Introduction
I’ll keep this introduction short. For those who have not followed the Trend Testing series in other sports, let me provide some background. Each week in this space, I create a custom trend. Depending on the week, I may create one specific trend for each position or chosoe to focus more heavily on specific positions. I then track the results in a large guaranteed prize pool contest on FanDuel.
This article is written in three parts. I write the first part of the article prior to kickoff so that you can see what I thought about each of the matchups ahead of time. The ‘Results’ and ‘Review’ sections are written early on Sunday evening.
Description
It’s Week 1 and there are cobwebs to be shaken off. I’ll be starting with a nice simple trend that highlights the power of our Trends tool. New in 2016 are our ownership projections (accessible via our Player Models). They’re put together by FantasyLabs Pro Adam Levitan. In this trend, I’m going to attempt to find low-owned options who have well-rounded matchups. I’ll be measuring the ‘well-rounded matchup’ part with Pro Trends.
Quarterback
We’ll start at the top with QBs. Here, I’ve set the maximum projected ownership level to four percent and the minimum number of Pro Trends to three. If you’d like a larger sample, you can tweak the filters to your liking. But I’m going to choose to be somewhat exclusive here.
The results are promising. On average, qualifying quarterbacks are around two percent owned yet post a +2.00 Plus/Minus with 64.7 Consistency. I think most of us would take those numbers on a weekly basis. The three matches are:
• Alex Smith
• Tyrod Taylor
• Jimmy Garoppolo
Not all Pro Trends are created the same, but I am particularly fond of Taylor’s qualifications this week. He is projected to be a top value in terms of points per dollar and, as we all know, he comes with rushing volume:
(Note: you can view a player’s Pro Trends by clicking on his name in Player Models)
These QBs probably have low anticipated levels of ownership partially because their salaries fall in what seems like no man’s land. While we are anticipating most DFS players either to take the savings with Dak Prescott or to pay all the way up to Andrew Luck, Russell Wilson, or Drew Brees, each of Smith, Taylor, and Garoppolo falls in the $6,900 to $7,200 range.
Running Back
There were actually quite a few matches this week, so I’m going to cherry-pick my favorites. Week 1 sets up to be a great week for old man value: Adrian Peterson, Frank Gore, Matt Forte, and Darren Sproles are all among the matches.
Peterson looks particularly attractive to me in the depressed PPR format of FanDuel:
Wide Receiver
It was more difficult to generate a positive return at the wide receiver position, but I think this will work. The addition of the Average Projected Points filter in this trends helps screen out a lot of the fourth and fifth receiver types. Although ‘Name starts with J’ was not one of the filters included, you wouldn’t be able to tell from the current matches:
Each player comes with concerns, whether they’re caused by matchup, injury, or quarterback. In a week in which the ‘chalk roster template’ will likely involve paying way down at QB and RB and way up and WR, these low ownership projections could be right on the money.
But if you cover up the name, doesn’t this seem like a player you’d want to roster this week?
If you answered “yes,” then you should have rostered Jordan Matthews in Week 1.
Results
Both Smith and Taylor were available at low ownership on Sunday. That’s where the similarities between their DFS performances ended.
Smith found himself in an unusual position in this game, down multiple scores and forced into 48 passing attempts. He had a huge day throwing the ball and even added a rushing score for good measure. The main reason Smith matched the trend this week was due to rushing-based Pro Trends, but the passing yardage was certainly an unexpected surprise.
Peterson came nowhere close to even his floor projection of 10 points. It’s almost unfathomable to believe that Peterson could be held to three fantasy points on 19 rushing attempts, but with Shaun Hill as the Vikings quarterback the Titans were able focus more attention on stopping the run. Peterson’s real-life team still won the game, but I doubt many of the fantasy teams he appeared on enjoyed similar success. The 13.1 percent ownership was also surprisingly high: Compare that to obvious value play Spencer Ware, who came in at just 17 percent ownership in this GPP.
Injury concerns and hot-hand rumors scared many off of Forte, but both may have been exaggerated. Had Forte been able to find the end zone, he would have been among the top plays at his position. Still, his +4.5 Plus/Minus was plenty useful.
The WR matches performed well for the most part and were available at low ownership levels, as expected.
Concerns about Matthews’ QB situation were very much baked into his 1.6 percent ownership, but he turned out to be a target monster (14) and was one of the better values at his position. Target volume and red-zone opportunities were two of the main reasons Matthews was a match for this trend in the first place.
It’s somewhat of an upset that Maclin posted only 63 yards on a day that saw Smith exceed 350 yards passing, even though Maclin did briefly exit the game. Maclin’s implied point total based on his salary was 14, so he slightly exceeded expectations.
Review
Aside from Peterson, each matching player was available at sub-five percent ownership, confirming that the ‘Projected Ownership’ filter is a good way to find contrarian plays. Of the matches, two were what I would consider to be ‘GPP-helpful’ — in other words, low-owned and high Plus/Minus.
