 We finally got it. That annoying slate that we have at least once each and every year where some chalk gets hurt. We have a lot of injuries. Bummer is like a football fan perspective. It's like a human perspective. And then there is a DFS angle as well. And it leads to a lot to break down from a DFS perspective as we look forward to week number four. We got to go through all those bummer injuries, outline what they mean going forward and how to view the guy stepping into larger roles from a DFS perspective. Welcome on into the Heat Check Fantasy podcast powered by Number Fire. That's right here on the FanDuel podcast network and NumberFire.com. My name is Jim Sonnis. I am a senior writer and analyst for NumberFire.com. Joined here as always by Brandon Gedula. He is the senior managing editor of NumberFire.com. Brandon, week three was gross. How are you? You know, it's been better, but you know, I can complain about all, you know, effectively everyone I rostered in Daily Fantasy, getting hurt, but trying to keep perspective that at least I'm not the ones getting hurt, so. True. I always try to remember that one. I'm tilting about injuries. Just feel a little human about everything. But yeah, it was a tough week. No one wants to hear about the season long leagues, but I had a lot of, no one wants to hear about season long, season long stupid. This is the proper format for me to get that takeoff. Cause I'm not gonna insult, I mean, I might insult some people by saying season long stupid, but like, I don't care. Like, yeah, I'm right. So it's fine. But I, you know. Enjoy your waivers tomorrow when you're doing it for six hours on Tuesday. But sometimes I can fall back and be like, all right, at least I like moved up the standings. I got trashed by some players with questionable roles who had huge games. So that's a, so I mean, look, not a whole lot. You're facing a lot of Jelani Woods lineups. No, try carefully because I've got him in some seat, some dynasty best balls where he's looking. That's a different format than like a 10 or 12 team like, I mean, he's gonna score two touchdowns for every eight rounds he runs. If we can get two touchdowns for every eight rounds that Jelani Woods runs, I feel like that third or whatever round pick it was for tight end premium is going to be great. So I'm okay with it, you know, no complaints here. I find nothing to complain about on this. Jim goes from saying season long, Jim goes from saying season long stuff and no one cares about it. It's not season long. It's dynasty best ball. I don't have to fill out waivers. I don't have to fill out waivers. The biggest issue. That's even worse. There's no waivers. It's great. What do you mean? But that's even worse to talk about like a dynasty league where you just get points for whoever happened to go off. Which is apparently is how everyone, everyone that I played against in season long at least that's how they got their points. I care deeply about Noah Gray's eight rounds per game. I care deeply about Jelani Wood's eight rounds. Used to care about Tony Tremble, but he's dead to me. So like, you know, I care deeply about this. I could not care less about whatever backup running back is now going to be on waiver wires and stuff like that. I don't need to worry about that till the all season because it's best ball, bro. I get to hang out. So I like the best ball. I was just saying like DFS didn't go great. My entire core for the most part combined for about 30 snaps across their games. And, you know, sometimes you have that fall back where you're then like, I'll just dig into my season long matchups and root and then it doesn't go well. So it was a, it was a rough week, but hey, here's the thing, Jim. There's always next week. There's always next week. And I can tell that we are among the right people here because over on the Fando YouTube page on the live comment section, One Eye Jack said waivers are so Y2K could not agree more fully on board. You're in the right place, One Eye Jack when we're not discussing waivers ever again. We're gonna talk about takeaways from week number three, what it means to make DFS perspective and much more throughout the show for today. But first, a reminder to make sure you are subscribed to the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed. We have twice weekly on a fell podcast Monday and Thursday, preview show coming up on Thursday for the week four main slate. We also have MLB still going for the rest of the six weeks, six decades, the MLB season is still going along, PGA. I'll be back on that eventually, but Brandon is doing that solo when there are good weeks as well. We have NASCAR, USC, et cetera, et cetera, all in the same place. So search for the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed wherever you get your podcasts. And if you like what you hear, leave us a rating and review as well. The 2022 NFL season is underway in Fanduil and GMC, in case you hadn't heard, by the way, it's underway. Fanduil and GMC are back to bring you the GMC Sierra Mountain Climber Pickham, a free to play contest series that gives you a chance to win a share of $10,000 in Fanduil site credit every Sunday. The courtesy of GMC, here's how it works. Every Sunday during the NFL season, you'll have a chance to answer questions based on that day's non-prime time games. The more questions you answer correctly, the higher up of the mountain you'll move. If during any week you answer every question correctly for a perfect score, you'll reach the summit when you're share of $10,000 in site credit. Contest series is now live. It's at Fanduil.com slash free slash contest slash GMC today to start climbing that mountain. Let's dig into the week three headlines for today. Typically we have two separate sections. One is the headliner, one is the injury section. They are one and the same coexisting for this week because the headliner for week three is the injuries. Let's start things off here with the biggest one, David Montgomery left early for the Bears and did not return due to a knee slash ankle injury. I have not seen any updates on what the severity of that might have been but he was ruled out pretty fast. So don't know, I was on a plane so I couldn't like check Twitter. So I was like watching the scroll on the bottom because I was watching TV on the Delta thing. So like I could see what's going on. They have Twitter and I just see David Montgomery doubtful to return. And you just like get to experience tilt as they didn't like the seventies, which is, and I'm sure they're sweating their DFS Linus back in the seventies. I'm sure that they were super thrilled to see the scroll say that David Montgomery is doubtful to return. Khalil Herbert dominated the backfield with no Montgomery 61% snap rate 20 carries to two targets. He ran 13 routes compared to Tristan Evner who ran five. They seem like Herbert quite a bit. So it's a flawed offense, Brandon. What's your view of them, of Herbert specifically if Montgomery does miss time? Yeah, I mean, not to like douse this one too much but Montgomery is considered day to day. So this might all be moot. But if we get this backfield frankly without one or the other, then there's more value here. Maybe I was a little too high on David Montgomery. I mean, he wasn't like a full on total, total core play for me. He was, I think someone who I viewed as under salaried but he was pretty much a core play to me. But like entering the week, we saw Herbert play 25% of the snaps, which is not nothing. And it's generally indicative of the type of role that someone would have if the starter gets hurt if they go from not seeing the field then we can be a little bit more wary. But we see someone on the field, getting touches, doing things with it. He was overperforming from rushing yards over expectation standpoint, entering the week and then you see the workload and the results. This week it's, yeah, it's a flawed offense but it's flawed in the sense that it's actually, look, you want points and you want the team to move the ball but for a running back, volume is kind of crucial unless you're Cordero Patterson and you run for 15 yards a carry. So, volume is not the worst thing specifically at running back. So I mean, yeah, the arrow would be way up on Herbert. That's not a big surprise, but his workload was great. What kind of salary are we talking here if Montgomery doesn't play? So I liked Montgomery at 71, despite the fact that, is it David Montgomery who has the meme photo of like vision of this superstar running back and legs is this? Okay, so I don't quite view him like that but I kind of like Khalil Herbert and it seems like he maybe did a little bit more with his opportunities than David Montgomery. So what I'm getting at here is if I liked Montgomery with Herbert kind of still in his side a little bit at 71, I feel like I would have to put Herbert by himself in the right, and again, that's not completely terrible around like 74 with that kind of workload. Yeah, I think that's, I think I agree through a lot of thinking. I might be higher on Montgomery as like a player, I guess. So I would say- Dan Herbert or Dan I am? Dan both. Okay. Like, I think he's a good football player. Like I know I'm alone in that but I think he's actually a pretty good, he's turned into a pretty good football player. So I'd probably go with 72. So I'm nitpicking just a little bit lower though. But I think 72 for a guy who's probably gonna get a majority of the early downwork, one or two targets or so. And a team that, you know, they're flawed but like they're not a complete dumpster fire. Like they're, I mean, wins don't matter but they are two in one. Like that's, they're not a good offense but they're also not like the worst offense we've ever seen in the history of, they can move the ball in the ground. So I'd say 72, 73 is probably where I'd go for Herbert. So Khalil Herbert 72, next week they get the Giants who will be on a short week and then Montgomery because again, he's day to day, he's off to 72. So I think it's probably safe to say that, like let's say there's no Montgomery we're probably into Herbert at that salary. Although just a spoiler alert, you know, we go through these games like as they unfold and as natural on the podcast but that game's not gonna sound appealing but very, very few games on next week's main slate actually sound appealing. So I got to, I normally contextualize that better but- So for next week, the next week on the main slate the highest total is 53 and a half, which is great. That's Bill's and Raven's great game. Love that. Second highest total is 48 and a half but that game includes Seattle, which means it's a bad game for DFS. Like that, that is the rule there. Third highest total is 47 for Eagles and Jags which is actually really fun. I think you didn't listen to your fun games in Slack yesterday, which I think is disrespectful and how- Pretty sure that was the second game. Was it? Okay. Okay. Well, I lied. Sorry. I didn't mean to disrespect you by saying- Yeah, I