It’s Groundhog Week
Early in the morning of August 1, 2016, the NFL (daily fantasy sports) season officially started: FanDuel released its Week 1 salaries. (Note that the season-opening Thursday game between the Panthers and Broncos is not included in the first slate that FanDuel released.)
In the days that followed, I released The Freedman Files, a series in which I uncontrollably spewed my thoughts systematically analyzed the FanDuel salaries on a position-by-position basis.
— Part 1: FanDuel Quarterbacks
— Part 2: FanDuel Running Backs
— Part 3: FanDuel Wide Receivers
— Part 4: FanDuel Tight Ends
FantasyLabs co-founder Jonathan Bales added some reason to the proceedings with his macro perspective on Week 1 FanDuel salaries.
Right after publishing the FD tight ends piece on Friday, I packed a suitcase, got on a plane, slept the entire flight, landed in Dallas-Fort Worth, and saw that DraftKings had just released its salaries.
In other words, what happened last week is basically what’s happening this week.
— Part 5: DraftKings Quarterbacks
— Part 6: DraftKings Running Backs
— Part 7: DraftKings Wide Receivers
— Part 8: DraftKings Tight Ends
Be sure to check out the recent Daily Fantasy Sports Roundtable in which FantasyLabs co-founder Peter Jennings and FantasyLabs writer Adam Levitan joined me to talk about . . . what else? . . . Week 1 FD & DK salaries. What they have to say about anything is more important than what I have to say about everything.
And, between the pieces last week and this week, I’m going to talk about just about everything . . . or die trying.
Monday Night Football, Alas
The MNF games are not in this Sunday-only slate, so Todd Gurley, DeAngelo Williams, Carlos Hyde, and Matt Jones will need to be rostered on FanDuel if you want exposure to them in the main slate.
At a minimum, all of those backs are intriguing for various reasons, so it sucks not to have them available. Of course, DraftKings will have a MNF-only slate, so you can still play DeAngelo as much as you want . . . along with 65 percent of the field . . . so it’s not all bad.
Adrian Peterson Is the Most Overrated Player of All Time in This Slate
I’m not exactly sure of the significance of what I just said, but it sounds right.
AD is $7,600 on DraftKings. That’s not exorbitant by any means — over the last two seasons (per our Trends tool) there have been 78 running backs priced above that — and they’ve been quite good, by the way, with a +2.21 Plus/Minus on 57.7 percent Consistency — but, still, AD is too expensive.
Last year, he was the most productive runner in the NFL. He rushed a league-high 327 times for a league-high 1,485 yards and a league-high 11 touchdowns. And he even was decent as a receiver — for him — turning 36 targets into 30 receptions and 222 yards. For a 30-year-old runner who had been out of the league for a year, AD was downright John Riggins-esque.
But you can probably see the problem: In a format that awards one point per reception (PPR), AD is a good runner but not an elite player. Last year, he was fifth in DraftKings points per game at the position. (Devonta Freeman was first with 22.06 points.) AD had 17.79 points. And with 17.31 in sixth was Dion Lewis, who led all running backs last year with 7.14 targets per game.
Just think about that. Scoring almost the same number of points are the guys who on a per-game basis separately led the league in carries and targets.
— AD: 22.69 opportunities (20.44 carries plus 2.25 targets)
— Dion: 11.92 opportunities (4.78 carries plus 7.14 targets)
Peterson almost doubled Lewis’ opportunities, and he couldn’t outscore him by even half a point per game. The AD-Dion dichotomy underscores a few simple facts:
— Receiving is important for running backs on DraftKings.
— A Zero RB approach, while theorized initially for season-long leagues, is screamingly applicable to DFS platforms with PPR scoring, especially when it comes to guaranteed prize pools.
— Peterson is not good enough to be considered a ‘good receiver’ for DraftKings. Maybe for FanDuel, which awards ‘only’ 0.5 PPR, but not for DraftKings.
All of which means this: When Peterson is expensive, he must get either more receptions than we expect him to get or a sh*tload (a.k.a. league-leading number) of carries in order to meet value. And what’s the point of paying up if you’re thinking, “Will he reach value?” instead of, “How high is his upside?”
Make no mistake. This isn’t a hypothetical conversation. The evidence suggests that Peterson is a bad play when he’s expensive.
Over the last two years, Peterson has played in 17 games and produced a +0.54 Plus/Minus. In seven of those games he has been comparably priced:
Peterson is more expensive than David Johnson ($7,500), Ezekiel Elliott ($7,300), Jamaal Charles ($7,100), Lamar Miller ($7,000), and Devonta Freeman ($6,900). All of them are strong receivers, because of which they all have what AD lacks: Upside.
If He Sucks, Within a Month His Nickname Will Be ‘Reek Elliott’
I just said that Zeke has upside — and NFL rookies in general have tons of upside — but my sweet lord does he have some downside, too. I thought that Zeke was priced aggressively with the seventh-highest salary on FanDuel. And then DraftKings came along, whipped out its calculator, and gave Zeke the third-highest salary in the slate.
I don’t want to make too much of this — because I’m a self-hating Cowboys fan and the sample is small — but running backs with similar salaries haven’t done well in similar situations:
I’m not suggesting that you shouldn’t roster Zeke. Just don’t try to be the hero by rostering him everywhere in Week 1. He might reek.
