Giants vs Rams – MNF Showdown Shippers | NFL Week 2 | DFS Picks, Plays & Process

Hoop I'll go to you first just get your thoughts grand scheme overview as usual on this game like I say Giants at the Rams the one thing you mentioned so the news did come out seventeen minutes ago says you know from Schefter certainly sounds like Puka's trending towards not playing they're not giving up hope that he can go in pregame warm-ups feel good and decides to play but it doesn't sound promising right now They're always trying to do some crazy shit, man, and just say it like that.

Then, you know, get the later on tonight. So I wouldn't be out there building your lineups too early. I would be ready for the chaos though, right? Be prepared. It's different than planned. You know where you say, I'm going to play tonight. Everyone's going to play tonight. Be prepared for if he goes and think about that and what that means. Don't just run all your builds out now. Say, I know he's not playing, so I'm good. You just don't know till you know.

So Hoop, I'll kick it over to you. What's your thoughts on this game and how you see it playing out as the information we have right now?

That's good caveat there just because you know it's tough doing content because we're not going to know for sure until an hour and a half it sounds like before maybe two hours sometimes they get out there before more about them get the news but we have to do the show based on the assumption that the guy's out like there's no way to to do this show under the assumption that that he's going to be in like the show will go along and the assumption will be that puka is going

To be out but you know we've seen this before in the showdown slates and usually it's the other way where guys get ruled out opposed to guys that we think are out end up playing so we'll see I mean at this point it's probably more Likely that he's out but there's always the chance that they're kind of just bullshitting here and he ends up playing and I mean there's no serious injury concerns or anything it doesn't sound like so um, he's a gamer.

He's probably going to want to get out there, but you know, based on everything and the information that we have right now, we have to, um, build by not build lines. Like you said, you probably want to wait today, but we have to analyze the slate as if he's out and that'll be the case for the show. Overall, I overall thoughts on the slate, really soft pricing, especially with Luke out. I mean, only one, layer at $10,000 or above.

And then with the Puka news, we have a ton, a ton of value like that we'll talk about. So it's going to make roster construction very easy. One of those slates, you're going to build your team or you're going to absolutely love it. You're going to wonder how it can possibly lose. And that's the mindset that everyone's going to have.

So you do want to, in my eyes, do things that look a little nasty and ugly today when you're building your team, just because it's going to be so easy. To play whoever the hell you want. I mean, it's basically going to be four or five studs in your lineup, then one cheap guy. It's all it's going to take to make everything work on the slate. So we'll talk through it and see what we can find. But especially on DK, I haven't really dug deep into FanDuel.

Pricing is just atrocious with the most expensive guy being Stafford at at $10,000. So that's definitely the one thing that definitely stands out to me. But, you know, we can find edges and opportunities based on knowing that going into the slate? Yeah, I hope Puka's out. I know other people would be like, oh, I'm fine with the chaos either way. I'll be ready if he is ruled in. But like Hoop said, we got to analyze it with he's out.

I hope he's out though, because people just love spending all their money in showdown. I think salaries are relevant tonight. So when I say I love slates, these are the types of slates I love. There's just a bunch going on. So I can't wait to get to it. Just to answer Justin from last night, Not much to explain. It was like the rotation at the top was like $4,000, $7,000, thirteen K.

And it just kept cycling between those three when the first prize is almost what was a quarter million last night. Like those are all pretty big chops. Like it was like forty to seventy ways that people were chopping it. So it's like just, you know, is what it is. So if you have a portfolio, I have no problem be like dedicate a portion of it. If you have one of those lineups in there, it's it happens.

I'm just saying it's like Most are playing to avoid that as much as possible. But if you have one fifty putting ten to fifteen towards that is fine. I think it's the complete opposite of what Sean is saying here. Like everybody wants. I mean. Actually, he says down here, I'd be surprised. The field loves playing. Yeah, well, good news is we have ownershipOwnershipOwnership is the percentage of lineups in a contest that include a given player. Projected ownership is an estimate made before lock; actual ownership is posted once the contest locks.Ownership isn't something to avoid; it's something to build around. The goal is understanding how the field is likely to build, then finding your edge relative to that.Full explanation ↗ projections. So if you just go check those, they'll tell you exactly what you need to know.

Like Colby Parkinson, Terrence Ferguson, everybody is just getting the ownership versus people trying to figure out whether it's going to be Mumpfield, X Smith, Tutu Atwell, guys like that. So you already know. And then title, I'll kick it over to you because we're going to get to captains in a second. I'll let you do your overview. But it also like... Again, okay, if it's Dart up top or Stafford up top, it feels like the quarterbacks are more popular than ever tonight.

But also, it's like you can round out the money very quickly with Dart, Stafford, Williams, and then one of Adams, Scott, or Nabers, right? It kind of just fills your line about it. And then there is a cheap guy that makes it all fit, whoever your cheap guy is. That's the good news that you kind of know it's Ferguson and Parkinson and guys like that. But what's your take on this slate?

Yeah, I guess I don't like it nearly as much as you guys because I just think with how loose the salary is, I can't really make a case to play anyone outside of Stafford, Kyron, Dart, Adams, Nabers at captain. Sure, if you want Likely or these other guys, but you're going to most Likely need the highest raw points player on the slate at captain with all the infinite value we have. And yeah, I mean, the field should know that.

And then once you play them, you have a lot of money to spend in the flex. So unless we're getting... Likely outscoring Nabers in a vacuum or like who else can I even look at? Blake Corum dominating and maybe outscoring Kyron or the kickers outscoring Likely and stuff. Like that's what I think we're going to need to do if you want to be up top without too many people. Maybe I'm wrong. I'm always open to listening. But, yeah, for me, it's going to be really concentrated.

Not only is Puka probably not going to play, but Jordan Whittington as well, which people aren't talking about. But he played forty one percent of snaps.

Last week so you're gonna know who's on the field for a lot of tight ends for the Rams and then yeah the Xavier Smith and mumfield uh will be in there a little bit at least we do have the quorum kyron stuff like two running backs to play a little bit on the Rams and stuff but yeah it's it's really going to be chalkyChalkChalk is the most popular, highly owned play on a slate. The term comes from sports betting, where the favorite is called the chalk.Don't label chalk good or bad. Ask whether each popular play deserves its ownership, then decide which chalk you'll eat and which you'll fade.Full explanation ↗ for me at captain Yeah, I think the former part of what you stated is definitely fair.

Like you said, the captain's going to be condensed. And because of the values, you're going to need the one that scores the most. I mean, honestly, if Puka was here, yeah, it adds one more captain. But even when he's not, it's still like you were – I don't think we were venturing too far out of like Dart, Scat, Nabers, maybe Likely.

