The Daily Grind: Week 7 Edition

Photo: USA Today Sports

Welcome to the 2016 version of The Daily Grind, a look at Daily Fantasy Football from several vantage points.  Together we will look at many different topics this season – from managing expectations and bankroll to what Footballguys has in store for 2016 and how to best use what this site has to offer to maximize both your enjoyment and your bankroll by Super Bowl LI.  So let’s jump right in with some thoughts on both expectations for playing this year and also a first take at a guided tour for Footballguys’ DFS coverage this season: 

Comparing the Numbers

I decided to build upon the previous advice from earlier this year – play more multiplier contests – by looking more at which types of rosters were more successful in these contests.  I started with a simple question:

Is it better to use a cash game lineup (instead of a GPP lineup) in a triple-up (3x) or quintuple-up (5x) contest?

It sounds like a simple question, but on several levels there is more to the story.  It is not a fair comparison to just look at the cash lines for each contest, because some of the tournaments allow for multiple entries, and also the cash lines do not reflect the same number of winning teams.  Cash games pay about 45% (double-ups) to truly 50% (50/50s), while triple-ups are in the neighborhood of 30% and 5x contests are even steeper at 17-18%.  So, how can we compare these contests?

First, I decided to take a look at several 50/50 contests and to find out how successful these lineups would be if the same lineup was entered into these multiplier tournaments.  The premise is simple – take a look at cash game contests and see where the 18^th and 30^th percentile scores fall.  By doing this, I am able to look at lineups that were built with the intention of winning a cash game by having a high floor, without a GPP high upside approach.   If the 18^th (5x) or 30^th (3x) percentile scores are higher than the cash lines for triple-up and quintuple-up contests, one can make the strong argument that playing a cash game lineup in those contests is a better approach than putting a tournament lineup in those contests.  I took several results from Week 6 100-man contests (single entry) 50/50s and here are the results:

Table 1 – FanDuel 100-Man 50/50s and Big 2x Tournament Results

From Table 1 above, we can see that the average score for cash games at the triple-up cash level (30%) is 138.2 points, while a typical cash game lineup reached over 145 points at the 18% rate.  I did happen to notice that a lot of the same competitors were in all five of these contests, so I also wanted to include the Big 2x contest from FanDuel.  While not a true apples-to-apples comparison since multi-entry is allowed, the fact that over 32,000 entrants were in this contest should outweigh some players entering trains of the same lineup.  I also had to note the 50% score rather than the cash line, as the cash line for the Big 2x was higher (only 43.5% of the entrants won). 

Now we have to compare these numbers to the cash lines for both 3x and 5x contests, shown below:

Table 2 – FanDuel Week 6 Big 3x and Big 5x Multiplier Tournament Results

This is where it starts to get interesting.  Table 2 shows that the cash lines for the Big 3x contest at FanDuel last week was only 133.6 – but the numbers from Table 1 show that 30% of the cash game lineups were at 138 or more points (and even higher in the Big 2x with 148.58 or more points).  The same is true for the 5x contests.  The Big 5x contest required 139.88 points for success, but 18% of the cash game lineups in Table 1 had higher scores (143.58 to 152.04).  That seems to directly imply that cash game lineups are more likely to cash in 3x and 5x tournaments.

I also went one step further with this hypothesis:

If I look at the 50^th percentile score in 3x and 5x contests, would that be higher or lower than the cash line for a 50/50?

By asking this question we can hope to understand the average DFS player’s approach to these contests. If the median score is higher than the 50/50 line (or close), then most DFS players are using their cash game lineups in these types of tournaments.  If it is lower, then it is most likely that GPP, or high-risk, high-variance lineups are being used. 

Going back to Table 2, the median score in both the Big 3x (117.70 points) and Big 5x (113.90 points) were well below the 50% lines from Table 1 (126.30 to 130.18).  This implies that the typical roster used in 3x and 5x contests had lower floors and higher risk than the cash game 50/50 and 2x contests.  So we are seeing that the average DFS player is using a GPP-type lineup for multiplier contests, which lowers the cash line overall for these multiplier contests – and makes it easier for a cash game lineup to cash in these types of tournaments. 

Both of these results imply the same things:

1. It appears that cash game rosters would be more successful (and have higher return on investments – ROIs) if they were also used in 3x and 5x contests
2. Most DFS players playing in 3x and 5x contests are taking more risk than necessary, resulting in a lower cash line

Now it has to be pointed out that this is just for NFL Week 6, where a lot of cash or “chalk” players hit big.  It still needs to be determined if this is a general trend, but at face value it certainly seems that more DFS players should be putting cash game lineups in 3x and 5x contests.   

