NFL Week 5 – Leverage Lane | DraftKings & FanDuel DFS Strategy

I know everyone's going to be looking for the same thing this week, but what were some of the things now for anyone who didn't catch it last week that you sort of saw and were able to bring that into your lane and have confidence to say over all those other options that he was going to be your guy? Because it's not really results oriented when you talked about it beforehand. You had your own stuff there.

So I'll let you go ahead on that one. Yeah, I mean, so this is one of those cases where like the call really wasn't about football takes, you know, it wasn't like, Oh man, this is a much better matchup than people realize because of this or that. Like it was just purely game theory. It was just, Hey, I have a really good read on 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 ↗ here. There are like five running backs in this, in this range.

I'm let's see if we can remember 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 ↗ that was right around him. We, we had Jeremiah love Aaron Jones. Who Aaron Jones, a hundred bucks more. Yeah. Jones. There were, uh, we had Skattebo who was, was also clearly fading a little bit in ownership. There was, there was another one that was fairly popular. Um, regardless, like the way, the way I talked it through, uh, for the leverage lane was basically like the guys around him are not more Likely to succeed.

And they're certainly not more Likely to give us like a huge score because tyrants touchdown equity was kind of his, you know, just in his own tier there. And, uh, That really is what came to fruition, right? It helped that the Eagles secondary did such a good job that Stafford was just checking down all game. So that was really nice. But the touchdowns, right? That's what it comes down to. And you mentioned the Kenneth Walker run out.

When Walker scored that second touchdown, I couldn't help but think like... My guys have never had that kind of luck. You know, we're coming down the stretch. There's like eight minutes left in the game. And I'm thinking, man, I just need like another eight points from this guy. And then all of a sudden he gets. Twenty two fantasy points in like two seconds of game time.

Like, you know, that has never once happened for me, but I will say Kyron was pretty good down the stretch. He had, you know, that final drive. He had a number of receptions, got into the end zone for a second time, but. It played out the way that we hoped, right? It was like, hey, all these guys who are getting, you know, I had Love steaming up to thirty five percent. That was one of the key reads ownership wise of last week.

Like there was there was absolutely no reason why Jeremiah Love should have been three, almost four times as owned as Kyron Williams. Just look at what Kyron Williams has done over the last couple of years. And I think part of that, too, was like, so much about finding good DFS plays is just recognizing where there's an ownership inefficiency.

And with Kyron, there was a clear ownership inefficiency in the sense that people were off of him despite the massive drop in price because Corum's role was increasing. But Corum's role is increasing in the sense that he's going from twenty five to forty percent of the carries in between the twenties. Kyron is still the passing down guy.

Kyron is still the goal line guy who cares if he gets three or four fewer carries a game in between the twenties when, you know, that's like maybe a point and a half of, of equity or something like that. Like that doesn't matter. That doesn't affect his overall range of outcomes. His ceiling is still really, really good for that price. As we saw last week. Yeah, there was a few other guys. I was trying to look at the chalk running backs from last week.

I'll flash it over here just to finish out this thought, and then we'll go into it. Using DFSOS.com, code SHIPIT over there gets you guys fifty percent off. If you want to check it out and see how the best DFS players actually play, you can get all the data, including the new FanDuel data that you could never have before. So you can see it works with all the sites that you're already using out there.

But if we look at this last week one drop king I believe won the the mega milli just on an absolute tear shot at the one drop king but it was jeremiah love Christian McCaffrey, Aaron Jones was way up there. Chase Brown, Braylon Allen had a little bit. And then, yeah, nobody was up there. Chase Brown was the other one I was thinking of. It was Chase Brown that...

And Brown ended up being pretty good for largely the same reason that Kyron was, where he really ran hot in terms of his receptions. But even there, okay, the difference is Kyron had more touchdown equity as we've seen over the years. So, yeah, I thought just we... We were given a gift by the field last week, both in the ownership of that group of running backs and in the ownership of that main Jacksonville-Cincinnati game.

I don't think we're getting the same breaks this week. The truck this week seems a lot stronger. I got a segue. We'll get there in a second for sure. Um, you know, Berga OD says tough week. Can we really fade or we'll be on it? If we just started with that, that would ruin the whole purpose. You got to stick around with us. We've got a lot to talk about, but we're not going to spend much time reminiscing.

We aren't going to spend much time on marketing either, but I'm going to quickly tell you there is a huge ship at games announcement. So I got to make this, this is special. So Alex referenced it. We had, you know, huge wins across our communities last week. And one of our guys sharks, uh, sharks, Thousand or four, thirteen hundreds. Anyway, it was over $40,000 plus that he won on a smaller amount of buy ins. And he did this last year.

Jamie is his name. Just an awesome, awesome dude. So shout out to Jamie. Shout out to Sharks. But this is huge. A ship it donation. So donated $4,000 eight hundred and fifty three dollars. This is outlandish. So again, cannot say enough. Thanks. High gratitude for sharks. Just an absolute stud to round up the ship at games prize pool to $50,000. Cash and prizes. So what does that mean? Right? When you're looking at it here, let me go back to it.

Just so you guys can see, if you go to the website, shipitnation.com, if you're, you'll be living under a rock, we're the only site giving out $50,000 now in cash and prizes. But if you go to Ship It Games and you click the link at the top, It will show you here your any all access and NFL only member is eligible. It's a community driven contest. There is fifty Golden ship it tickets available. You can get in at any time.

You can win this week. The Golden shipper that you play in the top three win a Golden ship a ticket. We now have twelve winners four weeks in. So the prize pool for them just all got bigger for what they'll be playing for. There is still the remaining spots to go so they can get in starting this week. But just so everybody knows, the prize pool got bumped.

It is now $12,000 for first, as opposed to $10,000 cash, real money, $6,000 as opposed to $5,000, $3,000 as opposed to $2,500. The twelve fifties for fourth and fifth went up to fifteen hundred and the five placements of a thousand from six to ten went up to twelve hundred. You can see all the details on ShipItGames.com.

But all you have to do is join Ship It Nation and be an all access or NFL only member or Think about it like another buy-in for your tournaments. You're just buying in. You're getting a great community, ton of content, lots of stuff incoming that we're working on. And then you get to play and Ship It Games as well. So that's like, that's like doing satellites for free. That's cool. It's what we think about. Your content is a contest, basically. It's like you're buying into a satellite.

You get to play each week, no matter what, as long as you're in. You get to hang out in the community. There's tons of great people in there talking through strategies, things like that. And then you actually get that as a bonus on top of everything else. It's a fun thing that we do. There will be a PGA Ship It game. So I would look at the annual membership if it saves you some money there as well.

But yeah, you don't see somebody giving away $4,000 eight hundred fifty three dollars. So we have plans to take care of sharks. Even more than he knows. But just to note it, that's just an incredible gesture and what the community is really all about. So as Alex said, I think it was a million bucks across both communities that people won and some combined in there, sure. But it was a great week and we're trying to do it again this week.

Let's talk about this because it's a segue to where we're going to go. We're not going to spend much more time on last week, but I talked about it in my leverage lane, Jacksonville, Cincinnati, just getting crazy 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 ↗ last week in that spot. It was just like being fixated on as the game of the week. I can look at it and you could talk about it, but not the same this week, right?

I don't think this week you're looking at the Detroit Arizona game thinking it's like the Jacksonville Cincy game of last week. Are you?

No, I mean, so I would even go as far as to say like the difference in the totals doesn't even tell the full story because on the, like it's, I think it's, it might be up to nine now, but whether it's an eight point difference or a nine point difference between that total and the second highest total, like the other thing is so many of these other games have rain issues or some wind issues.

And then with Arizona and Detroit, it's like you have Detroit who's number one in in terms of explosive passes allowed and then you have Arizona who's number six and explosive passes allowed in terms of like allowing a ton so Detroit allows the most so so much of like DFS success and game environments come from explosive pass plays so it's not just that we have this like huge difference in overall scoring equity but the way in which points are going to be scored in this game seems to be conducive for DFS points this is a really really hard slate I

We basically have two options and uh you know we're kind of jumping the the gun a little bit here but this feels like a slate where you you have to make a decision every single lineup one of two things before you do anything else and the first is I'm playing this game in a different way or you know you know chalk sack in 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 ↗ way or I'm fading this game and I need the rest of my lineup to tell the story of how this game fails last week I thought we could avoid that Jacksonville Cincinnati game and kind of not worry about it.

It was just like, okay, well that game might let people down. That's kind of what happened this week. I don't think we can simply outscore those, uh, you know, lineups with, with that game, unless our lineup is telling a story of how that game fails, uh, whether that's, you know, Hey, you know, the Detroit defense just really shows up this week, gets a bunch of sacks.

And consequently it's a, it's a slower second half game where Detroit just controls the ball and runs the ball a lot. Right. We, everything this week has to be a little bit more purposeful. Yeah, and I think there's more to be talked about, but I will start with my tangent. I said it earlier just to go into it. I guess you're the data guy, and you can definitely go against me on this for certain, but I just...

The sites that are finding the information and the nuggets, I appreciate that side of it. I love curating. Tambo's Tidbits, I've done for years. I think it's very interesting still. I'm not shitting on this. Don't take me wrong, but I just... Like the last three times this happened, or there's been seven events where this was the case. It's not even against them. They're putting out information. People want to learn it. I want to, I'm reading it. I'm talking about it.

So it's working, but like the last three weeks, aren't this week, the last seven events, aren't this event success does leave clues. And there's things we want to pick up from these things and try and make cases and talk game theory and, and think about this stuff. But realistically, like whatever happened in the last seven games, the whole thing can change, right?

For today you got oh and four teams that all of a sudden blow another team out they're not even supposed to the other night Dallas was like far and away like nobody could see Tampa Bay doing even sticking in that game and they win the game handily like it was easy for them so lots of shit changes and has nothing to do with that all we can do is take the data that we have at hand in my opinion And that's what this show is all about and say, okay, here's what everybody's doing.

We at least know that that's a nice part. We know what everyone's doing. How can we go against that? Or what would it look like if we were, and especially from a, you know, 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 ↗ perspective where it's like, if you only got one shot, how do you want to handle that? Knowing that everybody else only has one shot. And then we do talk a little bit of one lineup stuff too.

Like what if everybody else has one fifty and you've got one from a satellite ticket. So yeah, Talk to me a little bit about that. I'm sure you've seen some of it as well, maybe dug into it yourself as well. What are you seeing? What do you think of that? Does it matter? How much do you take away from it? I'm very curious. It's a good question.

I think the thing we always have to remember is the NFL, we would love it if we had great Sample sizes and we could take a lot from the data, but the truth is these games are so volatile. They're so random. I think that You mentioned the last seven times this happened. A Sample size of seven NFL games is literally meaningless for what's going to happen in the future.

I did think there were a couple really good either comparisons or data points that I did see people make around the industry, so I'll give two quick shout-outs. A jam to win. Um, I thought made a really good comparison, really good analogy where this is like a core slate and MLB DFS. I'm not going to, I'm not gonna spend too much time on that analogy.

Cause I think a lot of people watching probably don't play MLB DFS, but essentially it's just like, man, there's this one game that goes so far above everything else. And one of the things I always look for, like the very first thing I look for on a core slate is like, okay, well, is there a cheap pitcher that I can help?

That can both help differentiate me from the field, but also can help me fit in these really high-priced stacks in course fields, so on and so forth. And so one of the first questions that we should be asking about this slate is, well, do we have pieces that we can use around this game that can not just help us fit them, but also help us separate? And I think that's one of the things that made...