And then the other side, Stafford, Williams, Adams, Puka – probably wouldn't even but puka in there just changes so much because of his pride like you can't jam everyone up top and like the Davante Adams own like I feel like the puka injury I don't know I feel like it's night and day for how the slate is yeah I like it better that's what I'm saying to each their own that's why I love showdown but to me it's like way better because even if okay now we know which captains to play you just stay to them all it's good and then on top of it it's like again most people are when you put um let's

Use scat as an example first of all barely anyone's even playing him up top and he's like a perfect leverageLeverageLeverage is the edge you gain by rostering a play the field is underweight on, compared with how often it ends up in winning lineups. When that play outscores the popular option most lineups chose instead, you gain ground on those lineups, though the rest of your roster still decides where you finish.Look for leverage on players connected to the chalk, like the other side of a popular game or a teammate who can steal the popular player's touches.Full explanation ↗ for both ways this game could go. But also it's like when you put them, it just auto fills itself out. So my point is I'm not going to win on the slate. It's getting chopped heavy anyway, but most people are going to spend all their money. So that's great. I'm definitely going to be willing to say Mooney over Nabers. Boom. Leave all the money.

Is it Likely? Not Isaiah Likely, but is that Likely? Probably not. But when it is, I've got five hundred grand up top that hopefully it's me and very few people chopping it with. So I like it from that perspective. I think a lot of people don't like it. Like Nades and I just talked about on the takedown breakdown is like when...

That happens like like people just say like I'm losing all my money I'm losing all my money it's like I I'm planning to lose a lot of money playing this way because it only takes one shot to get it right and yes you only have one season to do it within but that's what makes me excited about this slate I mean it might still be fine even if puka's in there because I just think this slate it's all how people are playing it so Anything else you want to add with that stuff?

If not, you can get into your captain thoughts, but I think title nailed it with the fact that you're going to need the top score in the sense of not the obvious way, but because of all the values, it's just going to push those builds up.

Think that's honestly the main point and I'm glad title kind of brought that up because it's the truth I mean soft pricing and we've got the big injury like you're gonna need the guy more I guess there's a random scenario where all these guys Again, I always talk about it like this, but it's like you need all the studs to do well, but not go off.

And then you just need a cheap captain, which I would say is probably like less than five percent that would play out on the slate where Stafford, Nabers, Kyron, Cam, Skattebo are all between like twenty. Or like, I don't know, eighteen to twenty five. And then you need a cheaper captain to fit all those guys in. So I'm under the assumption you're just going to need the highest scoring guy on the slate and captain.

So it just really eliminates a lot of guys for me on the slate. The quarterbacks, I think, are both in play. Definitely prefer Dart over Stafford.

You know, Stafford, I usually don't like having him in captain on showdown slates because it's usually either puka or davante that just go off and then you need one of those guys in captain over Stafford well puka's gone and there is a higher likelihood that Stafford is able to spread it out uh assuming puka's out there's just a lot of different guys that could get on the field you could throw four touchdowns to four different guys today and that wouldn't surprise me so definitely have to keep him in that conversation up top like three hundred yards four touchdowns I think is definitely in the realm of possibilities to four different wide receivers tonight.

So he's definitely a guy I want to consider up top, but I do prefer Dart just for the running upside. You look at some of the other guys, Kyron Williams, you know, fine option. I will say though, man, Blake Corum looked phenomenal. I mean, the Rams did not have much going for them in that Australia game. But I think the one thing that definitely stood out to me is Blake Corum looked really, really good.

So, I mean, over time, you know, maybe he digs into it, into the workload a little bit, but he's not saying Corum for captain, but I do think there's a little risk with Kyron Corum ran the ball ten times, fifty four yards, and he just he looked good. So I think over the course of the season, I mean, I think we're probably going to see more of him, assuming he continues on that trajectory. I'm fine with Kyron. Don't love him for that reason.

Think Skattebo's fine. Malik Nabers and then DeVonta Adams for sure. I mean, we have him showing, yeah, fourteen percent. Right. So he's like the fourth highest ownedOwnershipOwnership is the percentage of lineups in a contest that include a given player. Projected ownership is an estimate made before lock; actual ownership is posted once the contest locks.Ownership isn't something to avoid; it's something to build around. The goal is understanding how the field is likely to build, then finding your edge relative to that.Full explanation ↗. I want to be really overweight on Adams, assuming that that Pook is out. I mean, the red zone stuff, the stuff at the two-yard line, he has so much upside, I think, in this matchup, especially with Pook out. So he would probably be my favorite. But I'm probably just playing the main guys. It's kind of boring.

I mean, it's going to be Dart, Stafford, Adams, Nabers, Cam Scadaboo. And then I don't know, maybe if you want to include Likely, I mean, you know, not very Likely he has the performance that he had in week one. But I guess you never know. I mean, he looked very solid, but not a Likely outcome there. So I'll just kind of rank them. Devante Adams, Dart, Scadaboo, Nabers, Stafford, Kyron. So it's kind of how I'm looking at it.

But it's going to be, you know, those six guys, seven guys, six, six guys. Yeah, and that goes back to what Title was saying and what I was saying, just putting it both together. I don't think anybody's going to argue with any of these captains. It's all how you rank them, what your exposures get to them are. But the big ones, like you brought up one there, is another better one than I gave earlier that I actually think is more realistic.

How many people are going to build a forty $5,000 lineup again? Some will plenty will actually in the grand scheme of the like of all the players. But Williams decorum just like that. Boom. There's $5,000 left on the table. Got to have the right captain first. You're still picking up one in six that we just went through there. But then you got to leave $5,000 and then have that outcome happen. Maybe it doesn't. But I love stuff like that.

And then. What if it's Corum you do need instead of Williams, but it's also you need X Smith instead of Mumpfield or Ferguson, and everyone's got it with Ferguson. You got the one with Mumpfield or with X Smith. That could be a thing. Somebody did say... This is actually funny. We show this stuff off all the time. This guy is so bad, so down at two hundred bucks. He can't even make the birthday list. We always got the birthdays on there.

You cannot make the list, but it is X Smith's birthday. I looked it up. He wears a guardian cap. So if that sways your opinion of him, you've got to think about that, too. But he does. I will say the guardian caps like. I do appreciate it when I'm rooting on a guy and, like, sweating a guy that is wearing the Guardian cap because it's super easy to find him on the field. Like, Chris Alave.

Like, you know, if you had Chris Alave lineups, like, and the Saints are passing the ball, like, you know your guy right away. You don't have to see the number. You don't have to remember the color of their cleats. Like, he's very identifiable. Yeah. Doubs, man. He showed it off. He didn't have any drops this weekend. I'm having some good catches and he rocks it too. But Beaglebane, we don't call him scat. He calls himself scat and there's his chain.