have Jacksonville, Philly and Buffalo Baltimore. It's the two games that I considered fun. There was one other one that I was looking at that I thought looked fun. Let me try to find it. Good luck. There was one other one. I know- I bet I know it. No, you don't. Well, let me- It's not Arizona, Carolina. No, it's not. I'm very dead to me. It's absolutely not. I don't know. Hey, only 13 times. It's only three times, okay? It's only three times. I'm dating back into last year, though. No, but that was successful last year. Kyler Murray won me a lot of money in the week of last year. So, like, are you- You're lying. Okay, anyway. And James Connor won us a lot of money, too. Like, let's chill out here. Okay, buddy. Okay. I can't find the other game. I think it might have been thinking of the Jags and Eagles because that game actually is fun. I think you probably were and I think you probably were certain that I didn't list that game as the game I liked. Yeah, I got nothing else. That's literally it. It's just those two. Okay, so my bad. So normally I'm like, okay, well, it's Bears Giants. It's going to be a gross game. I got to bump that down, but there's not a whole lot of that for next week because of the main slate. So again, to finish that thought, Herbert without Montgomery at 72 like it. If Montgomery plays, I think Herbert's going to take too much work. I think they're both cross-offs if Montgomery plays. And then you can't play both, really, that's all right. Yeah, I agree. Dowling Cook left early with a shoulder injury. He was pretty quickly ruled out for the game. Pro football talk is reporting that Cook is expected to play week four, but he has a history of shoulder injuries. So I don't know, I think there's at least a shot. We need to discuss this. In a negative game script there, Alexander Madison played every other running back snap. Kenny and Wang Wu was active, but Ty Chandler was inactive. We've seen Madison get featured in the past when Dow has missed time. So are you assuming that'll be the case again if Dow can't play in week four or would you be worried about having in Wang Wu and Chandler lurking there for the Vikings? So two things. One, it would depend on salary, which is always the case, but two, they play in London next week so they're not on the main slate. So it's not the type of thing that we really, really dice up. And it sounds like with Cook expected to play anyway, by the time I'm assuming on week five, they'll be on the main, well, I guess they'll probably have a buy after London, but so we might not even have this effect of main slate. So that walk about it. Can you talk about it for like a single game stuff? Okay, sure. Dow and Cook expected to play. I'm not gonna play Alexander Madison. Okay, but like what if he doesn't? Like that's sort of that was the point because you had a history of shoulder injuries as a possibility he doesn't play. Yeah, then sure. On a single game slate, you have to consider Alexander Madison. I'm not talking about considering, how do you view him? Do you view him as being like a featured back in that situation? Or do you worry that they'll mix in other guys because they actually have burst as running backs? Then well, I love Alexander Madison, but why, you just had good rushing stats in college. Okay, despite being slow, despite being running like a dump truck, like yeah. Yeah, I would worry. So I think that if like hypothetically, we get Madison to not play in this game, I would take Maddie. Yeah, if we get cooked to not play in this game, I would take Madison from 2021 when he was like the full featured back in place of Dalvin. I downgrade that like 15 or so percent, probably under the possibility that Wong will get some work cause he's returning kicks and stuff like that. Obviously pretty electric to the ball in his hands and I can't look good in the pre-season. And there were like reports that they were receptive to potentially trading away Madison. So I think like there's at least a possibility to lose his work, especially cause both those guys are very, very fast. And Kevin O'Connell comes from the Sean McVeigh, Kyle Shanahan kind of background. They do value speed at that position. So I would just take Madison's workload from when he's filled in previously and downgrade that a little bit to account for the fact that there's a possibility in Wong Wu and Chandler mix in. Sure, let's say this game's on the main slate. What salary are you thinking for Madison? 78? I think that's too high. You think it's too high? Yeah. So I'm higher on Madison than you are somehow despite that long back and forth? Yeah. Okay. Why? It just doesn't really excite me enough. I mean, he had a great workload last year. If he downgrade that 15%, that's still worth 78, I think. Like if you took his role last year, it was worth 85. So like off the top of my head. Anyway. Well, it's hard for me to wrap my head around stuff that is too hypothetical because it's not. It's not hypothetical. You can play. It's not on the main slate. Dalvin Cook's supposed to play. You can play single game daily fantasy. You can play full Sunday. There are other things that exist other than just the main slate. That's true. That's true. Gosh, poser. Anyway, same game. Talking about Deandre Swift here, Dave Burkett noted on Twitter that Deandre Swift was nursing his left arm after the game. That could help explain why Jamal Williams got so much work. They're actually out snaps with 43%, 42%. Craig Reynolds worked in a weird amount as well, which tells me that Swift has probably actually hurt. And that's why I think this is pretty noteworthy here. Williams, 20 to 33 running back carries. He had two out of seven running back targets. Swift had four in that game. So Swift had this ankle injury now potentially has like a shoulder or something. Let's just talk about this hypothetically. Brandon. We've talked about Williams in the past. It's Swift murder miss time. Has Williams role this year been good enough where you'd be pretty high on him? Is Swift were to be unable to go under the ankle or the shoulder, whatever it may be? Yeah, I think so. He's also been playing to expectation on the ground in terms of his rushing numbers. We know, trust me, we know he can get red zone work. So I think that there's a change in how I'm viewing Jamal Williams than I did last year, a little bit. He's in a good game environment next week. So I think I'd be more receptive to Jamal Williams this year than I was last year. Probably let's say no Swift next week, it's like 73. Yeah, I might be a little bit lower because he ran the same number of routes as Craig Reynolds and Justin Jackson could mix in for passing game work. So I would expect him to not get a lot of passing game work and that does impact things. But the reason why I'd agree with you and that I'm higher on him now than I have been is that this offensive line is like mauling people despite having some guys miss games. I think they've had a starter out every game so far along the offensive line. So they're gonna get healthier up there. Jamal Williams could easily pay off for DFS even if he doesn't get passing game work because he's gonna get goal line work. He's gonna be efficient as a rusher. He'll get a couple targets. So I had been hesitant on Williams but if we get him without Swift right now it'd still be pretty viable. I would say 71 is where I put him once factoring in the concerns around the passing game work. He's 74. Okay. So then you're higher on Madison without Cook than you would be Williams without Swift. Yes. Despite Williams playing in a vastly better offense. What? Do you realize that they scored fewer points? Literally scored fewer points in the Vikings yesterday. Jamal, I was setting you up. Oh, because of my boy Jared Goff? Yeah. I've shifted to that. I've tried to like shift to DeMarcus Marigota again. I go back and forth, you know, Baker's Dust. So I had to choose between those two at this point. Okay. So, you know. I'm sorry. That explains Cordeaux Patterson's efficiency then. Of course. You say this as if you're like saying it jokingly, but like you're right. It is because of that. That is because of Marigota. Gotcha. Yeah. Come on. But yes, you're right. It is a better offense because he's the best quarterback of all time. I'm sorry. You're right. Fine. The Saints offense was awful on Sunday and both Jarvis Landry and Michael Thomas got banged up. Landry has an ankle injury. Thomas is to his foot. Even with them playing a decent chunk of the game, specifically Thomas. Crystal Lave, 13 targets, 147 yards. Your air yard stuff, hyper pertinent this week, Brandon. So good job by you. Trayquan Smith at 105 receiving yards. I ran the third most routes behind Olave and Thomas. We were high on Olave entering the week. So going forward, how big could his rule be if Landry or Thomas were to miss time? Here on mute. I mean, there's really not much of a ceiling. Sorry. You're back. It was just delayed, but you're back. There's really not much of a capped ceiling here. He could get a lot of work, a lot of downfield work, which is obviously high value targets, but also some shorter targets as well. If these two guys are out specifically, he had seven downfield targets, which for me is 10 plus yards downfield out of his 13 overall, 93% route rate. Also someone who, yeah, if you look at the full season stats, he's still gonna look quite good, but in week one, his role was a lot smaller than it morphed into in week two, which is something that we talked about. And now, it can grow. He can run every pass route. So I mean, the arrow has to be way, way up. I was trying to look at Alvin Camara's workload in this game as well. 60% snap rate, seven targets. So maybe there's a bit of a pulse there, but yeah, for Olave specifically, love it. Yeah, I think that Olave, I just feel very good about. Like, I think even if like, let's say Jarvan MT wanted being totally okay, I would still be happily going towards Olave, because he had 13 targets with them both being fully active last week, 13 targets this week with them being partially active. I think the Saints are realizing that they can't be as conservative in the first halves of games because it has not worked. So maybe they decided to open things up a bit. I mean, maybe not because James is hurt, I guess, but like, I think we might see some sort of shift there philosophically to ignite the offense earlier on as opposed to just playing catch up the entire game. So that's all positive. As far as Alvin Camara goes, 15 carries, seven targets, a 70% snap rate. He also had three out of seven red zone carries. Now the one thing I would say there is that with Taysum Hill being banged up, that's one factor that was not in the equation yesterday in terms of the red zone work because he can lose some work there to Taysum Hill. But I still think overall, it was pretty encouraging for Camara. So he's also not in the main slate next week, but where are you out with him right now in terms of your feel for him after his most encouraging