Decisions, Decisions

Every fantasy owner is faced with multiple decisions every week, but none are as consistent or as important as when to use a replacement player.  No, I’m not talking about Shane Falco – I’m talking about backups who are asked to be the “next man up” when a starter goes down to an injury.  To be clear, this is not about a new player passing an older player on the depth chart because of talent reasons – this is solely due to an injury.  It happens in every sport in almost every week across the fantasy landscape, and NFL Week 7 is just one more of those speed bumps on the fantasy highway.  From Landry Jones to Mike Gillislee to Mike Davis to Adam Humphries and on and on, how can a DFS player – or any fantasy team owner, for that matter – muddle through all of this chaos?

I am not here to say that it is easy or straightforward, or that there is one script or recipe that answers all of these questions.  What I am here to do is to advise you on how to evaluate each and every scenario independently, and to point out what factors matter the most towards these decisions.  Some of these factors cross over to all sports, which is timely to mention considering that we have all four major sports active in October.  From the NBA to the NHL to the NFL, players get hurt and backups enter the starting lineups every week, so understanding how to evaluate these changes in the sports landscape can give you a significant edge on the competition.

Every situation is unique from a player personnel standpoint, as we all know that Ben Roethlisberger and Landry Jones are separated by several tiers on the talent spectrum.  Talent is an important factor, no doubt, but the supporting cast surrounding the backup player also factors in significantly.  This is the “talent vs. opportunity” debate, much like “nature vs. nurture” in the study of behavior.  Some believe one is a much bigger factor than the other, but the truth usually lies somewhere in between the two extremes.  Judging the talent of a player is one factor, but the opportunity for the backup player thrust into the starting lineup can be broken down in several ways.  Since this week we are talking quite a bit about backup running backs getting their shot at starting, let’s start with evaluating running back opportunities, and the factors to consider.  First, there is the first true measure of opportunity, which is whether it is likely to be a shared backfield or a solo act.  Scanning the depth chart can point out if there are other capable rushers behind the new starter, or if the cupboard is bare and the backup running back is the only show in town.  Then comes the implied game script, which refers to whether the new starter’s team is supposed to be ahead or behind in the next contest.  If they are supposed to win, odds are in favor of running the ball more to kill clock and hold the lead, but if the game script considers the back’s team an underdog, the passing game is more likely to be featured in the second half.  That might not matter if a back is “game script independent”, meaning he will be involved as either a runner or a receiver in the offense.  If the answer to that question is yes, the backup has even more value.  Think DeAngelo Williams for LeVeon Bell, for example.  Additional criteria like strength of supporting cast, like the offensive line and the defense, plus a weakness in other facets of the game (quarterback, receiver, passing game in general) can all boost the implied value of running backs.  All of these factors add to the opportunity for any running back, regardless of talent level.  This is why “RB Denver” was such a big thing back in the days of Mike Shanahan was such great opportunity, no matter who was getting the carries.

Similar factors can be applied to wide receivers, tight ends and quarterbacks, but running back is the main position that can be immediately replaced by a backup and lead to immediate production.  For receivers (WR and TE), the quarterback, his protection and the game script all has to be there – as well as the play calling from the coaches.  If a new receiver is thrust into the lineup, there is no guarantee that he will be even running routes on pass plays or if he is, he may be the third or fourth option in the quarterback’s progression.  For running backs, volume is almost guaranteed as teams have to run the ball at least 30% of the time, and a new running back can benefit the most from a strong supporting cast.  Even a backup can run through gaping holes created by a dominant offensive line.

Injuries happen in all sports.  Knowing how to evaluate the ever-evolving fantasy landscape as a result of players having to step up and into starting roles is a key element towards success in all aspects of fantasy sports.   Talent and opportunity have to be considered for each and every new player, and the DFS players that can predict the success (and failure) of new players will be well ahead of the competition.

Best of luck this week!

A GUIDED TOUR TO FOOTBALLGUYS’ DFS 2016 COVERAGE (FINAL EDITION)

Over the past three weeks I have provided you a guided tour to all the DFS coverage Footballguys is providing this season. Here at Footballguys, we have dedicated a good amount of the staff and resources to give you the best DFS content possible, and the intent of this tour was to highlight as much of the content and how to use it as possible.  As a courtesy to you the reader each week, I will leave this placeholder so you can find the tour in the future and can find the articles and tools you use the most.  Just remember to check the week number in the link, as it will take you to Week 3 content.  

Here is the final version of the tour:

Week 3 Daily Grind DFS Tour

Good luck to you in all of your contests!

Questions, suggestions and comments are always welcome to pasquino@footballguys.com.

Follow @JeffPasquino