DFS Building Blocks – Week 16

SUNDAY MORNING UPDATE: Not a lot of unexpected news, so not many changes to our lineups. Kelce is out so Hill will become chalk, along with Kupp and Jefferson. I’m ensuring I get some Thielen + OBJ stacks into some secondary lineups. And I’m getting Clyde Edwards-Helaire in some as well.

What a week. Let’s start with one of our core principles – building correlated lineups. In recent weeks, I’ve moved away from correlated lineups some, due to blowout risk, backups playing, other value options, etc. You’ve heard me talk about not forcing a correlated play into those situations, but last week was one of the best examples we’ve seen all year about why we should build correlated lineups.

Here’s where we landed. Screenshot from a high-stakes tournament (keep that in mind when looking at the ownership percentages).

We started the week locking in James Robinson. He was chalk, but potentially good chalk with the shift away from Urban Meyer and the good matchup against Houston. So what’s the correlated play? Brandin Cooks. You know we were attracted to a Mills + Robinson + Cooks lineup, but when we ultimately moved to Aaron Rodgers, we also shifted away from Cooks, losing our mini-stack. Let’s see this lineup with Cooks.

Dropping Chase, who we had no correlation with but who was in a boom or bust matchup at tiny ownership, for Cooks results in 149.32 and a 3k win. That was just a mini-stack, let’s look at our core stack of Rodgers and Adams. Could’ve added Marquise Brown, but we had a lot of WRs we liked already. So the next logical spot would have been Mark Andrews.

Cooks and Andrews and that’s a 100k lineup just by going back to our principles. Now, there was a reason Kittle was chalk and a much better play – on paper – than Andrews with the backup QB, but this shows you the power of building correlated lineups. When we have a week where so many other spots disappoint, if we get our stacks right, we get a huge advantage, rather than having to get all the individual plays right.

On to Week 16.

This week is all about what we do at the RB position, so let’s start there.

Clear value options this week with Ronald Jones, Alexander Mattison, and, most likely, Justin Jackson all starting. And unlike we saw earlier in the year when Mattison was priced as a starter, they’re all priced like backups this week. The chalk build this week is likely to be two of these three and may even be all three with one in the flex. So we have a choice? Follow the chalk or find a pivot? There aren’t any great pivots in the same price range, so if we’re going to fade the chalk we need to have a good reason. But we do have some things that prevent us from making each player a lock.

Ronald Jones has an okay matchup against the Panthers. But, as always, he could be one fumble or missed block away from going back to the bench. And angry Tom Brady may just throw the ball to anyone and everyone all game rather than the Bucs rushing it.

Mattison has a tough matchup against the Rams and it’s easy to see the Vikings playing from behind, limiting Mattison’s rushing upside, but boosting his passing upside. Mattison hasn’t seen the true boom performances this year that we’ve seen from him in the past.

Justin Jackson may still split time with Josh Kelley or Larry Rountree. I think it’s likely Jackson gets the bulk of the work, at least enough to pay off his value, and has the best matchup. Talentwise, he’s the clearest backup of these three, with Jones and Mattison showing numerous times they’re starter-worthy.

Let’s start our journey to a unique, leveraged lineup by thinking about fading one of these three. Without considering salary, James Robinson would be back on my lock list this week. So is his price, role, and matchup (against the Jets) enough to start him over the clear value backs? Maybe, but let’s come back to that.

If we’re going to fade one, we’re making the case that they’re going to bust and some other player will benefit instead.

If Jones were to bust, easy to see Gronk or Antonio Brown being the benefactor. Although I think it’s just as easy to stack Jones with one them. But if you want to play angry Tom Brady, Jones sets up as the easiest of the three to fade with a Brady + Brown + Gronk lineup.

If Mattison were to bust, easy to see Justin Jefferson being the benefactor. Again, though, easy to play them together. In fact, pairing them is a great way to get leverage off the individual ownership of each. That would set up with a clear LAR/MIN game stack and we’d come back with Kupp and possibly Stafford.

If Jackson were to bust it could be because of a timeshare or because the TDs came through the passing game. In that scenario, someone like Jared Cook becomes a pretty good pivot, particularly if Parham is limited or out. Herbert is the chalk at QB this week so there’s a lot of support for the passing attack making it easy to envision Jackson not hitting value, especially if the Texans can keep pace, as they’ve sometimes been able to do. I’m more of the mindset that we get bad Davis Mills this week, making me more likely to target Jackson + Chargers and fade the Herbert chalk.

