NFL Week 4 – Sunday Shippers | Main Slate | DraftKings & FanDuel DFS Picks, Plays and Process

Hoop I'll kick it to you first um twelve games a few in the afternoon late so opportunities but give us your grand scheme overview yeah still have a lot of games um you know I feel like this slate is is pretty similar to you know last week and and it seems like a lot of these slates have been relatively similar when you start kind of going through and looking at the games looking at the positions uh you know just kind of focusing in on the positions out of the gate quarterback Very spread out, as always, especially when you have more games.

We've got the twelve games today, so it's going to definitely be spread out. The only guy I'm seeing with over ten percent 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 Trevor Lawrence. But still, that's like.

Eleven twelve percent so really nothing and if you like the game you like the spot which we'll talk to because it is probably the most important we'll talk about it because it's probably the most important game on the slate because there is a lot of ownership uh in that game but there's ways to play it uh and get a little bit different I think so we'll talk about that But any other quarterback after him, like in terms of just looking at ownership, you know, not much at all.

So easy to get overweight. Running back position seems like we've had this same situation for quite a few weeks here where we have some studs at the top. We got CMC. We got Derek Henry. And I think we can definitely now put.

Kenneth walker in that category of studs so we have the studs and then specifically talking about drafting sprites and there's a bunch of guys are in that $6,000 range that are very viable plays on the slate there are some guys I think that that get a little overlooked today like you know James Cook maybe is a guy that I think the ownership will you know come down on uh not we're showing like Oh, we're showing like eleven percent.

I think he's going to end up being sub ten. So there's going to be situations like that that we can talk about throughout the show. But you have the studs, you have the $6,000-ish sort of guys, and there's a lot of them wide receiver position. Again, have the studs at the top if you want them. JSN is now, I guess this is an interesting dynamic where JSN is now like in a tier almost of his own, $9,100.

The next most expensive guy is Ja'Marr Chase. I'd guess JSN is probably right around ten percent. And it's kind of where he's been all season, every slate, like right around ten percent owned. So if you want to make a play on JSN, pretty easy to do so. And you don't have to worry about ownership. You can get way over if you want.

And be similar situation today where it's probably going to be right yeah right around that ten percent um and you know people just don't want to I guess play him at a high level and and now I guess there's another reason not to because of the price type but he's been nuking every single slate I mean just an absolute stud uh we do have some value uh at the slate with um DeVonta Smith out. Wicks will be pretty popular. No. Justin Jefferson.

Jordan Addison will be pretty popular. The Packers are down a few guys. I think Matthews Golden, our guy Nades, loves Matthews Golden. We have to bring that up every single time. He was beating that drum all last year. But the crazy part is Nades needed to follow up because last year he was talking about this dude every slate, and he sucked all season. Now he's producing, and Nades is quiet about Matthews Golden. So he's got to bring it up a little bit.

Uh but uh a lot of guys uh value I'd say sort of guys Parker Washington is gonna get some ownership like t Higgins is gonna be pretty popular uh at the position so a lot of guys at wide receiver like always and then really good tight end slate I think I think tight end is probably the most important position on the slate, like what you do at tight end, because you have the studs. You have the studs that you want. We got Bowers.

We got McBride. We got Kittle. You can even, I'd say, throw into that category. Mike Evans expected to play, but I don't know what we I don't think is going to be full go. But even if he does place it, I don't know. The wording on it was a little weird, so maybe not expected. We can kind of touch on that when we get there. But we have the studs and then you have value as well at tight end.

Um so tight end to me is like what you do at tight end I think is is pretty damn important obviously because um you know on drafting specifically a lot of people like saving the money you save the money at tight end you can get your ass kicked today because you got powers you got McBride you got Kittle I think all three of those could absolutely nuke the slate so it is a very interesting dynamic at that position specifically Yeah, the Chavis, I'm a double tight end as well.

Obviously, always in play with the way they set it up right now. And you can see that. And there's just so many options. And even the guys that you mentioned, like Kittle, is still only $5,100. He didn't get a big boost. Bowers, $6,900 people. It's a lot, but that's wide receiver one at tight end one pricing. So you're getting a discount just naturally got McBride. There's still just a ton of options.

And then there's some injury spots as well. The back and forth of the Jags Bengals game, but title one. Kick it over to you and get your thoughts on the slate and then we'll get into the first game Yeah, who broke it down really well? I was going to mention the tight end position. I do think it's more viable to spend upSpending UpSpending up means choosing a higher-priced player over a cheaper alternative, using more of your lineup's salary budget at that spot. You may also hear it called paying up.Build a version with your preferred expensive player and another without. Before choosing, check whether either version relies on a cheap player whose expected role still depends on unresolved injury news.Full explanation ↗ than most weeks. I do think the value, like it's really concentrated around TJ Hawkins.

Obviously projections are going to like it without Justin Jefferson, a lot of the Vikings, but FanDuel a little closer. I actually do think spending up at tight end is very viable, even in the cash streets. I mean, a big decision over there. I mean, Trey McBride, Brock Bowers, we saw Bowers first game back. Like, yeah, that onesie position can definitely separate I do think we'll see more three running backs than maybe we've seen all year.

Just a lot of strong ones in the low $6,000 high five Ks, no Gibbs on the slate, no Bijan on the slate, but McCaffrey in a solid spot too. And then Kenneth Walker, Derek Henry, James Cook. I do think the opportunity costs at running back when you don't play three is pretty high, but is way is a way to get different on a chalkier slate. Wide receiver is still kind of concentrating. I mean, they refused to move up Parker Washington price.

Addison without Jefferson. Wicks, like we talked about, without DeVonta Smith. But I still think that's a position you can get different. If I had to fade any chalk at any position, it's almost always wide receiver nowadays. There's just so many options and guys at low ownership that can explode. So, yeah, I think it's a good twelve gamer. I mean, these slates are about to start shrinking pretty soon here with the bye weeks coming up.

Yeah, it's also, I think, probably the best slate so far this season from a game theory perspective. There's just a lot of places you can go, and then there's a lot of moves that you can make that I always joke about. I call it the penthouse process. You're thinking different levels to this stuff. This is a good slate for that, and we'll get right into it. So, Title, I'm going to start with you.

We've got the Patriots at the Bills who brought it up earlier James Cook and then you brought up running back as a whole and like there's so many options just don't think James Cook can get clicked enough but also as much as people might like Josh Allen and we talk about this every week where you know there's opportunity this week uh no c gonzalez over c gonzalez I said that weird but over on the patriot side so DJ Moore guys like that you know could be in the mix there but what's your thoughts on the Bills at home versus the Patriots Yeah, really just a one-sided interest.

I mean, the Bills are implied for twenty nine points the most on the slate. It's just they don't expect really the Patriots to keep up. And how can you with how Drake May has played so far this year? So really no interest on any single Patriots like a Matt Collins at $4,000. I guess if you want to get contrarianContrarianA contrarian play or lineup is one built around choices most of the field will not make, such as low-owned players, unpopular teams or an unusual salary structure.Pick one or two contrarian spots per lineup and ground each in a real reason. The rest of the roster can look like the field.Full explanation ↗ in that range, fine. That's mainly in Josh Allen stacks. I think when playing Josh Allen, definitely you can always play Josh.

He's expensive. But yeah, no Christian Gonzalez is huge. For this Patriots team. So without him, Josh can do whatever he wants. DJ Moore, Dalton Kincaid probably would just stack it, like skinny stack it, because you're already spending a good amount of money. And when Josh fully gets there, you expect him to get one or two on the ground. So I don't love the double stacks. Kincaid at tight end, DJ Moore, both showing single digit 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 if you're not doing that, yeah, I think James Cook in a very solid spot at $7,400. The problem is he could score twenty three and which is definitely a solid game and still be nowhere near the winner. So it's hard to love, love anything in this game because of their pricing, but at ownership, I'm definitely interested in some of these Bills.

And I mean, you could play this bill stack every single week and you'll probably come out profitable long-term because at this ownership, they, they can explode. Yeah. Who, what do you think on this one here? Any Alan love James Cook, anything on the Patriots side at all? Yeah, not really too much more to add. I pretty much agree with what, what title said. I mean, you know, Josh Allen, low ownership. Yeah. I mean, I don't want to double stack it.

I'd probably play him with, you know, DJ more. If you want Kincaid, if you want nothing, nothing on the Patriots side, it's one of those situations. I get it. Like someone put in the chat, you know, Drake may will be one percent. Yeah, totally fine. And like, just, I still don't want to play Drake. May this team has looked like absolute dog shit.

And, you know, it clearly the, the, easy schedule they had last year was you can attribute that to a lot of the success they had because this team looks horrible maybe they turn around I mean I don't know it's only week four but I gotta see something before I click any of these names so nothing on the patriot side and then James Cook for sure gonna have him in the player pool uh but he's got to do something big I mean, there's probably a very high scoring slate at the running back position.

I think it would be, and it usually is. I mean, these guys are a lot of so many studs in the NFL at the running back position. So he's got to put up something big and at, at the low ownership, I think it's, it's lower. You know, we had, we're showing, you know, I think it could come down a little bit. I think it could be even like a seven or eight percent.

I wouldn't be surprised if that's James Cook ownership and, at that number he's a good place I'll have him in the player pool yeah I like more one-offsOne-OffIn NFL DFS, a one-off is a player you select outside your stacks, commonly a running back or a receiver without his quarterback. An opposing receiver intentionally paired with your stack instead serves as a bring-back.Before adding a one-off, compare him with an affordable teammate of your existing stack. Decide whether his individual upside is worth passing up that extra scoring connection.Full explanation ↗ in this game like you said I think James Cook a really good play $7,400 just the way he fits the builds um you know he's a bit more than when we get to all the guys later like scat and love and jones senior and all those things and we know James Cook can bust out a hundred fifty yards and two touchdowns very capable good spot big team total

Favorites at home Patriots have looked bad do what you got to do but I I think that's an opportunity there DJ Moore I think it's fine if you want to connect the receiver to a really good quarterback but not have to go all the way with the stack I think at $5,700 he can still pay off and then Kincaid is someone that people wanted you know a bunch this season so far and now not really buddy like not really anyone wants him at $5,300 so uh he's right there as well so I think any of those guys if you were going to a patriot probably like Doubs, but maybe just Matt Collins to speed it up.