But this is the replica for twelve ninety nine. I will say I'll keep the bet from last year. If I win $500,000, if I chop three ways or less tonight, I will buy the scat chain that says Tambo with twenty two on it and get the exact same chain and wear it on this show just because. But I won't buy the twelve ninety nine replica, but they do sell it on eBay now and very popular. The kids are big fans of scat.

He's a streamer now. Like he sold out. There was ten of these chains, all ten gone. So that tells you about scat, my friend. I'm sure on Amazon, I'm sure you can like customize one and get something pretty similar. Yeah. I forget who it was. I think it was Ocho Cinco telling the story before of how he's like, I just always wear fake jewelry. He's like, why would I waste my money on that shit?

He's like, if people think it's real, because it's me. And he's like, it's no different than if somebody buys a Rolex. It's always like, why would you even buy a real one? Because I mean, collectors should and do, but I'm saying they'll be like, if I'm wearing a Rolex, someone's like, oh, it's fake. No way, Tamo, you don't got a Rolex. But if somebody else has it, they're like, oh. It must be real, right? If a celebrity has it.

So Ocho Cinco's point was, why would I buy real jewelry if everyone thinks it's real anyway? He's like, I could just buy the fake shit and save my money. Not sure if that's true, but it was a story that was once told. Title, I'll go over to you, man. You talked about it already being pretty condensed. Up top, anything you want to add from any other rankings to them now, kind of like Hoop did for how you see that playing out?

Maybe any...

Roster constructions like if we're talking about like five ones two fours four two like anything that you see that could be unique with the the Shorter captain pool if you will yeah as far as the uh like roster construction I mean no one like one ram and five Giants is gonna is not gonna be played at all I think four two Rams and three three are gonna be the most popular but don't get it twisted five one Rams will be pretty popular on this slate as well With no Puka, like the pricing came out before the Puka news, so that means Davante Adams is way mispriced.

Parkinson, Ferguson, now Higbee gets a bump. No Whittington who got snaps. And Mumfield, Smith, when you just go to value, it's so much easier to go to the Rams side than the Giants side with how short they are. So it's going to be concentrated a lot more Rams teams, five, one, four, two, and three, three, than Giants. And I'm probably going to be relatively similar when it comes to that. I'm trying to look at my initial run.

Yeah, and I think the Rams win the game too. So once I put that into all of it, it's hard for me to get too many Giants teams. As far as my rankings, it's Davante Adams for me, number one. With him as the pure alpha. Favor to score a touchdown at minus-one-fifteen. I think it's a great spot. Jaxson Dart would be two. I think they're going to be trailing. He can get there four quarters to use his legs and find ways. So he's number two.

Kyron, number three. He's minus-two-hundred to score. Him and Davante Adams are the only ones favored to score a touchdown. And Corum looked good. I agree with Hoop. But I was kind of – like, thirty-nine snaps versus fourteen for Corum in the game one. That's pretty good if that split continues. That's favorable for Kyron.

What people expected coming into the year and then after that I think it's the Nabers and Stafford for me it's pretty close I I don't like scat very much plus one fifteen at to score and fifty one and a half on the ground without catching passes is not good so he'd really need a ceiling game or score twice and I don't think they win so I don't see that happening so maybe I just fully fadeFadeTo fade a player is to leave him out of your lineups on purpose, usually because you expect him to be popular or you think he is a poor play.Fade with a reason, not a feeling. If you can't say why a popular player will disappoint, you're probably just giving away points.Full explanation ↗ him hope people chase the Likely game maybe I fully fade him I think I'm planning on five captains right now.

And again, that's not a hot take. I think you need the highest scores. I think these five will be the highest scores and I can get overweight in all five if I do that. Yeah. One thing I will add, and I usually, you know, sometimes I'm, I've been the one like advocating for this all the time.

I actually don't love it as much tonight as I don't like the, the other reason I love to say is I don't like the quarterback captains nearly as much as the field does. And I get it. It's like, it's a product of there's only so many ways to go and spending the money. I've already talked about that part, but like, yes, I, Jaxson Dart with those legs, the way he's been working them.

We saw last time out, I think he was the winning captain at forty points or whatever it was or whatever he ended up having. Could that happen again? Yeah, much more Likely than Stafford to probably because Stafford doesn't even run it. But I also think we could see more condensed like you've got a guy like Nabers. I could see I could see two fours with Nabers up top.

Get Jaxson Dart in the flex and then run the other side and then still play roulette a little bit. But it's like, okay, let's say if that happens, it's going to be the comeback of most people will just have Stafford and Adams, but it could be, then you leave a bunch of money on the table and get two of the cheaper guys that aren't popular X Smith, something like whoever else you put down there. The other thing I like is Adams.

Or if Puka was in, we'd be into Puka. And then obviously if Puka was somehow in, not analyzing it that way, as we said, but if he was, that would bring the quarterback ownershipOwnershipOwnership is the percentage of lineups in a contest that include a given player. Projected ownership is an estimate made before lock; actual ownership is posted once the contest locks.Ownership isn't something to avoid; it's something to build around. The goal is understanding how the field is likely to build, then finding your edge relative to that.Full explanation ↗ down and change the slate a bit. But right now, because he's not in, I'm still interested in like Kyron. I'm still interested in Adams scat Likely, uh, you know, John Harbaugh might just go right back to this guy again.

So like, like title said, maybe he doesn't like hoop said, maybe he doesn't, but they kept doing it last game because if it's working, they do, they went out and got them for a reason. So Didn't see as much Theo, those guys out there. So I'll just say that is I'm more on the other quarterbacks for my rankings.

Equally, we'll say, but I'm just, I'm definitely underweight on the quarterbacks up top right now, even though they can spread it out a bunch. I just think the game could play out a little bit differently and then it makes you leave money on the table, which I love for tonight. Like I said, so hopefully it stays this way. Hoop, I'll go back to you, man. Anything else you want to add at quarterback in general and then talk us through as a flex perspective?

Yeah, nothing more to add. I'm with you. I guess I should say I don't love Stafford up there. You can make the case for him, I think, without Puka a little bit more, spreading it out, touchdowns to multiple pass catchers. I do like Dart, though, I think a little bit more than you. The rushing upside, I think, is pretty big. I like I think the Giants are going to be an improved team this year. I like them to battle in this game.

I don't know if I'm calling the full-on upset, but I guess I wouldn't be surprised if the Giants win this game. I think they're going to be an improved team this year. We'll see. I mean, they look good, obviously, beating Dallas in week one. But I was kind of high on them coming into the season, and I think they – battle in this game and potentially win it.