usage thus far? A little bit better and expected Fandall points workload of almost 17 points. The problem is I don't know how often he's going to realize that because the offense sort of, it's not the worst offense. Of course, catching two of seven targets isn't going to help. It's going to make a pretty big gap between expectation and reality there. But again, can't just look at Fandall points and results. I know people love to inform me that that's all that matters, but if you just go off of that, you're going to be missing a lot of potential. You're going to be buying in, basically buying high on guys who convert and not buying low on guys whose roles are better than their production indicates, but I still would have issues, which is so weird for Camara, but I would probably, he was, I think 7,000, I had no interest this week effectively, maybe like 75, but... Yeah, I think that's correct because it counts for the limitations within the offense, but then does bump him up for a better role. So I think 75 is probably where I'd be too. They're facing the Vikings on that London games and not in the main slate, but I think it was encouraging usage for Camara. And I feel 10% better about him this week than I did entering the week, which is a good, that's a good improvement for sure. 10% is noticeable from a bump perspective. Matt Jones left in the fourth quarter of an ankle injury. X-rays are apparently negative here, but sounds like he is likely to miss at least sometime with a high ankle sprain. They asked Bill Belichick this morning about this and he said he didn't want to speculate about whether Jones would go on IR. So it sounds pretty definitive he'll miss time. Brian Hoyer will probably start. Let's say Unleashed Bailey Zappie, let's go baby. Typically an injury to the quarterback would mean that the team is a cross-off and typically the team is a cross-off, but I think it's at least worth discussing here because Ramon Drey Stevenson had a 60% snap rate for the second straight game. He had 12 carries and five targets. Devonte Parker had 10 targets with no Jacoby Myers. Eight of those were deep for Devonte Parker. So just getting Chuckers from Mac. Brian Hoyer, he tends to play as if like, it's the Brian Hoyer show, which could be fun. If Mac sits, which it sounds like he probably will, we're probably not going at these guys, but I do at least want to ask, are Stevenson and, sorry, Parker of interest to you if we don't get Mac Jones in week four? That one would depend specifically on the matchup. It's against Green Bay. So 20 point total based on the way Green Bay is played and the way New England is played. Yeah, 41 point total, Green Bay's favored by 10 and a half. So their implied total is like 16, 16.25. I don't know, one thing that kind of jumps out to me with Mac is that he has been throwing it downfield a good bit. His A dot's 10 yards. That ranks him fourth among starting quarterbacks behind Jamis Winston, Lamar Jackson, Marcus Mariota. I think part of that for Mac might be related to the fact they've been trailing pretty big in two of those three games. But it's still a willingness to throw it downfield. And I mean, with how bad they've been, we can expect them to trail going forward. If they're 10 and a half point underdogs. Now we don't chase volume for quarterbacks. I would, I mean, is the 10 and a half point spread assuming Mac's out. Yes. I figured. So let's say he plays. It would be 13 and a half year playing. So look, there's going to be some volume here. Stevenson could be in play from like a bring back stack, a lot of check down work. He's going to be the guy who gets the routes. I don't know if I'd get to Parker. I think he would be popular after a pretty big game. So I would, I would be lying if I said I wasn't a little bit lower here, but in the right spots, like, yeah, maybe. Yeah, I think it would really depend on a salary. The problem is the Patriots running backs never get super low salary, no matter how bad things get. Give me a salary for a remandry then. I think based on his workload and based on the assumption that Brian Hoyer plays and has a little bit of Hoyer time, I would say that's like a 61 kind of salary. He's 59. Okay, that's respectable. That's at least low enough where it's like, okay. You know, you can give it some consideration. It's not the worst idea in the world. I did see Devontae Parker's. Yeah, that's too high for me. Yeah, I think so. Again, a lot of these games are going to be ugly for next week, so I have that in the back of my mind, but one thing I will say about Stevenson at least is I think one of my trends for this week is going to be looking into just running back workloads and look at how maybe dispersed they are because we don't have... Yeah. There's really not a running back right now who I feel like afraid not to roster based on workload. So I think I might be more comfortable with that. I felt like a lot of build-on items this week too. There wasn't really, I kind of fell into Joe Nixon and I'm ashamed to say that now because he played like poop, but you know, I did feel a little bit there. That was kind of the old one. I no longer feel that with Joe Nixon, shockingly. A.J. Green suffered a knee injury in the third quarter and did not return, gave a route bump to Andy Isabella, but I think the bigger thing here is we saw all the targets go to Marquise Brown, Zacharitz and Greg Dorch. All those guys had double-digit targets. Part of that's because Kyler had like 69,000 dropbacks, but because they played like poo again. So Green may be potentially missing time, could concentrate things more, but how much does it mean for you in a Cardinals offense that has been just poop for the first three games outside of the second half against the Raiders? Yeah, all their first half numbers are horrific, but I guess like if you're gonna be a negative script, and yeah, like the raw numbers are inflated, but Marquise Brown still had a 31% target share, 44% air yard share, kind of surprisingly, only five of those 17 targets were 10 yards downfield, as A.J. was 8.0, receiver average is about 10 and a half, let's call it. That's not what you expect to see with Marquise Brown, but the volume's there. I think the issue is that his salary's not gonna come down from where it was. Personally, 7,000, which I think was, that was a little bit low, little bit low for his role. Were you really tempted? Yeah, I used him. Sure, but like, were you like, oh, this is like too low? I felt pretty good about it, yeah. Like I felt way better about like T Higgins at 73 than Marquise Brown at 7,000 last week. Yeah, but that's probably like, I think that T was pretty good too. But I'm just like trying to contextualize like, I wasn't like, oh, I need to get to Marquise Brown. I think Marquise Brown, relative to the high 6,000 guys was much better. I think compared to T Higgins, it's like maybe not, but like compared to those guys he was. So if he were to say at 7,000, like, yeah. Okay, so I said already that I expect his salary not to go down. I assume it would go up based on the production attached to this game. So I'm at least a little bit covered there because I saw his salary. Name me a salary for Marquise Brown. They're at Carolina next week, if that impacts things, but where are you expecting? Do you think it'll stay about the same? Yeah, I think, I would say like, I think I would probably want a salary around like 73 or so. It's 77. Okay. He has had double digit targets in consecutive games, but you're effectively banking on this offense. 77's a little rich. Like that's higher than that. I thought it was gonna go up to like 75 and I thought that would be a little bit high for me. That's a little high. You're basically, again, the Marquise shares were good, but for that to turn into what you want it to be, you know, you need passing efficiency, you need teams to be in the red zone to score. Yeah, Marquise Brown can score from outside the red zone, but a very small, small portion of touchdowns come from outside the red zone. So I don't love it. Yeah. I think he's over salary. What about a salary for Dorch and Hertz? Considering how bad the offense has been. And that's the Carolina defense played pretty well on Sunday and it's just generally been fine. So they both played at least 80% of the snaps, had at least 85% of the routes, 10 targets each. Wow, Greg Dorch is 8.3.6. Calmer is 8.5 has to be tiny. Yeah. His 8.5 is height. Which one are we talking about here? Whoa. Whoa. What is his 8.0? I'm just curious here. 6.0, that's not good. It's a real Justin Herbert number. That's a 6.0 from a team trailing a lot or at least like not moving the ball. That's not what you want to see. So Hertz, I don't mind as much and also for Dorch, just because that's more of his role. I think I'm lower on Brown because the 8.0 is more suspect. So Hertz, I'll say like 57. He's 55. I was gonna say 56, but I thought a little bit low. Dorch, he should probably be like 6,000. He's 53. So Dorch is actually interesting. That might be a write down for main line. It's been hard this year to find low $5,000 receivers who had a good role. Assuming there's no Rondell Moore again, Dorch is pretty good down there. It's not like Olave had 55 this week. It's nowhere near that, but it's not bad for a guy who actually has a path to 80 or so yards, that works. But in the context of a slate, we'll do the salary scroll later, which is always my favorite part of the show, but within the context of the slate, knowing there's not a ton of like shootout games, presumably there aren't a lot of studs in great spots. So one Greg Dorch at 53 could like really feel, because the thing about like rostering low salary receivers and just players in general is the opportunity cost of not rostering a stud, but that also then would apply and trickle down through the lineup where like the mid salary or the mid tier guys are probably not a great spots either. So. It's interesting, Dorch at 53. Okay, so no injury section, cause that was the injury section. So let's move now to role changes from this past week. Joe Mixon alluded to it before he played like poop. So basically I said poop like six times in the show. So we're going to cut that word out from now on. No more saying that word, Jim. Very your vocabulary. He played like the S words. So he got benched late for the Bengals. Somajia Piran played 33% of the snaps. He had nine carries to Mixon's 12. He played better than Mixon too, like just looking at it. Mixon was hobbling around a bit, but I think this is more performance-related than injury-related. Mixon 12 carries, seven targets, 38 yards to scrimmage. He actually had a good role if you look at like his like numbers. I thought it was a snap rate. Like his role was quote unquote role was good, but I think everybody has rough games, which is true. But how much does this lack of performance and then subsequent performance by Piran impact your view of Mixon going forward? Yeah, I mean, it's tough with this offense because we expected it to be