Over the past few years, my (now) wife and I have witnessed our lives change in many ways – marriage, a kid, buying a house – standard late-twenties/early-thirties stuff. Central to all of these life events, though, was a decision to uproot our lives in a larger metropolitan area and move back to our hometown – a small, rural community in central Wisconsin. Trading in expressways for cornfields, our day-to-day lives changed dramatically – shortened daily commutes, more time with our families, and new responsibilities.
Having only had a small concrete patio and single parking spot to care for prior to our move, I quickly realized that I would need far more than the beat up snow shovel I had been employing to maintain the blustery, snowy winters we were set for at our new country residence. And how was I going to take care of the surrounding yard and field?
As I mentioned, we had grown up in this area, so it wasn’t as if these were unanticipated issues, but they were issues nonetheless. My answer: buy a tractor. Once my wife was onboard – a victory in its own right – it became a question of what to buy.
After pouring through specifications, reviews and pricing, I began to notice a trend. Many of the lower priced models were vastly outpacing the bigger name brands in terms of their specifications. It felt as though I had discovered some great loophole in the system. With these savings, I could buy a ton of extra attachments and still have the same (or better!) performance. But then I began to look into the reviews a bit further and reality set in. Turns out, that while many of these models were definitely capable of performing at the same level of the bigger brands, they were unreliable and constantly back at the dealership.
Moving on from these great “values”, I found myself looking at the bigger name brands. I knew I’d be paying more, but at least I could count on the tractor actually running when I needed it. Sure, I wouldn’t be able to afford any extra attachments, but I could always use a bit more exercise – and wielding a shovel and rake are a great way to get that.
A funny thing happened during this second stage of research though. I came upon some value options within the fleet offered by the bigger brands, almost a “mid-tier” option if you will. What they lacked in flashy frills and extras, they made up for in terms of their specifications and quality. I would be getting the consistency I craved, while not sacrificing the horsepower and other specs I needed. Plus, with these savings I could afford a few attachments to increase the utility of this new purchase even further. That was all it took to sell me on this model and start what now seems to be an endless honey-do list of landscaping projects around our property.
Cam, Carson, and the Mid-Tier Guys
I approach my daily fantasy research with almost the exact methodology that I employed while searching for the perfect tractor. I compile the relevant data, pricing information and past performances (my “customer reviews”). Despite doing my best to follow the same methodology each week, I’ve noticed myself straying with regard to the quarterback position lately. The allure of the cheap quarterback with big upside (but little reliability) has pushed me off of quarterbacks I like more and has burned me a few times over the previous weeks in cash games.
Two quarterbacks that have spent much of their season priced in that mid-tier (and I haven’t rostered far enough) are Cam Newton and Carson Palmer, a pair of players that once again paid off their price tag this week. Priced below the top tier for most of the season – Newton has recently invaded the otherwise faltering top tier – these two have offered unmatched consistency and production this season.
While Newton has slightly outpaced Carson in terms of DraftKings (DK) points per week – 24.62 to 23.74 – Palmer has the edge in consistency, having returned valued every week, while Newton has missed value once this season. Falling in between the top guys most of the year and always a notch above the “values” at the position each week, they’ve represented a different type of value that we often overlook. An ability to return their value every week, regardless of price.
Having spent every week through Week 13 priced between $6,400 and $7,600, they’ve shown a consistency that has far outpaced their comparably priced counterparts.
The above stats were compiled prior to Week 14, as Eli Manning had yet to play as of this writing, but the picture remains the same. While Roethlisberger has played to a comparable level as this duo, he has been injured and failed to meet value again this weekend.
When we stack up their performances against every quarterback that has been priced in this price range over the previous two seasons, we start to get an even better idea of how valuable that consistency has been.
Utilizing Fantasy Labs’ Trends tool, we are able to query this data and see that, on average, quarterbacks in this price range have averaged a mere 18.93 DK points and have only met/exceeded their implied point total 54.91% of the time.
Can you just pay up for the consistency?
The production we’ve seen from Newton and Palmer is something we generally expect out of the top priced players at the position – a tier which Newton has moved towards, but has still been hitting value, nonetheless.
Looking closer, we can see that Palmer and Newton have actually outperformed this grouping in terms of average points per week. When we consider the fact that this top tier has met/exceeded their implied point total only 50.32% of the time, the value you can gain by rostering either of these players is apparent.
So how can we take advantage of this crazy consistency? To illustrate, let’s use a hypothetical situation we’ve seen often this season.
Tight ends have been highly variable and as such, many players have paid up for Greg Olsen lately and Rob Gronkowski in the past, because of a perceived stability they provide. Olsen has been great this season, averaging 15.3 DK points per game, but has still only hit his value 66% of the time through Week 13. Compare him to a lower priced tight end like Ben Watson, who while only averaging 12.27 DK points per game, has hit value 83% of the time this season and costs $2,500 less.
Using this Week 14’s pricing, a player could have – in a vacuum – rostered Ryan Fitzpatrick and Olsen for $12,300 or Palmer and Watson for $10,900. If Watson were to struggle, Palmer’s Plus/Minus of +7.3 stands a good chance of making up for it. While I’d be apt to say these two were had a decent chance to equal Fitzpatrick and Olsen on their own, the additional $1,400 could have been used to push your wide receiver three from someone like Anquan Boldin to Allen Hurns for additional point potential.
Now obviously this situation was in a vacuum and the player could have certainly found savings elsewhere, but the player just as likely could have rostered Jameis Winston and his dud of a performance too.
Newton and Palmer has been priced so inefficiently – they’re returning value more commonly found in the mid-$8,000 price range in the past – that by rostering them, they have allowed you so much flexibility to build out your roster in other areas and take chances where you maybe wouldn’t have in your cash lineup otherwise.
All of this being said, there’s always value to be had and matchups to exploit. Someone like Ryan Fitzpatrick has returned great value in the lower tiers this season, but until recently hadn’t had much of a ceiling. Every time we see a bargain player put up a dud or a premium-priced guy lose work due to game flow, just remember players like Newton and Palmer. Keeping an open mind towards your roster construction – I’ve seen many become averse to rostering anything other than an option under X amount each week because they feel the higher tiers have burned them – and looking for players who are circumventing DK’s pricing algorithms is a great way to start your roster construction each week.