But in portfolios, you'll have stacks of Allen, but I'm not trying to figure it out too much in this one. Go to you on this one who big game, biggest game of the slate. Probably this is what everybody wants to talk about. So we'll get it started. So Bengals at home versus the Jags. And you said it, there's a ton of different ways.

So I'll say this, the, you know, over at Chippin nation, we've got the stone and we label the games and people kept saying, Oh, there's never really been any 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 ↗ games yet this year. So far it's still spread out and all these games, it's been a long time. It's been a long time. It's been a long time. It's been a long time. It's been a long time. It's been a long time. It's been a long time. It's been a long time.

It's been a long time. It's been a long time. This is a chalky game. It's the first one we got all season. Still ways to get different. Hoop will go into it here. But, you know, Chase Brown, T. Higgins, Parker Washington, Trevor Lawrence is even separating a little bit at the quarterback position. It still keeps them, you know, ten to fifteen range versus anything crazy. But this is the spot, Hoop. So take us through how you're thinking about this game.

Yeah, I mean, the most important part about this game is going to be a lot of the pieces are going to be relatively highly owned and there's no doubt about it. No one like Parker Washington, they won't bring the price up. I believe title is one that brought that up, but it's just, he's underpriced. If you go to any site and kind of sort the wide receiver position by value, he's going to be somewhere at the top. So, you know, this is one of those games.

If you like it, like to me, don't just say, Oh, I'm not playing it because of 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 ↗. Like, play it in a different way than what the field is playing it. If you go into this game and you're hand building a team and you say, I'm playing Trevor Lawrence, I'm playing Parker Washington, And I'm going to run it back with with Chase Brown. Just don't do that. Like, that's what everyone's doing. Trevor Lawrence, Parker Washington and run it back with with Ja'Marr Chase.

Like, that's what everyone's doing. So don't do it. So the important part to me in this game is not necessarily to argue whether or not these are good plays or not, because individually, a lot of these guys are really good plays. It's how can you play this game different than the field? At the quarterback position, play Burrow over Trevor Lawrence. A lot of people are just going to be playing Trevor Lawrence. Play Burrow.

Play Tootin in any sort of way, like a one-offOne-OffIn NFL DFS, a one-off is a player you select outside your stacks, commonly a running back or a receiver without his quarterback. An opposing receiver intentionally paired with your stack instead serves as a bring-back.Before adding a one-off, compare him with an affordable teammate of your existing stack. Decide whether his individual upside is worth passing up that extra scoring connection.Full explanation ↗ situation or include him in a game stackGame StackIn the NFL, a game stack usually combines a quarterback, one or two of his pass catchers and one or more players from the opposing offense.Target games where the spread is close as well as the total high. A high total with a lopsided spread can turn into a blowout where only one side keeps scoring.Full explanation ↗ because a lot of people are going to be playing Chase Brown. Take a look at some of these Jaguars secondary receivers. Not a very comfortable situation, but Jacobs Myers still had What was it like eight targets? I believe last week. Yeah, he had eight targets in that game. So he's still a part of this offense. A lot of people are just looking at Parker Washington in Park.

Washington's definitely wide receiver one. But take a look at Jacobs Myers. The Brian Thomas stuff was probably a little bit more difficult. He's been. Complete ass uh let's see yeah like he's I'd draw the line probably brian brian Thomas but uh tight end position we know where the ownership's going at at tight end people are going to pay upSpending UpSpending up means choosing a higher-priced player over a cheaper alternative, using more of your lineup's salary budget at that spot. You may also hear it called paying up.Build a version with your preferred expensive player and another without. Before choosing, check whether either version relies on a cheap player whose expected role still depends on unresolved injury news.Full explanation ↗ people are going to look to hawkinson people are going to look to To Kittle, Bretton Strange at $3,200, like a perfect pivot off of T.J.

Hawkinson, who's going to be probably the go to cheap option on the Bengals side. You know, a little bit more difficult to identify the lower owned options because Ja'Marr Chase is going to be owned. It's really consolidated offense. Ja'Marr Chase, obviously going to be owned. T. Higgins is too cheap. So not good. As it's just more difficult to find the lower owned options on the Bengals side, you can overstock this one. So a lot of different ways to play this game and be different from the field.

And I think that's what you need to do if you're getting involved here. Yeah, I got a bunch of stuff, but I'll let you roll first on this one. Yeah, I mean, pretty hard. I mean, great breakdown by Hoop. It really comes down to it's the biggest total by about three points. It's going to get a ton of ownership. When you talk about the running backs like Chase Brown, it feels just looking at his price at $6,100.

If you're in the best ball streets, I mean, this guy was going like mid second round, early second round. And now he's in the best game environment. The usage has been fine. He can catch the ball to the backfield. They're implied for a lot of points, like just looking. He'd be probably one and a half times owned if there just wasn't the Aaron Jones, Jeremiah Love. The range is just really loaded with mispriced plays.

So he's definitely someone that I think the floor is really high, and obviously the ceiling is as well. So him and Parker Washington, my favorite two pieces in this game, even as one-offs. When you play them as one-offs, you should have a lower-owned stack, like a Josh Allen it would fit or something like that. I kind of struggle to just go like all in on this game because I don't know where I can get difference amongst playing this game.

Like Bretton Strange is going to be one, $3,200, a very cheap tight end or pivot right from Hawkins. When you're playing Trevor Lawrence, I think he makes a lot of sense as a way to get different. But I mean, it's hard for me. Like it's been really bad for Brian Thomas. I know Jacobs got in the box, but. The usage for him, it's clearly Parker Washington show. Trevor Lawrence can use his legs. He always has the rushing upside.

I'm struggling to get to too much outside of Lawrence, Parker Washington, and Bretton Strange when it comes to the stacking. Then the other side for the Bengals, it's so condensed with them with T. Higgins, Chase, and Chase Brown. So... When I play this game, I really just think I'm going to eat most of the chalk pieces.

And then from there, my other part of the lineup is going to be like, like I said, Kincaid and Josh, you only talked about one game so far, but they're in single digits. It's going to be a stack that's off the board. And then this piece or whether or I stack this game and I play other. Different games as a way to get different in the lineup or vice versa. But yeah, it's, I mean, it's a good game environment.

I'm not going to ignore it by any means. Each individual lineup though should tell a story for your contest and do know if you're in the fifteen hundred dollar two hundred eighty two Person contest like this ownership is going to be even inflated relative to the twenty dollar Miller Milly Maker. So know that as well. Yeah, so like I said, I got a bunch here. I'm glad it's an early game in case I fully lose this thing.

But just noting it from a game theory perspective, tons of really good options. First of all, I think there's like five other games on this slate you could go to. I know they don't have the same total by some points. I know they don't have all the same stacking options, but this game is just loaded with ownership like we talked about. So it's hard to really separate. There's ways to do it. These guys just broke it down perfectly. But I did one yesterday with Blickle.

First of all, yeah, tootin and Higgins is basically the same two v two as Chase Brown and Parker Washington we actually only have it projecting like two points less and if you have the game going that way I know you're probably not not out there physically changing your projection but mentally you are right you're saying it's going to go a different way than you expected that would that would 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 ↗ Lawrence and the stacks that would leverage Parker Washington because you got tootin It's the opposite running back of Chase Brown.

And then Higgins is on the opposite side for a little bit less of the money of Parker Washington. The other thing is I get the Parker Washington situation. Title brought it up earlier, though. When you have chalk wide receivers, anybody who's been playing this game any length of time, they can definitely bust. It's not the same as all these other positions.

Second of all, did you know of the day that Parker Washington's broke twenty DraftKings points three times in twenty twenty five twenty twenty six like it's not he's out here breaking slates yeah he's he's $6,500 it could be seventy one seventy five whatever you want to put him at based on his opportunities but It doesn't mean it's going to happen. And then the other side of it is like the losers that nobody... Myers, he sucked. Brian Thomas Jr.

Washed. So far, yeah. And what we've seen, even Brian Thomas Jr. Last year, I get it. But if you start the season off and look at it from this perspective, Brian Thomas Jr. Played... The guy we talked about earlier, Gonzalez, he played Sertain. And then week one, they got blown out. It was a blowout, the Cleveland game. So it's like, what if you want to get different in this game? That's a prime way to do it. You flip to the Burrow side.

You can go Burrow. You can stack them with any of those guys. But if you go Burrow, Chase Higgins, And then save the money on the other side with Myers or Brian Thomas Jr. Now you can still build a really nice lineup around it. You can go Tuten and the Jags D. You can go Tuten and Higgins instead of Brown and Washington. Here's the interesting thing. Last piece on that one. Brown, Washington. Could happen.

But I think it's going to be more of like, that would be where you have the Gibbs Wilson last week and then realize all the game stacks come up over the top of you. And you're like, damn, I got the two guys, but I didn't have Sadiq and Gino and all the other stuff that you needed there.

In this game if it's tootin and Higgins I actually think you could get away with that because it's a flip and it's a change of how the game would go so it doesn't necessarily mean that versus like you know if you play Ja'Marr Chase as a one-off and he actually breaks the slate somebody probably has the Burrow chase whatever you needed on the other side so just be really cognizant of these things when you're building out this game.

But I think there is a lot of ways to get different as opposed to just over stacking with Dante Myers or Gesicki and saying, but I got a couple unique pieces there. Gesicki is going to be a, you know, twelve tight ends ahead of him on the slate. But in the game stack, it would make sense.

I'm just saying it's still you need a lot of things to go your way first, and then you need a lot of other things to not go the way that they can go at the tight end position.

So who ball kick it back to you I got nothing else to add on that one but we'll go to the bucks and Packers up next yeah I mean pretty ugly game low total uh sitting at you know below forty thirty eight and a half um it's tough I mean with baker out I mean a big downgrade to bucca Chris Godwin, guys like that. I'm not fully going to write off this Daniels guy, especially in one fifty.