I mentioned Robinson already. Two other names that stand out to me this week are Miles Sanders and D’Andre Swift. It’s never comfortable playing Sanders with everyone but him getting the TDs. And he hasn’t been practicing. If he’s out that will bump up Hurts’ ownership and make someone like Howard a better punt play. And we don’t know what Swift’s workload will look like. Not very strong reasons to play them over the value options, but they both have high upside at what should be lower-than-normal ownership.

If we do want to pivot to similarly priced options we have a lot of guys in potential timeshares. Michael Carter, Darrel Williams, Ke’Shawn Vaughn getting some attention from the Jones haters, Penny, Freeman, DeeJay Dallas, Mike Davis (great matchup – if ever there was a week, this is it), Singletary (coming off a nice week for us last week). You get the idea, plenty of names, but nothing as clear-cut as our three chalk options. Davis and Singletary would top the list for me as the best high-risk pivots.

Let’s return to the scenario where we’re playing all three options: Mattison + Jones + Jackson. Throw the bad matchups out the window and roll with the value. After all, as I’m typing this, Jeff Wilson is sitting at 13 points in the first quarter against a similarly tough matchup in Tennessee. The same Jeff Wilson who flopped in a chalk situation a couple of weeks ago…

So we need to differentiate our lineup elsewhere. This core will give us a lot of money left, as it will the field, so we can expect a lot of expensive WR chalk and expensive QBs this week. You can expect someone like Cooper Kupp to get massive ownership this week coming off another big game and with the field having no problem fitting his salary in. That starts to put Kupp into the fade conversation even though he is the best WR in the best matchup this week…

What I want to do is pair at least two of these RBs with a WR from the same team. Most likely candidates Mattison + Jefferson, Jones + Brown/Gronk, Jackson + Cook (double-value stack, but could easily take a Chargers WR, or could go more unconventional and just pair Herbert + Jackson).

Adding these mini-stacks will reduce our total lineup ownership, giving us leverage on the field even though we’re playing some individually chalky pieces. What does this look like?

Mattison + Jefferson (then add Kupp). Jones + Gronk. Jackson + Chargers (further leverage off the Herbert chalk). This leaves us a lot of money for QB and our last WR. We know want some correlation with our pass catchers, so we have Cousins, Stafford, or Brady or build a new mini-stack with our last WR.

Stafford is the most obvious choice in this spot since our lineup is already telling a story of a LAR/MIN shootout. Then we’re left with someone like Mooney, Claypool, DeVonta Smith, Jeudy, Jakobi Meyers, Emmanuel Sanders, or, down just a bit further, Marvin Jones.

DeVonta Smith really stands out as cheap for his talent, but he has volume concerns. If you think the Giants can somehow make a game of it, then Smith has a great chance to pay off. But, if you do think that, then you’re also opening up the conversation to a Hurts + Smith mini-stack to fill these last two spots.

The other that stands out to me is Marvin Jones. I really want to play James Robinson. And it’s not that I’m betting on him busting, but since I’m playing the three chalk options, I want to build my lineup in a way that benefits from Robinson not hitting his value. Enter Marvin Jones.

That’s probably where I’m ending up with primary lineup, assuming no major news before Sunday morning.

Let’s talk about my secondary options.

I really like the idea of a Brady + Brown + Gronk stack. That takes Ronald Jones out of my lineup and puts Jackson at RB instead of flex. I can drop down to Atlanta defense, which should be popular because of their low price against a COVID-plagued Lions team. Then I can fill out my flex with a cheap flier. Uzomah, Engram, Keelan Cole, Bolden, Everett, Okwuegbunam, Zylstra (adding opposing WR), Josh Kelley (counting on a timeshare, but both guys hitting value), Josh Gordon or Demarcus Robinson (if Hill and Kelce are out).

When you’re looking at those names sitting just a few hundred dollars cheaper than the three chalk RBs we’re talking about, it really puts their value into perspective, meaning we need a really good reason to fade them.

I can also put the fade on Kupp and play OBJ or Van Jefferson instead opening up enough salary in my flex to get back to James Robinson. In this Brady + Brown + Gronk lineup I’m already getting unique by fading Jones, so I can get some additional leverage by going with a different RB in the flex. And I’ll get extra leverage by fading Kupp.

I should also mention another double-leverage play in choosing (guessing) a Rams RB instead of Mattison. If the Rams get out to a lead through the running game that means less Cooper Kupp and less Mattison on the other side. Good luck guessing which one, but it’s a viable path that would break a lot of hearts and bankrolls this week.

If keeping the three chalk RBs, but not wanting to pair with Stafford, my next preferred QB option is Cousins, then Brady, then Herbert.

You can also drop from Kupp down to Van Jefferson or Beckham and play around with moving up to Mahomes at QB, depending on how the Chiefs COVID situation plays out this weekend.

That’s it for now. Check back in Sunday morning to see if anything changes.