who has only 5 multiple TD games in his career, priced as the third most expensive WR ($8,200)? Still, not playing a top player from one of those two games is just not the right move to make in cash. If I'm paying up, I'm playing WR Julio Jones. Jones is coming off a lackluster Week 1 performance to play back at home, in a slam dunk spot. Jones torched the Packers in the postseason last year, also at home. The Falcons, as a whole, were in a perfect spot here, not just a normal home game, but opening a new stadium in the process.
Packers RB Ty Montgomery was my other must play for Week 2. Montgomery's salary must have gotten lost in the lint trap like the one sock that never seems to have a match. The Falcons struggle with pass catchers coming out of the backfield, which is precisely the Packers game plan in the way Montgomery is used. At $5,800, Montgomery was likely going to be in everyone's lineup. It's just too cheap for a RB who will likely see 20+ touches in a match-up that yielded a 65 total game score in BOTH meetings of 2016.
The fun part of DraftKings pricing is when a team that plays on Monday Night Football is not properly adjusted for the new week. This is because DraftKings releases prices for the following week every Monday, before MNF. The Chargers are the next contestant on The Price is Right! Come on down! The price for the Chargers went pretty much un-adjusted from Week 1 into Week 2, meaning they were priced relative to their away match-up against the Broncos, in the reality of a home game against a much weaker secondary, in the Dolphins. WR Keenan Allen, who saw double digit targets in the "No Fly Zone," mile high defense in Week 1, being priced under $6K was a must play, in my opinion.
Sticking with the Chargers, I find it impossible not to notice Phillip Rivers' price tag ($5,800). The other QBs around him: Andrew Luck (out), Jimmy Garapolo and Derek Anderson (backup QBs), and Dak Prescott (playing in DEN). Rivers is just far too cheap with good receivers against a weak secondary, and playing at home. Stacked in a lineup with his main target, Keenan Allen, gave me more reason to play Rivers in cash.
Following suit with the rest of the fantasy community, allow me to give ESPN's Chris Mortensen his due props for his Tarik Cohen call in the preseason. Mortensen's take on Cohen came while the Bears were keeping him a secret before finally unleashing him in Week 1. Sure it feels like a "chasing points" kind of play based on recency bias, but Cohen seems to have a significant, defined role carved out in Chicago's offense. Fellow RB Jordan Howard spent most of the week on an injury report and was limited in practice at the end of the week. Partnered with the Bears lack of offensive weapons, they have to move the ball some how. In Week 1, we saw Chicago play Cohen both out of the backfield and switch him into a slot receiver position. $4,100 was a great value for the role player Cohen seems to be, as long as Chicago continues to use him as they did in Week 1.
Packers RB Ty Montgomery was my other must play for Week 2. Montgomery's salary must have gotten lost in the lint trap like the one sock that never seems to have a match. The Falcons struggle with pass catchers coming out of the backfield, which is precisely the Packers game plan in the way Montgomery is used. At $5,800, Montgomery was likely going to be in everyone's lineup. It's just too cheap for a RB who will likely see 20+ touches in a match-up that yielded a 65 total game score in BOTH meetings of 2016.
The fun part of DraftKings pricing is when a team that plays on Monday Night Football is not properly adjusted for the new week. This is because DraftKings releases prices for the following week every Monday, before MNF. The Chargers are the next contestant on The Price is Right! Come on down! The price for the Chargers went pretty much un-adjusted from Week 1 into Week 2, meaning they were priced relative to their away match-up against the Broncos, in the reality of a home game against a much weaker secondary, in the Dolphins. WR Keenan Allen, who saw double digit targets in the "No Fly Zone," mile high defense in Week 1, being priced under $6K was a must play, in my opinion.
Sticking with the Chargers, I find it impossible not to notice Phillip Rivers' price tag ($5,800). The other QBs around him: Andrew Luck (out), Jimmy Garapolo and Derek Anderson (backup QBs), and Dak Prescott (playing in DEN). Rivers is just far too cheap with good receivers against a weak secondary, and playing at home. Stacked in a lineup with his main target, Keenan Allen, gave me more reason to play Rivers in cash.
Following suit with the rest of the fantasy community, allow me to give ESPN's Chris Mortensen his due props for his Tarik Cohen call in the preseason. Mortensen's take on Cohen came while the Bears were keeping him a secret before finally unleashing him in Week 1. Sure it feels like a "chasing points" kind of play based on recency bias, but Cohen seems to have a significant, defined role carved out in Chicago's offense. Fellow RB Jordan Howard spent most of the week on an injury report and was limited in practice at the end of the week. Partnered with the Bears lack of offensive weapons, they have to move the ball some how. In Week 1, we saw Chicago play Cohen both out of the backfield and switch him into a slot receiver position. $4,100 was a great value for the role player Cohen seems to be, as long as Chicago continues to use him as they did in Week 1.