So I guess I'm going to be building my teams under that assumption, but not too much more to add in terms of talking quarterbacks. I mean, quarterbacks always have such a high floor on the showdown slate, so you can make the case for them and flex and get as much exposure as you want there, obviously. Yeah, our man Rio, again, shout out. Hopefully he caught the start of the show.

We all wish him a big congrats for yesterday's second place in the twenty dollar Milly Maker and could have been could have been first. It was right there to the end. Needed the Ferguson over the lamb touchdown at the end. But he says Stafford captain plus fade. Adams loves something like that. If you are going again, when I do put Stafford up top, that's what I'm saying. Like, again, it's bad.

Obviously, it's way more Likely, but that's baked into it that it's going to be Adams involved. But what if it is Stafford to Williams to Parkinson to X Smith? I keep using it on the other side. You just need the other guys. You could build like that and have a completely different lineup altogether. And he said he's playing some Parkinson captain up top tonight, too. That's that's pretty sneaky. And I might have to join you on that because, man, at $5,400 in the captain.

How do we even spend forty five grand at that point? I mean, I have to think about it. I know how you'll be building and I know I'd be building it, too. But, you know, you don't want to do that. Anybody hand building out there right now and just jam all the other dudes. But just think accordingly when you're building that out as what that looks like. But, you know, that would leave a bunch of money on the table as well.

So title, anything else you want to add a quarterback flex perspective? I'm going to play a lot of them. I think we need raw points and both make like dark could have three points at halftime and finish with twenty five. And if I do think the Rams win and maybe you're up two touchdowns like that only benefits start getting in there and garbage time and then Stafford.

Yeah, I like Stafford less than Dart, but I mean, there's only so many options with guys that are going to score. I don't like scat and there's only so many guys that can spend on sixteen from Stafford could be in the flex tonight. And when that's the case, it's hard to fade. It's also Like, the Rams really want this game. I mean, they just got absolutely embarrassed week one. Now you have a little longer week, but it's – I mean, they're the Super Bowl favorites.

You get Aaron Donald back, you lose Garrett, but they're going to show up at home, and I think they're going to put up points. Yeah. That's a key component that you mentioned too. Like I said, as, as much as I mentioned, not liking them as much up top. Great. I mean, these are the top flex plays for me because of that, because it's just, it fits with everything else I'm doing.

If it's Nabers or Adams up top, I Likely have them in the, in the flex, you know, you don't not always, but for the most part, yes. And then the same thing, if you're going with a Likely or whatever else I'm doing, Up top, it's going to be a lot of these quarterbacks in the flex for me. Title, I'll stay with you. We already talked a little bit about Williams versus Corum. You already talked a little bit.

I mean, the scat stuff makes sense from the props perspective. I know last week it was like, what was it? Tracy and Singletary. And then Tracy had that fumble early on. And then after that, it was no more Tracy to be found. And Singletary was getting mixed in some though. So that is of interest, I guess, as like another cheapie on the slate that you could go to. But what's your thoughts at the running back position?

I'm definitely going to play some Singletary. Yeah, I mean, Tracy, it was a preseason block that he missed that someone got blown up, and then they signed Najee Harris, and then he fumbles in the first quarter, and he was nowhere to be found. They're done with this dude. I can't blame them. And then they rolled out Devin Singletary, who can pass block a little bit, can catch the ball out of the backfield. Just a veteran they trust. And, yeah, he played a lot of snaps.

He played... Thirty six percent of snaps last week. And if they are trailing and they're in clear passing down situations, I think you will see or you could see a closer split with Singletary and SCAT, kind of like we saw last week. So the $3,000 Singletary, when people are not going to be going to value on that side. He actually is one of my favorite value plays as a way to get different at six point eight percent. We're showing in the flex.

Other than that, I already said I'll be under on scat. And then I do think Kyron and Corm are both good and I'm fine playing both of them in the same lineup. Again, if the Rams roll, both of them can find their way in the box and then get there in the same lineup. So, yeah, that's a Ram side for me. I like that call to putting those two together. Definitely a way you can get a little bit unique. Cause not, not everyone will do it.

Some will because they're both going to be owned on this slate. And like you said, only so many options, but just something to think about when you're out there putting your lineups together. I liked it the other day, underdog had posted out on Tracy jr. Said, um, illness and ball security won't practice Wednesday. So it is a problem when you come in the game and that's sort of what you do.

That's not going to go over well, especially with a new coach that's there too. So got to remember that, but not sure on, I don't, I haven't seen a nausea update in forever. I'm not sure if they actually are going to play him and not the other or what's going on with him. It's been like two weeks since any news even came out on this guy, but a hoop, I'll kick it over to you for running back.

I'll try and see if there's anything else that I can find on nausea, but anything that you were wanting to bring up here. Definitely prefer the ramp side to the giant side if you're picking some of these running backs. I do think there's a little additional with Puk out, additional potential receptions for these guys. We saw yesterday, we talked about on the show on the Ravens, like no Zay Flowers, and they were scheming plays for Derrick Henry to get those little receptions.

I think he had like three or four. I don't know what the exact number is, but that goes a long way. Unfortunately for the Ravens. I don't even know what that was in the second half. It seemed like they never even had the football. The time of possession must have been so lopsided in the second half. It was insane because Derrick Henry was cruising in the first half I was massively overweight on it.

I'm like, they just, I don't think they had the football like at all. It must've been a bunch of three and outs or something. Cause that was bad. But in, in regards to this game though, I think we could see a couple extra catches for Kyron and maybe even quorum. So for me, that pushes those guys up, you know, Skattebo fine with him.

I, I do agree with, you know, kind of with what title saying, and I think he's made some good points about him.

So I, probably bring him down a little bit even in the captains like he got no catches last week it was just eighteen carries uh Singletary was out there more than expected so I do think that is a downgrade for a guy like Skattebo and if you are building assuming they're playing from behind it could be even more Singletary so for me just when you factor in everything quorum Kyron Williams, Skadaboo, Singletary. That's kind of how I'll rank it.

But yeah, I don't mind taking like an underweight stance to Skadaboo. And then, like I said about Corum, he looked phenomenal, man. And ten carries, $4,600, one one trip to the box. And, you know, he's probably needed on optimal. What's the props on Corum right now? So Nades just threw in the rush receiving for Singletary twenty seven and a half. Rush receiving or just rush? You can just do rush. It's fine. I was just more curious as a whole.