fantastic and it just hasn't been. I mean, Borough had a great, great first half, but you know, as we all, I don't really need to like rehash and dig in, but I'm losing to Pittsburgh, not able to score basically with an overtime, losing to Dallas, and then putting up 27 on the Jets. I'm not like the hugest Jets haters. That's not like a joke there. Right. That's worrisome. I will point out that the Bengals had the highest increase in pass rate over expectation from if you look at weeks one and two, compared to week three, on the biggest jump there, they were below average, entering plus 9.3 points there, which is one of the higher marks of the week. Maybe they just sort of try to air it out, which is always a bit of an issue because of the SAC problem that this team has, but that's gonna take some value away from Mixon. Yes, we want targets for running backs, but if they're willing to do something like this, then it gives me pause to plug in Mixon and do a cash game lineup. So I think the Sally has to come down. I'm sure it will because the results weren't there. That's what I'm thinking. I agree with you. It just adds more uncertainty into a situation, whereas we were like, I was very into him at 82 or 83 or whatever it was because his workload was very good. He was in, I mean, the Jets defensive line played legit. It was not just the Bengals messing it away. It was also like the Jets played well along the defensive line. That's why they couldn't run the football. It's probably why they were more past heavy than they have been. But you know, the Bengals offensive line still trying to gel, still trying to get cohesion up there after a lot of changes in the off season. So I don't really think that rushing issue is going to go away necessarily. They played the Dolphins on Thursday. That game will actually be really fun. I just don't know, like, I don't know. I think that Mixon, there's more uncertainty there. I'm still expecting to be like a good role, but it's not gonna be the great role. Maybe they give him more breathers or whatever it may be. He's got a 21% rushing success rate according to the next gen stats and per game he's averaging 16 yards under expectation on his carries. My goodness. That's not what you want to see. That is not like... I mean, still like, you can see it. He was frustrated during that game. Like he looked mad. And that's probably compounded and led to some of the issues. But like, and like Samajit Perine, he's only had 11 carries this year, but a 55% success rate based on number fires expected points model, whereas Mixon's at 29% there. So like, I'd expect them to take some work off of Mixon's shoulders. Not gonna get benched, obviously, but like scaling him back a bit to give him more breathers. Yeah. And still 26 adjusted opportunities, which just carries plus two X targets. And if you look at the full season now, he leads the position with 32.7. But that's gonna come down now. Yeah. That's gonna get there, but yeah. It's been a good role. Like I said, if you look on paper, like his red zone role is good this week too. So it's like, you know, if you look on paper, it was good. It was, but it was bad outside of that. Devante Smith. It was good, but it was bad. Yeah, it was. It was good, but it was bad. Devante Smith was already running a lot of routes for the Eagles, but a much better target sharing week three. And like, he looked like a dude. Like, can we get like a next gen stat number for that? Like, dude-ness, cause he had a lot of dude-ness in him. And that game led to the Eagles with 12 targets, a 35% target share. He's at 25% for the season now. Dallas Goddard got banged up, heard a shin during this game. So I was too low on Devante Smith coming in personally. Where are you viewing him now going forward after his dude-ness in week three? Yeah, I mean, it's bumped up, but I will say it's not just the results, which is it's never really about the results that gets me interested in stuff. Hopefully that's clear by the like 10th year of doing the show, it feels like. But he got targeted on a 13% of his routes in week one when AJ Brown was just the guy then 21% in week two. And then in week three, it was 34%. So it was either a case of or, you know, partly all of these, but like they wanted to feature AJ Brown on week one. Can you stop on me? I'm checking one thing quick. Okay, nevermind to continue. I thought there might have been something else in play there, but there was not. What was it? So one of the notes- Did you interrupt me for a narrative? No, it's an actual thing. One of the things later on the show we're gonna talk about is Jeff Acuda for the Lions. He was on Justin Jefferson pretty much all day yesterday and shut him down. I was gonna look and see what his route, what Devante Smith, how often Devante Smith saw in week one. He did run against Acuda on 47% of his routes. So I'm guessing that was like a first half thing. They're like, okay, we're gonna put Acuda on Devante, but then AJ Brown was just like crushing their soul. And they're like, oh, we should change this. And Acuda did, AJ Brown did run 23% of the routes against Acuda. So like, I think that might have been partially explaining Devante Smith's weird usage. I think Jeff Acuda might actually just be good potentially. And like that's influencing things for both Jefferson and this. And I think I might not have counted enough for that when trying to evaluate Devante Smith and saying, okay, week one is the fluke as opposed to week two. So, okay, yeah, I thought week one was more fluke than I did not think AJ Brown was gonna get targeted on like 40% of his routes. No, I'm more so meant like expecting Devante Smith to have a 20 or 19% target share as opposed to like 23%, which is I think what he had entering this or has now or whatever. So, okay. I mean, I could see that. Yeah, I mean, I loved Jalen Hertz this week. It was, I didn't play too many lineups. I had a more tight lineup distribution this week. I spread a lot of that out toward AJ Brown and Dallas Goddard, which was fine, but missing out on Smith's or not fully taking advantage of like the Smith game I'm not saying like, yeah, I predicted this. That's not what this is, but I was expecting his role to improve, not necessarily to this degree and also to these results. It's important to like, yeah, he had a 17 and a half year at ADOT. He had a catch rate over expectation of 21%. Like he, big games from receivers come from converting on your chances at an outlier actually high rate. That's what he did. But the underlying workload here was still really good. It's been getting better. So that's why I'm up on Smith, not necessarily that he just had a 169 yard game. Yeah, so Devontae Smith, so far this year, we include week one, include week two, and include week three. That's what this year means. 24% overall target share, AJ Brown 34%, AJ Brown and Devontae Smith both have 38% of the deep work so far this year. And in the red zone, AJ Brown is at 42%, Devontae Smith, 17%. I think that like... So if I wait, just if I wait those, I have AJ Brown at a 35% weighted target share, which accounts for all that kind of stuff. And Smith at 27%, including week one, week two, and week three, AKA the full season. So to you, is it AJ Brown one Devontae Smith two or is it one A, one B? Still one two, I think. I agree. So I'm higher at least in Devontae Smith than I was, but still viewing AJ Brown as the number one here. And that's not a knock on Devontae Smith, more so an endorsement of we still like AJ Brown a lot. Bruce Hall got a pretty big boost in his snap rate this week. He played 51% of the snaps, Michael Carter 49%. Passing down specifically seemed to favor Hall. He finished the 11 targets compared to Carter's two. Carter did out carry Hall 11 to eight. It is worth noting they were in a negative script. And if it was Hall getting the passing game work, I guess I could play a role there. I will say that I thought that Hall was in on third downs a lot early in that game. I've not checked next gen stats to fact check this. So I shouldn't, but I was busy. So I haven't gotten a chance to check that, but it did kind of seem like Hall was getting work early on third downs. So I would rank Hall above Carter right now from a DFS perspective. And I'm not using him in DFS yet, but he's on my radar where he's a guy I'm monitoring week to week. Where are you out on this backfield right now? It's going to be hard to get excited about them from a DFS standpoint, unless I really, really change my outlook on how I invest in running back, which I might. I've already started to, but I'm never really open to the idea of like a full value back in a time share unless there's nowhere to spend at running back. So for me to get to this team is kind of asking a lot. As far as the first half snaps go, I have Bracehall. Sorry, I just pulled up the third down snaps. So the third down snaps to the entire game, 18 snaps, Bracehall played 15 of them. Michael Carter played two, Ty Johnson played one. So he's the third down back, but he's also getting some early down work. That's not the worst role. No, it's not. It's not the best offense either. But again. We're about to get Zach Wilson back. Is that a good thing? How dare you? It's better than Joe Flacco. I think. So like they play, okay, so they play Pittsburgh next week. Let's be realistic about this. What's a salary you would need for Bracehall to consider playing him? Because that game, you're not going to really stack that other side of the game. We're going to have a lot of Jets games where we're not really stacking one side or the other. So I feel like I probably don't really want to go there because it's Wilson's first week back. And I think they're going to be pretty conservative with their game plan. We'll talk about that in the philosophical changes. But like, if I weren't accounting for Wilson having his first week, I would say that Hall's salary, how Hall's role in that matchup is probably worth around like 63. So a bit above where I had Ramon Dresden at 61. I would say 63 is where he should be. That's where he is. Okay. Where would you have said? Like 6,000. I might need a five in front of that to play him though. I don't think that's entirely wrong. To be fully honest, like I could see being lower on him, but he's going to play every third down basically. And he's gotten double digit targets twice this year. I know again, they're changing quarterbacks. They've thrown way too much so far this year. But I think like Radar is at least up for Bracehall going forward. We'll probably have him in role changes quite a bit if I had to guess just because it's getting a little bit better. Jared McKinnon out snatched Clyde Edwards E. Lair in week three, 51% to 41%. Both those guys had seven carries and 30 red zone chances. Overall, Edwards E. Lair had five targets. McKinnon just won, but McKinnon did run more routes 18 to 15. I liked this game a lot to my detriment. Didn't even consider a CAH at all. So he was already kind of a write-off to me partly