That where like this like became really difficult is with the Ashen Genting news where now you have the entire field has access to $4,200 Mike Washington who projects extremely well. You can't really differentiate around him. You can't pivotPivotA pivot in DFS is an alternative player or lineup combination you choose instead of another option. Tournament pivots usually seek comparable scoring upside at lower ownership, meaning fewer competing lineups use them.Before swapping, check what the replacement changes around it: your remaining salary, teammates, opposing players and available later-starting options.Full explanation ↗ off of him to, you know, another $4,300 running back or something like that and expect to separate from Mike Washington. And so that part makes it a little bit difficult.

And then the second thing that I really enjoyed kind of focusing on this game was from Sam Brott of ETR who talked about the other games that were like this. But the interesting thing about his analysis was he looked at it like, well, okay, when those games go off. So like, let's say, let's say we knew ahead of time that this Detroit Arizona game was going to finish.

Is that enough to say that we know for sure that we need this game that we need pieces from this game or is it possible for a game like that to to really hit but it's it's random guys right it's it's Elijah Higgins catching a touchdown and then it's you know penny sewell catching a touchdown for Detroit and maybe there's a defensive touchdown here there and it's like maybe you know the production is balanced enough where Gibbs gets twenty five. St.

Brown gets twenty. LaPorta gets fifteen. Jameson Williams gets fourteen. On the other side, it's like McBride gets twenty two. Michael Wilson gets seventeen. It's like these are all fine scores, but there's not a single score that you need to have in your lineup. And so I thought it was really cool the way he kind of broke it down and just talked about, like, even if this game hits, it doesn't guarantee that we're going to need it. And so.

Yeah, it's just like a really, really unique puzzle this week that we have to solve. And as you and I have talked about, that's what we think is the most fun part of DFS. So even though this is a difficult week, I think it's just an enjoyable one to, for one thing, just sit here and talk through, but then also really... Dive in deep tonight.

I think this is a week where, you know, ownershipOwnershipOwnership is the percentage of lineups in a contest that include a given player. Projected ownership is an estimate made before lock; actual ownership is posted once the contest locks.Ownership isn't something to avoid; it's something to build around. The goal is understanding how the field is likely to build, then finding your edge relative to that.Full explanation ↗ projections could change a lot, not just with news, but also as people search for different ways to, you know, sneakily play this game. And I think, you know, as we talked about a lot of the time, like the number one thing kind of formula for steam on a player, you know, someone who's projected at ten percent and twenty five percent. Everyone's like, well, how the hell did that happen?

The number one way that happens is everybody has the same thought where, hey, this is really sneaky. It's actually not sneaky. And I think that's one of the things I do pretty well over with the ownership analysis is like finding who everyone thinks is sneaky and ends up not being sneaky. Yeah, if you're thinking it, chances are others are more than you think. That's one of them for sure. And Greg, we'll definitely get to this. That's part of Leverage Lane.

If you're joining us for the first time, make sure to hit that thumbs up, subscribe to the channel. But we do talk about game stacksGame 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 ↗ later. And one of the things about a slate like this too is that, yes, I think this is when we get to the common build here in a second, Alex, of Brissett, Wilson, and McBride. That is a lot of the target shareTarget ShareTarget share is the percentage of a team's targets (passes thrown toward an intended receiver) that go to one player. A receiver who sees 8 of his team's 32 targets has a 25 percent target share.Judge target share over the last three or four games, not the full season, especially after a trade, an injury or a quarterback change. The most recent role is the one you are paying for.Full explanation ↗ over there. So you say that's the other tricky part of it. You're like, well, it might not work out.

But it's like, well, if it does for them, though, it's kind of you know where it's going typically. You can make a case for Harrison and Bourne and things like that and Love, and we'll talk about all that stuff when we get there. But just noting it, it's like – Usually when you're looking for another game stack, you can find something that's more condensed.

And if it was to hit, you're like, well, that gives me a bunch of stuff going to one spot for points that could make up for those others. I might even be getting discounts as it's a salary constraint game that we play. So I'm getting that. Those can work in my favor. But then I'm also getting a unique build. Most people only have Gibbs.

I've now got Gibbs, this guy and this guy, and most people can't get to all three of them at the same time or something like that. So when you can find that and work it in your favor, I definitely think that's a way to 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 ↗ it. And we'll get to that later. But before we do, let's go over here now. Anything else you want to touch on from last week before we get into this?

I mean, this to me, I said is like, you know, you did the baseball analogy or somebody else did, but I'm saying like the the golf analogy, most people that have watched us before on leverage lane is a PGA DFS edition. It's the weeks we have to have the Scott Scheffler conversation. And how does that work?

And I think something that, again, whether people follow PGA DFS or not, that's kind of a takeaway for me with that is what I was just hitting on before the previous point. With Scott Scheffler, the conversation is about combinatorial ownership. Like, okay, if him, then this, that means this gets left open, right? This is an area that people just can't get to, or this is a thing people can't get to.

Because there's stacking and correlationCorrelationCorrelation describes how two players' fantasy scores move together. Positively correlated players tend to have big games at the same time, usually because one player's success directly adds points for the other.When you build a tournament lineup, ask which of your players need the same thing to happen. The more of them that do, the higher your lineup's ceiling.Full explanation ↗ and more of it in football and NFL DFS, it's like, okay, if people are landing here, that means they probably aren't getting to this, and they can't get to this, or they wouldn't be able to do that. And that's what we want to talk about on this show. Yeah, on that point, I think Gibbs is like Scottie Scheffler this week, for sure. I think that's another really good comparison.

And to that point, one of the things that we talked about all season with Scottie was whether or not to play Scottie isn't about how well you think Scottie's going to play. It's how... How good are the pieces that you need to play in order to fit him? And like, sometimes, you know, major championships was like, you know, the $6,000, $7,000 players were actually really good players. A lot of the time they were crappy players.

And I was like, you can't play Scott because even if he wins, your line was probably going to suck. This is one of those weeks where like Gibbs is at a price point where you By all means, he should do well, but you need cheap plays that are actually good to fit him.

And like I said, unfortunately now with Mike Washington and a couple other spots at receiver, I do think this is a week where, yeah, he's probably a very good play and he's deserving of the ownership he's going to get. And that ownership might be as high as like sixty, maybe even seventy percent in certain high stakes single entry contests. Yeah, so let's do this. I've got – this is a version. Look, there's a bunch of ways you go.

Roman Wilson could be – Williams, if people play him, will wait on the news. There is a bunch of injury news that we're still waiting on. I feel like we have a clear path to some of it. But just looking at this right now, I think kind of the setup, again, could be off in a couple spots, but Jacobs, Wilson, McBride, you get Gibbs in there. You got Noma Nungai. I threw Swift in. The Gentee official news, by the way, is what?

Let me just go to what it is now. It came out that he got downgraded yesterday, but I'm going to run over here. He fully mispracticed, I believe. The data puts that at something like eighty percent to miss. Yeah, Thursday. He went from limited Thursday to DMP Friday with the ankle. Questionable for a team that just ruled out four quarters. Yeah, that's another piece of information there, but just to note it. So we're assuming that we're going to see Washington in here.

Now let me go back. And so I threw him in. Mm-hmm. I threw Rowan Wilson and Trey Harris, and it let you afford the Bengals. You could change this around. If it's a cheaper D, which it probably is, if we look at 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 ↗ this week, it can be spread out, but I don't think people are going to care that much. But if you went to, say, the Commanders, is more popular, it would get you more money to upgrade one of Harris or Wilson.

Obviously, Quentin Johnston ruled out there. So Harris is picking up a little bit of steam. I think Rowan Wilson was already popping in a lot of places because the Pittman stuff. So I don't know, close enough for me. Anything you want to comment on here first before we start breaking it down?

No I I think man like for one thing I very much agree with this um I also would say like you know the the cheap wide receivers is where initially I thought everyone was gonna have to go uh you know yesterday was kind of a crazy news day maybe it was even Thursday where uh both Higgins and chase were surprised like full participants in practice and and it was really weird because the the only news I had heard previously was like Higgins was spotted at practice showing up uh you

Know a little bit late on his own because he wasn't participating the first few drills he was doing some kind of rehab work on the side and then a couple hours later it's like oh by the way he practiced in full he's listed as a full participant so you know that was Strange I I I do still think there's a chance that we learn that maybe Higgins isn't going to play or he's leaning towards not playing today, so we'll see what that news is like when we get it this afternoon.

But yeah, it looked like there were going to be one, maybe even two potential cheap Cincy receivers. It looked like a sickie was going to be a super popular tight end. Now that's out the window, but... You know, right as we thought, okay, now there's going to be fewer ways for people to fit this Detroit Arizona game. Then the Gentine news, uh, hit and now it looks like Mike Washington.

So yeah, it's, it's just, this is, it's going to be a really difficult week to solve because everything that the field is doing is like really, really high probability of success. And so, uh, we've, we either have to try to like, you know, uh, thin, a very, uh, thread, a very thin needle, or we need to get off of it and tell a story that's not Likely to work out, but it has a chance to work out.

And then, then the question is like, okay, if you're not playing that game, which of the ugly games do you go to that has a better chance of success than, than what the, uh, you know, the, the Vegas total implies. Yeah, so one of the things I talked about earlier with all that said, because it is a tricky week from that perspective, but you mentioned it with, I always forget how to pronounce his username, but like Wah-Wah-Woo-Ha or whatever, like Wah-Woo-Ha over here.

Yeah, that's Sam who I mentioned earlier. Sam, yeah, that's right. I forgot his first name, but just to note, obviously very sharp, extremely good DFS player across all sports. A lot of respect for him. I think the note there, I would say, is that was one of the ones I referenced where it's like there's three games, so it is what it is.

But the best part, and you did talk about this a little bit already, but noting it, is that on all the slates, these other games still pop off. One of the problems, mistakes I think people make when there's still eleven games on the slate is just because this game is eight points apart, nothing else is going to pop off. That was in JM's information.

Another sharp DFS player, I've been doing it for years, a lot of respect for him as well over a one-week season, says, you know... He's got the seven game Sample. Again, I don't like the seven game and like there's a top score on those slates. You got to go find. Yes, there is. But also you could play that top score with the games that went off.

It's more about when the game went off, were the pieces needed in that game to make an optimal or to make the lineup that we're looking for? Or could you get to it in a different path? And you could have just got the pieces from that game and the top score from the other games. But the one piece that stood out was how everybody just writes off the forty five point totals. One of those games can have sixty points. Two of them can.

You have no idea what's going to happen. I think there was a game during one of those sets, Alex, where it was like... I think it was the thirty nine and a half total and it got to sixty one points. And it's like no one would expect it. No, no, exactly. But especially in the larger field tournaments, I think there's definitely some conversation to be had here for the sizing of your tournament. We already know that overstacks are better in smaller field tournaments, right?

If you're playing in a smaller field tournament where it's like that's way more Likely to happen. The the thirty nine point total that score sixty is not Likely to be in many rosters. So you're not as scared of it as you might be. It's no different than we talk about in a super large field tournamentGPP (Guaranteed Prize Pool)A GPP is a tournament whose prize pool is guaranteed to pay out in full even if the contest does not fill. Payouts are steep: a small group at the top wins most of the money.Before you enter a tournament lineup, ask how it finishes first, not just how it cashes. If you cannot name that scenario, rebuild it.Full explanation ↗ when everyone's like, well, all freaking point one percent. Sean Tucker just broke the slate. Well, no, he didn't because he's point one percent.

So he's only in a very limited number of lineups and they screwed it up somewhere else. Not their fault, but it just happened. So it's not Likely to hurt you at all. The week that that happened, I'm referencing, was like a Bucky Irving week a couple of years ago. He was chalk. He still got like twenty five points and did well. But Sean Tucker, I think, had thirty eight or thirty seven.

Didn't show up anywhere in the top ten lineups in the Milly Maker, the twenty dollar, the big one. Now, when you get the smaller field, this is where people are having a tougher time of saying, why am I going to try and figure out the 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 ↗ I need when I can just play this game stack and then, you know, mix some pieces in around it? So.