Like I'm going to include him and probably pair him with somebody, you know, preferably a Bucca low ownedLeverageLeverage 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 ↗. And then I guess part of the reason I like it, you got the clear runbacks on the other side, Watson and Golden. And it's kind of all you really need to worry about. So I think you have a very clear, cheapish sort of stack that not many people are going to be on.

I'm hand building teams like I'm obviously not getting there if I'm building three teams I'm not getting there if I'm building five I'm not if I'm building ten I'm not getting there this is gonna be twenty lineups or above and it to me it's just it's a clean clean stack that's cheap and low-owned and then you can get all the other studs on the slate like to me like stacking this up and playing jsn I think makes sense uh you know the high expensive guy that can just go off and not many people are going to get to him so this would be like my stack I would go Daniels igbuka Matthews Golden, I think is fine.

And then I put JSN and then build around that. And again, this isn't a single entrySingle-EntryA single-entry contest allows each user exactly one lineup. It can be a cash game or a tournament.In single-entry, one or two contrarian decisions are usually enough. Pair a strong, popular core with a lower-owned piece instead of fading everything the field likes.Full explanation ↗ thing. This isn't a five max thing. This is twenty lineups and above. I like it. And that's pretty much it. And there's some running. There is some rushing upside, too, with this Daniels guy. So that's how I would do it. Good luck to the sheriff was in here telling us about the mega ticket before and said, going with the Green Bay triple stack, no bucks, springbacks.

That's a nice. Well, I was going to say that because you, you let you mentioned the other side and I know Jalen Daniels sort of subbing in, but the good news is you think he can do something. I want him to do something so that love has to do more because I like Watson. I actually think Watson better play than Parker Washington for two hundred bucks more. Um, so I like, I like love Watson, Golden, even Tucker Kraft.

And I think it was our boy, um, Hebrew cheetah, happy belated birthday. We wished him one in the, in the Discord there, but he had a Teddy Hearst the third last week. If you did something like love Watson, Golden Hearst, You could get all the best running backs. You could get the tight end pay upSpending UpSpending up means choosing a higher-priced player over a cheaper alternative, using more of your lineup's salary budget at that spot. You may also hear it called paying up.Build a version with your preferred expensive player and another without. Before choosing, check whether either version relies on a cheap player whose expected role still depends on unresolved injury news.Full explanation ↗. Like you'd have all the money in the world. So you think this could be a sneaky spot here. Could be good title. You're a Packers guy.

Give us your thoughts here on this one. I think it's a good way to be in the far left of the leaderboard when it's all said and done. Yeah. Sorry, Sheriff. Hey, with that being said, if you were to do it in one thing, When it's a million to first and fifth place is not crumbs, but crumbs relative to first, you might as well take a shot in something where it's that top heavy. When you win, how much do you win?

It's not for me. I mean, the Packers offensive line has been as bad as it gets. They can't run the football. So that does leave me with interest in Golden or Watson with love. Like if you want to double, I'm sure. It just feels like on the slate. What I'm worried about, though, is the Tampa side. Oh, man. Hoop, I give you some praise for this Jalen Daniels wanting to play him. I'm worried, though.

I think the best way to do it is to stack nobody. I wouldn't stack them with anyone. I mean, the receiving props, thirty-seven and a half, twenty-five and a half, twenty-four and a half, twenty-two and a half. Have a nice, strong secondary stackMini-StackIn NFL DFS, a mini-stack usually pairs two players from the same game without either team's quarterback. Often a secondary group beside your main quarterback stack, it can pair a running back with an opposing receiver.Before locking a pair, describe how both players reach big scores together. Then ask whether that outcome would make an omitted quarterback or teammate difficult to beat.Full explanation ↗ in the lineup. Maybe have them with a Green Bay guy. Daniels with Watson or Golden or something. I think is the best way. I'm worried that this game just really slows down. His rushing prop's actually solid. It's thirty-three and a half.

It's Jalen Daniels. His passing prop's terrible. Bucky Irving there. This team's going to want to run the ball, and I think the Bucs can get after him. Buck's defense has been awful, but the Packers O-line, what's going to cave, the D or the O? But I'm worried that the game just really gets slowed down on the Buccaneers side. But Golden, Watson, they have the one-play home run ability, so those are two one-offsOne-OffIn NFL DFS, a one-off is a player you select outside your stacks, commonly a running back or a receiver without his quarterback. An opposing receiver intentionally paired with your stack instead serves as a bring-back.Before adding a one-off, compare him with an affordable teammate of your existing stack. Decide whether his individual upside is worth passing up that extra scoring connection.Full explanation ↗ for sure I want to keep in my pool.

And then, yeah, I mean, if Jordan Love is three percent on, which he is, I don't mind playing a love to Watson, love to Golden. I don't love Kraft as much, and I don't really want any Buccaneers, even in a runbackBring-BackIn the NFL, a bring-back is usually a wide receiver, tight end or running back from the team facing your quarterback stack.Pick the bring-back who gains the most when his team falls behind. In football that's usually the opponent's top pass catcher, not a running back who loses carries in a comeback.Full explanation ↗ or if I was playing Daniels, but I don't plan on doing that. Yeah. The chat mentioned Watson close to home game said he's got like fifteen to eighteen family members coming out to watch him, too.

That's definitely not why I'm on Watson can promise you that they can watch him get a zero, too. But I just think it's a good spot for like title said, the one off. But if you do want to go with it, you know, there is at least some love. And if you look at the stone on the optimal rates and things like that, you can get a little bit behind some of that leverage with your love, Watson, Golden and that type of thing.

But yeah, not my favorite spot on the slate. This is a good one here, Title. I'll stay with you. Ravens at home. Good discussion piece, I should say, because obviously the Henry narrative stuff that we talk about with playing against his old team that he was with forever, first time going against them, but The thing is, everyone's talking about it. Nobody's really clicking it because it's $8,400.

And you've got later, you know, McCaffrey's cheap on this slate versus the price of Henry. You got other options and ways to build. What's your thoughts on this one? You got the Ravens big, big favorites at home versus the Titans. Yeah, I'm kind of torn on what to do with Derrick Henry. It kind of just goes back to the same James Cook conversation. Like Derrick Henry could have a hundred on the ground, two touchdowns.

If he doesn't catch the passes and the opportunity costs at running back, you're not guaranteed to get there. It feels like he's a lock for a touchdown though. It feels like he's almost a lock for a hundred yards.

Like it all, adds up really nicely the one I have quite a bit of interest in though compared to the field is Zay Flowers like just if anyone has watched any bit of Ravens this dude is electric he's always open Lamar finds him the play action is great I think the receiving prop at seventy and a half is a little too low it's really hard to click that name on this slate at $6,900 like twelve percent I wouldn't be surprised if it was like eight percent because people aren't playing Lamar they'd rather play Derrick Henry Not that Henry's getting much 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 ↗, but I think we have Derek at ten, Zay at twelve.

I could see that flipped. I think more are Likely to go, Henry, but I don't see people playing either. Mark Andrews is fine at $4,200 as a contrarianContrarianA contrarian play or lineup is one built around choices most of the field will not make, such as low-owned players, unpopular teams or an unusual salary structure.Pick one or two contrarian spots per lineup and ground each in a real reason. The rest of the roster can look like the field.Full explanation ↗ tight end, kind of in the dead range, but... For me, I think Zay Flowers for sure looks way too low on he's going to break plenty of slates this year. They said won't be on a pitch count, they don't think. That's great news. And then you had Derrick Henry. So it's mainly the individual.

I mean, they're applied for twenty seven points on this slate. Tennessee, can they catch up, keep up? Probably not. But we saw what happens with JSN and these good receivers. It doesn't necessarily matter. Yeah. I was just trying to pull it up here on DFSOS. You just mentioned it, but it had, this was from this morning, one hour ago says Zay Flowers, not expected to have a hard pitch count Sunday.

I mean, last week there was a definitely snaps were in check and it still was a huge game for this guy. This is the one I'm talking about though. When I'm explaining it, there's no Homer on this because everyone knows I'm a Ravens fan, but Zay Flowers is the wrong price at $6,900, not Parker Washington at sixty five. You can Yes, I disagree. I think they're both wrong. I think it's better than you think. Delta to it.

One guy's on pace to literally be the best receiver this year. The other guy is, like I said, three games ever in the history of drafting scoring over twenty points. So it's like we're playing a fantasy points game. Zay goes off in twenty whatever limited snaps he had last week and now he gets back in the spot. If you're not playing Henry. And you're not in on that. Well, how's this game going? Like, how are the Ravens scoring thirty points if you think they are?

But you're not getting to Henry. So it's like I think you should be thinking about Zay Flowers on this slate. There's tons of ways to plug them in to your builds. And I also think that's why I said I love this slate from a game theory perspective. Let's say you're even on. Like a Burrow chase Higgins. And obviously it gets expensive depending on how you're building this. But I'm just saying, we know we've got value running backs.

It's like, if you can move to a Parker Washington to a Zay Flowers, it's, and then you have, you can have like Burrow Jamar, with um btj or myers and then use

Zay Flowers and you've got like Zay Flowers leveraging the Higgins stuff with the single stack hoping it's just chase doing it and then you've got zay leveraging the Washington stuff but you're picking up the Washington stuff from the cheaper guy to help make it fit so when you see stuff like that I think it's at least somewhat interesting but yeah I love the spot great call out on zay love seeing the news this morning that it's you know could be even more in favor and I don't know what his ownership ends up getting to but it wasn't very high before this so we'll see um anything you want to add on anything Titans at all or defense I can't I can't click these Titans

Man this team is this team's bad uh no I think you're just wasting roster spots Carnell Tate like if I had to click one but You're hoping for garbage time. Man, it's just watching tape and who gives a shit because it's cardio. But, man, he's just running routes on boys out there. I saw somebody posted this week. These are pretty insane. He's making them work, and they're over there, and he's over there. It's pretty crazy. He can get loose, but unfortunately can't get him the ball.

