The dynamic game of Daily Fantasy Sports (DFS) requires much more than simply knowing the sport for which we’re entering contests to be successful. We must be adaptable, precise, and open to learning from previous endeavors, the latter of which will be the primary focus of this weekly written piece. Game Theoretic methodologies will allow us to analyze and dissect the previous week’s winner of the largest and most prestigious Guaranteed Prize Pool (GPP) tournament on DraftKings – the Millionaire Maker. These same tenets of Game Theory, which can most simply be explained as the development of decision-making processes given our own skill and knowledge, assumptions of the field based on the cumulative skill and knowledge of others playing the same game, and the rules and structure of the game itself, will allow us to further train our minds to see beyond the antiquated techniques of roster building being employed by a large portion of the field. Approaching improvement through these methods will give us insight into the anatomy of successful rosters and will help us develop repeatably profitable habit patterns for the coming weeks. We’ll start by looking at the previous week’s winning roster, extract any pertinent lessons for future utilization, and finish with a look ahead towards the coming main slate.
Winning Roster
Lessons Learned
Game Over-stack
Six players from the same game were on h418ov21c’s Week 16 winning roster – the thing is, this isn’t entirely unheard of. We’ve seen this tactic pay off exactly twice in each of the previous two seasons, which typically occurs when one game environment runs laps around the others on the slate. And while the Giants and Vikings played to a solid 51-point game total, typically this strategy has only worked in games that combine to score more than 70 points. So, what was the magic formula for this game on this slate? Concentration and cost. The four-player Giants stack present on the winning roster contained a singular pay-up piece in Saquon Barkley and three value pieces in Daniel Jones, Isaiah Hodgins, and Richie James – all four needed to combine for only 86 fantasy points to keep this team on pace in large field GPP tournaments this week. They ended up combining for 91.96 fantasy points, good for a solid 4.28 salary multiplier on four of nine pieces on a roster. Furthermore, if that four-man stack were to hit, it would be highly likely that a member from the opposition would also hit due to the concentrated nature of the Vikings’ offense. Enter Justin Jefferson, who entered the game chasing history through the form of the single season receiving yardage record, and T.J. Hockenson, who had remained an integral piece in the Minnesota offense but had yet to have a true breakout game. Those two Vikings pieces combined for an elite 73.20 fantasy points, taking this roster to the promised land along the way.
But how do we spot these opportunities before the slate kicks off? Again, back to concentration and cost. A game stack or an over-stack are typically not enough to win a large field tournament for you, but they reduce the number of variables a roster needs to “get right,” keeping the roster on pace to do damage in the process. As you’ll notice, this roster would have fallen short on shipping the Milly Maker if it weren’t for the upside one-offs hitting, but the process of reducing the number of variables a roster needs in order to hit will maintain its +EV nature with so much of the field content to enter rosters with nine individual pieces that need to hit in unison, somewhat like the lottery. Summing this up – team stacks, game stacks, and game over-stacks need two primary ingredients to keep a roster on pace in large field tournaments: concentration of volume amongst the pieces of the offense and cost-considered upside (whether through a team’s high Vegas implied team total or a high game total).
The Value of a Cheap Quarterback
The way I teach to view the one-off positions (quarterback and tight end) is to break the players up into two distinct categories heading into the week – players that can “put the slate out of reach,” or have enough of a ceiling that they become pieces you had to have in order to win, go into group A, with all other players going into group B. If you play a player from group A (Josh Allen, Jalen Hurts, Lamar Jackson, Justin Fields, Patrick Mahomes, and Joe Burrow are examples from the quarterback position, while Travis Kelce, Mark Andrews, George Kittle, and T.J. Hockenson are examples at tight end), you are playing them under the premise that they become a player you had to have in order to win a large field GPP on the week, effectively lapping the field in scoring at a position that only requires you to start one player. If you play a player from group B, you are effectively betting on two things – none of the players from group A putting the slate out of reach and the player chosen from Group B putting up a score that keeps your roster on pace with the rosters that contain a higher-priced piece. This is extremely important to understand as it guides your decision-making process when building a roster!