Let's start having that conversation because I think that's the key component here of, you know, this is 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 ↗ style build, but the chalk style build is going to be fitting in a lot of value pieces, right? Mike Washington, Trey Harris, Rowan Wilson. We'll see about Williams and some of these other guys from your data and your data construction or your 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 ↗ data. Just talk a little bit about what is good when it comes to that type of stuff.

Like where are people reaching for the chalk versus sometimes like Mike Washington is a $4,200 potentially starting running back here. We're expecting it to be the case. Where does the data say to go and where does it say to avoid, if you will, in some of these spots like this? It's a great question. One thing I'll kind of caution ahead of time is like.

We can talk about how cheap running back chalk has performed in the past, but we also need to contextualize that with like a lot of the time when people have played cheap running back chalk in the past, it's like, they're, they're a little bit desperate, right? They, they, they know, okay, I want to jam in Puka. I want to jam in Gibbs, whoever it's been from, uh, from past seasons. I want to jam in Christian McCaffrey.

And in order to do that, I'll play this guy at four to eight hundred, something like that, who, uh, Like he's, he's got a role. Maybe he's the pass down back, but I'm playing him solely so that I can get the other pieces of my lamp that I want. Whereas Mike Washington here is like, if, if Gibbs is out the rest of the season and Washington is just the lead back, he's going to be $6,500 $7,000 by the end of the season.

Like almost no question about it. So you're getting like $2,500 to $3,000 worth of discount on a player. It the New England defense is really beat up. There's no Carlson Davis. There's no Christian Gonzalez. I think Barmore is probably still out for them. I could be wrong about that, so don't quote me on that one. But the point being, this is a good spot. He projects really, really well. His probability of success is really high.

We don't need past roster construction data to tell us that, hey, Mike Washington is Likely to succeed and he's unlikely to fail here. That being said... What we have seen in the past is that running back is the position you you want 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 ↗ for for chalk a little bit more. And you want to differentiate a little bit more at the top of wide receiver.

Now, I think one of the kind of ways we can interpret that is that both the field and this kind of the way it plays out is like there's more of a priority. On the floor for running backs, more of a priority on ceiling for wide receivers. Makes sense. The, you know, the range of outcomes is a little bit more narrow for running backs, especially guys like Washington and Gibbs who kind of have this full role.

Uh, whereas at receiver, the range of outcomes is a lot wider because you get so many more explosive plays. You get those games like city lamb had where, uh, the defense apparently is just like, okay with you going off and catching every, every pass. Whereas there are other games where it's like, you know, CD, let's say CD has seven receptions in the first half.

Like everything they're doing in the second half is designed to say, okay, he's not going to beat us in the second half. We're going to make somebody else beat us. And then they do. And so there's just a much wider range of outcomes for receivers.

And so you get that pattern in the roster construction data, but yeah, like again, so that, What that says is, okay, if we should be prioritizing expensive running back chalk more than cheap running back chalk, if you're then saying, therefore, I don't want to play Mike Washington. The question is, how do you fadeFadeTo fade a player is to leave him out of your lineups on purpose, usually because you expect him to be popular or you think he is a poor play.Fade with a reason, not a feeling. If you can't say why a popular player will disappoint, you're probably just giving away points.Full explanation ↗ him? You can't just say, all right, I'm not going to play him. I'm going to throw in a different, you know, running back around him. That's way too unlikely to succeed.

So I think what you have to do is number one, like you have to tell a story of how he fails. And then number two, you have to just avoid that price range at both the running back and the flex position. You need, you know, you need, uh, you need a structure where like your lineup can hit and you don't necessarily need any of your guys to be competing directly with Mike Washington.

So again, like that's, that's part of why this is a very complex week. And I think a lot of DFS concepts that in a lot of weeks, like they play a role, but they're subtle this week. There's nothing subtle about that. You know, all of these kinds of complex issues are really important and jumping to the forefront. Yeah.

I think it's easy though, too, for like a lot of people just to say, you know, this week is kind of a crapshoot because it's this game or bust. I think the best players, the best DFS players are going to win this week. I, you know, I mean, I can, you can say it any week. I get it. Typically it's what you see anyway. I'm just noting it that it's like, you can't always do that. You go to a poker tournament.

You're like, yeah, the best player is probably going to end up at the final table. Yes. It's a high skill game. There's a lot of thought process. The reason that is that some people don't recognize, and I'm, it's just a random poker analogy I have, but like you, A lot of people can pick up a stack early on in a poker tournament, right?

And then what happens is as the blinds go up and the decisions become harder, they make mistakes and there's leaks and there's just errors and a better player capitalizes on that and ends up stealing their stack or taking it away. And then there's luck involved. Somebody gets lucky on a move that they made and pulls it off. This would be an example for me. And it's nothing against Bryant. It's a good question. I'm sure other people are thinking this.

But thoughts on stacking up the Arizona Detroit game, but then just swapping out the quarterback. You got all the dudes from the game that are the most correlatedCorrelationCorrelation describes how two players' fantasy scores move together. Positively correlated players tend to have big games at the same time, usually because one player's success directly adds points for the other.When you build a tournament lineup, ask which of your players need the same thing to happen. The more of them that do, the higher your lineup's ceiling.Full explanation ↗ to the quarterback. And you're going to hope for like a one point two or two point three on your QB swap that ends up bringing you ahead of all those other game stacksGame 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 ↗. Can it work? Could it happen? And me and I look like, you know, egg on my face here. Sure. Is it foolish?

Yes. Very right. And I know, Alex, you saw this the other day to somebody Mayo and I talked about as well. Like, Oh, I'm going to play Gibbs. I'm going to play McBride and I'm going to play Wilson. And then I'm going to switch it up and go completely different. It's like, if, if all that stuff actually gets there together, it's just going to be so, so random.

I do want to talk about that though, versus like the Gibbs versus McBride, like 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 ↗. That's not even forcing it as much as it kind of makes some sense, but I'll let you go ahead first. I think the first thing I'll say is if I were forced to do something like that, the way that I would do it is I would go cheap at quarterback, and I would find someone who could be carried by a ceiling performance.

For example, you could sack this game, and then instead of using Brissett or Goff, you could go Winston and Nabers. Cause then at least you're saving money at quarterback and he has a very clear path to success. And anytime you get the ceiling performance from Nabers, you know, that four to a hundred dollars, James Winston is going to hit like he did last week that, you know, he came through for the, for the early only slate for me.

That was a, that was a key piece of that win. Um, But this goes back to something we've talked about in the past. One of the first, I think, moments that really resonated with people watching Leverage Lane was this concept of we're not trying to build lineups that can work. We're trying to build lineups that are the best possible lineups that we can build. That they give us the best possible chance of a top one percent finish and of a takedown.

And doing something like this, building an Arizona Detroit stack and then using a different quarterback, it's like it can work. But it's a decision that takes your top one percent probability down below one percent. Like it can still work, but it's now half a percent or point seven percent.

And our goal is to build a lineup that takes us from one percent to two percent or to two and a half percent or to three percent chance of a top one percent finish that's not the kind of decision that does that yeah I think there's a lot of things to be said too and even if I was doing that just of note I would honestly go like Love, Gibbs, and McBride or something like that.

I would rather want it at the onesie position of tight end, the running backs that make it all happen. The other thing people forget is when they play these receivers, and by the way, they learned the hard way last week with Parker Washington. When you play them hoping for just fifteen to twenty points, that's not going to do it in tournaments very often. Can it? Yes.

Like Alex just said, we don't talk about what could work or what can work or what might because that's... To make that repeatable and proven and to stick around and play DFS for ten plus years and have success with it, that's not going to happen. You might get your – again, some people, the one big win is all they need or want and they'll be happy. Great. It could happen for you.

But I'm trying to play it for the long term and the upside and to keep putting ourselves in the position to pay it off. So if I was doing that, it would be something more along the lines of like I've got pieces. Someone said, oh, you said don't just play three pieces from that game. I would do it very intentionally. The running backs eat and do all the work. It hurts.

All of the other stuff of Jamison Williams, TeSlaa, born Harrison, Wilson, whatever. And it'd be more on Wilson later on, but just to note it, I think that's another topic. This is another one since we're spending so much time on the, this game and 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 ↗ build.

Anyway, we still have to have the Gibbs conversation separately, I believe, but yeah, Sean says might be one of those those for twenty maxTwenty-MaxA twenty-max contest lets each user enter up to 20 lineups. It sits between small-field formats like three-max and the largest 150-entry tournaments.Plan all 20 lineups before building any of them. Decide your stacks and exposure limits first, so the set works as a portfolio rather than 20 separate guesses.Full explanation ↗ where I only play stacks in this game and just go all in super interesting week we have on our hands I'm curious your take on this I know you're not always playing twenty max or rarely ever actually but just out of curiosity your thoughts on this yeah I'm going to take this in a slightly different direction for one thing I think that's totally viable I think this is a really important point in terms of like if you are someone this week for example who has a ticket into the mega and you only have one lineup I have a giant strategy post in my Discord on this exact concept.

But you need to recognize that if you have one lineup or two lineups, you're facing a number of people who are taking Sean's approach here. And if you're in a twenty maxTwenty-MaxA twenty-max contest lets each user enter up to 20 lineups. It sits between small-field formats like three-max and the largest 150-entry tournaments.Plan all 20 lineups before building any of them. Decide your stacks and exposure limits first, so the set works as a portfolio rather than 20 separate guesses.Full explanation ↗ and you only have one lineup, you're facing other people who are doing this. If you are in the mega, you're facing a bunch of sharks who are doing this exact sort of thing.

The takeaway then is if you only have one lineup, What are your chances of finding the exactly correct combination of Cardinals and Lions? And... Doing a better job of that than the people who have twenty chances of getting it right or fifty chances of getting it right.

They're going to be people with a hundred and fifty different Arizona-Detroit stacks this week where they're trying to, number one, get the right combination of Arizona-Detroit guys and the right combination of, you know, those cheap 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 ↗ around that that make it work.

So, if you are in that sort of situation, whether it's a contest that you usually play, like maybe you just every week you throw one lineup into the Mills or you throw one lineup into, you know, a a hundred dollar multi-entryMulti-EntryMulti-entry means entering more than one lineup into the same contest. A contest's entry limit, such as 3, 20 or 150, sets how many lineups one user can submit.Set your total spend for the slate first, then divide it into entries. Multi-entry should spread a fixed budget across more outcomes, not raise how much you put at risk.Full explanation ↗, like whatever contest we're talking about, you know, the three, three, three wildcat, whatever it is. If you were in that situation, I think you can't do this. You can't play this game because your chances of getting it right.

When other people have a hundred and fifty chances of getting it right are just way too low. You've got to find a totally different way to play this slate than the main way people are playing it. And I'm going to stack on that. So I brought it up. We are aligned, just doing it differently here. I would do the opposite of what Sean says here if it was me, because here's the math.

If you have one lineup in the mega out of seven hundred, you have like a point zero zero one percent chance. Right. Like just math on paper, just out of the gates. If you have twenty lineups, but then you got to do this now. It's like thirty or $80,000 people. It's actually worse. It's like you have one lineup in that tournament, even though you have twenty and everyone else only has twenty. I know it's a bit different. I'm just noting it.

I'd be way more Likely to go against it than not. You look, you can take your way this way. It's very viable to make a bunch of money or cash or whatever, like not make a bunch. But, you know, I mean, like they all hit because the game does go off.

But then you got to hope one of them is like the the special version that gets there against the $20,000 other versions or $10,000 other versions depending on the math it's gonna be tricky so I think you're trying to thread a very fine needle and I think there's also more things that we'll get into in a second when we talk about leveraging it on how to play differently but go ahead it sounds like you gotta yeah I mean it So I think like what you're getting at there is when you have twenty when you're when you have twenty entries in a twenty max like you want enough diversification where you're not just making one bet throughout all of your twenty lineups.