due to salary, but where's he at for you right now entering week four? Get him out of here. I mean, he was like game stack consideration only. And that was like a, if I liked the other quarterback in that game, and I really want to like just sort of onslaught that kind of game stack. Very rarely, if ever, we'll have the interns check all the tapes. But I don't know if I've ever been afraid of not playing CEH. And now I feel even less afraid of CEH, but not on the main slate, so that helps. Yep, I would agree. Okay, Damian Pierce saw a lot of work on Sunday, 20 carries and two targets, 61% snap rate. Rex Burkhead at 39%. Burkhead did still have the better receiving role. 16 routes there compared to eight routes for Pierce. Pierce said eight red zone carries on 12 total plays in that area, which is a really good red zone share. But I feel like it's kind of status quo. Like I know he had production, but I don't think his role changed. I think it's exactly what it was in week two. What about you? So I don't think it changed a lot, but I think people will view it differently. I think it's worth discussing for that reason, yes. Like there was a drive where he basically brand from the 50 on multiple rushes and then into the end zone. And I was like, wow, like this is probably it. And then I dug into like the usage numbers. And I was like, it's still not flawless. I probably should have considered him. I think it was 58 this week. The simulation model I run liked him a good bit. But I, you know, those are the types of players that I usually just don't go to because I feel like there's not enough of an upside from, especially in a game that I thought would be completely dreadful. I'm probably a little bit higher having seen the results, which I know sounds contrary to what I just said about Devonte Smith. But in this offense, I need to see results on that volume because it's not a guarantee. Some guys have a lot of work and don't do a whole lot with it in bad offenses. Maybe like Anaji Harris, something like that. But I think I'm a little bit higher on Pierce. Just definitely not like, wow, this is the value back that we just keep targeting. Yeah, I think that like, the question I always ask for backs like him where they're very unlikely to get passing game work or like it enough is like, can I get burned for not using this guy? And like the answer is yes, but like the odds of him burning me are not super high. Like this week, good game, you know? 101 yards in scrimmage, you had a touchdown, still 17.1 fan dual points. Like you're not trying to down it at a value salary, but he's not a value salary anymore. I saw his for next week. It's not a value salary anymore. So I feel like I still don't have a lot of like fear of getting burned, Fogba. I don't have a lot of Fogba with Pierce yet, given the offense, given the lack of passing game work. So I'm still, honestly, I'm still just kind of status quo on him. Like, and that's probably lower than consensus. Yeah, I think we're about the same. Yeah. And that seems like it's probably lower than consensus, which is, you know, maybe a mistake on our part, but it's 6,800 for next week, so I think we're going to have to plan the chargers probably going to be trailing. Do you watch? Maybe. I mean, the chargers get a pass because they've faced the two best quarterbacks in football the past two weeks, and Patrick Mahomes and Trevor Lawrence. So I get it. What's that spread? Chargers by six and a half on the road. Yeah. I think he's going to get a lot of steam this week. And I hope he does because I think that like, I don't get a lot of spots where I can deade I think this would be a spot. If he gets steamed up, I'm okay, deviate. People will talk about the chargers rush defense, et cetera, et cetera. I kind of hope he gets, he gets pushed up this week because like, there is a lot of value in catching passes and Rex Burkhead is still doing more than him. It's a flawed role still. I don't know if we've really done any comps this year, but this feels a little bit like a Damian Harris comp where like, not quite the same offense, but like, yeah, if there's, he can get scripted out. He can also, you know, have a lot of red zone work and score twice maybe if they're lurking down there. But that's his path to beating you. Now he's up around, I feel like 68 is like, the Damian Harris salary after a good game. And then he'll kick back down to like 63 and then eventually he'll do it again. That's kind of the vibes I'm getting. Yeah. I would say that like the, I'm just bumping up the odd team, Burnsey for not using a meter a little bit. Like that's all I'm doing. Baseline is still the same. Ceiling is a little bit higher, but it's still muted relative to where it should be. J.K. Dobbins saw his first action since 2020. Kind of got eased back in as was expected here on a pitch count. He did play 44% of the snaps, which is actually kind of higher than I thought it would be. Justice Hill played 48%. Dobbins seven carries for 23 yards. He ran 13 routes and had two targets and the red zone Baltimore through nine times and ran four times. Dobbins did have two of four carries there. So the role will likely increase as time goes along. So where we have for Dobbins, entering week four specifically. Another spot where I'm probably like going to be lower than consensus always, just because I hate how this team uses their running backs, which is very rarely if ever throws two of them, although he did have 13 routes, which is about 40% in those two targets. Ultimately played the 44% snap rate, but in the first half he played 62%. I think I'd need to see his snap rate more stabilized around 60% for me to wanna play him at whatever salary he's gonna catch. So I have a hard time thinking about a realistic way where Dobbins earns a role within this offense that I end up rostering him frequently. So I'm probably lower than most. I think the fully realized version of him will be something that someone will wanna use in DFS eventually because the Ravens are much more past heavy now than they were last time Dobbins was healthy. So like his passing game role then was not ideal, but they're a past heavier team now than they were. Lamar is playing pretty well right now. So we have pieces of this offense and they haven't used running backs in that way, but they've also been playing with Mike Davis, like the ghost of Devonte Freeman, stuff like that. This is once he gets back to being his full self, it's within the range of outcomes. And it's not like the target competition is that big outside of Mark Andrews and Rashad Bateman. So I think the fully realized version of JK Dobbins we very much will have a ceiling for DFS. I just think we'll see it slow played a bit to get there. If I were projecting a snap rate for next week, I would say 55% or so, which is respectable, not high enough for me to get to him in the best game of the week yet, but I think the fully realized version of him will be someone we can roster in DFS. Okay, so best game of the week next week, what's the salary got to be to be tempted? Okay, so 55% snap rate probably 15 carries two targets, great game environment, very good offense, 62. He's 58. He went down for some reason. Why is that? That's odd. Why did he go down? His salary went down. He got five Fandal coins. Who cares? Everyone, literally everybody just cares about what you produced. So 58's low enough where like, right, I mean, we'll learn a lot about the position at running back for next week during the salary scroll. Maybe it's a week where like, yeah, but I guess I'm gonna play some JK Dobbins because maybe there's not a whole lot of running backs in great spots. That's way lower than I thought. I thought he'd be 65. I thought he'd be like 64, 65 as well and that was gonna be too high. So you were lower on him than I was. What's your rate on him now that he knows 58? I would consider him at this point in the week, which is literally as early as possible with looking ahead. I would consider him assuming that running back is bad for next week. Fair assumption based on the overall game. Yeah, overall so yeah. We keep teasing it, but we're getting close to the salary scroll. So I would consider him. I would not have if he was around like 65, like I thought he would be. I agree. We've talked about Austin Neckler's role previously. That overall role was bad again this week potentially because that game got out of hand, although they kept Justin Herbert in there for some reason. But the Red Zone role also stinks for Austin Neckler. He was losing goal line work to Sonya Michelle previously. He has four Red Zone opportunities the entire season across 25 plays. That is a 16% share. I think he was around 34% in his fully healthy games last year and even that was kind of low. Like he had, you talked about this in week one, he had a lot more touchdowns than you'd think. That was compared to his Red Zone role. His Red Zone role has now gotten worse. His overall role has gotten worse. I honestly don't know if I can use him in DFS even with the past catching still being fine. They get Houston next week. So I should be on Eckler, but like I don't know if I wanna be. Where are you at on him right now? I mean, another spot where we were lower on Eckler in week one just have been lower than basically salary. If we say salary is expectation, lower on Eckler week after week after week. The efficiency is really bad on the ground. 25% rushing success rate averaging about eight yards under expectation per game. Not that there's a whole lot there cause he's expected for 35 on about 11 carries a game. So like to underperform that, not ideal, but I mean, it is what it is. It's, I've been trying to think of a comp role, but there really aren't because he's not viewed as like a part-time back. Okay, how about this? His role is kind of like Breeze Halls if Breeze Hall actually like had good offense. I was, the one that came to mind for me was like, probably not this year, but in years past like a very inefficient Aaron Jones. Like where the salary is up, you're still tempted a little bit, but like. Maybe, I guess from that perspective, I was more thinking from like how he gets used perspective. Sure, but I mean like the usage of like moderate carries but like fairly good receiving still, but I guess the red zone stuff isn't quite the same with you. There's really not a good comp. So give me a salary for next week with Eckler where you think he should be and then we'll figure it out. Like 67, that might even be too high. Yeah, this is one of those spots where like if you just blanked out the name, you're like, okay, this team has this implied team total. They're favored by this. Here's his role, like, yeah, 66 or something. I don't know. 84. Look, eventually, eventually he's gonna have like a multi-touchdown game. I know, he's gonna totally like shove it to us, but like he'll score two touchdowns and have like 60 yards, that's 18 points. That's not gonna kill me if I don't have it. So, especially at 84. At 84, you really got it. Can he get 30 points right now? Only in a game where he scores twice and they're trailing a ton and he's like, oh yeah, he got 14 targets and caught 13 of them. And like, that's kind of the path to his getting that. Yeah, so let's give him a touchdown each game. He has not scored yet, but let's just, I know we talked about his red zone role being bad, but let's give him one touchdown per game. If you add six points to his fandal point total for each game so far, he'd be at 15.2, 19.9, and 15.3. That is with touchdowns, you would be there. And again, in the red zone role is part of the thesis of being lower on him. The Fogba is low here as well. Mack Hollins, Fogba is there. Got a lot of run with no Hunter Renfrow. 