Oh, excuse me. Forty seven and a half. I might need that. Sixty two and a half. Scats fifty two and a half. So he's five yards off a scat. Really? Fifty two for Skattebo? Yeah. Props hate him. I will say that's my point. I know the jokes, the chain jokes aside, like I like scatting the captain or not. I mean, it's got to be him or not. Like, it's kind of like, that's how you got to look at those situations.

So it doesn't seem like it's great because of all that stuff. But it's like, if it is going to be him, I think it's going to be him. But again, probably low odds of that. And that's why we have him at a low optimal rate over at Shippenation. And that's why you're not seeing as many people playing him.

But that, what I meant by that is like, when you're going, when you're doing something like that, it's almost better to commit to it in some spots and then just be away from it on the other because you just said you like quorum and Singletary somewhere else and does not even need him so it's almost like if you're gonna need him let's play for the outcome of you actually needing him if not let's just not go crazy with him so I think that's a horrible number I mean a ninety $9,400 running back fifty I mean I'm You've got to build for the under and a Giants win, in my opinion.

I'm tempted. Even if the over hits and Giants win, there's probably some receiver or something that's happening where it's hard as just a traditional powerhouse. If this is a competitive game, though, let's say it's a competitive game, the guy gets probably... Twenty carries, right? I bet you that's where you're thirteen and a half. That's going to be lower than fifteen. Not even close. Singletary played a ton.

Maybe, I don't know how much they want to just fully, after that injury last year and stuff, I don't know how much they just fully week two, week one, just want to give them twenty plus Because, yeah, like you said, they won that game. It was a close game. He got eighteen, eighteen carries, eighty one yards. Like if this is a close game, not script. He got that. Yeah, not script.

But but if this game is competitive, though, I mean, if it's within a touchdown, like he has to get over fifteen carries and that would be what? Three yards. Three yards a carry, a little over three. I don't know. That is a wild number. I would just bet you over on the carries, though, if you like that. Yeah, I would. Thirteen and a half. If you think he's getting at least fifteen, I would do that, too. I do agree with what Tambo's saying.

Like, if you're going to play him, I think he's better at captain and just hope he fully gets there. I'm just not really on the same page. But build it for, in my opinion, a Giants win and under, I think, is the best chance if Skadabo was that captain. But it's football. It's one game. Anything can happen. None of us can see the future. Yeah, that's what I said. All we can do, I always say this, it's how, not who.

That's why all we can do is build for what we think the future is going to hold. And again, you have a portfolio that you can do that in. So definitely think it's like a way to think about that that's different. I was going to add to, I got the nausea news, quote unquote nausea news, but it looks like Tracy could be sat and that they could activate Najee for this week just to have them.

But it's the focus is on scat, Singletary, and then going from there. So again, it'd be short yardage, stuff like that. If he got in, not saying to play that guy, but just noting it, that that could be the case. We'll wait for inactives later. It'd be a big slate for inactives because again, we'll have to wait and see if Nacua wants to show up and do it.

Funny enough, it's the guy that we're about to get to and segue to Nabers and the Giants and the receiving core there, plus the other side. But Nabers, the guy that showed up last week, And was like, yeah, I'll play. Why not? And just run it out there. And, you know, McConkie yesterday throws on the vest. We're good. Let's just go out there and see what happens. So these guys sometimes do want to do it.

It doesn't seem like Hookah's going to, but who knows? Guy can be a bit of a drama king, if you will, sometimes. He likes to be in the news and get his name out there. So maybe that's a way he can drag it on. But, Hoop, I'll go to you, man. There's a lot of receivers here. And that goes, I know we just had a big conversation about tons of different running backs. But it condensed for like who you'd expect it to be.

But a lot of guys after that on who it could be at wide receiver. Yeah. I mean, there's two, I'm not guaranteed, but two appealing guys, obviously Devante Adams looks phenomenal with puke out. It's going to be very, very popular, but man, he should, he should do very well in this game with the opportunity that he gets Nabers fine at $9,000. But after that, it's, A lot of question marks.

I mean, on the giant side fields at at $5,600 like he's priced where I mean, he's really got to do something.

And what he's $5,600 four targets last game um I struggle with that

One like dart captain teams sure you know get some exposureExposureExposure is the percentage of your lineups in a contest, or across a slate, that include a particular player, team or stack.Set exposure caps before you build, not after. Decide the most you're willing to have on any one player, then let your lineups fill in around those limits.Full explanation ↗ to him but man outside of that I just struggle to click that name and then Mooney at thirty eight definitely prefer just playing Mooney over fields uh you know only two targets oh two for two last game but he's $3,800 he doesn't need to do as much as the $5,600 guy so uh and then I I guess people might want to play Odell Beckham and I just uh yeah don't think so and then on the Ram side uh obviously this is where the value comes in with with puke out uh Xavier Smith you've been calling him X Smith two hundred bucks people love the two hundred dollar plays um got a decent

Projection on them ownershipOwnershipOwnership is the percentage of lineups in a contest that include a given player. Projected ownership is an estimate made before lock; actual ownership is posted once the contest locks.Ownership isn't something to avoid; it's something to build around. The goal is understanding how the field is likely to build, then finding your edge relative to that.Full explanation ↗ is showing where's this guy? Six percent we have now. That's going to come up. It's definitely going to come up once we get official news that Puka is indeed out. People love the two hundred dollar play. It's fine. Like if you're building a ton of lineups, include them. Mumfield. Don't you think he comes up more though?

Sorry to cut you off, but you're saying like, I think he comes up way more if Puka plays, but we're not expecting Puka to play because two hundred bucks you would need. You don't really need him right now. Yeah, but then the projection is going to totally drop. But I don't even know if Puka does play. You're probably not going to need him anyway, because you got one guy that's going to be over $10,000 on the entire slate.

Like you have one guy and then his projection is going to fall like a freaking rock. So right now... Puka's seventeen-something. Again, we're not even expecting to play, so it's kind of moot. I'm just noting it. If Puka was in, then I'd see people trying to jam Puka up top with everybody, and I would expect X Smith to still be up there because I'm assuming Whittington, and you'd still have him out. So it's like, okay, at least he makes sense. I think...

The only reason I'm saying is because I think like there's an opportunity with X Smith, which will segue when we get to tight end later is like, if everyone's on Parkinson or Ferguson or whatever, that's another spot that you could just leave the money. And you could see a guy like X Smith or Mumpfield just beat those guys straight up and leave all that money on the table.

For me personally, I think these guys are super thin plays regardless, even with Puka out, because they're going to run two tight end sets. They're going to run a lot of three tight end sets. They do that with Puka and DeVonta Adams healthy. What are they going to do with Puka out? Either way, I do think these guys are thin. I guess I'm hoping the ownership comes up.