But I I think where I'd push back is I think you can make plenty of different bets within these game sacks right where like some are going to be reset oriented. Some are going to be golf oriented. You can take multiple chances on like the really cheap guys. So like maybe in three of your twenty you have to slot in two of your twenty you have Kendrick Bourne. You have Martin Harrison Jr.

In five of your twenty, Jameson Williams in ten of your twenty, so on and so forth, where you are mixing it up and then you can also mix up who you have around that stack plenty. So I think you can differentiate well in a portfolio. But in order to do this strategy and to do it well, I think you need to be maxing whatever tournament you're doing it in. Yeah, if you're doing it, go all in.

I'm just saying I still think it's bad because at the end of the day, it's like, well, you can do what you just said. I think people are confusing twenty versus $80,000 and not thinking about it like how they would think about if they had. Again, people don't even do this well to your point of your strategy post nailing it. It's like if you have one lineup and that's where we talk about 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 ↗ usually. But this is talking about one lineup.

Out of people have max entries150-MaxA 150-max DFS contest allows you to submit up to 150 entries into that contest, paying the entry fee for each. Max entering means using every allowed entry, whether the contest limit is 150 or a smaller number.Multiply the entry fee by your planned entry count before building. If you cannot justify additional lineups on their own merits, leave the remaining entries unused.Full explanation ↗ in a tournament now in twenty max I know you have the equal to everyone else so you're saying but I got twenty but so does everyone else but then almost everybody playing like a lot not almost everybody but a lot of people playing twenty max have twenty so it's like they all have one and they're all going up against it it's kind of like a single entry so I don't know to each your own I would play the opposite before I ever go all in on that game on this slate there's eleven games um another factor I

Want to bring up quickly and this is you know This contradicts what I said earlier, but I just want to bring it up because if everyone else is bringing up the last seven games and the last three games and all this shit, I'm bringing it up. I don't care. We can go back and see the Detroit Lions in a massive shootout this season, right? We can go back here and look at when the Lions played the Bills.

Different game, different things, different everything. I'm just showing you something because if this game played out, you know, look at the score, forty one to thirty one. You must think that everyone had a huge game, right? Everyone crushed here, I assume. Well, Goff, pretty good. Three hundred twenty seven yards, four touchdowns. That'll play. OK, Gibbs, sixteen carries, fifty two yards, zero touchdowns. But he did have six catches for sixty one and a touchdown. It worked out.

I believe Alex to like twenty three fantasy points. Not going to do too well, most Likely, at $9,800 at twenty three fantasy points. We'll leave Amon Ra. Obviously, he broke the slate nine. What would have broke the slate? I believe this was also might have been a Thursday night game, but just know this was an island game. Yeah, island game nine for one forty two and two. And this isn't an Amon Ra piece to say like, see, just play Amon Ra.

It's to explain and show that even when these games go off, think about if this was on a main slate right now. Amon Ra would be on the lineups. You'd see him. I don't think you would see a $9,800 Gibbs. You might see at a onesie a LaPorta because he had six for fifty two and one, but maybe not. Nothing for Jamo, nothing for TeSlaa, nothing for anybody else. So you could have seen that.

And then you go to the bill side and look at it. Kincaid seven for ninety five and one. Right. It could be like LaPorta and McBride this week. Like maybe, you know, this would show that you could play like Goff. Amun-Ra, LaPorta, and McBride. Because this game wouldn't have been a lot too much from everybody else, but it's just like Josh Allen. And then people would have stacked him with who?

Would they have really stacked him with just Kincaid or James Cook and Kincaid with an Amun-Ra 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 ↗? It'll just be so rare. All this could happen. You could extrapolate all this over into this exact same game. But there's ten more games on the slate, and it just goes to show it's the things that did fail. I think it was Sam, again, in his article over on ETR that said it was the week of the live final.

It's actually the week of the penthouse process that I trademarked where it was what he's talking about in that article is it was the week Brenton Strange was popular and Brian Thomas Jr. Was popular, but you actually needed the flip side with Aaron Rodgers, Wilson, Davante Adams at the time, Brian Thomas Jr., and Strange. You had those five, and it wasn't even the big game on the slate.

There was another massive game, and he's like, I had pieces of it, but I didn't have this guy, and I had the guy with the zero.

When there was fifty point scored and all that of course right well that's the tricky part about this type of thing and there's going to be other places on the slate you can go I don't have any other thoughts to this stuff it's not to to prove like this game equals this game because my whole point is you don't but it's more to show the concept of even when you have seventy plus points Are you really threading the needle to that exact version?

Or would that even be one of your twenty? I don't know. Would you have a Goff, Amon Ra, LaPorta with Kincaid? Kind of would be like the most common. Maybe the James Cook one and you get away with it because he was all right. But I don't think a lot of people would have had the right version of this on that Sunday in a smaller field, 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 ↗ type tournament. Yeah, I mean, there are a couple things here.

First is, like, I was also doing a little bit of study of this game because I have a mega ticket to theSatelliteA satellite, also called a qualifier, is a contest whose prizes are tickets into a more expensive contest or a live final instead of cash. Tickets are free entries into that bigger event.Before building, compare the number of seats to the size of the field. The share of entries that win a ticket tells you whether to build like a cash game or a tournament.Full explanation ↗ Bills-Rams game on Monday night. Nice. Yeah, we were already kind of looking at that, but...

As far as the main slate is concerned, I think the biggest thing to take away from this is like, I don't like this comparison to the Cardinals game because the game scriptGame ScriptGame script is how a game's score and time remaining influence its pace, play choices and player opportunities. In football, teams protecting a lead often run more, while teams chasing a deficit often pass more.Before locking a lineup, ask who keeps playing if your expected script reverses. Check passing-down roles and backup rotations instead of assuming a team's leading rusher handles every situation.Full explanation ↗ would be shocking if it played out the same way this Bills game did, which was the Bills went way up early and then Detroit had to play catch up just to get as close as they did. That's why I removed that though. I'll push back.

Cause that's why I said that I'm not comparing this at all to this game. I'm comparing that people like, again, it's not the same game. I'm just noting, but TeSlaa is going to be pushed into these game stacksGame 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 ↗ that people look at. Oh, there he is. But young TeSlaa, but just, you know, people are going to say JMO instead of this. People are going to say born instead of Palmer or Shakir or whatever, and try and make these things work.

All I'm saying is it's hard to thread the needle. Even when, you know, there's going to look at the Chicago game. This it's concept, not example, totally different game. No prep, no thought at all. If Chicago, remember the week? Everyone's like, why the hell did I play Loveland? Well, let me tell you this. If I told you there was going to be fifty plus points from just Chicago before the game started, would you have wanted to play Loveland? Yes. OK, so you can end it there.

So you look, you want to be in the spot and I get it, but I'm just saying how the spot can still fool you or get you because you just because you know there's going to be points there. That's what your point. I'm going back to it, but that's kind of what you're saying when you're looking at like one mega entry or something like that, where it's like, yeah, you're gonna be in the right spot probably.

And it could really go off, but are you gonna have that version? And then are you gonna have the version that also differentiates and that nails it and differentiates enough that others don't have the same thing? Or can you really separate yourself talking about how to 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 ↗ the shock build by getting completely unique but not in a stupid way, in a smart way. And we'll talk about more of that in a second. I'll let you keep going on. I just wanted to point that out.

It's not about comparing the game flows or how they played out or whatever. It's just showing that in a seventy point plus total, that doesn't mean you got it all right and got away with it. That's the tricky part. I'll bring up one other point about that Island game that we saw with Buffalo and Detroit, which is that was a game that DJ Moore left early with an injury.

And I only bring that up to say, like, If you're struggling to find the inspiration in your mind of how you can fade this game because you just think it's overwhelmingly Likely to succeed, remember that NFL is weird. NFL is random, and injuries happen. What if in the second quarter, McBride has already left the game injured and Jameer Gibbs has already left the game injured? Weird, weird stuff happens in the NFL.

And so if you're looking for just inspiration to fade this game, just remember how crazy stuff is and how random a lot of these runouts are. And as you said, I think your point about Loveland is really good too, because it also brings up the idea of like, okay, well, Then we should ask, why did Loveland fail? How did Loveland fail in a game where they scored fifty plus? Oh, they ran for like four hundred yards combined. Right.

And so we can tell different stories if you are fading this game. It's unlike the Jacksonville Cincinnati game last week, as I said, where I was comfortable not having any piece of that game. I think this week is like if you're fading it. All right.

Well, maybe I'll use jeremiah love and hope that he does everything for for the for their offense or I'll go gibbs and Detroit and say again like what if what if Detroit wins this game twenty seven to ten and it's just it goes way under the total because the Detroit defense is a lot better than people expect this week you know they've been atrocious on the back end but at least they're getting pressure right like they're they're uh you know what they're a top ten t top ten defense so far in sack rate could be hit rate pressure rate all this stuff uh it's not like Brissett handles pressure all that well, so maybe that's how it's done.

And the other thing there is like Detroit's biggest weakness, as I mentioned earlier, they've allowed the highest explosive pass rate in the league so far. Well, Arizona doesn't like to throw the ball down the field. They like to do everything underneath. And part of that is because Brissett doesn't have a ton of time back there to get the ball downfield. And so maybe it fails that way. There are routes, I think, for this game to fail.

I definitely think that I personally am leaning towards fading this game and just trying to find the right way to fade it. Yeah, we'll get to leverage lane after and we've got some thoughts there for sure. But I want to note final topic on this. Definitely have to have the Gibbs conversation as a whole because I think it still is going to be, I think Gibbs can be popular no matter what, right?

Like it's just, even if people don't get to this game, they still can easily think about every stack that's cheaper, easily fits Gibbs and he's just popping off the page. So you had like a little flow chart a couple of weeks ago that we talked about where it was like, you know, is Gibbs on the slate? Yes. Play him? No. Play two wide receiver studs. And you had the conditional 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 ↗ over at Black Analytics to show that off. And it was all super valuable stuff.

It's going to be just as valuable this week as usual, maybe even more. But what is the Gibbs conversation for people out there? You're the best at breaking this stuff down. So I think give us the Gibbs breakdown here from all angles. And then I'm chomping at the bit from the game theory side about leveraging. We had that Washington conversation earlier. I can't wait to get there. So we'll talk about that in a little bit.

Yeah, that flowchart was basically in week three, I think it was. That was the first week we had the conditional ownership tool, and we saw the week prior that there's really, really low combinatorial ownership of stud-wide receivers together because everyone wants at least one stud running back. And so... I think that week I played St. Brown and CeeDee Lamb together, and then Gibbs went off, and I was like, you know what?

Maybe it's not the best idea to do the double stud wide receiver idea on Gibbs slates because he's just so damn Likely to succeed that even if both of my receivers hit, I'm not getting the separation from the field because I'm competing with lineups that have Gibbs and one of those studs. I'm not gaining as much as I otherwise could from that combination going off. The way it did last week. No Gibbs on the main slate. And then what did we see?

We saw like Nico Collins and CeeDee Lamb get there in a huge way. So it came to fruition last week as well. And so Gibbs is on this slate. Maybe we don't go to the double stub wide receivers, but I will say like at least this time Gibbs is $9,800. So he's in his own price point tier.

And I'm looking at conditional ownership now is like One of the ways that Gibbs doesn't have the ceiling performance, as we saw in that Buffalo game, is, okay, what if St. Brown has the ceiling performance instead? And sure enough, in St. Brown lineups, JSN projected for three point nine percent conditional ownership compared to twenty seven and a half percent conditional ownership for Jameer Gibbs with St. Brown in St. That's interesting, right? Like St. Brown and JSN, no Gibbs.