44 routes on 46 drop backs. And one of the reasons he didn't run one of those routes is because he was the passer. So he basically ran a route in every play that he could have except for one. He converted 10 targets, 158 yards. I also had referenced Darren Waller's route rate on the preview podcast. It did go back to where it had been previously with they ran more two tight end sets with Renfrow being out. But Renfrow might miss more time. How would you view these Raiders past catchers if Renfrow does miss another game? Would like them more if I, well, I guess, I guess Derek Carr is literally as good as Aaron Rodgers according to Devonte Adams. So I should probably be higher on this team as a result, but I think Mack Hollins is fun. Obviously, I still like Devonte if I like the game environment. One of those spots where I'm assuming here. Denver at home. So it's indoors, at least. Oh gosh, that's gonna be an ugly game. That's gonna feel like the game of the week where there are plays, but there aren't plays. Are there plays though? We're not, it's gonna feel like there should be plays. Oh yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. So in week one, Devonte Adams, 10 catches, 17 targets. Since then, averaging three and a half catches on eight and a half targets, catch rate over expectation of minus 16 points, 24 yards a game. He's been bailed out with touchdowns. So he's gonna have a good red zone roll, that much is certain. I know this is probably more about Mack Hollins, but I think Devonte is just more interesting, frankly, because he's a salary's high and we know that he can burn us. You would just expect a little bit of a better workload. Then what he does. My guess, this is just a hypothesis, but I'm guessing teams saw what happened week one and saw cars efficiency when throwing to non Devonte Adams people and how bad it was. And we're like, okay, we can just devote every resource stop in Devonte and make him burn us elsewhere. So why don't you do it with Hollins? Kind of did. Why don't teams do that with Cooper Cup? Why is he always open then? I mean, I don't know. Like if teams can do that, but like it's... My theory is that Cooper Cup is good at football. Not to say that Devonte Adams is not. But don't say that. My theory is that Cooper Cup is good at football, which does buck previous Jim's thoughts on these things, but whatever. He did fumble last week again, just for the record. Vindication. I was right. So yeah, I would say the arrow was way up for me on Devonte after week one. I was kicking myself a lot for not being higher on Devonte. Now I feel a little bit more vindicated because Derek Carr is like not my favorite passer. So I feel like this is a little bit more of what we should expect if you look sort of collectively. I'm probably not gonna fear Devonte and that that could always scare me. I think the upside is still there. It's more so that the floor is much lower and that's something you don't deal with with Cup. Sorry. The median expectation is something that's much lower than we might have thought. And that's something you deal with Cup. Yeah, I thought it was gonna be sky high with Devonte. I thought he would just be penciled in for... I mean, he had 10 targets, but like the production just wasn't there. So I'd say Devonte's probably like an 82. I'd probably still go 84, 85 because of the ceiling. Sure, but... Darren Waller was 64. He should probably be like 6,000. Oh, really? I thought better about him. Now, I guess if Matt Collins gonna take work away then... Yeah. Darren Waller's salary has to go down because he didn't produce. It's just the way that it works. Matt Collins higher on. Afraid to chase it though. Huge catch rate over expectation. 26 points there in this past week. Everyone saw the production. The role's really good. So I'm not like, no, this is a Jelani Woods, like eight routes, two touchdowns thing. Very different. King Jelani Woods' name out your bleepin' mouth. But I think the salary's probably gonna climb too high and we're probably gonna then try to buy high on a guy who's not gonna do that every game. So I don't know, like weirdly, like everyone shifted a little bit, but not drastically, I guess. Yeah, I would say that like, I was worried that to steal a rich rebar loan, I was worried that Collins would just be doing cardio like he was in week one, you know, running a lot of routes but not getting a lot of usage. I think now that that's not as much of a concern and he's a consideration for game stacks, but I don't really want to stack that game next week. So that's a bump up. Okay, so Devante 79, does that appeal to you? Yes. Cause I think the ceiling is still there. That's all that matters. Cause I'm not complaining in a cash game. So if I'm looking at ceiling, the ceiling is still there. So yes, I think 79 is a buy low potential spot. Yes. So I was wrong with Waller. His salary went up to 65. Okay. Is up 100. And what's Mac? And then Mac scrolling, 58. Good search. Okay. 58. That's high enough where I'm not as itchy to go there. So yeah. He's got a sweet headshot though. He does. That Collins is awesome, man. Like I always got annoyed with him cause he like had basically the same number as Mike Kosicki when he was with Miami. He was, I think he was 86 and Kosicki was 88. And so like he catch these touchdowns like, oh yeah, Kosicki touchdown. It's like, no, that's not Collins. You moron. Well, he did the two small thing and then zone after scoring, which I would appreciate. Yeah. Okay. Speaking of Raiders, number two wide receivers who weirdly occasionally pops a Jones, had a solid usage day on Sunday. Former Raiders receiver, I guess I should say. I led the Jags to 11 targets. Christian Kirk had nine. Marvin Jones had seven. Across three games, Kirk does lead with a 26% target share, but Zay Jones second at 23%. Zay Jones, I have to keep saying Zay because there's also Marvin. Zay Jones has six red zone targets this year, which is 27%. Now Zay's A dot is 6.5. And he has one deep target so far this year. So it's like, it's a slot type role even though Kirk as their slot receiver, Jones runs about 33% of his routes from the slot. So he's an outside receiver, but he has the workload of a slot guy. But is there enough here for you to consider Zay Jones in a game where you're stacking the Jags, AKA potentially next week? Yeah, he also got a rush, which we'd love to see. Curtis, he had a red zone rush this week, by the way. Just thought I'd let you know. Negative two yards, but he got it. Yeah, Zay's apparently was in the red zone. I did not see that one that I recall. But yeah, it's a good workload. The A dot, yeah. The A dot specifically this week, 3.7. But still two downfield targets of 10 plus, good red zone roll. This might be the type of week where I just sell out on particular game stacks because the odds of a lot of games being terrible is quite high. And so if we get like three games that sort of pop off, it's really not the kind of week where I think I'm gonna be dispersed all over. So probably gonna be more open then to value guys in the games that I actually like than trying to force guys in games where they might score like 27 total points. Yeah, I think I'm pretty receptive to him. I think that Zay Jones with his current workload, entering a game that I'll probably want to stack, I would say that that combination is worth like $5,800. What would you say? Yeah, I think I could not get there if there was a six to start that salary. There's not, it's a 59. So it's like appropriate, but like, so what I would say, and this is probably not something I would have said prior to this week, but what I would say now is that Zay Jones is worthy of game stack inclusion at $5,900. I think it's worth it. So we didn't talk about this with Davante Smith, but he's up to 6,900 and A.J. Brown's 8,300. So if you can sort of pair those together with a Zay, like that cuts down those salaries a good bit. So I think that's reasonable. Christian Kirk, six catches in each game so far, 14.7, Fandall points in each game. He's great. He's 76, it's high and like, but it's justifiable. Yeah, scored again this week, love to see it. Hate to see it after I talk about touchdown rates progressing. However, it's not about not scoring the next week. It's about being more average and... His average is going to be astronomical because he's the best player of all time and Trevor works great. It's a lot of indication on this show because we loved him with Arizona. Oh yeah, it's not time. And it didn't work out. Cliff, buddy, find a way to use good players. I'm just saying poor Rondale is going to just toil over there. Anyway, Robio Dobbs, or Robio. Robio, I was worried about saying his last name wrong and put your first name. Romeo Dobbs was the wide receiver one for the Packers this week with everyone out. Dobbs ran 94% of the team's routes. Eight targets, 24% share. He had two out of four red zone targets as well. Eight out pretty low at 2.8 yards. But could you see yourself getting to Romeo Dobbs if this role were to sick? So they play the Patriots next week. Little again, 41. It's Brian Hoyer, though. So remember that there's more shootout potential now. Sure. But yeah, the eight targets came in a game where, look, let's say, you know, a similar quarterback to what they saw last week projected for this week for the Packers. So it could be similar game script. Brian Hoyer equals Tom Brady, question mark. Tom Brady with nobody to throw to. They played together for a long time. They're basically this. Yeah. Okay, don't hedge it. Don't hedge it. Commit, commit like me. Come on. I mean, very clearly everyone has to know that's a joke, but. No, don't hedge. Yeah. Come on, this is disappointing. It's fine, the role. The low A dot is a little bit problematic for the target share being 24%, which is normally good for a receiver. If it's tied to such a low A dot, you have to catch all of them, which you did. You got to kind of do a little bit after that. You got to score. So it's more of a like offensive volume expectation thing. And I don't project that to be substantially different next week. And what like overall could be like a similar game where there's not a ton of points. So I would guess after scoring, after catching everything, probably get bumped up a bit too much for my