So that's the problem. Hoop, kick it to you. I guess Ravens D is what I was saying there at the end too. It's hard to pay upSpending UpSpending up means choosing a higher-priced player over a cheaper alternative, using more of your lineup's salary budget at that spot. You may also hear it called paying up.Build a version with your preferred expensive player and another without. Before choosing, check whether either version relies on a cheap player whose expected role still depends on unresolved injury news.Full explanation ↗ this week at defense, but that could be a spot here too. That's how the Ravens would do it where it might just be that kind of setup too. But go ahead. Yeah, I mean, probably kind of my preference. I mean, I'm fine. Like, I'm fine playing Zay Flowers. I think he's a good play.

But man, like when I play him, I just want some push on the other side. And it's like, there's just there's nothing like on the other side. Like I could see like Zay Flowers, at yards into a touchdown at half like that wouldn't surprise me at all. But then it's like, I want you want more in the second half, and then just nothing else ends up coming because the Titans are so bad.

So know my preference for sure is going to be Derrick Henry you compare him with uh the defense for the spot like for for the spot in the situation like henry is we have henry at eleven percent ownership like that is just way way too low and I get it like people are gonna want to play McCaffrey over him people are gonna want to play those $6,000 guys over him but in this spot Derrick Henry Eleven, twelve, thirteen percent, whatever it ends up being, is just to me a phenomenal, phenomenal play.

People don't really like playing him on DK because of the pass catching stuff. I love him over there. I'm going to make a move on him for sure on this slate and hope it's just a Derrick Henry three touchdown game. Yeah, I think that's the other way to go. Exactly. Like I said, not enough people are doing it, and it's really hard for people to get there. Like Title said earlier, so many running back options.

You can't play them all, and I just don't think people will be able to get to that. I'll stay with you, Hoop. We'll go to another one here. It's Eagles at home versus the Rams. What a pathetic...

Team the Eagles are I don't even care what happens the rest of the season that performance on whatever day that was what was it was it Monday night it might have been Monday or why can't I mean Jalen Hurts just has to be the most gutless quarterback in in the NFL just looks like a little out there like no fight like nothing like that was that was so bad That being said, like it can't be worse than it was on Monday night.

Like I think everyone is just assuming it's going to continue to be that bad. And maybe it is like maybe it is. And now everyone just wants to jam the Rams defense. You know, $2,600 going to be so, so popular on this slate. I guess like my main point here is I'm not necessarily getting to the Eagles. But it can't be as bad as it was on Monday night. That was just horrible.

No DeVonta Smith, Wicks, Lemon, two guys that you can put in there for cheap. Zach Ertz, I don't mind getting to him for a cheap tight end, . You know, if the Rams are successful offensively, like the Eagles are going to have to do something. But, you know, the drawback to that is they were in that situation the other night against the Bears and couldn't do anything ever throughout the game. So that is the risk.

The interesting part to me on the Ram side, Puka is back, and it sounds like he's going to be relatively close to full go. Now no one wants to play Davante Adams at all, like two to three percent 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 ↗. This guy is obviously a stud. We saw what he's capable of doing the last couple of weeks with Puka out. His price is to a point where people don't want to click it. Two to three percent Davante Adams.

Let's say there is a chance that Puka isn't a hundred percent. We know he's capable of getting re-injured. I think in, in tournaments, um, including Adams makes a lot of sense, the large field stuff. And then Kyron Williams as well. Like you have all these, uh, running backs in this range and he seems to be one that's going overlooked.

And if the Rams defense is going to be popular and they do make sense at $2,600 little Kyron Rams defense pairing and a little secondary stackMini-StackIn NFL DFS, a mini-stack usually pairs two players from the same game without either team's quarterback. Often a secondary group beside your main quarterback stack, it can pair a running back with an opposing receiver.Before locking a pair, describe how both players reach big scores together. Then ask whether that outcome would make an omitted quarterback or teammate difficult to beat.Full explanation ↗ within a team, I think makes a lot of sense. So there's, there's stuff here to, to take a look at. Um, The Eagles, though, man, that's tough sledding for the Eagles for sure. Yeah, this is an interesting one, too, because what was the – I think we're waiting still on Parkinson news. He's questionable. Obviously, Ferguson hit the IR.

But what was – I think Parkinson is – With Puka this morning was do not intend to limit his workload. Yeah. I mean, say $7,500. He's the price that Parker Washington should be. But he's Puka at that price already. So title, give us your thoughts here at the Ram side of the thing. And $3,100 Higbee, if no Parkinson already, no Ferguson, Kyron $5,900. Just I don't think a lot of people can get to the spot.

People just want to play the defense by the looks of it. Yeah, I don't mind Kyron for sure. He is separated from Corum very strongly. Rams implied for about twenty-four. Game's supposed to stay competitive. People aren't clicking the name. You can pair him with Rams defense. Don't mind any of that. My favorite play in this game, though, it's definitely Puka. If this dude's not on a pitch count, he's low teens because people are worried about injury or whatever, and he's only $7,500.

Yeah, I mean, I don't know if people forgot, but this dude is one of the best, if not the best receiver in football. I think he has a chance to come down to the ownership. I think people are going to be hesitant to click the name. I hope so. I mean, this feels like a classic thirty five plus point performance from Puka and they're going to give him the ball. I'm not it's not a pitch count. He's yeah. Anyone that watches Puka.

So, yeah, at $7,500 three weeks from now, he might be $8,800 $9,000 and we'll be looking at this ten percent $7,500 and just laughing. So I Puka and then after that, it's a little tough. I don't mind. He'd be a Parkinson out. I don't know if it feels like chasing. He's $3,100, so it doesn't. And I like that Hawkinson's right in that range. So he's a pivot there. But man, this tight end slate's pretty good.

Like, I'm not sure twelve is going to be enough. And it feels like he kind of hit his ceiling last week. So I'm all aboard the Puka train. Don't mind Kyron when not playing Puka. What about your boy on the other side? $4,300. Dontavion Wicks. But I'm nervous. Interesting spot because he is like he's the one now. Obviously got Lemon out there and whatever. But I'm just saying it's like there is a lot of guys missing. What do you think happens here?

Yeah, I'm nervous because I almost don't want him as the one. I mean, Trent McDuffie, we always talk about Sertan and certain guys. I don't fade stuff for certain reasons, but there is a couple names out there at corner. Trent McDuffie is one where I'm always a little hesitant if I think there's a chance that he gets followed. And I don't think they're necessarily going to follow Wicks, but I think it's clear that Wicks has been the best choice.

Has been the best receiver for sure ahead of Lemon in this spot. I'm just concerned because the price has so many people gravitating to him, and I think that projection might even be a little high. Cash gameCash GameA cash game is a contest that pays a large share of the field, usually close to half, the same flat prize. Fifty-fifties, double-ups and head-to-heads are the common cash games.Treat cash games as the steady base of your bankroll. Use one safe core across your cash entries on a slate, and save riskier ideas for tournaments.Full explanation ↗ is most definitely in play. Tournaments, I'm worried at this price. I don't think you need to play Lemon because you're not playing Wicks to get different. You can just not play any Eagles and hope the offense continues to look buns. That's what it has looked like.

Jalen Hurts has not given me any any bit of optimism to fire up a somewhat 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 ↗ receiver in a range that I can find plenty of pivots. So I don't love it. Of course, I'm going to play some, though. I mean, he's projecting one of the better values on the slate at the price, but I know ball take. I'm scared. Yeah, we'll get to that later, too, when we get to the Minnesota game, I think. But same thinking here, but obviously he still fits in.

And at $4,300 bucks, it's whatever. It's like you said, you go to. I'd rather Addison like when we get to that, like I prefer other chalk on this slate more than he's one of the most I'm worried about. So let's just put it that way. Yeah, I prefer Wix. I think a lot of people use them as a one-offOne-OffIn NFL DFS, a one-off is a player you select outside your stacks, commonly a running back or a receiver without his quarterback. An opposing receiver intentionally paired with your stack instead serves as a bring-back.Before adding a one-off, compare him with an affordable teammate of your existing stack. Decide whether his individual upside is worth passing up that extra scoring connection.Full explanation ↗ because it's like, give me my cheap value that makes it work.

But I actually prefer them in something where I'm using the other side because I want that to push it. If I want Puka to get the thirty five, well, maybe I want Wix to do something or Lemon to do something as well to make that game go back and forth. So. Um, other thing there with just Williams, um, Blickle talked about it yesterday. It was his lane on leverage lane. But if, if everyone's playing the Rams too, it's interesting.

Usually you see that boost the running back, but because there's so many guys at the Williams price point, that's not really someone that people are getting to. So it's, it's an opposite effect. Sometimes when the running back is popular, they're the defense starts to pick up steam because people want to pair them together. This is the opposite effect. Everybody just wants to play the defense and move on. You could play Kyron in there as well, but I'm with you. I like Puka the best.

All right, I'll stay with you, Title. We've got the Giants at home versus the Cardinals. Talked about it earlier. Love, scat. That's two running backs in the spot that a lot of people like. Interested to hear your takes there. You've got McBride, Wilson, Brissett. I mean, there's a ton of different ways. Nabers, Likely. Lots of options here, but again, not a lot of love compared to some of the other spots besides the running backs.

Maybe a little bit on Michael Wilson, but there's so many tight ends that even like a twelve to fifteen percent on McBride wouldn't be that much. Go ahead. Yeah, I've kind of gone back. I want to like this game when I do. You say not a lot of 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 ↗, which is kind of true. But then if you look at the total relative to other totals on this slate, it feels relatively concentrated to see four players in the double digits. But we can start.

Michael Wilson is one of the best plays, like we always know. Just fire him up. With a lot of confidence, hoops, laughing, think I'm kidding. He finally understands that this dude is the real deal. Um, and it only gets better when you see Jeremiah loves going to get some ownership as a nice pivot that way. If you want to go that way. Uh, I do like Jeremiah love though, quite a bit, $5,800.