I think that's a potential leverage lane candidate. I don't have my leverage lane figured out yet. So that's definitely up there as a possibility. That was with JSN and Amun-Ra. I was going to ask, funny, because I was about to ask you that at the end of what you said, but didn't we look at it pre-show and Gibbs and JSM was almost six percent? Just those two? Let's see.

So it's like half the ownership to go to the double stud version at wide receiver and leave Gibbs out of it, I think. So Gibbs JSN with Gibbs in JSN is five point three percent conditional ownership. So that's really interesting. Right. It's like one of the reasons why these combinations are as low on as they are is because you run into price prohibitive price prohibitiveness, I guess, is the best way to say that. Right.

And so it's interesting that at nineteen hundred dollars more, The conditional ownership for JSN is higher with Gibbs than it is with Amon Ross St. Brown. That to me is really, really interesting. That's very telling. And yeah, that's definitely a potential leverage lane. Yeah, so I think one of the things that I would say too is, again, like now we'll get into it a little bit of the accounting for certain things. I've got a couple that pop right off the top.

It's like if you're going, you know, Darnold and JSN as a stack, for example, that can definitely hit. We've seen it already multiple times this season where it was right up in the mix or very close. Then what if... What if Ja'Marr Chase plays? Well, here's an example. First of all, how many people are going to have JSN and Ja'Marr Chase? Probably not many. But just an example as well is like, oh, wait, I have to afford that. Well, and I probably can't get to Gibbs.

You know what I would do? I would play Sam Darnold. I would play JSN. I would play Ja'Marr Chase. And I would play Jeremiah Love. Because now I'm hoping I'm not, I'm accounting for Gibbs and that game on the other side, because what would slow the game down, possibly flip the game scriptGame ScriptGame script is how a game's score and time remaining influence its pace, play choices and player opportunities. In football, teams protecting a lead often run more, while teams chasing a deficit often pass more.Before locking a lineup, ask who keeps playing if your expected script reverses. Check passing-down roles and backup rotations instead of assuming a team's leading rusher handles every situation.Full explanation ↗ and keep Gibbs off the field from paying off a $9,800 price tag. People say, oh, there's no way that happens. I don't care.

I'm explaining why I would play it this way, because it's it's the method to do it. You can't get to Gibbs in that lineup, but you should be accounting for it. You can just sit back on your laurels and say, you know what? He's just not going to pay off the nine, eight hundred dollar price tag. Twenty points. That's fine, too. You don't have to do that. I'm just explaining how I would think about things.

When you talked about it earlier about Mike Washington, assuming the gentee news comes true. I mean, like I said, very rare. Somebody practices on Thursday, you know, limited and then gets DMP on Friday and comes back and plays.

On Sunday, but just noting it, it's like right away, he, you know, how do I get away from what a Mike Washington lineup, which is typically going to be a kind of quote unquote stars and scrubsy build from what we saw on the screen right now, where it's like, you got two cheap wide receivers, a cheap guy, but then you fit the big 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 ↗. All right. What about 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 ↗?

Well, I know what that would look like because I can double whammy it. I can not play Washington. I can not play McBride and I can play Brock Bowers. And is he going to have ownershipOwnershipOwnership is the percentage of lineups in a contest that include a given player. Projected ownership is an estimate made before lock; actual ownership is posted once the contest locks.Ownership isn't something to avoid; it's something to build around. The goal is understanding how the field is likely to build, then finding your edge relative to that.Full explanation ↗ too? Yeah, some, but that's also a potential more balanced build because I'm kind of just sticking it through that way. I'm not going to have Washington. Now I can 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 ↗ to a different, another prime example though, exactly this.

What is, it might not be that close, but it's just that you can get there somewhere else in your lineup if not. But what is the price of Washington and McBride? It is $10,000 nine hundred. And then you go to Bowers. And to go back to my guy Love again. And it's more, but on this slate, you can find it.

I'm just showing the difference of more balanced build, but it's like, that's not a two V two, but it's just to show and explain again is way more people will have Washington with McBride And yes, Gibbs can still fit in or not. I'm just noting that if you did some sort of flip where you're going to account for, okay, who covers off Washington, but also can beat McBride. But then how do you cover it off for McBride?

Most people just put Michael Wilson, right? I'm sure you'll see that. I don't know. Look this one up at a random thought. Look up Bowers with Michael Wilson. You want conditional ownership here? Yeah, I'm just curious. It's a little bit off the ball. It might not be that good, but I want to see it still. I like learning the stuff. Here, let me share my screen just so people can kind of follow along here. I'll remove this, and you can pull that one up.

All right. Can you see it? We will now. Just had to move it across. Perfect. All right. So if I want to bring in, let's go Michael Wilson. Now we go to tight end, and we see Price-wise. So McBride goes from forty two and a half percent to sixty point three percent conditional 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 Bowers drops from eleven point eight percent to six point six percent conditional ownership. So, yeah, that's a that's a very unique pair.

And it's leveraging a massively owned McBride in a way where like. You know, these, this shows us how many people are like full on game stackingGame 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 ↗ here. This is a much higher conditional ownership than usual for an expensive tight end alongside an expensive receiver teammate where, you know, a lot of the time people are afraid to put these two together because they worry, Hey, when Michael Wilson has that really big game, it means McBride isn't.

So this is, this is another like really, really good combination. Um, uh, and I, I, I definitely won't steal this from you if you don't use it, but if, if, or if you want to use it, but if you end up going first in leverage lane and you don't use it, this too is a leverage lane candidate for me. Oh, actually, you know, spoiler alert, but Michael Wilson will be in my leverage lane.

Just maybe not the way you might think, but just noting it. Um, what I want to see though, again, this is just a prime. I'm actually, I'm very surprised that it's only, what was it? Six point six. You said for Wilson. Okay. I'm very surprised because For you and for myself and for most that are playing the game, that's just a natural common thought.

If I'm going to cover off McBride with a guy that can actually cover him, Bowers, then I'm going to need to figure out where does the McBride stuff go so I can double... You're double separating yourself, right? You're moving away. But I wanted to see what love... Looks like. You can do this one first if you want, but I really want to see, because I thought the six point six would be much higher.

I want to see what love in 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 ↗, because love is also going away from a $4,200 running back there where you're kind of double flipping it. What is I want to see Washington and McBride? I don't have the update on Washington yet for ownership, though, do you? Yeah, I do. Real quick, though, I wanted to show this as well.

I think one of the reasons why you were surprised at that is because you're thinking about it in the sense of, okay, I don't have Jacobs Brissett in this lineup, so then what am I doing? But if we go Michael Wilson in... Jacoby Brissett out of the lineup. Now it does come down a little bit, right? McBride goes from sixty percent conditional ownership to thirty one percent. Bowers goes up from that six percent conditional to almost nine percent conditional.

So that brings that closes the gap a little bit. If we also say no Jared Goff in this lineup, now that probably moves it even further. Now we get the same idea, right? Conditional ownership for McBride stays.

At about thirty five percent and then Bowers now goes up to uh his conditional ownership is like right in line with his overall ownership so uh I think that's a really cool way to kind of walk through this and now we can uh backtrack and and uh please remind me what what you wanted me to check here I want to see quickly this is I mean this is awesome so we could go for days but I want to see um first off I'd like to see Washington with McBride okay By the way, the other thing we can do here, if you don't want to think about it through the conditional stuff, you can just put them both in and see what the combinatorial ownership is of the two.

This says, let's get rid of him for a moment and just look at what conditional ownership looks like. And so you can see, yeah, so many people who are using Mike Washington are using those savings to go up and get Trey McBride. And then you also have this interesting difference in conditional ownership here because Washington and Bowers are on the same team.

So as soon as someone wants Mike Washington in, that makes them less Likely to get Bowers, which makes them even more Likely to get McBride. So in addition to just like, Mike Washington is a vehicle to get to this game stack. You also have, and people are more Likely to then pay for McBride as the 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 ↗ tight end because they don't want to double up on Raiders here with Bowers as well. Now let's see Love with Bowers. Okay, so let's go here.

Let's go Jeremiah. And this will finalize it for me because it's going to be two things. It's going to be one, what they are versus what we just looked at, and then also what they are versus the Mike Wilson version. Mm-hmm. So here now you're seeing – this is like the thing that you're kind of – this is more what you expected to see ahead of time, right? It's like when people go Jeremiah Love, okay, now they're less Likely to use McBride. They're more Likely to use Bowers.

So this is kind of the thought of – this is showing the train of thought that you were already kind of on top of. The other thing I'll – I want to mention here is before I even click Jeremiah Love here, let's just notice right now I've got him projected at four percent ownership. I think this is going up. I think he's going to be like ten percent, something like that.

Reason being, I haven't seen a show yet this week fail to bring up love as like one of the main ways that you can 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 ↗ this game. And I think people are really going to kind of just enjoy that thought because I think it's a sharp one. I just think it's too sharp to not be played more than it's being currently projected. All right. Let's see. Is that true? Just a second. Yeah, I told people this was going to happen. This was in the Discord.

Everybody can go get it in Ship It Nation Discord from two days ago. When you see a hundred posts come out about this Marv Harrison trade, and it's nonstop, and now we get it right now. To an unspecified team? What the hell is that? Yeah, we knew this was going to shake it up just because and I was about to use it and I was about to be part of my leverage lane, too.

But it's just funny because I was just about to tell you to put Marv Harrison into that same version instead of love. But it's pointless now. So, yeah, slate changes on the fly. Can definitely see that, you know, I posted about that two, three days ago. I told you it's going to happen anytime this type of shit goes on. You're doing this too long, Alex. This is the thing. It's not a victory lap. It's a note of like, this is the setup that you're used to.

Like when you've been playing this game a long time, you just know that shit's going to happen. So first reaction to that, we'll go back here and then we'll get into some more stuff in a minute. But first reaction on that, the target treeTarget ShareTarget share is the percentage of a team's targets (passes thrown toward an intended receiver) that go to one player. A receiver who sees 8 of his team's 32 targets has a 25 percent target share.Judge target share over the last three or four games, not the full season, especially after a trade, an injury or a quarterback change. The most recent role is the one you are paying for.Full explanation ↗ just got tighter. Yeah. I mean, first question is like, does that make Kendrick Bourne chalk? I think it's going to pick up steam now. Cause think about what you can do in that version.

Now you don't have to think about Mike Washington or these guys, if you don't want to write Mike Washington in the road, just because whatever reason you could say now, I mean, he's still going to be massively owned. Yeah. I mean, he's not going to go down. I'm just saying like, or down crazy, but I'm saying, I think let's go back. Let's, let's do this then.

Now we'll go back to, I think, I think the biggest thing here is like, I, I already think that I was highest in the industry on, on Michael Wilson ownership. I've got him at thirty seven percent or high stakes ownership right now. Thirty six percent 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 ↗, twenty seven percent of me. Like he might get to fifty. And in fact, I will be pretty surprised if he doesn't get to fifty.

So now I think that also takes percent from where I think I had him at like twenty seven. Like he could get to thirty five percent. This could be crazy. I think I'm getting closer and closer to knowing my 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 ↗ link. Yeah, well, it might be stealing mine now because I mean, people could probably figure out what mine was already. And now his ownership just went up. So let me see here. I'm just trying to see how you can finagle this down.

I'm just going to try and use like 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 ↗ of the chalk. $11,300 left. I'm trying to see like a few other spots. I can't believe it's an unspecified team. What do you mean it's an unspecified team? Who's he being traded to? I don't know. Probably going to be the Colts. I'm just like, we're so, so close. I think people were okay with Tennessee, right? Was another one they were playing?