liking, but that's kind of how I'm doing him. So how would you put his, I want to hear salaries for him, Lazard and Big Shot Bob Tunyon, who had six targets, seven targets, seven targets on 21 routes this week. This is tough because I didn't give this team any thought. So I guess. I'll go first then. I'll go first. I would put Dobs at 59. I would put Lazard at 56. He actually had a higher A dot, but I don't think that's going to stick. I'd put Big Shot Bob Tunyon if. Lazard actually had a higher A dot than 2.8. I know. Are you sure? Honestly, I'm surprised because Lazard's kind of like a two yard A dot kind of guy. So I was a little bit surprised, but like Bob Tunyon will go at. Was he 48 last week? Fine. No, I should have considered him. He didn't burn me, but I should have considered him. He used freaking over Smith like a moron. I get his letter. So it was fine. But like, I have a moron. I would say Tunyon 53. So 59 for Dobs, 56 for Lazard, 53 for Tunyon. Sure. I might go like Dobs, 50 at Lazard, 57. I think it's a little bit closer just based on. If Dobs isn't going to like push for double digit targets, he has to do literally everything right. He has to catch every single one of those targets. Well, I don't think that that role is sticky though. I think that he actually has downfield juice, even if he wasn't used that way in this specific game. Okay, we'll see. From a player archetype perspective, he is someone who could get downfield work. Yeah, but it's just not what we saw. Right. But that doesn't mean that you can't assume that a 2.8 yard A dot will be his like, his role in perpetuity at Debo Samuel. So like, I feel he had two targets in week one. Who do you expect to have a better downfield workload? Okay, so two questions. Dobs had a 24% target share at Lazard at 18%. Do you think those are about correct? No, dobs will come down. And do you think Lazard will go up at all or stay around 18? Yeah, I'd say they'll probably both be flirting around 20%. So then what we're looking at is similar target volume, but one guy projected to get a lot more air yards on those. I don't think that's, I wouldn't project it that way though, because Alan Lazard's player archetype is not downfield bomber, whereas Dobs is more of that. Okay. So like, I'm not basing it off of what we saw in a certain one game. I'm basing it off of like archetype. And Alan Lazard is like a... Lazard has a 13 yard A dot this season. On like three targets, nine, 10 targets. Dobs had two deep targets in week one. I'd rather have Lazard. Straight up? I would probably favor Lazard straight up, but... After all that. But it's not by much. Yeah, if you gave me like plus 130 odds, I would consider betting you straight up that Dobs outscores Lazard the rest of the way. Plus 130, half PPR scoring. The question was... Points per game. The question was Lazard or Dobs, who's like roll, do you like better? And then you said, here's why. Dobs' role is gonna get better. Lazard is just gonna be worse. Cause he's not that better. I think that Dobs has more room for like, for being like a guy with upside. Yeah, obviously he has more room to grow from a 2.8 yard A dot. It's not, I'm not talking about from that. I'm talking about from like, his actual like ceiling potential is higher. Then Lazard's? Yes. Lazard is like the... But the boring... You need plus 130 odds to take that. Yeah. It's about median, it's about median. It's not about average. Cause that's what betting is, about medians. Okay. Well, I like Lazard still. I'm probably not gonna get tempted by Dobs. Bet me then. Plus 130 that Dobs outscores and the rest of the way. No. Why? Cause you're a coward. Come on, you can do this. Come on. No, I'm good. Bet me, bet me, bet me, bet me. No? Okay. Hard to 6,000, Dobs 59. Robert Tunyon is 49. I can get by on that. All right, I'll take the bet. Yeah. Okay. Plus 130. That Romeo Dobs, rest of the season, points per game. Fandal points per game, will outscore Al and Lazard. Plus 130 odds in my favor. Let's party. Let's go into situations to monitor other stuff that sit out to us in week number three. Brandon, what did you note when going through usages from Sunday? Jonathan Taylor's role is still fine. Just kind of checking in on the, you know, the former best DFS player, you know, from a year ago, the guy that we had to play all the time. 77% snap rate, had more routes with 23 than 90 behinds with 19, had five targets behinds at six. So like it's good, but the results haven't been there and that could be a little bit scary, but it's also, Taylor was really boosted by churning out big plays and scoring at a higher rate by having an elite, like unmatched historic, like not unmatched historical, but one of the best historical red zone rates that there have been. This offense is not quite looking great. So that's kind of where we are with Taylor. Don't want to write them off completely, but just kind of making a note there. Similar situation, Derek Henry, six targets on 14 routes, played 73% of the snaps, 20 carries, but just one of three red zone carries with Tannehill getting the other two. Don't forget about him. These guys are not like role changes, so we don't get into them more deeper, but you know, just checking in, I guess. Kim Acres role made it look like he separated a lot with 12 carries over Dale Henderson, who had four carries in a target, but they did each play 50% of the snaps. Acres was more involved in the red zone, four carries to one for Henderson, but Acres just three routes, 14 for Henderson. I think we're probably always looking for these backfields to start to split, and based on simple production and volume, it looks like that was benefiting Acres this week, but still pretty narrow, so I'm not going to be chasing Kim Acres just yet. The Browns, I talked about a Mari Cooper week two recap or we talked about them. Another good usage game. If you look at just the past two games for this team, Mari Cooper has a 36% target share and a 64% air yard share. David and Joku is at 26% of the targets, 70% of the air yards, but we're looking for tight ends with pulses and Joku could be that guy. Are you going to roast me or no? What's that? Are you going to roast me or no? For what? For Thursday, you were like, I should consider a Mari Cooper at MVP for a single game, and you're like, he's projected to be on 1% of rosters in the MVP slot, and I was like, no, people will chase it, he's dumb. And then he was the highest growing player in that game. Yeah, I brought it up for you, don't worry. Well, thank you. I appreciate that, but basically we're seeing Cooper treated like a true Alpha wide receiver one, which we did not a week one. So while we're never going to love that offense, that is something that you can't just write off. Cowboys could use a guy like that. Yeah. Yeah. Another sort of similar situation. Deontay Johnson is a 32% target share and a better than average ADOT actually, better than receiver average, I should say. 11.1, receiver average again, around 10 and a half, but just hollow production, despite the 122 air yards per game. I'm not like ever going to love Deontay, but if the salary starts to scale back a bit, maybe. I'm going to let him burn me first. I will get burned for nice and Deontay Johnson before I use Deontay Johnson. That's fair. Traylon Burks ran a team like 27 rounds, but had just two targets. So just kind of something to, I was like looking at routes for rookies and see what happens. I don't really know if he's ever going to morph into like a DFS viable guy in this offense this year, but we'll see. DJ Moore, just checking in on our guy. 100% of the routes so far this season, but just a target on 29. Exactly, you're checking in on him as more than Baker may feel this done. So thank you for that. That's where I consider it of you. I'm getting targeted on just 20% of those routes, which is just completely forgettable. So yeah, Kyle Pitts, 70% route rate on week three with eight targets, which is 42%. Super high eight out of almost 19 yards. Six of his eight targets traveled at least 10 yards downfield. Route rate was down from 82% before that. So kind of conflicting, but Kyle Pitts not dead yet, especially with some downfield work. You'll love to see that for a tight end. And we already talked about this one, but Jelani Woods with the routes being 11 and the two touchdowns on three targets, not something to chase. I wouldn't totally ignore it. Like don't use him, but like, cause like he's a rookie. He was apparently terrible in training camp. So like the fact that he's earning snaps now is noteworthy and like being productive. So it's at least, and he has juice, which they don't have as a team. That's not a Jonathan Taylor. So that's what we're monitoring it. Yeah, exactly. So don't write it off entirely, but like don't use him. So keep an eye on him for now. Josh Jacobs' role was pretty solid again. He ran 24 routes and had six targets. That was with Brandon Bolden being active this time. Obviously no Hunter Renfrow, but they did drop back 46 times. But honestly, I've like, I've taken Josh Jacobs in my brain and bumped him up like a half percentage point each week so far. And that happened again this week. So at least slight improvement. Still tough to trust a Buffalo back, but Devon Singletary a good usage again, or good usage, I shouldn't say again. He had good usage Sunday again was incorrectly phrased. He played 74% of the snaps, which means he played about 97 snaps. He had 11 targets. Part of that was the fact that they had, I think the most drop backs in the past like 10 years or so or whatever, but you know, that's not bad. 74% snap rate for Singletary. He also ran like 80% of the plays in that game. Yeah. Give me a salary, because Singletary is in that Baltimore game. 74% snap rate, hollow production. Could have his role go back to where it was, like 57. He's 62. Okay, that's too high. Singletary or Dobbins in that game? Dobbins. I'd go Singletary. You wanna do a bet? Sure. Okay. I'll do even odds with that. Singletary might have 10 more targets than Dobbins next week. And Dobbins might have 1,600 more rushing yards than Singletary in that game. Well, we'll see. Has Devon Singletary gotten 100 rushing yards yet this year, like aggregate? Let me check. I don't think he's gotten double digit carries yet. He's gone 48, 19, 13. So now? Rushing yards, no. Okay. Okay, so we have two bets. But yeah, you take that, you apply it moving forward. That's always the case. Correct. Singletary tied Stefan Diggs, the team's leading targets, but it was Isaiah Mackenzie in second with nine targets. Gabe Davis had six in his return. Even if Mackenzie is not like a full-time guy, he's taking targets away from Davis. I think that Davis works in game stacks for next week, but Diggs might be the one guy here who's attractive outside of game stacks. I do wanna ask you, have you seen enough of Mackenzie to consider him in game stacks or is it just Diggs and Davis? I don't know. I mean, I didn't really, really try to pull up that final play, but it