How much does 'betting on regression' play into your DFS calls for a given week especially midseason and beyond? If a core contributor for an offense has not found the end zone or received much goal-line work, etc. does that fuel a target recommendation or play?
Does the opposite work as well when a notable 'hot player' is seeing ridiculous volume or a sky-high touchdown rate? Does it need to correspond with a positive matchup? Do any players fit your regression criteria for Week 9 or the coming weeks in general?
Justin Bonnema
It’s easy to say “he’s due” regarding a player that hasn’t scored a touchdown or hasn’t performed well in several games, but regression doesn’t necessarily work like that. A full NFL season is already a tiny sample size, betting on regression from just a few games seems shaky. That said, we can identify when the volume is failing to lead to positive results. If a good player is seeing a lot of targets each week and isn’t logging a lot of yards, chances are that eventually, those targets will lead to yards, which then lead to touchdowns.
James Brimacombe
I have used this narrative a few times in building lineups and one example that I can think of is the Tampa Bay passing attack. When Chris Godwin opened the season on fire and Mike Evans the opposite I wanted to flip the script and chase Evans over Godwin until he hit for a big game. For example, Evans only had 2 catches for 28 yards in Week 1 and 4 for 61 in Week 2 while Godwin put up 3/53/1 and 8/121/1 in those two weeks. Well in Week 3 the script was flipped, and Godwin went 3/40/0 while Evans exploded for 8/190/3 on a ridiculous 15 targets. The same happened for Evans after his Week 5 flop where he had 0 catches on 3 targets but followed that up with a 17 target game for 9/96/0 and a 12 target game for 11/198/2.
justin howe
I'm only moving the needle if he's got the volume outlook to Regression will happen, but it's shortsighted to assume it's coming this week hardcore right now. If Ted Ginn Jr, for example, sits touchdown-less, I'm unmoved. If it's someone like Robert Woods, catching 5-8 passes a week but never scoring, then I'll boost my interest a little. Short-yardage usage is the biggest factor here by far.
Going the other way, I definitely tend to project hot scorers to cool off. Touchdowns are more volatile than any count stat in the major sports that I can think of, and they require numerous happenings at once to occur. And they come in bunches; when Mike Evans catches three in a game, it's generally because the stars aligned, and they probably won't next week.
Jason Wood
I agree with Justin that "mean regression" is less powerful as a tool in football than other sports including baseball and basketball, mainly because of the much smaller sample size but also because of the scoring being tied to more variable outputs like touchdowns.
However, there is some value in paying attention to outliers versus established norms. For example, if a quarterback with a 5-year history of touchdown rates ranging from 4%-6% has a 2% touchdown rate through six games, it's not irrational to build a 4%-6% output in Week 7 and beyond.
I think volume, whether it be snap count or targets or carries, is the most valuable metric when building projections. Role is critical. Those of you who read my Player Spotlight series in the preseason know I'm fond of saying fantasy success is the combination of ability and opportunity. So I'm not sure I would fade high snap/touch counts unless there's a reason to expect a change. For example, Latavius Murray isn't going to be a workhorse once Alvin Kamara returns.
