Join the Footballguys Daily Update
Start your morning with our roundup of the most important stories in football - with the fantasy insight you need to make league-winning decisions. Delivered straight to your inbox, 100% free.
How are players actually allocating their funds in GPPs?
During the preseason I wrote about how I typically like to spend more at wide receiver and less at running back in GPPs. This was due primarily to the correlation of variance at each position which was typically higher at wide receiver and lower at running back. Quarterbacks also have an extremely low correlation of variation but they didn’t run into the same issues as running backs because they are priced a lot more favorably at FanDuel than any other position. This led me to the process of taking into consideration the odds of a player making their target goal.
Since writing that article FanDuel has gotten a lot sharper at pricing their players. In particular the pricing around breakout running backs is a lot better this year than last so there is not as many bargain basement running backs to plug in to your GPP lineup as there has been in the past. For example, in previous years I am pretty confident that C.J Anderson would have been closer to $5,000 this week than the $6,500 that he is priced at this week.
At this point the low end running backs seem to have odds that are very similar for reaching their GPP value of 3X as do the top end RBs. For example, this week I show that Matt Forte, Jeremy Hill, and Bishop Sankey all have about 15-20% of reaching 3X value. This shows that the top end and bottom level value plays are very similar in their odds of hitting GPP value. I would still tend to pay up for wide receivers more than running backs but based on these pricing changes I would recommend being a little more flexible on your running back GPP plays.
However, do owners really pay up for WRs in GPPs and spend up on RBs in head to heads?
In order to test this I had to get a large sample of head to head and GPP lineups and compare them to each other. Unfortunately, FanDuel doesn’t allow us to do this very easily so all of the following data will be from DraftKings which allows you to export rosters from all players in the same contest. I think this data will be fairly consistent across both DraftKings and FanDuel but note that there are two big differences that can being skewing the results.
-
DraftKings offers a full PPR whereas Fanduel offers only half point PPR
-
DraftKings offers a flex spot which can be a RB, WR, or TE.
In order to test this I took a look at all of the data from week 6 and 7 at DraftKings’ Millionaire Maker and World’s Biggest 50/50. I then separated the entries into experts and everyone else. To determine who the “experts” were I used all of the people that I knew of as experts or if they had what I deemed a significant amount of entries in the tournament.
The results show that the standard player actually pays about the same for both their wide receivers and running backs in GPPs and head to head games. They spend $5,603 on WR’s in head to heads and $5,608 in GPP’s. For RB’s these numbers are $6,277 for head to heads and $6,224 for GPPs. These stats would lead you to believe there should be no difference in the price you pay for RBs and WRs in the different game types.
However, if we look at the expert players we get a different answer. Experts pay $5,319 for WRs in head to heads and $5,556 in GPPs for a very significant increase of 4% in GPPs. 4% may not sound like a big increase but over a sample of thousands of entries this is a very significant change and not just random variation. On the other hand we see the opposite and expected trend. Experts pay $6,378 for RBs in head to heads compared to only $6,122 in GPPs. Again this is a very significant change of 4%.
Based on these findings it is pretty clear that expert players are willing to pay up for WRs in GPPs and pay up for RBs in head to head games. This is all consistent with our preseason hypothesis. In addition, since we noticed that the average player is not taking this same approach it offers us an opportunity to take advantage of this market inefficiency. By taking advantage of these types of inefficiencies one will be able to greatly increase their odds of long time profitability.
Fanduel GPP plays
Below are my weekly GPP plays at Fanduel. Throughout the season I will be employing strategies mentioned in Week 1 about contrarian plays. My goal will be to highlight players owned less than 10% to give you a contrarian option unless the player is such a good value that you should play him anyway. But remember that if you think a player will score three times their salary at a higher rate than their ownership level they are still a good buy. It is also important to remember you don’t need to go contrarian on everyone one of your positions. Additionally I will take the approach outlined in my preseason article about the best approach to allocating money in my lineups. In this article, I showed that in general it was best to spend on studs at wide receiver and to a lesser extent quarterback and save your money at running back and tight end.