If it's the Chiefs, I just saw that Davis Maddock tweeted, like a hypothetical that Kansas City was about to trade for Martin Harrison instead of bringing back Tyreek Hill. Well, hey, that's actually a very high possibility, actually, because the other thing that was tweeted out yesterday, I forget who posted this one, but was like the Tyreek Hill stuff with his girlfriend or whatever and all the stuff that came out now. It's like he was trying to get signed or do something before that came out.

I don't think they're going to be able to sign him right now. So I actually think that could be the case. They shouldn't. He's a scumbag. Yeah, exactly. Marvin Mahomes is going to be the new thing. That's what it's going to be. I think we called it. I think Matic called it, so shout out to him. I still can't believe this. How has the team not been specified yet? It's just weird that they would put that out and then not say anything.

But anyway, this is a lineup I just put on the screen now. Look at this one. Jacoby, Wilson, Bourne, McBride. You get Gibbs and you can get Jamo in there and it just rounds itself out with the Swift, Washington, and Titans is the low price D that everybody's been talking about all week, right? If you're going to just punt and play a cheap defense, that's kind of where people can land. So...

That's only going to pick up ownership from here, by the way, that doesn't have any updates in it yet. This was still our initials. Our new one comes out around lunchtime today. So just to note it. Yeah. That's a quick thought there. Let's, let's talk about game stacksGame 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 ↗. Let's move to some different places that we can go. I don't know if you have any other pieces.

I want to talk about those ones, you know, a couple of certain ones, but is there anything you want to talk about there? If not, people want to talk about the game stacks we can go to and other spots we can stack up here.

Yeah, before we get to other stacks, and this is kind of a segue to it, I think we should spend a moment talking about the cheap wide receiver chalk that people are going to in order to fit some of this stuff. So, like, Trey Harris, Rowan Wilson, KC Concepcion, Antonio Williams, like... How do you feel about these plays? Cause I personally, I think Rowan will Rowan Wilson is really interesting.

Um, both, I think we're going to end up talking more about pit indie when we, we talk about some other potential stacks, but like, I, I have mixed feelings about this. Uh, I think no Pittman is great for that offense. Just, I don't know. Did you see, um, have you seen like what Aaron Rogers is mouthing towards the sidelines every time he like targets Pittman? Yes. Okay. I believe it was like worst effing play call ever or something like that. No, no.

The first was like, this, this guy fucking sucks. He's like, this motherfucker sucks. He's so fucking bad or something like that. Two weeks ago, maybe three weeks ago at this point. And then the last time was like, And he, you know, he threw like a six yard slant to Pittman. It was behind him. The defender got his hand in, knocked it away. But Rodgers was apparently mad at Pittman for not catching it. And he just mouths like this guy, this fucking guy.

And like clearly doesn't want Pittman on the field. And it's not his called. Like he's he's being on the field. Plays are being called for him. And Rodgers wants no part of it. So no Pittman is is really interesting. Like now he gets to throw to guys he actually wants to throw to. Uh, Rowan Wilson, who's the other guy like this week that's on that squad. We're definitely gonna talk about that stack. Cause I think it's interesting.

Well, yeah, Jeremy Bernard is, is interesting too. And this is the, this is the point I wanted to make, which is Wilson has been very good. He's been very effective. He's getting open. Uh, he's, he's leading the team in DVO way when targeted, like, That matters to me a lot with Rodgers because we know that Rodgers finds things that work and just sticks with it, and he loses patience with things that aren't working.

And so when he's throwing to guys that it's not working, he just might not keep throwing to them. So that part is really good for Wilson. The matchup is also good for Wilson in the sense that Indianapolis is at least showing signs of being a slot funnel and giving their outside corners like it would make sense if they are. But Pittman has been playing more on the outside. Fryermuth has been like the main quote unquote slot guy.

Jeremy Bernard has been playing primarily on the outside and Bernard actually ran twenty routes to Wilson eighteen last week. It wouldn't surprise me if like Wilson goes from eighteen routes to twenty, twenty five, something like that. And Bernard goes from twenty to like thirty five, thirty seven, however many dropbacks Rogers has. So I have Rowan Wilson projected better by a pretty considerable margin, but I also have scenarios mixed into the projections where that's wrong.

Wilson shouldn't be projected out ahead of what he's already been doing, and it's Jeremy Bernard who should be getting the main benefit from no Pittman. So I think that's at least an interesting one to talk through. Yeah, so I'm there with you on that one. I'm not really super high on the other spots. That's kind of the one I'm most focused on, only because I don't really love the other game stacksGame 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 ↗ or things. And I even think there's still a problem.

There's a hole to poke in that Pittsburgh spot, as well as maybe it's an opportunity, which is who do you want to run it back with? I think I know what you'll say, but I'm just curious there. Yeah, I mean, I think it's downs. Right. Yeah. Yeah. I think a lot of people would go to Taylor though. Right.

I think that's what a lot of people think is like a way to get different or I can fit because that stack is so cheap. You can now fit Gibbs and Taylor, for example, but downs has been getting loose like crazy. And he's a guy that just fills out your wide receiver positions and then you can 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 ↗. But I think in that lineup, you might still be able to get a really nice wide receiver in your flex.

And be able to bust it up that way. So I think that's truly interesting. I'm not actually as high on the other stuff. Someone did say it earlier, which I thought was intriguing, of like the Sean Payton now calling the plays. He's over it because last week should have been a Knicks week and it wasn't really. And it's like, man... But it's still the same stuff. Like it still is. Knicks, Waddle, Sutton, Pat Bryant out.

Like you have Harris on the other side that you could go to. There's no Quentin Johnson. We got to wait and see on McConkie. Like that's a way to make that one work. So to me, if I was going the Harris route, it's going to be way more of something like, so it'd be something like that. Or it would be something like a unique build, probably more for afternoon only, to be honest, but like a R.J.

Harvey Harris or something and just hope that that continues. But it's just so hard to get to Harvey on the main slate. And obviously, you'll keep Mitchell on the other side as well. Yeah, I mean, one of the really kind of hard things to think through with, with Denver. There is the problem. Didn't seem to me to be the play calling.

The problem was that Nick's was staring at open receivers down the field and saying, no, I'm throwing this two yards to RJ Harvey instead. And so like, unless, unless Sean Payton is calling plays where he doesn't give Nick's, uh, a check down outlet and just says, you're throwing this past twenty yards down the field, or I'm going to punch you in the face. Like, I don't, I don't see how a ton changes there.

Um, we also now, uh, One thing I will say there is, like, I made this point last week. We have seen Knicks do a lot better, both from a fantasy perspective and a real-life perspective, against bad teams. And in game scriptsGame ScriptGame script is how a game's score and time remaining influence its pace, play choices and player opportunities. In football, teams protecting a lead often run more, while teams chasing a deficit often pass more.Before locking a lineup, ask who keeps playing if your expected script reverses. Check passing-down roles and backup rotations instead of assuming a team's leading rusher handles every situation.Full explanation ↗ where you don't really expect, you know, fantasy goodness to come from, most quarterbacks, like, they're best in a trailing situation or in a neutral script, and they get conservative with a lead. Like... Nick's is almost the other way around. It's like he, he plays nervous.

He plays timid in close games or when they're trailing and when they're winning by a lot, he's really confident and he's willing to throw down field. And so maybe it works out that way. Uh, and I do, I definitely have some interest in this Denver LA game. That game is, is an afternoon game, right? It's the early afternoon. So there's three games in the afternoon. That's 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 ↗ game.

It's the game everyone will pivot to in Seattle and San Francisco because of JSN and CMC and Kittle and all the options on that squad. I'm Mike Evans is back full go.

So however that could work out, he could be, he could be no go after the first quarter again, the way his injuries shake out, but just noting it, I don't think anybody would slip would flip or switch to, um,

To the uh other side and play the game that starts a little bit earlier but the thing is if you're dead from the morning you're probably dead already like you should be looking at those swaps I do think there's some interest to that lac Denver spot just of like trying to make it work the problem is is like how how does it actually fit versus the pricing and all that other stuff so yeah I think well with Denver you you can do that in a cheaper way and then you can flip um uh Cardinals beat reporter said it's not you know as as you and I are

Live like we're getting all our news right now from the comment section so keep it up guys it's really helpful saying undisclosed team and now they're telling us who it's not why don't you just tell us who it is like what's going on here well who gives a shit it's marv Harrison like just tell us what team he's going to they're acting like it's the biggest trade of all time in the history of the NFL like this is nuts Yeah, we have some in the chat also pointing out no Sertan or Moss.

By the way, we have so many offensive injuries that we're paying attention to this week. But yeah, Denver's secondary is decimated, and also the New England secondary is decimated. So some interesting stuff with Las Vegas, which I'll talk about momentarily as well. But man, I don't like our chances of getting out of here in an hour and a half, by the way. No, but you know what happens? We keep an eye on it.

Like if it's going to be boring or stuff, I always said this, it's funny because all we talk about is DFS, but if you talk about like the marketing hat for a minute or like the content creator hat, founder hat, whatever you want to call it, that I try and sometimes put on for people is like, People always say it's like Shorter is better. I say less is more about a lot of things. I do.

And I agree with it, to be honest, across almost everything. But if you're putting out good content and people are sticking around for it and they want it, like I think Joe Rowan, not vouching for the guy, but I'm explaining it of like three hours in a podcast. People, when he first came out, said like, that's going to be horrible. Like who's going to listen for three hours? I don't care what you think about the guy. I'm not getting, not vouching or going again.

I'm just saying, it's like, it's clearly worked. The guy's made hundreds of millions of dollars now, whatever off of a three hour podcast. So if people, you know, want to leave, they can leave. They want to stick around. We got more coming, but I think it's been good conversation the whole way.

And like I said, I think it's one of the most important weeks, at least this season, if not episodes of this that you and I've ever done, because it is a big puzzle to figure this out this week. So, Where do you want to go next then on these? You want to move to the game stacksGame 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 ↗ a little bit? You said the Las Vegas going against this decimated secondary for the Patriots. Where did you want to go with that one? Well, yeah.

So I wanted to kind of remind people, like one of the things I said off the bat is when we're fading these like really obvious spots, both the Detroit-Arizona game and Mike Washington is like, I don't think we should just be pivoting off of them. I think we need to be telling the story of how they fail. So what if... New England jumps out to a big lead.

Vegas has to throw all game, and Washington ends up with twelve carries, a few receptions, and no touchdowns. One of the ways that happens is if they're throwing all game, and it's all Brock Bowers and Trey Tucker instead against this decimated New England secondary. That's something I'm going to explore is Kirk Cousins doubles that leave Washington out. I'm not totally sure who I'd bring back with New England. Maybe pop Douglas as another cheap option. Um, you know, no Mac Collins this week.

So pop should get, uh, more routes. Maybe you go Doubs as a result. Um, so like I said, multiple options there, but, but yeah, that's, that's an intriguing route to me. Um, I, I also think, uh, we should bring up, um, Denver, uh, just going right back to that. Like one of the other thoughts there is okay. No pet. Brian is really important to me.

Uh, A lot of the routes that Nix was turning down that were wide open were deep digs, basically like the same route over and over, the same combination of receivers where it was Waddle running a clear-out route and Pat Bryant running a deep dig kind of coming into the middle. Bryant could have had five receptions for a hundred yards on that route alone last week, and Nix just kept turning it down. What if that's Sutton this week?

And what if he actually throws it this week? Because I'm sure that Sean Payton grilled him in the film room this week saying, we need you hitting this route. It's called well. It's timed well. We got the right coverage. It's wide open. Waddle's doing his job with the clear out. You need to hit this. And now this week, that might be Sutton running that route with Waddle as the clear out. So I'm definitely intrigued by Nick's doubles.

I also like that because if we didn't get Mike Washington, one of my favorite plays of the week was potentially going to be Keyton Mitchell, whose role keeps growing. And I think that McDaniel has no choice but to keep him heavily involved when they don't have Ladd-McConkie, probably. They don't have Quentin Johnston. They need playmaking somewhere. He had three design targets last week. I think they're going to continue to do that. He's getting more and more on the ground.