Because I want to be probably under on these guys outside of like Matthews Stafford captain teams. Matthew Stafford captain teams is where I want to use these guys. Outside of that, I'm just not going to be excited to click on Smith or Mumfield or Tutu Atwell. So I'm hoping, I guess, the ownership does come up when we get the official word on Puka because I don't really love these guys all that much. It's going to be a lot of two tight end, three tight end players.

And those are going to be the wide receiver twos. When those guys are out there, they are going to be the de facto second option, third option for Stafford. They're used to those sets. Like I said, they do that when Puka is in the game. So now that he's out, they're just going to do more of that stuff. So I guess it's a long way of me saying I don't have a ton of interest in these Rams cheapies.

Hope ownership comes up and then I I'm underway down but it is a pretty in my eyes ugly position after even Davante Adams I mean I'm fine with Nabers but I don't love Nabers like I like Jackson dark because I think he's going to run the ball I think nades posted the prop in the chat it's like a fifty was it fifty something russian prop maybe for for dark I'm not sure oh wait no thirty so in the thirty still that's fine I like that number as well so uh not thrilled with this position outside of davante yeah you put the numbers up here that's why I said like again right now it's so much money available but yeah yeah perg Park Parkinson and Ferg Ferguson.

That's the, the two that have the bigger numbers on them. And then people know about these tight end sets that the Rams run and all that stuff. So I think that just becomes a little bit more common. I will say like even last night title, I'll kick over wide receiver to you, but like I'm pretty sure Thornton beat rice straight up. Didn't he? To be honest, I fell asleep right near the end of that game. I will say, though, Rice just might be stone dust.

He's probably the most overrated ADP player, and yeah, he's got to figure things out. But yeah, he might have. Thornton's a beast. I don't know for sure. He was close. Anyway, it was, and it could have been a lot more, but it's like, again, just for people tonight, like it's like, again, this is a spot where you would expect a lot of things, but things can flip up and switch a little bit.

So it makes it at least somewhat intriguing, but we know Nabers, we know Adams. I'm curious your takes on some of the, the, the Rams backups and then. Not backups, but like the two threes and the guys that are playing in as backups. And then also Malachi Fields of dreams. If you, if you build with him, points will come. I don't know.

Like who said four targets are going to have to wait and see, but maybe they try and get him involved a little bit this week, deep targets, things like that. Mooney. I'm not sure what we're, what we're doing here on either side besides Nabers and Adams. What do you got? I don't even know if the coaches know what they're doing. I don't think you can get a worse receiving room.

But with all that being said, if you're going to jam all the chalkChalkChalk is the most popular, highly owned play on a slate. The term comes from sports betting, where the favorite is called the chalk.Don't label chalk good or bad. Ask whether each popular play deserves its ownership, then decide which chalk you'll eat and which you'll fade.Full explanation ↗, like captains and stuff, this is where your Nabers, forty seven percent, Devante, forty five percent.

And we don't have one other receiver over ten percent in the flex it's absolutely crazy but it goes to what hoop's saying like these guys are the fourth fifth options on the Rams it's Parkinson it's Ferguson it's the running backs it's davante all of these other randoms are the fifth option and then you're going to the Giants they rotated last week fields Mooney Nabers barrios and obj

And fields I think probably is going to have one of his better games he ran seventy two or seventy two percent of snaps because Nabers only had fifty two percent because they were working them in so now when Nabers is going to go up in snaps fields is going to come back a little bit and the props indicate all of that twenty five and a half for fields nineteen and a half for Mooney fourteen and a half month field thirteen and a half Xavier Smith They're all terrible.

Parkinson, Ferguson, Likely. After Nabers and Davante Adams, those are the next three highest receiving props. So it really just shows I think you need to get lucky. And if I need to get lucky, to be honest, I think it's Mayfield and Xavier Smith have the best chance of just catching a sixty yard, fifty yard bomb or something from Stafford. So I think they're my next favorites. And they probably fit best in five one builds. Like I'm worried.

I'd prefer Mooney to field just because of the savings and ability to leave money.

Obj and barrios like they played but they only played what was it's twelve snaps eleven snaps this position is absolutely terrible I think you really are only playing it as a way to get different and chalk your teams and it's cheap and yeah I prefer mumfield Xavier Smith tutu didn't see get one snap last week Whittington had forty one percent of snaps he's out and now obviously poop is out so yeah I guess the Rams by by default Yeah, the Mooney one could be interesting.

We've seen him have opportunities back when it was with Atlanta where he would move around a little bit with London and Pitts and Bijan and all those guys out there, and he would just dance around and end up being open somehow. I guess that's possible, but we just haven't seen it. We haven't had a chance to see it yet, I guess, is kind of the point too.

So at least, like you said, when you're sort of playing roulette at wide receiver, that's a way, but I liked your Mumfield and Smith calls. I think that's the ones that are more Likely to be where I fit them in. The biggest thing for me, and then I'll segue it to tight end for you, Hoop, is that what I said earlier, and we'll go to tight end, but it's no doubt that it's going to be Ferguson. People love Parkinson.

People are getting to Likely coming off the big game. All of those are opportunities just to leave that money on the table and play these guys. It's just not going to feel great, but you're leaving props that are mostly unknown. They know just as much or just as little as we know, we should say for these fourteen and a half, sixteen. They're just throwing it out there and you could go and bet on it if you want and make your picks.

Based off of that and get your, your betting lines in and do that. But I think for the most part, like, yeah, you would expect Parkinson and Ferguson to have more yards than Mumfield and Smith, but they're one play away from just dummying either of those guys. So it's like, that's how I'm looking at it for lineups tonight. Well, it takes some luck to get there, but it could lead in your favor from the variance factor, but tight or a hoop.

I'll go to you at tight end, both sides. Yeah, I mean, you look at the top three guys and I guess there's reasons to like in terms of projections, there's reasons to like them and there's reasons to not like them all that much. You know, Likely just seems like such a chase play after the big week one performance. Like he absolutely went off, nuked the slate. You needed him. $7,400 has a big price tag.

But then it's like you go back and we just talked about the wide receiver position and we kind of hate all those guys. Is he the number two on the Giants? Like it's very possible. So, you know, the ownershipOwnershipOwnership is the percentage of lineups in a contest that include a given player. Projected ownership is an estimate made before lock; actual ownership is posted once the contest locks.Ownership isn't something to avoid; it's something to build around. The goal is understanding how the field is likely to build, then finding your edge relative to that.Full explanation ↗ and the chasey nature of it feels kind of gross. But again, if you're building a bunch of teams and you're playing Jaxson Dart up top, like you just have to include them by default. And then you got Parkinson, you got Ferguson. It's no secret.