Uh, everyone knows the talent he had at Notre Dame and, uh, The expectations, he finally overtook Algier and by a pretty decent margin. And I do not see why that would not continue. Small favorites are the Cardinals here. So I think Love is one of the best plays on the slate. I think Michael Wilson is one of the best plays on the slate. And then Trey McBride, like I really want to get in on him.

Him versus Bowers is a really interesting take or conversation. McBride more expensive on DraftKings, whereas Bowers more expensive. No, McBride's more on FanDuel, and then Bowers is more on DraftKings. Both of them are very, very good plays. I'm not sure how much I can get, but I like them quite a bit. I think the Cardinals moved the ball. Brissette's been very good. Can I play Brissett? I'm fine playing him. I think he actually is pretty strong because he's cheap.

He's going to drop back a good amount, and then you have the clear pairings in Michael Wilson and McBride. So it's really just I hope ownership stays in check. And then I'm going to fire up this Cardinals defense, too, at $2,500. You can always fire up defenses against James, as we've known. Pair it with Jeremiah Love as well. All aboard the Cardinals and then on the Giants side. Yeah, really a scat about or nothing.

And I'm kind of worried about scat like in this range with Chase Brown, with Jeremiah Love, with Aaron Jones. I think he comes in last. I mean, he was off the field like a decent bid and pretty important situations against the Rams in prime time. I think they can stack the box and make James try and beat him. I have concerns with scat relative to others in his range at ownership.

So curious to hear your guys' take if you guys think this Cardinals ownership stays kind of where we're projecting it. I think it does. I think it's going to be pretty close. There's just so many other ways to go. And that's what I said. You can get Brissett. By the way, I think this is another interesting way to handle this one. You mentioned liking all of them, and one of them's name is Love. So loving in this spot.

But I think you could have Brissett, Love, Wilson, McBride, Nabers. And that's just different than everything else. Nabers is staying in check at $6,000. So he's getting like less than ten percent ownership. Brissette is, you know, what's he going to be? Five, six, seven, eight percent, somewhere in that range. You know, Wilson probably stays around the fifteen, I think. And then McBride, it's hard to even tell.

What happens because I think a lot more people want Bowers there's cheap tight ends but there is double tight end line up so I think that's where he kind of is the right number um with you on the scat side of things so I think I would probably look at it from that perspective and then the other thing um two more I would go love Cardinals d in some and just beat up on jamis and pick it up that way it's not super low own but just a way you could play this game differently and then I think the other thing is love with Nabers and again Nabers slices into it some and you're also leveraging the scat ownership there by going to Nabers a hundred bucks less at

A different position who about kick it to you same game yeah I mean this is a really a good game I think for for fantasy and the cardinal side is just much easier to figure out like we know that Brissett to Michael Wilson to McBride makes a ton of sense. I mean, Brissette's a guy I just want to be on almost every slate. I mean, it's like a perfect situation for fantasy. He's willing to chuck it. He knows who his guys are.

Marvin Harrison is ass, but he knows Michael Wilson is good and I'm getting closer. I'm getting closer to title on Michael Wilson because I watched that game very closely last week. I've watched a lot of Michael Wilson, but I watched almost that entire game last week and he just gets open and Brissett gets him the ball. It's an ideal situation.

McBride phenomenal tight end but there's a lot of tight ends that are good on this slate there's cheap ones there's expensive ones like there's no way his ownership gets like super inflated so like that I like love but it is a little more difficult but I think you know if you're going in on this game you got to embrace the giant side a little bit Skadabo fine for tournaments and then Nabers like you got a guy at Winston who will just throw the ball and like there could definitely be a big touchdown here for Nabers and no one's going to be on them so um obviously the cardinal stuff

Is clean you know the guys brissette love Wilson McBride you can play them in a variety of ways but I'm fine embracing some of the Giants uncertainty I guess Yeah, the full circle again. We talked about it the other day. The chat's been hitting you up on the Judkins stuff, which you didn't come full circle on that, but you did come full circle on Aaron Rodgers, and he ended up getting the job done. What did I miss on the Judkins stuff?

Well, you were just hating on him again. He had another solid game. He was pretty good the other night. I think on some of the winning lineups he was there, close to it. So he was definitely in the mix the other night for sure. I'm going to have to do some research here to defend myself. Go back and look it up. Eighteen for seventy. Okay. And then two for... No, that's not a victory. I don't care if you found the box.

Eighteen for seventy. And two for... You needed him. You need him in the flex. Yeah, for showdownShowdown (Captain and MVP)NFL Showdown lets you select players from one football game, including eligible quarterbacks, running backs, receivers, tight ends, kickers and team defenses. Your Captain or MVP receives the contest's scoring multiplier.Compare complete lineups with different players in the multiplier slot. Leaving salary unused can reduce duplication, but do not sacrifice meaningful scoring potential just to make your lineup unusual.Full explanation ↗. You needed him. You can still say he sucks, though. It's okay. He's horrible. Horrible. Horrible running back in that one. But the Wilson stuff coming full circle. That's another one. Again, like that's the one title. Like I know I'm look, I, I understand the Parker Washington play the spot, the price. I'm not like just shitting on him for fun.

I'm just noting it that like there is, everyone just keeps saying him. It's like, you could say it about so many guys, Michael Wilson five, five hundred. What'd he get last week? Eleven targets and pretty much caught eight, whatever it was. It was like, he's just like you said, he's always open. I think another, I'm just finishing this one offOne-OffIn NFL DFS, a one-off is a player you select outside your stacks, commonly a running back or a receiver without his quarterback. An opposing receiver intentionally paired with your stack instead serves as a bring-back.Before adding a one-off, compare him with an affordable teammate of your existing stack. Decide whether his individual upside is worth passing up that extra scoring connection.Full explanation ↗.

You already talked about, but just to say the last thing, I think something really interesting is like Brissett, Love, Wilson Nabers not scat leave off McBride go Bowers the guy that hurts him at almost the same price in that build and then you've got a more balanced buildBalanced BuildA balanced build spreads salary fairly evenly across a lineup, using mostly mid-priced players instead of a few stars and several minimum-salary players.Go balanced when the slate lacks trustworthy cheap plays. Forcing stars and scrubs without real value just fills your lineup with players who have no role.Full explanation ↗ you're not going to get to very much after that that's probably you got like a $5,000 quarterback a $5,800 running back $5,500 wide receiver sixty what is uh I think $6,900 for Bowers when we get to him later and then Nabers $6,000 you don't have scat in the lineup like I think there's a ton of ways you could get different here but I do like the spot for the Cardinals And I like this game back and forth.

I think it is sneaky. So we'll say that. All right. Go back to your hair title. We got the Jets at the Bears. Gross. I mean, Garrett Wilson, he looks good. This Bears defense isn't very good. Geno's going to lock in on Garrett. We saw what he did last week. $6,800's a price tag, though. You definitely have to do something. So I like it. Do I love it? No. After that, I mean, really interesting from Ben Johnson to go with Tyson Bagent.

I don't hate it. I mean, they paid Bagent last year. He's the clear backup quarterback, but I mean, you don't see that every day. That's why I respect it a lot. I mean, most coaches would just naturally give. All right, Case Keenum won. He played well. You're starting the next week. Ben Johnson thinks Bajan's better. He has more talent. I'm curious to see how this all goes. I'm debating it at $4,800. Like him to Burden is really, really cheap.

Him to cleave Raymond really cheap. If you want to jam all these studs, I think Bajan like I prefer him to Daniels on the Buccaneers. If I were to do that, he's showing like no ownership. So. Braylon Allen, better price on FanDuel than on DraftKings. Fits the scoring a little better over there. Fine with it. Still don't love this Jets spot too much. And then I guess I don't even deserve to talk about Sadiq. He buried me last week, so you guys can talk about him.

I like the Allen call. I think a guy that was already getting...

Share like he was already getting attempts he's already getting targets all this stuff now no breeze hall so definitely think that's interesting obviously Garrett Wilson stand out pretty much every single week for opportunities just what does he turn them into Burden um underpriced on the other side for both sites I think it's more on FanDuel people are going to want to move to him at $5,800 so uh he's $5,200 on DraftKings though hoop ball send it over your way here but The defenses are getting talked about in this one mostly, and then a little bit of these wide receivers with Wilson, Burden, maybe a little bit of Allen, but what's your thoughts?

Yeah, it is tough, man. You come in as a backup quarterback and just absolutely smoke a team, a team that people think is good, and then they're like, all right, you're asked to go back to the bench, and we're playing the other backup. It is pretty wild, but for fantasy purposes, I mean, I don't know.

Love it I don't think but if you are playing it you have a pretty direct run backBring-BackIn the NFL, a bring-back is usually a wide receiver, tight end or running back from the team facing your quarterback stack.Pick the bring-back who gains the most when his team falls behind. In football that's usually the opponent's top pass catcher, not a running back who loses carries in a comeback.Full explanation ↗ in Garrett Wilson who can't be super popular he's going to get some ownership but there's just so many guys like so many playable guys we have seventeen percent I wouldn't be surprised if it comes down on Garrett a little bit so you got a a clear run back and I guess you could include Braylon Allen if you want but overall I'm not super interested in this one All right, take us into the next one.

I think it is the last game of the morning, and then we'll get to the afternoon games just after that. But we've got the Cowboys at the Texans. Very interested in this one. Somewhat one-sided. Not one-sided, I guess, because there are guys I like on the other side. But I think this is a very, very good spot for the Texans. And the Cowboys defense is terrible. They're on the road here. And I don't think the Texans defense is as good as people think either.

So I think there is a chance for some back and forth here. You've got Nico Collins coming back. From injury, which I think is big. There's a ton of wide receivers, a ton of really good wide receivers. So it's a position where I don't think ownership is going to come into play all that much. I just wanted to see. We got Nico at like, you know, eleven.

There's so many guys that are going to be right in that range, ten, eleven, twelve percent. But, you know, C.J. Stroud's a guy I typically don't play, but I think it's a really good spot. They're oh and three. They're at home. They need this win. They need it in a big way, and they're facing a team whose defense is pretty bad. So... I guess the one problem is it's hard to look at things outside of, like, just C.J. Stroud to Nico Collins.