And the thing about him as a bringback is... When he hits, he's probably hitting because he gets at least one explosive run or explosive reception. And so there, I wouldn't be using Keyton as a pivotPivotA pivot in DFS is an alternative player or lineup combination you choose instead of another option. Tournament pivots usually seek comparable scoring upside at lower ownership, meaning fewer competing lineups use them.Before swapping, check what the replacement changes around it: your remaining salary, teammates, opposing players and available later-starting options.Full explanation ↗ off of Mike Washington, but Keyton and Mike Washington, and now you have all the money in the world to spend at tight end and wide receiver. That's an interesting way to flip the build. So yeah, kind of a lot of thoughts there.

One right away because this just ties in a little bit more late swapLate SwapIn NFL contests with late swap, you can change unlocked afternoon or evening players after earlier games begin. Only games included in that contest's player pool are available.Before the first games lock, identify affordable backup combinations for your later players. Check that each combination fits the open positions, then confirm your saved changes in every affected entry.Full explanation ↗ stuff for the people as well $11,000 seven hundred dollars for bo nicks and jalen Waddle I know you talked something we could someone in the chat said mims could be by the way a great leverage lane on mims last year so you know maybe that could be the case with no Pat Bryant but just noting it again don't think people will do this even though it fits exact do you know who's $6,200 and $5,500 is that percent Wilson Yes.

Yeah. Exact, exact two V two swap right there. And I know that people will catch on or figure it out. Like it's just, it's, I didn't hear anybody point that out this week yet at all. And it's like, that's the type of stuff that we look at where when people move things around in the afternoon, I don't think that would be their first thought, right? They're not prepared. They're not thinking ahead about looking at this type of stuff.

They're just acting on the think ahead the better. Yeah, that's the other thing I like about this Denver idea is you can 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 ↗ early. You can have a lineup where you're contrarian in a spot or two early, and if it doesn't go perfectly well where you know, okay, I'm behind some combinations that have full access to the Detroit-Arizona stack, you can pivot to Denver where – you mentioned like – If you're dead, you're dead anyway. It doesn't really matter if you pivot.

The way that I like to use late swap is more like if I'm in good shape, but not great shape, that's when I want to pivot. I had a subscriber this past week who won $50,000 made the brilliant pivot and a really, really gutsy pivot of Bowers and Taekwon Thornton instead of Kittle and Jordan Addison last week. He was in good shape after the early games he had. He had CD lamb. He had Nico Collins, but he also had a couple of busts.

So he was like, I'm in good shape. I can make real noise here, but I'm not in great shape. If, if 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 ↗ hits for me here, like I'm, I'm going to be beaten by a handful of people made that aggressive pivot to Bowers and Taekwon Thornton and ended up third place in the, in the wildcat for a $50,000 off of thirty three thirty three. Entry. So again, shout out to him. I gave him a ton of credit in the Discord.

Like that was one of the boldest and sharpest late swap decisions I've seen. We can do something similar this week with this Denver stack where you can play it. We're like, I think the Denver stack, especially if you're using Keyton as the bring 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 ↗ is a lot cheaper than the Arizona Detroit stack in at least most iterations. So you can do something like Denver, uh, Denver stack with Gibbs that can pivot to a Detroit over stack without Gibbs.

And you just hope that it's, you know, uh, it's, it's Amon Ra and Jameson maybe and LaPorta or something like that this week. Uh, and, and Gibbs has the fifteen to twenty point performance instead of the forty point performance. So I, I like that route a lot as well. Um, We brought up Colts-Steelers. We want to talk about that one. Yeah, I got two more games we'll go to, but Schefter just posted this one.

I mean, literally only Marv Harrison could even getting traded wrong. Like he can mess up everything, even getting traded. So Adam Schefter says the one certainty is that Martin Harrison time in Arizona is done. Arizona feels comfortable enough to know it can and will trade Harrison, which is why he will be inactive Sunday. That's hilarious. It goes on to say, but no Harrison trade will be completed until after Sunday's games are played. So we're just going to guess who it is for the whole weekend.

This is fun. I like this. I think it's the Chiefs. I think Maddox got it right. I honestly think that Tyreek's stuff, again, like you said, should be the way it is. And I think they were trying to sneak something through. Didn't work out. All they have, like the stuff in court and all that stuff is just disgusting. So all that stuff comes out. Now it's like, yeah, they can't associate with that even if they wanted to reunite them. I just don't think people will.

He's not like... It reminds me of another scumbag, Ray Rice, right? That situation. You're not good enough that someone's going to take on this risk and bring you in. You know, it seems to work out that way for some too, but it's like, unless you're crazy good or you got a lot going for you, teams aren't going to risk it that often. Yeah, I mean, the only thing there is like...

Replacing Taekwon with Tyree kill from a football perspective makes sense because then you're, you're, you're still getting that speed, that clear out guy, deep threat who, when like last week, when, when the defense says, yeah, but we know you don't want to throw deep. So we're just going to let the clear out guy run. It's like, well, my homes is my homes. He's going to say, all right, I'll just make that pass and get the Martin Harrison jr. Isn't that guy?

He's just, he's, he's not that guy. So yeah, they can work around that though. I know what you're saying. Like I, maybe it's not them, but I think that a team like that, I think I saw it earlier. A previous tweet was posted or anything that said, uh, I've now seen two people in the chat ask what we're talking about with the news about why Tyree Kill is a scumbag.

Are there people who really don't know that, or are they confused and thinking that we're talking about Martin Harrison Jr.? Tyree Kill, you can just type it into your search bar. It's not a difficult thing to find out. Now it says one team that has had talks with him is Houston. So it could be that as well. But Houston has some stuff coming. Like, isn't, like, Tank Dell? Tank Dell is almost back. Nico's there.

They seem to – They got Booth, who has been Booth Cheats, but maybe he can show up and do something. But I will say the Kansas City thing, someone had posted what I was saying before about his contract not really being as prohibitive as what you might think. So it's like, who gives a shit? Let's take a shot on him, and then we can figure it out from there. Yeah, they said we thought you had – No, he's just bad. Tyreek Hill.

Marvin Harrison stinks, but he seems like a fine Person. Seems like a nice guy, though. Yeah, or has been. Two games. We'll go to both of them, but I'm just saying Pittsburgh and Indy. You talked about downs being the run back. And then you talked with the Wilson versus Jeremy stuff, Bernard there.

But the, um, the other one I want to talk about is any, we talked about a different J love earlier and his ownership steaming is this guy's ownership steaming or anything to go with it? Because we can go back to Pittsburgh indie. We already hit it on a little, but I do want to mention this game. Some Green Bay it's love. It's Watson. It's Golden. It's craft all at home. Um, Chicago, Bagent, I believe, right? Going to be him again this week.

You've got Burden. But my big thing here is like Swift is going to be popular, right? There's no man guy and we know this. So when you talked about like the Washington thing, it's not the same because price and differences and all these other factors. Some of these other guys you can make moves on like Trey Harris. You can just play Gadsden or you could play Keyton Mitchell. Instead, similar prices, different positions, still just 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 ↗. Let's run with it.

With Washington and you're leveraging him, you're saying, I'm going to not play him, but you can play a Tucker with Brock Bowers, with Cousins, with a real defense situation that could work in your favor. And Drake may look better last week as well. So you could see that back and forth, but you could 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 ↗ it and also get to a unique 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 ↗. That way that makes sense. So that one's really powerful.

Is there anything you see here in this one knowing that really right now it looks like just kind of Swift is going to be popular and then take it from there? Uh, yeah, I, I think the Golden is going to be popular. Christian Watson has a chance to steam a little bit. Tucker Kraft is going to get it at a touch of ownership. So I, I think love stuff could be a little bit popular. I don't love the game.

I just think the game environment, like the Bears want to run the ball even now, maybe there'll be a little bit more pass happy, um, since they don't have a nun guy to lean on as well, but they want to run the ball. They want to bleed, bleed, bleed clock, uh, I don't love the environment. With Indy and Pittsburgh, at least there, both teams have given up a bunch of explosive passes, so you can get the game environment really pushed in that regard.

The last one that I want to talk about is Washington and New York. Similar idea to Arizona and New York last week, where If McLaurin plays, now that's still a big variable. The thing I really like about this game, number one, you have a rushing upside quarterback in Jayden Daniels. You also have mid-priced wide receivers that have the kind of ceiling where if they hit, it's a guarantee that their cheap quarterback hits.

If McLaurin has a big game, if Nabers has the kind of game that he had last week, you know that they're bringing the quarterback with them. So that makes that game interesting. The only thing is like, If you're thinking about both this Washington and New York defense and the way they were last year, where both were really susceptible explosives, at least so far this year, they haven't been that way. So I can see that game environment being overrated a little bit.

I think this game, as well as the pit game and like a handful of others, have some rain and wind concerns that we have to monitor. So I'm not super into all of them. I also think that this is one of those rare instances where I might actually have more interest in Washington if McLaurin doesn't play, because then I feel very good about the role for Antonio Williams, feel very good about the role for Traylon Burks.

Both of them can make some explosive plays, especially Burks. And now you're saving so, so much money through the stack. Nabers is an awesome bring back. So I'd be interested there. Yeah, I wonder too, how do you feel about the Williams versus Burks if McLaurin plays? Because I think Nabers makes this thing work perfect. I think Jayden Daniels at $6,000, like that's, look at what he was doing before the injury in the Dallas game a couple of weeks ago. And you'll say, oh, but it's Dallas.

I mean, oh, it's the Giants. It's like, there's still a possibility here at $6,000 is only five hundred bucks more than Brissett. And you've got stacking partners. But when you had the Wilson versus Bernard conversation earlier for Pittsburgh, which we'll segue to that to finalize this. Um, Williams versus Burks. If McClure, cause I just looked it up over here. I have it up on the screen. Do you have SOS? It was, um, limited at Friday practice.

Most Likely game time decision digs is obviously out any, any thoughts on this? And then people are talking about the weather as well. Yeah, I mean, the weather's a bit of a concern. I don't want to spend too much time on it now because I think we get a better forecast tomorrow. But I think I would prefer Williams just because he ran – he ran thirty-three routes last week leading the team. Now, Burks still got twenty-eight. That was with Diggs in, no McLaurin.

So maybe that moves things a little bit. That's mostly the slot guy out. So maybe Williams moves into the slot. It's a little bit hard to say, but yeah, I think they're both actually quite interesting teams. Williams had a twenty four percent target per route run last week, only eleven percent for Burks. But Burks stuff is is the more explosive stuff he had. Let's see. Twenty nine point seven yard average depth of target last week. Eighty nine air yards.

Williams is still good, though, at twelve point one. So. So, yeah, I think I think Washington is definitely intriguing. And that's a game environment that I think could get pushed. All right. Anything else that you want to hit on there? If not, we can finalize on the Pittsburgh Indy stuff. I was segueing to that. Anything more to add?

The one thing I guess I'll add on the Pittsburgh Indy before I send it to you that I wanted to say it earlier, I'll say it now, is part of the Rodgers saying whatever he wants it and dropping all those F-bombs to the sideline. By the way, I haven't heard you say that many F-bombs ever. I was quoting him. You might have. Yeah, those are just quotes. I like that one. I'll use that in the future. Also, you haven't played golf with me.

So that's where they come out. Yeah, I could see that. But that's for everybody, I think, that plays golf, no matter how good. I mean, you're actually very good at golf. Other people are not, so it makes it even easier. But I will say, part of it is, too, I think it's just like this last hurrah, and he's stuck in a situation where no... Is Pittsburgh winning a Superbowl? This is like building the lineups we talked about earlier. Could they? Sure.