Like when we just talked about the wide receivers, like if you take everything out of the equation, it's like, who do you feel the most comfortable with? After DeVonta Adams. It's going to be these two. It's going to be Parkinson. It's going to be Ferguson, but the field knows that and the ownership is following behind those guys. But it's almost like you just, you got to play it out of necessity.

Again, especially if you're building a bunch of teams, if you're hand-building three teams, you probably don't have to do this little thing and you can avoid some of this ownership that's following. But if you're building a bunch and you're building Matthews Stafford captain teams, like you have to include Parkinson in Ferguson. So it's kind of by necessity, I guess. It doesn't feel great, though. I'll say that much. The one that is interesting to me, though, is Tyler Higbee at $2,800.

Not much ownership. I think a lot of people will just take that bigger price break with those wide receivers that we talked about over Tyler Higbee. But Higbee had a role on this team. Prior to Puka being out, he was on the field, had a couple catches last week, has the connection with Matthews Stafford. I think he is a very interesting play at $2,800 five percent ownership.

I think he's the one when you look at these pass catchers that kind of that definitely stands out to me the most. There's no way the ownership gets up there. It's going to stay in check. Already had a role prior to Puka being out. And now has the opportunity, I think, to potentially pick up some additional targets. So I think he's a fine option. I mean, you've got a lot of guys here that are projecting. Theo Johnson, Davis Allen.

Davis Allen had, I remember, at least one catch. That could be the end of it last week. I can't remember. Let me see. Two point three. One catch for thirteen yards. If you want to include him in Stafford captain teams, it's fine. But yeah, I mean, you know, Likely Parkinson Ferguson. There's pros and cons of those guys. Higbee, though, is one that stands out to me.

Yeah, I think Hoop said it best when he's like, he's hoping that they get up there because he wants to fade it anyway. So that's what he's hoping for. But Franks Gore is a product of, who do we got? Josh Allen, Amon Ross, St. Brown, Jameer Gibbs, all on the same slate. That's how you get a four hundred dollar guy up there when people want to jam four guys that cost that much. Currently, we don't have anyone that costs over $15,000 in captain.

And that's Matt Stafford, who I think like, you know, Hoop said it. Title said it. I agree with both. You got... Jaxson Dart running for what? Fifty, sixty yards last week. Like, I'm not saying that's going to happen again, but you feel much better putting him up top, being able to do it that way. And if you're going the other way, it's probably more people putting Adams or Stafford with Adams, that type of thing.

So you're just not going to need that as it stands right now. If you like him, play him. You think he's getting a touchdown for his birthday present? By all means, get him in there at two hundred bucks.

But otherwise, it's like Hoops said, maybe you hope he gets a pushed up and then you're not on him there's so many other options I love the Higbee call that you just had at tight end I think uh nades posted it but like Theo Johnson was involved last week a lot of us played Theo Johnson last week only to get crushed by Likely almost the opposite effect of what we usually see where it's like oh that's the the backup guy but it's it's the starter really it's the main guy Likely that it just went off but theo and um Higbee are both squeezed right between

Parkinson and Ferguson who are way more popular on that side than obviously Likely popular but he's also $7,400 it's a big difference in that flex position so title anything you want to add there on these uh these titles really every position tonight we've been able to make the case for two to three guys and not just beyond the ones that we know of like who it could be that's the the unique part about this slate Yeah, it's definitely a unique one.

I mean, I feel like I've never been more concentrated in my life on a showdown game. Again, the more lineups you play, definitely the more you should diversify. I agree with everything Hoop said. I'm Ferguson number one, then Parkinson, but I like them both tons. But Higbee is the one that's standing out because... Yeah, he's showing really low ownership. Then just looking at the props, comparing him to Mumfield and Mooney and all this, Higbee's thirteen and a half, which is right around him.

Again, showing way less ownership. And Higbee's more Likely to score a touchdown than Mumfield, Malachi Fields, Xavier Smith, Mooney, Theo Johnson, all of those guys. And a lot of them will be higher owned. So he only played... Twenty percent of snaps last week, but maybe that comes up a bit with with no puka and not wanting to put Xavier Smith and Mumfield out there a bunch. So, yeah, I think Higbee at low ownership is interesting.

Theo was not one that I was on, but two percent when I really don't like many Giants. Maybe you just play five Rams all more expensive and he's your punt. Yeah, Nades was right. He was involved quite a bit. Forty four percent of snaps, forty six percent of snaps, eight and a half receiving prop. Is it good? No. But again, none of these wide receivers are good. Twenty five and a half for fields.

And then everyone else is below that when you're not including Nabers and Likely so. And then, yeah, for Likely, to me, it just feels like a massive chase. Could be wrong. I think he's an athletic guy. He's the second option behind Nabers, but now I think Nabers snaps will go up more. And I'm just on the Rams today, so it's harder. With that being said, I'm on the Rams. I think they're going to trail, so they'll be throwing a lot more.

So maybe, but he's $7,400. And I think he just naturally knowing what he did last week, people, his ownership will get boosted just for that reason alone, which I don't love to chase that either. Yeah. Take us right into kickers and D's. One thing that definitely looks, um, accurate tonight is like, it looks like the kickers will be pushed up. Somebody mentioned kickers in captain earlier.

And the main, the one main reason is because the Giants D just, I mean, probably won't get any ownershipOwnershipOwnership is the percentage of lineups in a contest that include a given player. Projected ownership is an estimate made before lock; actual ownership is posted once the contest locks.Ownership isn't something to avoid; it's something to build around. The goal is understanding how the field is likely to build, then finding your edge relative to that.Full explanation ↗ really, because most people aren't on anything related to the Giants D being involved and they're playing so many Rams that how could they ever get to that anyway? But just give me your thoughts as you've got them at kicker and D tonight. Yeah, and it sounds – everything I've said and then what I'm going to say makes no sense, but that's showdown.

Giants is probably my favorite of all four of them. They're six percent owned, and one random play can score it nine, eight points, and that's enough. So I need to get different when I'm chalkyChalkChalk is the most popular, highly owned play on a slate. The term comes from sports betting, where the favorite is called the chalk.Don't label chalk good or bad. Ask whether each popular play deserves its ownership, then decide which chalk you'll eat and which you'll fade.Full explanation ↗ elsewhere. They're six percent, and they have forty-eight minutes to get anything. So, yeah, that's the only reason there. But otherwise, I'll probably be under on – Probably almost all of them, like any Nevis team, I'll go to Ferguson or Parkinson.

And again, that's not going to take out a ton of dupes, but at least you're leaving $2,000 or whatever it is that way. So, and even though I didn't love Mooney or the Mumpfield and Smith, plug in Nevis and go to Mumpfield and leave $4,000 right there. So like you said, from the top, that's what your plan is. I think in flex. My plan will be dropping one V one pivots to leave chunks of money as a way to get different, but that's all.