But I guess the nice part is it's not going to be a super highly owned pairing. You have clear runbacks on the other side. C.D.

Lamb, I think, is a really good play on the slate just because of where he's priced and the guys around him and should be – pretty low ownedLeverageLeverage 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 ↗ uh nine percent you know for a guy that could absolutely break the slate or he can go with with picking so I really like the spot uh I guess the one Downfall, not necessarily downfall, though, is it's just like a pretty direct situation for me. It's C.J.

Stroud with Nico Collins and then one of the Dallas pass catchers on the other side. But overall, that pairing isn't going to be super popular. It's not going to be like the one we talked about earlier with Trevor Lawrence, Parker Washington and Chase Brown on the other side. It's not going to be super popular like that. So I do like it. I like the Stroud to Collins quite a bit on the slate. Yeah, as do I.

I think the other thing that's really interesting is if you want to double stack him, if you actually think you're going to get this back and forth, Hutchinson and Booth are both, well, Hutchinson exact same price as Wicks. Booty's a hundred bucks more.

And it's just more of, if you're already stacking that instead of just putting the, you know, the Wicks one-offOne-OffIn NFL DFS, a one-off is a player you select outside your stacks, commonly a running back or a receiver without his quarterback. An opposing receiver intentionally paired with your stack instead serves as a bring-back.Before adding a one-off, compare him with an affordable teammate of your existing stack. Decide whether his individual upside is worth passing up that extra scoring connection.Full explanation ↗ because he projects slightly better, let's get someone that if they can hit their ceiling will help the quarterback that you've got boost the game, get the stack to fit.

And you've got, you know, something like a Stroud Collins X Hutch, with cd lamb or Pickens and then you'd be able to still go to a bunch of really good running backs if you wanted to on this slate so I'll kick it to you title what do you got with this one hope people do not uh have too much marcus mariotta I didn't see what happened but to the medical tense yeah as

Far as this one I mean yeah I'm three for three on the cj to nico um good price on cj and FanDuel even better on DraftKings too we'll expect more ownership over there Dallas side's tough for me though because yeah like sure cd is always a good play but if I love puka at $7,500 how much can I get cd if I like Derrick Henry Zay Flowers all this stuff so I think I prefer Pickens for six hundred cheaper or no way more than six hundred cheaper fifteen hundred nico six hundred cheaper um and I think I actually prefer nico as well so Yeah, that Pickens price tag, though, is very intriguing.

One other name, yeah, like you mentioned, the Hutchinson booty. Don't hate it in stacks. Flournoy, though, down there at that same price, I think I would rather him than all of them. I mean, it was terrible last week for him in the game log, but if you watch the game, he had multiple opportunities just – was on a different page a little bit. I think he might have had a drop, but $3,800. He's playing about seventy percent of snaps. They're trail or they should be trailing.

They're going to be in the dome. I think Florida at thirty eight low ownership is a pivot from all those guys makes quite a bit of sense. So, yeah. And when you are playing Nico and CJ and then you want a cheap run backBring-BackIn the NFL, a bring-back is usually a wide receiver, tight end or running back from the team facing your quarterback stack.Pick the bring-back who gains the most when his team falls behind. In football that's usually the opponent's top pass catcher, not a running back who loses carries in a comeback.Full explanation ↗ so you can spend upSpending UpSpending up means choosing a higher-priced player over a cheaper alternative, using more of your lineup's salary budget at that spot. You may also hear it called paying up.Build a version with your preferred expensive player and another without. Before choosing, check whether either version relies on a cheap player whose expected role still depends on unresolved injury news.Full explanation ↗ elsewhere. Flournoy might even be my favorites run back in the game. So it's him or Pickens. Outside of that pretty tough for me definitely not playing running backs on either side.

The thing with the Flournoy one is I actually like the Dak stack with that. If you go Dak, CD, Flournoy, and Flournoy helps you get the CD money because you're paying down there, and you're hoping it's him not Pickens catching the fifty-yard pass or something like that and doing something with it, then you can still get Nico in if you wanted. I would. And then you've got all the money again to spend.

Obviously, you could go Pickens, Flournoy, but I like a Dak, CD, Flournoy run back with Collins. I also think... Another one that's probably more of like fits the FanDuel model and who might hate it, but Davis Montgomery is going to be big leverage because I think on FanDuel at $7,000 Stroud is going to be really popular. So there's not many cheap quarterbacks. You see like Bo Nix is $7,600 over there.

There's there's a lot of pricey quarterback, $8,300 for Purdy, you know, things like that. So I think that you could go to Montgomery and just hope he's getting the touchdowns. But yeah, I'd be a little, they already had some talk about Woods Marks might like take more touches. He's only implied for forty four and a half is his rushing prop for demon thirty four and a half.

He's going to be way off the board, but I would worry about something I'm monitoring is where those snaps go in the coming weeks. Yeah, I agree. It looks like Woods could pick up some of those in the future here as it goes on, even starting this week possible. But you're hoping for touchdowns with him. DeMont's going to get you. When he has a big game, if he has a big game, it's usually because he got like two or three touchdowns.

That's just the FanDuel model in a nutshell. And on FanDuel, when Stroud going to be popular, that can make some sense. So Hoop, I'll go back to you now. We got Vikings at home versus the Dolphins. Aaron Jones Sr., Jordan Addison, Hawkins, all getting love, Kyler a little bit. People don't really love the runback. Malik Washington the only guy even getting anything, and it's not much at all, so it doesn't matter. But what's your thoughts here with this one?

Vikings, big favorites at home here versus the Dolphins. Yeah, tough to identify the runbackBring-BackIn the NFL, a bring-back is usually a wide receiver, tight end or running back from the team facing your quarterback stack.Pick the bring-back who gains the most when his team falls behind. In football that's usually the opponent's top pass catcher, not a running back who loses carries in a comeback.Full explanation ↗ when the team's projected to score fourteen real-life points. If it wasn't going to be anyone, it would be Malik Washington.

Struggle with this one just like with with Addison being popular and t.j hawkinson being popular Kyler Murray sucks as an NFL quarterback like man it is painful the guy is just bad and I understand that Jefferson went out early in that last game but you still have other NFL wide receivers he looked like ass So I do struggle with Addison, Hawkins. I don't love the Kyler stacks. I absolutely do love the Aaron Jones stuff though, because their defense is really good.

This Vikings Vikings defense is phenomenal. They get a dream matchup at home against Miami. So I love Aaron Jones here.

You know, the, no concern with workload I mean they gave him seven team carries uh six targets so he has the big workload big favorite I think they're willing to ride him and this defense to a victory and that's how I'll be you know building a lot of teams the defense is expensive a lot of people look to pay down at defense I actually really like the Vikings defense here I mean you get the defense projected to score the most points by a pretty wide margin at less than ten percent, which I mean, I guess that's not saying too much because ownership at defense gets spread out quite a bit.

But this is the dream spot for a really good defense and not a lot of people are going to go to him. So love the Aaron Jones to with with the Vikings defense, my favorite pairing. But I do worry I'm going to have them in one fifty. Don't get me wrong. I'm going to have some of the Kyler stuff in one fifty, you know, just in case. But man, he is it's really painful to watch him play quarterback in the NFL.

A couple things here. One, the defenses. I think it's funny because what you said about Kyler Murray and how bad he is. I actually like the Dolphins D at $2,000 flat. Just you're against 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 ↗. If you're not playing Jones, Addison, Hawkins or Murray, I'm fine with just rolling to that. Because like you said, he can have. Some really bad spots. It just depends on what defenses do today, but for $2,000 flat, I'm not too worried about it.

I'll be interested there. I also think, and I want to ask title about this in a second, but I'll save it. But where I asked title about this hoop, do you have notifications turned on on your phone right now for the, like anybody underdog Schefter, anyone that tells you I got the underdog stuff. Yeah. Okay, do me a favor. Pronounce the name of the quarterback that just came into the Washington game. This is everybody's favorite game with Hoop is try and get a pronunciation.

Give us your best on this guy. Oh, my Lord. Here we go. Here we go. Let's see. Athen. Okay. Kiliakmanis. Kiliakmanis. Could it just be like Athen, like Nathan without the N, though? Ethan, Ethan, Ethan, Ethan. Yeah, it could. Yeah. Yeah. It's hard to say. Yeah. Why do you have the official? How close? I don't. I just I want to see you say it. I would. Happy birthday to our man. Go collect, by the way, as well.

But if you were Cleo Monis, right, Cleo Monis, that's got to be somewhat close. You ought to be close. Yeah. I don't know what it is. I just, I knew it would be a good spot for you, but this spot, I want to talk about with you title because your boy, Justin Jefferson, unfortunately, you know, injured, not in the game this week, but man, this is interesting. So Aaron Jones is like really high owned and he's projecting well, and the optimal is there.

And like, who just said, we're going against me. You're going against Miami here. Like, this is a perfect spot. It makes a ton of sense. But if you, the Dolphins know that Kyler sucks and that they don't care about like Addison, Jawan, Jennings, Hawkins. Can they just bear down on the running back spot and just say, look, do whatever you can make Kyler beat you with these other guys and go with that route. And you could see this be a, you know, a chalk bust.

If they do that, I think Jordan Addison going for one, fifty, and two. I think he is one of the most underrated players in the NFL, and I do not think anyone on the Dolphins can get close to guarding him one-on-one. I mean, just seeing it last week, the air yards, like, man, Addison could have had another fifteen, twenty DraftKings points. I struggle with this spot to an extent because I see ownership and Kyler concerns and all this.

But I just come back to this Dolphins team I think is terrible. And I think Aaron Jones is going to get the ball about twenty times and can catch passes out of the backfield. Kyler can run himself when lanes close down like this. This team's really bad, this Dolphins team. It's a team we want to pick on. Addison, I think, is way too cheap. He's my favorite play.