Colin Kaepernick $7,400 5% – Kaepernick has had some significant struggles the last few weeks and let me down last week in this article. Over the last three weeks Kaepernick has thrown only 3 TDs and hasn’t rushed for a TD yet this year. Speaking of TD rates he threw for TDs at a rate of one every 152 yards last year and has only done so once every 240 yards so far this year. He has also historically scored rushing TDs once every 100 yards. In both cases he is well under this historical rate and regression to the mean happens more on TDs than any other stat. This week Kaepernick and the 49ers get the Giants who are allowing 19% more yards per attempt than league average. Vegas expects the 49ers to score 24 points and for the game to be close. As the 49ers playoff lives are on the line I expect them to pull out all the stops including a few more run opportunities for Kaepernick. This could be the week where Kaepernick scores 3 TDs and adds 30-40 yards on the ground and you are one of the few to own him.
Andrew Luck - $10,200 5% –The Colts have learned this year that their best chance of winning depends on the arm of Andrew Luck. So far this year they are the most pass happy team when considering game situations and strength of schedule. This is a big change from last year. So far Luck has taken advantage of this change of philosophy by throwing for over 300 yards in every game but one and during that game he still threw for 3 TDs. The upside you are hoping for with most QBs you get each week with Luck. Of course you have to pay up for that luxury. This week the Colts play the Patriots in a game that will have huge playoff implications for the first round bye. Vegas favors the Colts by 3 points and expects them to score 30 points in the process. Teams have preferred to run on the Patriots so far this year but I expect this game to be a high scoring shootout and running won’t be an option for the Colts to keep pace. Anything less than 300 yards and 4 TDs plus some rushing yards will be a letdown and will return you value on his high salary.
Shane Vereen $6,500 15% - I really thought I was going to be going with C.J. Anderson here as I liked taking a chance on him as a high upside play in the Broncos offense. Unfortunately, his ownership was a lot higher than I expected at 11% so I am not so sure the risk outweighs the reward. So I am going to switch to Shane Vereen. As mentioned above I expect the Colts and Patriots game to be high scoring. The Colts best weapon on defense this season has been Vontae Davis. We saw how much trouble they had with the Steelers after his injury early in that game. Against the Bengals Davis kept a close eye on Giovani Bernard since A.J. Green was out. However, the Patriots have a better passing attack so Davis will have to line up against Brandon Lafell a good amount of the game. Outside of that Bengals game against Bernard pass catching running backs have been very successful against the Colts including Justin Forsett who amassed 7 catches for 55 yards, Darren Sproles 7-152, and Le’veon Bell's 6-56 to name a few. 7 catches for 50 yards seems fairly safe for Vereen plus a good shot at a couple of TDs given the high scoring nature of this game.
Demaryius Thomas $9,100 9% - Thomas gets a prime matchup against the Rams this week where Vegas projects the Broncos to score 30 points. Thomas hasn’t scored for the last three weeks despite going over 100 yards receiving for the last 6 weeks since the bye. This lack of TDs has kept Thomas’s price depressed but as mentioned earlier is one of the stats most likely to regress in the long term. Another reason to believe in this regression is if you believe in the narrative that Peyton Manning likes to spread around his TD passes. If so then it’s Thomas’s turn. If the Broncos score 3-4 TDs as projected by Vegas don’t be surprised to see two go to Thomas.
Rob Gronkowski $8,100 21% - If you haven’t noticed a trend I like getting players from this Colts/Patriots game. The Colts have been bad at covering tight ends so far this year giving up the following stats to those teams that focus on using tight ends. Heath Miller 7-112-1 Larry Donnel 4-25-1, Owen Daniels 5-70, Delanie Walker 5-84-1, Zach Ertz 4-86, Julius Thomas 7-103-3. For each of these tight ends this was one of their better games on the season. Obviously Gronkowski has even better upside than the rest of these players. 8 catches for 120 yards and 2 touchdowns wouldn’t surprise me at all. I am willing to pay up for Gronkowski despite his high price and ownership.
As always please send any questions to Buzzard@footballguys.com or follow me on Twitter Follow @SteveBuzzard