More Than Just an Almost Awesome Last Name
Devonta has the sixth-highest salary among running backs . . . and he led the position last year in DraftKings points per game. Last year, he saw 6.47 targets and scored 0.93 touchdowns per game. Running backs with comparable salaries and target histories have torn it up:
The Falcons open the season as three-point favorites, but even if they fall behind Devonta should still be involved because of his receiving ability.
Of the top-tier backs, Freeman might be the best option. He’s the cheapest and last year he was the most productive and saw the most targets on a per-game basis.
Are You Betting on a Touchdown?
Jeremy Hill is $4,600. At that price, basically all he has to do to meet value is score a touchdown, catch a pass, and get 19 scrimmage yards without fumbling the ball. Hill is a big-bodied bully who last year was one of the league-leaders in touchdowns rushing. Despite being more of a grinder, he has 42 receptions across his two seasons, during which he has carried the rock 222 and 223 times. As a DFS asset, any player whose name rhymes with ‘Schmeremy Schmill’ has produced a +2.39 Plus/Minus since 2014.
And when such a player has been priced similarly, he has done even better:
What’s there not to like about a 200-carry bruiser who catches the ball adequately and scores double-digit touchdowns?
Well, he’s playing on the road against the Jets, who last year had the league’s No. 1 run defense according to Football Outsiders’ Defense-Adjusted Value Over Average (DVOA) metric. No team allowed fewer yards rushing (1,015) and touchdowns rushing (two) than the Jets. They did allow 76 receptions, 617 yards, and five touchdowns to running backs through the air — and they were also the only NFL defense to allow a running back to complete a pass, which went for a 41-yard score — but almost all positional receiving work will go to his $4,800 teammate Giovani Bernard . . . and Hill’s chances of throwing a touchdown against the Jets are barely better than mine.
So he’s cheap and likely to get double-digit carries. He’s even likely to get a goal-line carry, as last year he was top five in carries within the five-yard line with 13 in 15 games. But history suggests that Schmeremy Schmill schmight not do well against the Jets in Week 1.
Basically, you’re hoping that Hill can manage to score a touchdown. That’s a dicey proposition.
Analytical Consistency Is Overrated Anyway
I think that Justin Forsett is too expensive on FanDuel. He has the 14th-highest salary. That’s just too much for a guy who is old, small, nonathletic, and an inefficient receiver.
But he’s too cheap on DraftKings. Even with all of his flaws, he’s a starting running back on a slate with 26 teams, and 25 running backs are more expensive than he is at $4,600. As inefficient as he is as a receiver — his 4.9 yards-per-reception average makes milk turn to cottage cheese — Forsett is still a guy in a Marc Trestman offense who has caught 75 of his 100 targets over the last two seasons.
In 2015, he was 18th and 22nd among running backs with 4.1 targets and 12.84 DraftKings points per game. If he’s the starter in Week 1, he’ll be facing a Bills defense that last season ranked 30th in rush DVOA and 29th in pass DVOA against running backs.
I don’t think that Forsett will keep the starting job all season, but in Week 1 he is more than just a high-floor option. Over the last two seasons, he has flat-out balled out when priced as he is now:
When priced similarly in the past, he has almost averaged the FantasyLabs definition of Upside (2x expected points).
I’m not saying that you should expect Forsett to destroy the Bills in Week 1. I’m just saying that, given 1) who he is, 2) for whom he plays, and 3) what he has previously done, he’s really cheap.
It’s Not a Science
Charles Sims ($4,400, 30th), Bilal Powell ($4,300, 32nd), Theo Riddick ($4,000, 43rd), and Shane Vereen ($3,800, 46th) are all low-priced pass-catching backs. All four were top-15 backs last year in targets per game. Not one of them is priced higher than his 2015 positional rank in DraftKings points per game. Each running back is still on his 2015 team and playing (more or less) the same role.
Last year, they combined to do well when priced in this range:
Those receptions count for something.
More Than Just an Almost-Awesome Second First Name
Ryan Mathews is a frustrating running back to roster, but he’s the only workhorse-sized runner on a team whose head coach likes to run the ball. He’s more expensive on DraftKings ($5,700, 14th) than FanDuel ($6,100, 27th), but he could still provide value as a decent play in tournaments as a pivot away from Eddie Lacy ($6,700), Mark Ingram ($6,600), LeSean McCoy ($6,400), Doug Martin ($6,200), Matt Forte ($6,100), Thomas Rawls ($6,00), and maybe even lower-priced options Latavius Murray ($5,600), and Frank Gore ($5,500).
In Week 1, the Eagles are six-point home favorites implied to score 24.75 points against the Browns, who last year ranked 26th in run DVOA.
Per our Trends tool . . .
Mathews is someone you should probably consider, just as he should consider learning how to spell his last name.
———
The Labyrinthian: 2016, 79
This is the 79th installment of The Labyrinthian, a series dedicated to exploring random fields of knowledge in order to give you unordinary theoretical, philosophical, strategic, and/or often rambling guidance on daily fantasy sports. Consult the introductory piece to the series for further explanation.
Previous installments of The Labyrinthian can be accessed via my author page. If you have suggestions on material I should know about or even write about in a future Labyrinthian, please contact me via email, [email protected], or Twitter @MattFtheOracle.
Matthew Freedman is the Editor-in-Chief of FantasyLabs.