The one I'm most worried about is Hawkins just because, I mean, we've been talking about TJ Hawkins for a decade now, and now he's going to be chalky on a loaded tight end position slate. So he's where I'm worried most, but it still makes some sense. We don't need to play – like, even if I'm playing Aaron Jones and even Addison, you don't need to play Kyler with him necessarily, though.

Maybe that is my preferred approach, but – I think Jordan Addison is a really, really strong play. That's kind of when I was talking about Wicks, though. Is like I can't eat chalk everywhere. Like I think it's – I really, really prefer the Addison chalk to the Wicks chalk. Problem is, though, yeah, I'm not running back like Malik Washington, but if anyone runs back a stack in this game, it's going to be Malik Washington. So maybe I just pass it up.

With that being said, if anyone watched the Dolphins last week, Malik Washington also could have had fifteen, twenty more DraftKings points. He was missed a couple times on big shots. So, yeah, it's – It's really concentrated. They have a good team total. They have the nut matchup. A lot going for them, obviously, minus the ownership, but I'm going to be in on some Addison for sure. I got really sold there. I don't know how you sold me so good.

Maybe it's because I'm under the weather, but like, well, it's like you said it too. But also the thing about him at $5,300 is it could be I mean, I don't want to exaggerate it, but it could be like six or seven for one fifty and nothing. No touchdown. You just get the one hundred fifty, one hundred forty yards, the bonus, the catches like that'll all rack up. Don't need Kyler. Didn't need Jones because if they do go that route, he's going to be open.

Like you said, Hawkins can bust at $3,300. No one there's no one to really run it back. You don't need to run it back like Addison can do that, whether or not Malik Washington or whoever you want to pick shows up. So I think thinking about the spot, it's like you don't have to love the Jones senior spot or you can be worried a little bit about whatever. But then I think you'd want to Addison. That's that's the way to look at it.

Tight end is loaded. Talk through that quite well. See, I really like that breakdown. That was good. All right, I'll stay with you then. Let's go to the forty Niners at home versus the Broncos. We talked a lot earlier about CMC, very affordable on both sites at $7,700 and $8,800. Got a lift last week, even more playing time. Mike Evans, even if he plays, I think this was the take last week, too.

It's like even when he came in, like we knew we knew he was going to be in and then Kittle still goes off. They still used him a ton. So give us your thoughts here. Bo Nix O-line is being talked about. Right. And his ability here. So what's your thoughts on this game? Man, it was amazing to see Freddie McCaffrey fantasy holders or whatever. Fifty-five percent of snaps week one, fifty-two percent week two, eighty-three percent week three.

Black definitely got faded out a little bit. Again, they're just so beat up at the skill position players. You have to play Christian McCaffrey if you want to win. I think him and George Kittle, if you've watched the San Fran team, it's pretty concentrated right now. Kittle, he is getting a decent amount of ownership at the tight end because he's in between the Bowers McBride, if you want to spend upSpending UpSpending up means choosing a higher-priced player over a cheaper alternative, using more of your lineup's salary budget at that spot. You may also hear it called paying up.Build a version with your preferred expensive player and another without. Before choosing, check whether either version relies on a cheap player whose expected role still depends on unresolved injury news.Full explanation ↗, or the Hawkins punts down below. He's the one.

People are going to click in the midrange if they go there. I'm definitely good clicking it, though. Yeah, McCaffrey. I like Derrick Henry. I like James Cook. McCaffrey's going to be owned, but his receiving props, this seems like prime Christian McCaffrey catching seven dump-offs, favor to score a touchdown. It's just really concentrated now. And Brock Purdy's played as good as it gets.

I don't know how much Purdy, probably not much that I'll play because when you do play him, it's like I'm playing him with George Kittle and or McCaffrey. So it just feels like a very narrow path. I said it last week and it busted or like it burned me, though. And he has a real price tag at $6,700. So I think it's really just Kittle McCaffrey. I'll let you guys talk about the Knicks Waddle stuff. I mean. Yeah, it's whatever.

I don't plan on having too much, but I think those are two really good individual plays. Yeah, I like both sides, but I think maybe you sold me again, but it was also like I think I like Brissett and all the stuff they have going on in that game a little bit more than just stacking Purdy the same way everybody's going to stack him because there's not that many ways to get different on everything that you're doing.

The way I would prefer it is actually to go to the other side, which I wrote this up.

I don't really like it, but nicks Waddle Sutton even Pat Bryant then you can get to cmc kiddo whatever you want there and you're not really using anything else so that all makes a lot of sense to me so I think I'm going to stick more to the one side with the bow nick side and then um you know have some purdy out there but I think I'll I'll move a lot more of my action this morning to the The Arizona side, then the Purdy stuff, and keep the Knicks stuff to still get action.

Plus, I'm going to have CMC everywhere, Kittle everywhere. You're still going to have these guys in your lineups anyway. So Hoop, I'll let you take it from there. All right. Sorry, I was just pulling up because I wanted to see my boy, Pat Bryant. I thought he did more. I guess he caught the touchdown. The guy is freaking good. Like, I love Pat Bryant, but not getting enough action.

Now, this game is, you know, the Forty Niners look like probably the best team in the NFL, if not one of them. And, you know, Brock Purdy has looked absolutely phenomenal. The Brock Purdy stuff is a little bit tough today because, you know, if you're playing Purdy, who are you pairing with? And it's pretty clearly Kittle and, you know, maybe CMC, but it's tough to play this and get different.

The one thing, though, again, you look at the ownership on the slate and we have Purdy at, oh, where the hell did he go? I got FanDuel up, that's why. Purdy, we have five percent. And you're talking about, you know, an MVP candidate on the season projected to score twenty six real life points. Yeah, I mean, he's been he's been phenomenal. The one concern, though, definitely is. You're limited in what you do. Maybe just pair them with McCaffrey.

Cause a lot of people, I think just go right to, to Kittle. So I want to play them. It's easy to get overweight. I don't know. I'm still like Denver is just, it's such a tough team to, to figure out. And it can, it was last season and in terms of like how you want to play it for fantasy. So I'll be under on, on the Denver stuff, but yeah, You know, McCaffrey getting back on the field a ton. They just need them, like Title said.

You know, George Kittle, the price on DK at $5,100 is way too cheap. And then Purdy five percent, I think, is a phenomenal play. But, you know, again, don't just say, all right, I'm going to go Purdy and Kittle. That's what everyone's doing. If they play Kittle, you can do it. But, you know, kind of be careful, I think, in how you stack it. Yeah, I'll stay with you. We got two more games to go.

And the second last game on the slate is the Raiders at home versus Patrick Mahomes and the Chiefs. Big total, what, forty-eight in this one? Not. So I guess you look at the ownership with Mahomes and Cousins, like no one's really going to be there. You guys know where I'm going in this one. And title, you can put it on mute or something for a minute. I am going right back to to receive rice like I don't care.

$6,400 ownership now is like You don't need to lose all your money on a spike, man. Oh, it's not going to be all. It's just going to be – It's a twelve-game slate. In my one-fifty, okay? I'm not, like, hand-building. I'm not hand-building Rashee Rice, all right? I will preface it by saying that. But there's no way this dude is washed, as title says. Nine targets last week, seven for eighty-eight. Let's say he gets – Twelve-yard touchdown.

Now we're looking at eight for a hundred and a touchdown, and everyone's going to want to play him because Rashee Rice is back. He's one twelve-yard touchdown catch away from having a massive, massive day. Massive day? You just had Buckins had a bad day doing the same thing. So, Buckins had – Buckins averaged three points – what, three-point-something yards per carry? Like, no. You know what I'm saying? He had over seventy yards, a touchdown, caught some passes. It's a better day than Rice had, yeah.

But now we had a historic day for Rice coming up. It would have been. I said would have. One more big catch, right? I'm going back to it, though. Kelsey, I think – on FanDuel, really cheap at $5,500.

Uh genti low ownedLeverageLeverage 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 ↗ like not many people are going to be going to him and then you have Brock Bowers you know I'm still hesitant how many people are willing to pay the big price hesitant to to believe how many people are willing to pay the big price tag at tight end with with so many cheap guys so I could see a world where Bowers and McBride come in lower on than people are thinking because you look at, you know, Bauer's $6,900.

Oh, do I pay $6,900 or just play a punt for $3,000 and a guy like TJ Hawkins? So I do think the ownership can be held in check and a guy like Bowers. But man, just absolute stud slate breaker at the position. But my favorite way for sure, if you are playing the Casey stuff, my homes to rice and then maybe bring it back withBring-BackIn the NFL, a bring-back is usually a wide receiver, tight end or running back from the team facing your quarterback stack.Pick the bring-back who gains the most when his team falls behind. In football that's usually the opponent's top pass catcher, not a running back who loses carries in a comeback.Full explanation ↗ Bowers or something.

Yeah, the Kelley spot, like you said, cheap on FanDuel as well, but is opposite of Brock Bauer's to flip it there. But Rashi Rice title, every Parker Washington lineup could be Rice. Just drop the hundred bucks and play Rice. Please keep doing that. Everyone, please play Rashi Rice over Parker Washington. Not a bad pivot, actually. That's a good call. The Megan Shock guy that barely breaks twenty or the guy that can absolutely nuke slates in Rice.

We got to have some sort of side, but I mean, it can't be a one V one, but I was like, I'll, I'll even give you a three. I don't even know the projector. I'll give you three points. Is that good, or what do I need? Three points. That's not – no. What do we have? Fourteen point seven. I want odds. Give me odds. Fourteen point seven versus seventeen point five. That's three points. Yeah, so you're giving him three more points. Just give me some odds in Rice outscoring.

No, but are you giving him six? You're giving him three more points than what the projection's got. I would have to – I'd be three points in the hole. I'd start – you start with three for Murshi Rice. I start with zero. Yeah, that's a good deal. No, that's not fun. What do you mean that's not fun? That's not a fun bet. He's doubling the delta. I get it.

You want me to try and calculate these odds quick on what three points comes out to be? You're not going to... You're not going to get me good. I was just trying to think. Let me think of something. I want something friendly for the show. So let me think. Just Rice outscoring. He's giving you plus six. Yeah, I just want something friendly for the show. So I just want Rice. You guys can put it in chat.