Fill It In
As I outlined earlier, my goal was to get as much exposure to those top two shootout potential games as I could. A little back story on me: I am a Patriots fan through and through, so I have a lot of exposure to Boston sports media. Let's be honest, Bill Belichick doesn't care about anyone's fantasy sports teams and no one can accurately predict what that man's game plan ever is. I like to think that being exposed to Boston media insights daily, that I have seen how Bill Belichick seemingly devises game plans. In this match-up with the Saints I figured he would control specific game aspects, starting with trying to shut down the Saints top receiver, Michael Thomas. TE Colby Fleener, on the other hand, isn't a big play guy and sitting at $3,100. I thought Fleener might be a nice punt play with a TD upside if or when the Saints got in the red zone, as I figure the Patriots would focus on stuffing any run play in that scenario.
Clearing up additional salary with Fleener in my TE position and paying down at QB instead of the top 4 guys allowed me to spend up a little more at WR as I wanted to do this week. As I outlined in my Week 1 Cash Lineup Review, I liked Larry Fitzgerald to start the season. With the latest injury to the Cardinals star RB David Johnson, and fellow WR John Brown out in Week 2, I saw no reason, after getting peppered with double digit targets in Week 1, why Week 2 would not be the same for Fitzgerald.
I had been looking at the Ravens D/ST at the beginning of the week, but mostly wanted to try to fit in the Seahawks D/ST as the week progressed. With the Seahawks, I wasn't confident with the final WR spot I was looking to fill. I went back to the Ravens as they too were at home, and in a favorable match-up against the Browns, which I didn't see much of a difference in with the Seahawks playing the 49ers.
Deciding on the Ravens D/ST over the Seahawks allowed me to get Randall Cobb in my FLEX spot and gave me exposure to the Green Bay offense playing in Atlanta.
Clearing up additional salary with Fleener in my TE position and paying down at QB instead of the top 4 guys allowed me to spend up a little more at WR as I wanted to do this week. As I outlined in my Week 1 Cash Lineup Review, I liked Larry Fitzgerald to start the season. With the latest injury to the Cardinals star RB David Johnson, and fellow WR John Brown out in Week 2, I saw no reason, after getting peppered with double digit targets in Week 1, why Week 2 would not be the same for Fitzgerald.
I had been looking at the Ravens D/ST at the beginning of the week, but mostly wanted to try to fit in the Seahawks D/ST as the week progressed. With the Seahawks, I wasn't confident with the final WR spot I was looking to fill. I went back to the Ravens as they too were at home, and in a favorable match-up against the Browns, which I didn't see much of a difference in with the Seahawks playing the 49ers.
Deciding on the Ravens D/ST over the Seahawks allowed me to get Randall Cobb in my FLEX spot and gave me exposure to the Green Bay offense playing in Atlanta.
Results
Week 2 was a high scoring, very challenging week in DFS. The cash line was very high this week. A lot of what we through was going to happen, did happen, and in the end it was just about having the right players. I'm not going to sit here and say that I should have played Adams over Cobb, or say I should have considered JJ Nelson when the news broke about John Brown being ruled out, because that would have freed up a lot more salary. There are no excuses for the decisions I make. Fleener made value. Rivers and Allen, I thought would have connected for one TD together, but was fortunate to get the 300yd passing and 100yd receiving bonus' respectively. Montgomery was the chalk and he played great. No one can say Julio was not in a good spot, it just didn't play out that way this particular week.
My final score was 151.24, and I only won an even 48% of my head-to-head contests. I scored more points this week than I did in Week 1, but lost a higher percentage of my head-to-head contests. I don't blame the process I chose to take. I set out with a plan to not pay up for one of the four higher salary QBs with intentions on paying a specific price range at WR. It just wasn't the right plan for this particular week, so I will re-evaluate things going forward, and start fresh in Week 3. That is the great thing about DFS; Every week is a clean slate.
My final score was 151.24, and I only won an even 48% of my head-to-head contests. I scored more points this week than I did in Week 1, but lost a higher percentage of my head-to-head contests. I don't blame the process I chose to take. I set out with a plan to not pay up for one of the four higher salary QBs with intentions on paying a specific price range at WR. It just wasn't the right plan for this particular week, so I will re-evaluate things going forward, and start fresh in Week 3. That is the great thing about DFS; Every week is a clean slate.
2017 Results
Week 1: 143.48 points, won 86.96% of head-to-heads
Week 2: 151.24 points, won 48.00% on head-to-heads
Week 2: 151.24 points, won 48.00% on head-to-heads