Yeah. We're playing a little bit of our own variance game. Cause like I said, it's, it's not ideal that that's what you're spinning the wheel on tonight, but if it's for the prize at the top, that's kind of what we're looking at. Right. Versus if, you know, you get the, let's say, I don't know, who's the most popular of the cheap captains. Like, is it maybe Likely? Probably one of the tight ends. I'd say.

Yeah, I guess like whatever one just jams everybody in. I'm not sure. I guess it would actually probably be like if Dart or Stafford is up top or Adams, one of those three, and then Ferguson or Parkins, whoever ends up more popular. You get that lineup that comes along where everybody just gets there. I mean, $500,000 is going to turn into five hundred bucks quickly. Likely Likely is going to be more popular, I think, up top than. A lot of projections are showing.

I just want to do a little. Let's do a little Sample lineup with Likely. Yeah, so it's like you get Likely up there and you can get probably four studs and then one punt. I'm assuming so you Likely you probably want dark. Let's just say you put in. So you got Likely dart Devante Kyron Williams. And let's just say we plug in Xavier Smith just for shits and giggles and see if we can get another stud in there. Yeah. Then you get Stafford as well.

So like Likely up top, you get four studs and one punt. So like, I do think people are going to find that pretty appealing. It's Likely up top, a full punt, and then four other studs to go along with Likely. And if you're playing Likely up top, you want dark. So I do think Likely could get bumped up a little bit. I mean, we're showing, let's see, we got them right around three and a half. Could get, I don't know, maybe six or something.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was double that, six, seven range. Yeah, six, seven. Maybe it does. We'll have to wait and see. But, like, yeah, the title you answered, I was going to ask that question. Like, we've just seen a lot of this stuff. But, like, from a game perspective, ask the Survivor folks how it's going out there with teams that can win. And if you really think it's just like an onslaught of all these big wins. Philly almost lost to Tennessee yesterday.

Like, you know, the Ravens lost to the Saints at home. There's a bunch of these teams that are, you know, getting crushed right now. And so anything can happen, especially earlier in the season.

Maybe the Giants are for real leo what we saw last week they come out and do it all again we'll see but uh or maybe the Rams are worse than we thought they were and knowing when they're without miles garrett and puka and they don't play up to it like there's just so many ways to go about it and that's why this is a like I said that's why I like this showdown slate and I hope it's a good real life game too I think I think it's going to be a decent one but uh hoop did

You have anything to add on the kickers and d's just with some of those ownership percentages and whatnot No, I mean, you guys know I'm always going to be higher on the kickers than just about anyone. The price point is just flawed for the showdown format. So, yeah, good with the kickers and whatever I get at defense, I get at defense. All right. Anything from you on the FanDuel side that you're noticing? I guess that's one to look at today with the way pricing sets up.

Ferguson is still pretty cheap over there. Likely at $11,000 one. Oh, no, sorry. I'm looking at the wrong thing. He's eighty two. I will say like Skattebo is a little cheaper on FanDuel. He's $8,800. And the game definitely fits FanDuel scoring much better. You know, if the Giants are competitive or winning and he does hit. Carries and gets a hundred yards and a touchdown. I think he makes a lot more sense over on FanDuel than he does on DK.

You're getting the price break and you're also getting the format, the scoring format fits his game much better. It is pretty similar because you go down and it's all the same cheap guys. Higbee's $5,000 though. That's one thing. I like Higbee a lot on DK where he's really cheap. Higbee for some reason has How is he more than Parkinson and Ferguson? Yeah, so stupid. That is so dumb just looking at this. So, like...

Why is Devin Singletary seven point $2,000 right by Blake Corum, who's seven? Like if it was even worse today, everyone's going to play the cheap tight ends on the Rams or if you play any punt, that's not a Ram. Like there, there you go. You can get different that way, but Singletary almost scats price over there. It's crazy. What are they doing? That's nuts. Are they just picking like a two, two at all? Didn't play a snap.

Let's make them five, four above every single tight end. Let's play like, Oh, I don't know. Yeah, so those Rams tight ends are going to be even more popular on FanDuel besides Higbee, who is the most expensive of all of them. So pretty similar after those conversations, though. Although like Adams is $16,200 versus $19,500 and $18,300 for those other guys, a pretty similar ratio.

But it's like, you know, on FanDuel, people just don't like playing or typically don't like playing wide receivers in the MVP. It's almost always going to be running backs or quarterbacks. So, you know, something to think about over there for sure. Title, do you have any other final thoughts you want to talk about before we get out of here? No, I hope it's a good real-life game like you said as well.

I mean, I think I played a hundred and fifty in the night and I think I might have cast one team, maybe two. I think it was a record for me, which also part of the reason I went to bed. So it can't go worse than last night. So hopefully some bubbles are to the right to keep me awake for a sweat.

Yeah, a last question I saw here from Sean says, going back to captain real fast, is it possible Adams touches over twenty percent captain ownershipOwnershipOwnership is the percentage of lineups in a contest that include a given player. Projected ownership is an estimate made before lock; actual ownership is posted once the contest locks.Ownership isn't something to avoid; it's something to build around. The goal is understanding how the field is likely to build, then finding your edge relative to that.Full explanation ↗ if Puka is out? Everything already assumes he's out. I will say there is the main possibility, I think, is just because maybe Stafford comes down a little. I think there is a thought where people know that at least Dart uses his legs and runs and they don't have all the options they want to pair.

And also with Stafford, that is a captain and also Stafford. Once you put Adams in, Yes, you can fill it out with other ways, but like a lot of people aren't going to want to go like what Rio said earlier with Stafford and the captain and then three guys not named Adams. Well, then too much money is left over. Let me wiggle this around a little bit and see what it does.

And then they'll move it around and get Adams up top, get Stafford and then be able to go to all these other expensive guys. So it's just the way people view it is differently. And that could be a case. I don't know if he gets over twenty, but you could see the flip, the flippening of Stafford and Adams for sure, I think. Hoop, final thoughts from you?

No, let's finish out week two on a strong note, and we'll get to work on week three shortly after. Yeah, it's going to be a good one, guys. Make sure if you're a member to get in the Discord. The Ship It Games contest link will go out tomorrow. If you're not a member at Ship It Nation yet, just go to the site, shipitnation.com. Click the Ship It Games logo at the top.

Find out how you can get in the games and play for up to $45,000, currently $45,000 plus in cash and prizes. So check that out for title, for hoop, for myself, toe, tag and tambo. Good luck in your contest tonight. Let's ship it.