I'm just taking Rice over Parker Washington. Rice to outscore Parker Washington. Huh? Yeah, it doesn't matter for title. Yeah, I know, I know, I know. I want to do something friendly for the show, I'm saying. So I'm going to just take Rice over Parker Washington. If Rice wins, title has to do something. If Washington wins, then Hoop has to do something. Crop top or shoot. Yeah, something like that. Something fun for the show for next week. So I'll take Rice. Title can have his boy Parker Washington.

And we'll go from there. All right. Hoop and I used to play plenty. I had to have it back in the day. Not anymore. A long time ago. Who can play on Nades, though? Nades doesn't want the smoke anymore. Nades does not want that. I'm going to start my lineup with Matthews Golden. If I ever play Nades again, I don't care what the slate is. I'll take a zero. If Matthews Golden not on the slate, I'm starting my teams with Matthews Golden.

If I ever play Nades again and I had to... I'm so shocked, man. Like, we only got one game anyway, but I'm so shocked. Title said you can have plus six on Parker Washington versus our audience. Yeah, I mean, if I was going to bet money on it, yeah, but this is just going to be friendly for the show. This is just going to be a friendly entertainment for the show sort of thing if we can come up with if someone comes up with a good idea.

I'm not creative, so if someone comes up with a good idea, just give me Rice over Parker, Washington. If we're betting money on it, then yes, I need some fantasy points to start. The chat said crop top versus steak tartare bet. I do. I could grab a crop top from my daughter. That is in play. It could be a crop top bet. She's got a lot of crop tops. Okay, double crop top bet right now. That's what it is. I'm down for pretty much whatever.

Are you in title? Yeah, of course. I'm not going to lose, so that's fine. But otherwise, I'm not home. I'd have to have my wife bring one back. I don't got too much else here, so we'll go to the last game. Then, Title, I'll go to you. It's Seahawks at home versus the Chargers. JSN, you would have thought more people want to get to them. This guy's been just going off. But now, $9,100, slate dynamics, all these different factors.

Give us your thoughts on JSN the rest of this game. Well, I just want to just touch on the KC Vegas game quick. It feels like, yeah, last week with everything with Mahomes, it does feel like a spot. Now Mahomes could be the one. I mean, they're implied for twenty seven points in a dome. And I do think the Raiders are able to keep up a little bit if there was ever a spot. Yeah, I think Mahomes to Kelley, Mahomes to Rice, Mahomes to Worthy.

I don't hate it. I don't hate it. Only when Mahomes is in the lineup. But I actually like it more than I do most weeks. It's a low-owned stack. It's away in the afternoon. I think the biggest part, the Vikings in the afternoon, the Niners game we just talked about in the afternoon, this feels like the pivot of the pivot when you need to play catch-up at lower ownership. Instead of playing Brock, go Kelley.

So I'll definitely be looking – Always late swap if you need to do it. But this afternoon window, this feels like this is a good spot if you need to get off of some of that chalk. And then Vegas side, yeah, Brock Bowers looks good. Chargers, Seattle, it's really hard for me to get to this game. I'd say probably one of my least favorite on the slate. JSN you can always play showing around like ten percent. He's just so expensive. Like there's nothing bad to say about him.

If he has thirty five again, you might need him. He has thirty, though. It rarely absolutely kills you outside of that. If you need a punt tight end, A.J. Barner is a pivot from Hawkins I guess I'm fine with. Better in Darnold stuff. Darnold's not going to be played again. And then I guess Emmanuel Wilson, Seahawks defense. Jaden Price went to the IR, going to miss about four games. Emmanuel Wilson, let's see, he's projected. He's already getting some goal line work.

Plus one thirty five to score, which isn't terrible on the slate. Forty nine and a half rushing prop. Is that good? No, but no one's going down in this price range at running back. So it's just you're flipping a bill and getting on a completely different roster constructionRoster ConstructionRoster construction is how you organize a DFS lineup within its salary cap and roster rules. It includes where you spend or save, which positions you prioritize, and how your players fit together.Build two versions around your biggest spending decision, then compare every player who changes. Revisit the comparison when injury news changes the available value.Full explanation ↗ than most people. Mainly that probably lead you to spending upSpending UpSpending up means choosing a higher-priced player over a cheaper alternative, using more of your lineup's salary budget at that spot. You may also hear it called paying up.Build a version with your preferred expensive player and another without. Before choosing, check whether either version relies on a cheap player whose expected role still depends on unresolved injury news.Full explanation ↗ that tight end. Don't mind doing that. But yeah, I think I think it's probably one of the worst games on the slate.

This Chargers team has to show me something. Yeah, you might be able to do like a late swap. Darnold, JSN, and Barner for Mahomes, Rice, and Kelley. If you want to take something like that, it looks like pretty close. So as you said, though, nobody really playing Darnold here.

If $9,100 JSN gets home, typically it's close I know we looked at this yesterday on on leverage lane it was like last week wasn't needed but the perfect lineups a bunch of the perfect lineups at the top within the top twenty of them were with Darnold and jsn it's just the gino ones got there because the way the field played and so on and so forth but it's never a bad idea if you're doing that especially hoping that $9,100 jsn gets all the way there I think it was our guy sean sully mentioned it in the chat said the Barner is a pivot over Hawk.

If you're running that game stackGame StackIn the NFL, a game stack usually combines a quarterback, one or two of his pass catchers and one or more players from the opposing offense.Target games where the spread is close as well as the total high. A high total with a lopsided spread can turn into a blowout where only one side keeps scoring.Full explanation ↗ up or you're running that stack side with Darnold, JSN, Barner, definitely think that's good. McConkie, they said, is going to play. And then I saw a bunch of people hop on it and say they just don't think it'll be as effective. How would you know? But if you are wanting to pick off something from the other side, you could still roll with a QJ or something. And look, he's out there regardless.

If McConkie's out there, maybe it's better for him. If McConkie gets hurt again or isn't up to speed, if you're thinking Darnold and these guys are going to do things, they're going to have to be chucking from the other side. It's just been so bad for the Chargers, though. Hoops, I'll let you take it from there. Chargers at the Seahawks. Yeah, I mean, that's the main thing. It's been horrible for the Chargers. It's been really, really bad.

It makes it tough to get in on this game. It is a low total. Chargers projected to score a seven-team. It is wild. Just going back to the Chargers, they bring in the offensive mastermind, Mike McDaniel, and their team totals are now under twenty consistently. These NFL retread coaches, it never works out. But, yeah, JSN in a tier of his own now pricing-wise, ownership is going to be held in check. He's nuked the first three slates of the season.

So it's tough if you are hand-building to get to him. But, again, like I talked about, if you're in on some of these cheap stacks, like instead of playing like CMC and these cheap – and you might be able to make it work with him too, but like – Go to JSN, who's going to be low-ownedLeverageLeverage 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 ↗. $9,100, phenomenal play. Manuel Wilson, $4,700. I think he's a fine play. Barner, full punt, fine. But I got to see something out of the Chargers.

And I know you said Ladd McConkie.

A little dinged up and you don't know how effective he's going to be he hasn't been effective when he hasn't wasn't dinged up this year so it's just a really bad team really bad offense but jsn $9,100 ten percent you know if you're building a lot of teams you just you have to include him at this point yeah he was having that one good game I think is what it came down to with McConkey there but yeah all right um title any final thoughts on the slate from you No, I think, yeah, again, the late swap stuff, if you're in first place after the early games, I mean, obviously you're happy, but there's plenty of ownership in these late ones.

And, yeah, if you have a great start or if you have like if you're one offOne-OffIn NFL DFS, a one-off is a player you select outside your stacks, commonly a running back or a receiver without his quarterback. An opposing receiver intentionally paired with your stack instead serves as a bring-back.Before adding a one-off, compare him with an affordable teammate of your existing stack. Decide whether his individual upside is worth passing up that extra scoring connection.Full explanation ↗ someone, you have a snowflake, probably not going to be enough. And you have a lot of Vikings stuff. There are pivots that a lot lower ownership. I mean, McCaffrey, Aaron Jones, Hawkins, Addison, Kyler, these guys all going to be decently owned. There's Bowers. Kenneth Walker, if you need to get different, there's plenty of pivots.

And if you are already different and your lower pieces did well early, you can swap on to some of 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 ↗. It's a good slate. I'm really excited to watch football all day like always. So good luck, everybody. Yeah, this is the one to watch for, for sure. We'll obviously be over in the Discord if you guys are at Ship It Nation. If you're not, you can get in, but we're in the Discord all afternoon.

People are talking about all this stuff back and forth about what these late swap decisions look like. Go collect again. Happy birthday to you. But yes, as the Minnesota stuff is going to be really owned, if your morning goes poorly, probably don't want to be sticking with Aaron Jones Sr. And CMC and all the same stuff everybody else has. You're going to want to look at what are your options.

If there's a better option out there, probably want to move to that hoop uh any final thoughts from you before we get out of here no I mean good slate a lot of different ways to go um we kind of you know broke it down from every perspective so um yeah good luck to everyone in your contest let's have a big week four and then we'll be back tomorrow uh for the Monday night game you guys see at the top the $45,000 one hundred forty seven dollars in cash and prizes if you've been living under a rock Ship It Games still going on we've had our first nine winners up to this point this week the triple j's the uh jason joe and james will

All be in the mix for the share ship and the three thirty three Wildcat, the Golden Shipper, still has open seats in it. So if you are a member, it is any all-access or NFL-only member, content, Sabre or not, doesn't matter. As long as you're an all-access or NF-only member, you're in the mix. At the end of the season, we'll be giving away the cash prizes.

Week one of the playoffs will be the finals, where the top ten of the fifty Golden Shippet ticket winners will play off. So check that out. If you want to go to ShippetNation.com, click Join the Nation. All the promos, etc., are down here. All right, guys, that's going to do it for this week. Appreciate you sticking with it here with me as I'm losing my voice and going through it all.

But let's have a big day for title, for hoop, and for myself, toe tag, and tambo. Let's ship it.