Anything's possible. Will they? Probably not. So it's like, that's, he's just doing whatever he wants. He's got very close to the three hundred yard bonus this last couple of weeks, which he almost never gets to because he's just saying whatever. He's throwing it up there to these guys, taking his shots. And then he's throwing touchdowns when he gets down there.

I know like Warren and you could play Warren with Rogers, by the way, but I think it's funny that it's also like when he's down there, he's just going for himself. Like whatever he can get to stack up. And I kind of like, someone said earlier, like Rogers DGAF mode. Well, that's what it's kind of always been when he's wanted to prove himself, even when it's at the Packers. But it's like right now, I feel like he's heavy in that mode.

So he can just go. That's a really good point. And he has control of the line of scrimmage. So like, even if there's a run call and they're on the one yard line, Rogers like, fuck that, I'm throwing this in. We're calling a slant to DK Metcalf. That's what we're doing three times in a row here. And what's McCarthy going to say? He called him out the other day. That's what I was saying earlier. He said, that's a terrible play call.

He's coming at him even. And McCarthy was like, he's an asshole or whatever. He said that one came out with so much lip reading going on. And both those guys, very easy to tell what they're saying. But yeah, he's definitely one just to say, forget it. I'm calling it like this and we're doing it this way. So I think for me, it's just the Pittsburgh side. I do think your point on downs was critical. And It sounds minor, but I'm just noting it.

I really do think because Wilson, Bernard, even Metcalf are all so cheap. I think the first thought is to immediately get JT in and someone be like, ah, I got JT and Gibbs. I'm set. It can work. I would play it in some game stacksGame 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 ↗, especially if this is going to be in my portfolio of game stacks. I'm definitely playing Pittsburgh Indy. I think that makes sense to have some because that is a rare scenario. It's tough to run on these guys.

But what if Jonathan Taylor does the Bucky Irving display from the other night? It just is like speed the game up, run a bunch early, now get the team throwing the other way. That could do it for sure. But I like your call out of just using up those wide receiver positions. And then you've still got two running backs, a big boy tight end and a big boy flex wide receiver if you want it as well.

Anything you want to add more on that one? And then I'm going to hit you with one more off the cuff. Let's go one more off the cuff and then jump into 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 ↗ lanes. Okay. Gibbs McBride mini 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 like every non-stacked lineup. Super popular, right? And then what do you think of it? Um, let's check that conditional ownership because let's see. All right. Gibbs and bride. And then let's say, uh, no quarterbacks from that game. So golf and Brissett should be up.

Um, now they're talking about the Marv Harrison, CJ Stroud connection from before. So plausible theory, they're saying reunited with his college quarterback. All right. Seven percent of the field using Gibbs and McBride without either quarterback.

I mean, I don't love that just because, like... Now, what I will say about this is, remember that we've had this conversation that, like, when tight ends go off, it's largely because, you know, they're catching a bunch of short passes, so there's not a ton available for the rest of the offense and the game environment as a whole. Same can be said about Gibbs. So, like...

If you get a slower game where this is like twenty seven, twenty one and all the production is concentrated, at least these two could go off in a way that not just not just like.

Survives the rest of the game kind of going off but actually prevents the rest of the game from going off so so yeah I I'm more interested in this uh 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 ↗ than than most or mini 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 ↗ than most for that reason but I still think like the combinatorial ownership is you're not getting a discount in any way they're they're they're more owned um than you than we would expect just given uh their their individual ownerships I believe actually you know what let me let me take that back So with Gibbs in, Goff out, Brissett out, the conditional ownership for McBride drops from forty two and a half percent to twenty six percent.

So it's still popular, but it's it's not crazy. And so, yeah, I could be interested in that. You could talk. I think it's better because I think it's like one that actually slows like shows how the game could slow down. And you've talked about a bunch where it's like almost if I'm stacking Brissett. You had it up there earlier. It's obviously insane with McBride. It's yes. It could get there that way too.

Could our, our big thing from today, the takeaway is the goods versus what we're going to play for. It's like, I actually think it's going to be a game where typically, and we've seen it with the tight end production where I almost want Brissett with Bowers or something, or Brissett with craft or Brissett with something else. I'm going to play it in a different way and get there that way. That's how I would do it.

Because in this scenario, it's like Gibbs just does it for the running back position and for himself because he's one of the best fantasy football players we've seen in a long time. And I mean it, obviously one of the best football players, but really good from a fantasy perspective as well. Him and Bijan are prime examples of really racking it up in many ways. McBride would be like catch and fall, catch and fall. It was what you'd hope for. Clock run, clock run.

They still both get theirs, but you don't need the whole game stack at that point. Yeah, I think one thing you could do there is you could go like Brissett, Wilson, Bourne, 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 ↗ Gibbs and Jameson or something like that, whatever you want, and then get Bowers too because now you're telling the story of, hey, this game goes off. McBride doesn't have a great game.

And because McBride doesn't have a great game, it gives Bowers an even higher chance than usual to separate at the position. So yeah, I like that thought as well. We've got lots of candidates now for leverage lane. I'm curious to hear where you're going. Yeah, mine's going to be easy, but we'll get there in a second. Last thing this guy said, my take on it is someone sent an offer. The Cardinals agreed they will do it.

On, on Monday, if no one offers something better in that timeframe. And it's kind of like the point of what's the worst that can happen. Everything falls through. And it's like, you could have literally Max Crosby going to the Ravens and then a trade fall apart. So what's it matter if they sit at Martin Harrison for one game, try and get the maximum formula. Hey, well, we got a deal, but let's get a last hurrah and see if we can get something better.

Cause they obviously hate to, to lose them for nothing. Right. They want to try and get something in it's risky though. Cause like, you know, let's, let's suppose for a second that it's Houston. And now let's say, uh, you know, Keishon booty goes out and has a hundred yard game. It's like, well, do they now want Martin Harrison jr. So it's risky. Yeah, definitely. Definitely a risk, but I think they're willing to take it at this point with him specifically.

Cause whatever, whatever, but all right, I'll, uh, I'll let you do your lane first. I don't think it's mine. So you go ahead. I think that with this Harrison news, I think that Wilson is going to get so insanely owned and McBride's going to get so insanely owned that I want the 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 ↗ of trying to tell the story of how they fail. And so whether that's Gibbs and the Detroit defense, the main point is the Detroit defense, I think, is the way to go.

And so it's weird to like, my leverage lane is play the Detroit DST. It's not so much playing Detroit. It's this is how I'm fading. The, the game. And, uh, and particularly this is how I'm fading, um, Wilson and McBride specifically, if you're fading themFadeTo fade a player is to leave him out of your lineups on purpose, usually because you expect him to be popular or you think he is a poor play.Fade with a reason, not a feeling. If you can't say why a popular player will disappoint, you're probably just giving away points.Full explanation ↗, you need to tell the story of how they fail. And to me, the main way that they fail is, well, what if Detroit's pass rush just is suffocating percent all game long and, uh, and, you know, preventing stuff that way.

Damn. It's not Detroit D, but the other side of it is what you took. And mine was going to be, it's a little bit bolder, I think, because of what their ownership percentage is going to be. But I'm fading both Wilson and McBride and Brissett in my 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 ↗. So it's just like we talked about it enough throughout the show, but it's the same way in a different thing. I don't necessarily know if I'll put the Detroit D in there because of that.

I could, but there's other ways that I could play it as well. But I'm just noting, I don't want any of those guys in those lineups. Like I said, even in my Brissett lineups, I more want Brissett and the Brock Bowers situation I talked about. So maybe there's opportunity for that now. Maybe there's some lineups I can do where it's like Brissett, Love, born with Brock Bowers and something like, and I have all the money to spend and things like that.

And the reason Brock Bowers comes in is like I said, I'm trying to take the points from the other side. So it kind of, um, is yours, but in a different way. My thing is the Wilson situation is like, yes, the spot's good. Yes, it just got better. The ownership is just going to be outlandish. In the portfolio with all these lineups that have five, six other different spots, you can do it.

In my main single entry, I just want to attack in a different way. I'm treating it that way. I don't want to play him in that. So him and McBride for sure are going to be out of it. This is what Soccer Junkie said about yours before you said it too. Already was in here. Said, I like Lions D a lot. Arizona offensive line is very bad. Jacoby isn't the type of quarterback to take advantage of the explosives. Lions give up in the secondary.

Could be very true. Also, it's the slice and dice.

Effect that's all I like you went with I was talking about this gibbs is going to be popular no matter what in the game stacksGame 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 ↗ on the lineups that don't have them it's just cheaper guys so it fits gibbs so to me it's it's that and you know jeremy says for mine how do you build with bauer's price tag how don't you it's like it's everyone basically the same price tag as McBride and and forty percent of the field is able to build that way so Three hundred bucks more.

Yeah. And if you have watched any of the games, I mean, I feel like Bowers could have had much better games even than he had, even like last week at eighty six yards, he got held at, you know, there was there was more opportunity. And that was that was one of the better defensive coordinators in the league. Spagnola. Like, yes. Selling out to stop Bowers and he still got to twenty five DraftKings points. So, yeah, I think I think Bowers is awesome.

And their coaching is a disaster, by the way, on their particular team. You have one chance to come back in that game. I think they ran because the reason I calculated because I would have won a FFWC seat. I think they ran nine plays and decided Brock Bowers on even one would be a bad idea. So let's just run nine plays and not use him when we need to come back and win the game. The broadcast is literally circling the guy over and over.

Like, here he is. Should probably go to him here. Nope. I think it was nine plays. And they decided that we'll just go with zero for nine on trying to include our guy who someone said it best, soccer junkie again. Bowers is the A.S. And he's tight end one pricing at... Or sorry, he's a tight M one pricing for a wide receiver one.

He has been up there with these other guys that you're looking at, like Colin's first big game last week, which someone asked earlier, were we on it? We talked about all over this show. It ended up being my main core on the site was, was Stroud, Nico lamb. It's what came twelfth in the mega Milly. That was just a great spot to be in, but he's done a lot more and will do a lot more this season than a lot of your $7,000 wide receivers have.

Are, will, or will still stay healthy for. So lots of different ways to go there when it comes to that and opportunity that way. Alex, let the people know where they can find you, what else you got going on, man. And then we'll get out of here. Good, good show. Love this one. Yeah, this was a really fun one, BlickAnalytics.com. And I just launched a brand new props tool.

So if you want to check that out, I built the tool so that it allows people to very clearly, very easily, all in one place, use the exact process that I use personally to build props and hopefully people will really enjoy that. So check that out, BlickAnalytics.com. Find me at AlexBlickleOne on Twitter. I posted a video yesterday that kind of previews that tool if you want to get a first look at it. Yep.

And like I said earlier, guys, if you guys want to check it out, go, go to X at ToeTagginTambo. You can find me there. Everybody knows that if I pull this down, pull this up quickly, we did announce it off the top of the show, but again, shout out to our guy. Just, this is the real special thing about our community. We've obviously been around longer and stuff like that.

So it's helpful, but we just have an amazing community for sharks who won of his winnings to the ship at games to round it up to $50,000 so if you go back here and see it on the on the site Ship It Games you go to Ship It Games.com you load it up it looks like this it'll show you everything you need to know but it's a internal community contest all you have to do is be an all-access or an NFL only member at Ship It Nation you can play every week For the three Golden Ship It tickets that are available, there have been twelve won so far.

And at the end of the season, when we crown the ultimate winner, we did this last year as well. But right now, top prize just moved up to $12,000. You can see the rest of the prize payouts on ShipItGames.com. Check it out. Go to ShipItNation.com. If you need anything, hit me up on X at ToeTagginTambo. That's going to do it for this one, guys. For Blickle, for myself, ToeTagginTambo, good luck in your contest this week.

Let's Ship It!