For example, T.J. Hockenson became a piece you had to have in order to win this past week, lapping the field at a singular position. Whereas Daniel Jones was not the highest scoring quarterback on the slate, but his value resided with the fact that he kept pace from a salary multiplier standpoint and no quarterback put the slate out of reach at a higher price point. There is no way of knowing what path on the game tree will be optimal for a given week until the games have run their course but breaking the theoretical components down into digestible and actionable processes will affect your expected value over time. Adding this simple process of visualizing the path to first place along the game tree in a given week will greatly influence your return on investment (ROI) during your fantasy career. And the best part is that it doesn’t take much to wrap your mind around this particular process. If you’re interested to learn more about the theoretical components that I have discussed in this section (game tree, optimal practices, leveraged bets, variance, etc), I have done extensive research on the subject of Game Theory, with my works on the matter found by following the link in my bio.
One-Off Selection
As we touched on above, the importance of hitting on ceiling in the few one-off pieces housed on a roster should not be understated, as those pieces are typically required in order to take a roster to the next level (as in, a team stack, game stack, or game over-stack simply keeps a roster on pace, while the one-off pieces are what vaults the roster past the rest of the field). This understanding will also help shape our decision-making process as it dictates what players are worthy of consideration as one-offs. Basically, a player added to a roster as a one-off piece fundamentally has to have a path to one of the top raw scores on a given slate at the respective player’s position. There is one exception to this steadfast rule, which is introduced due to the constraints of the contests we play – salary (which goes out the window in contests of different formats, as is the case on platforms like Underdog – there, ceiling is the only thing that matters).
Without knowing each of you on an individual level, it is highly probable that the average roster put into action on a given week has zero chance of actually winning the contest in which it was entered (assuming large field play as the theoretics change drastically for contests of smaller size). That’s honestly a difficult thing to be told, but the entire reason we’re here is to get better at the game we all love to play.
Looking Ahead
We’re going to do things a bit differently in this section this week, bypassing highlighting individual plays and instead talking more about the theoretics behind those plays.
Quarterback Selection (The Value of a Cheap Quarterback)
Instead of listing the individual plays at the quarterback position, let’s instead work through the process of quarterback selection for Week 17. Putting the players into the groupings that we discussed above would leave us with Patrick Mahomes, Jalen Hurts (assuming he plays), and Justin Fields (yes, theoretically Tua Tagovailoa and Justin Herbert belong in this grouping as well, but their respective recent performances remove them from consideration in that grouping for me, personally). Those are the players that can put this slate out of reach at the singular quarterback position. Every other quarterback on the slate falls into grouping B, players that should be regarded as players that need to both keep pace from a salary multiplier standpoint and not have a player from group A put the slate out of reach. If Jalen Hurts doesn’t play this coming week, that leaves us with only two quarterbacks that can “put the slate out of reach,” which means less things have to go right in order for a pay-down option at the position to be optimal on the coming slate.
Game Over-Stack Theory
11 of the 13 games on the coming slate have game totals of 45.0 points or lower, with only Bears @ Lions (52.0) and Vikings @ Packers (47.0) checking in with game totals above that threshold. That should give us a solid starting point for deciding whether or not an over-stack is feasible, in addition to providing the blueprint for where to find it. Through the lens of last week’s example, only the Chicago Bears and Detroit Lions fit the blueprint involving the combination of expected concentration and relatively low player pricing, leaving that game as the only one I would recommend using for a potential over-stack in Week 17.
One-Off Selection
The teams with the highest Vegas implied team totals on the slate include the Chiefs (28.75), Lions (28.25), Eagles (25.5), 49ers (25.0), and Packers (25.0), which is where our process of identifying potential one-off plays with upside should begin (the fundamentals make sense – the act of scoring a touchdown carries the most variance of any singular act in the game, but increased exposure to that potential leads to less things that have to go right in order to hit). The Chiefs are less-than-concentrated currently but are giving Jerick McKinnon increased red zone work (exposure to touchdown variance). The Lions are concentrated through the air but not on the ground and are playing in desperation mode as they chase a potential playoff spot, potentially increasing the relevance of the pass game. The Eagles could be without Jalen Hurts again but get a lesser opponent in the Saints, and quarterback Gardner Minshew is a one-read quarterback that has the propensity to lock onto one player throughout a game (as we saw last week with DeVonta Smith). The 49ers have devolved into a two-man offense with Brock Purdy in at quarterback and in the absence of Deebo Samuel – Christian McCaffrey and George Kittle are worthy of consideration. The Packers lack any semblance of elite volume or concentration but utilize Christian Watson heavily in the red zone. This obviously isn’t a list of every viable one-off play (and doesn’t include any discussion on potential value pieces), but I wanted to highlight a step in my process that simplifies things regarding one-off selection.