looked like Mackenzie tried to cut up field instead of just getting out of bounds. And so I wonder if that's gonna, like not bode well long-term. So again, we don't really try to like factor in all that off-field stuff, but- Probably should though. Probably not a ringing endorsement. Yeah, he like tries to cut. He gets kinda- Are you watching it right now? Yeah. That's funny. Yeah, I think Davis will probably be fine for game stacks, but not like great for game stacks. He is- Wait, did you know Davis for game stacks? I doubt it's 65. That's better than I thought it, because he was 73 and like he's gonna get like six, seven targets a game. So he- 65 though is pretty sick. So he didn't play week two, but in week three, he had a 94% route rate, Stefan digs 70%. Week one, Gabe Davis, every route, Stefan digs 76%. Okay, but like targets, like- Yeah, cause- Diggs just gets breathers cause he goes hard, you know? Yeah. So- So target share in those two games, Davis is at 13%. So here's what I'm- Below Mackenzie and it's below Singletary. So in those two games, 96% route rate for Gabe Davis, what'd you say his salary was? 65, so I think his salary's too low. So I might- In that game, if he's gonna be on the field, he's gonna run in routes. Yeah. I thought he'd be game stacks only, but at 65, he actually does extend beyond that. Yeah. That might be a write down salary, honestly. I thought I'd be low on game. I think that is. But they pushed him down a little, yeah. They pushed him down low enough where I'm on him again. So good for you guys. Thank you. Mackenzie's salary is 59. So like pay up, pay up for Davis at 65. And he does have a few beyond game stacks. So- And it's not like some guys who maybe run routes and very clearly are not parts of the offense. Sorry, Gabe Davis. Gabe the babe. We can call him by what he prefers, Gabe the babe. Four downfield targets per game. And those did have an end zone target in week three. I think that, yeah. That's a write down salary almost. Okay. Chase Edmund scored twice, but he mostard still had the dolphins and snaps. 59% to 41%. I'm not touching anybody there. Justin Jefferson at his second straight down game. This time, six targets and 14 yards. I think it referenced this before, but it might be because Jeff Acuda was shadowing him. Do you look at PFF grades? Acuda is not gonna pop, but like he did keep Devontae Smith in check in week one, held Jefferson in check week three. Jefferson ran 78% of his routes lined up against Acuda. So Acuda's looked pretty good so far. I'd note that for wide receiver ones facing the Lions, if you think that Acuda shadows, maybe you'd bump them down a bit. But also Jefferson might be more susceptible to wide receiver cornerback matchups this year, because I think he's playing, running about 33% of his routes in the slot or so. So consider that a bit more maybe. Amanra, St. Brown, this is a few snaps due to injury Sunday. Health Josh Reynolds have a nice game. 10 targets, five of those were deep. DJ Chark had a pulse, which was nice, but just six targets there. So I don't know. I think that Reynolds and Chark kind of cannibalized each other behind Amanran. It's probably more so just go Hawkinson or Swift or whatever if you're not going with Amanra. We were already pretty low on Antonio Gibson after last week, but should probably be lower now. He did get out snapped by JD McKissick in a hyper negative script. Just one target was just season low. Gibson three out of nine red zone chances, but his appeal is very low outside of a positive script, which hard to bank on with stuff. Travis Homer had a rib injury in this game pretty early for the Seahawks and Rashad Penny ran 24 routes without Homer. I still don't want that backfield, but it makes them less cross-offy if they might actually luck their way into a target or two. I think we talked about it before the show and I didn't think it was relevant, but I still don't think it was relevant. Okay. Philosophical shifts for this week. This one is not something that's happened yet, but I would expect the Jets to be more run heavy next week with Zach Wilson likely to make his debut. I would expect to be more run heavy both for like his health and from like an offensive acclimation perspective. Joe Flacco dropped back 56 times again Sunday. He might have 50 drop backs in all three games, which is absurd. The early down first half pass rate is 58%. It helped Elijah Morgan get 10 targets with seven deep on Sunday, but I think you were going to want to scale back in the Jets passing game, view them as being more run heavy until proven otherwise. So we were on Garrett Wilson at least a bit in general. Are we off that now with Wilson assuming starter roles in week four? Yeah, it's a good week too. Good matchup to sit out. That game has to have a very low code, I would assume. 41 and a half, I guess higher than I thought. But yeah, against the Steelers, I don't really think there's enough there unless what's Wilson's salary? Not Russell Wilson. Garrett Wilson or Zach Wilson either. 61. We're checking Zach Wilson's salary, right? 65. Even the first game with Jimmy Garoppolo, the 49ers, basically 50-50 rushing and early downs in the first half. That hurts the passing even a bit, but they also lost Trent Williams with ankle injury. If he were to miss time and he doesn't have a high ankle sprain it sounds like, it would hurt the efficiency of the passing and the rushing game and it might keep George Cattle into block more, which would suck. So it seems likely that Williams misses time. So what's your view of the 49ers passing offense with Garoppolo, but potentially no Trent Williams? Yeah, didn't love what I saw from Garoppolo. Hard to love when you see someone giving Dan Rolofsky some company by running out of the back of the end zone, but... I think the IEUK connection is at least legitimate. So I'd say the arrow's up on Brandon IEUK. The George Cattle situation, it's tough because he's got to help out more. That left tackle who came in, not to put it around last, kind of didn't flash a lot, obviously. I did play some left guard in middle school, but I'm not an offensive line expert. Right guard's better, baby. Yeah, it is. Left guard was the weakest position, that's why I played it. I didn't want to play football, but I got forced into it, so that's why. But I played left guard, so I mean, I know a thing too. Right guard all the way, right guard all the way. But yeah, I think the arrow's got to be, not that it was up on Kittle, but definitely not up anymore, maybe a little bit down, but I probably didn't like it anyway. And then Debo's Debo, I mean, there's still a chance that he has a big game. Five carries this week, eight targets, Stellar, 6.8 yard eight-ot, three downfield targets out of eight. I'd say down on Kittle and Debo, and up on IU a little bit. Yeah, I think that's fair. Okay, you had some notes on some pass rate and pace stuff, what'd you see there? Yeah, just draw to some things down. Even with their injuries, part of this was trailing with this, helps adjust for that too. The Buccaneers played at the fastest week three pace among teams that have played so far, had a pass rate over expectation of plus 4.2 points, with a raw pass rate of 78%. They saw the largest adjusted pace jump from week two, so I think that that's at least noteworthy. It may be they'll be fun, if maybe they'll just get a little bit de-gaffy, if Brady can stay upright and just start chucking at once, Mike Evans comes back. And then two fun teams, I would say they're both fun. Sped up this week, the Eagles, in week three, they were a better than average pace, ranked 17th entering the week, eighth, fifth week so far. Their pass rate over expectation also jumped, which you love to see. Maybe that was partly due to like piling it on like Carson Wentz, but if that stays, that's really fun, because Jalen Hurts, despite contrary belief, can throw the football a bit. If he's gonna throw it more, it's also gonna help him run more. And they gotta, the defense would have to play back. It's a whole thing, Jim, with defenses. But the Chiefs also sped up this week. I think that's noteworthy. We're 21st. Well, no, but we're gonna need volume for everyone other than Kelsey to make these like receivers viable. They were seventh in pace this week up from 21st, and then two quick things. The Vikings, because this affects some stud pass catchers, Vikings pass rate over expectation, scaled back to below average this week. They were sixth entering the week, and then the Bengals ranked third for the week in pass rate over expectation. They were actually below average entering the week. So there's that. And I think that'll continue, because they can't run the ball. It's kind of, it's not, it's like, that's what we've seen in Miami. That's part of why they're so pass heavy. I think we might see a bit more of that with the Bengals as well, which would be a good thing for, from a DFS perspective. Let's go to our salary scroll, pulling up the week four main slate over on FanDuel. We'll start off at quarterback, scroll down there and shout out anything that stands out to you. Oh boy. So we got Josh Allen at 89, Lamar Jacks. Oh no. I don't have to scroll to see Jared Goff. That's the, oh no. Yeah. Oh boy. So we have Josh Allen at 89, Lamar Jackson at 88, Jalen Hurts at 86. And then it bumps down to Justin Herbert at 8,000, depending on what his health is. Maybe, and then Kyler Murray, he's probably gonna be at 78 forever, just to tempt us. Yeah. But it is going to be the question of the week of, do Allen, Lamar and Hurts pop off? If they do, it's really gonna be hard to replicate that. And if you wanna fade it. If you wanna fade it, I think we go to a guy, I talked about last week. He was 7,000, he's up to 75 now. But Trevor Lawrence is actually in play for DFS, I think. They weren't as past heavy this week, but it's in part because they actually got a lead right away. They got a pretty good team. I do worry about that Eagles defensive line, because they were a monstrous unit against Carson Wentz. But Trevor Lawrence is better and twitchier than Carson Wentz. So I think he's at least, he's at least like, he has, he has, I have to look into it a little bit more. That's what I would say. Yeah. All right, let's go to your running back. Shout out what stands out to you there. That's quick. Well, we're already at an hour and 35 minutes. No, no, no, but guys, we're back. Okay, so. Saquon is 81, why is that? That's way too low. He's gonna go off tonight. His rushing plus receiving prop is one of seven and a half. And I was like, oh, I should take the under. And then I looked at his, he's just like, oh, I shouldn't. No, I don't, I shouldn't do that. That, that was a lie. 8100 dollars is too low. Saquon is a write down for me. I could see that short week, but it's about it. James Robinson is 78 is crazy. Aaron Jones is 73 jumped out to me. He fumbled on the goal line. Just to spite me. Yeah, I know, but I needed those points. I don't care about the usage going forward. I wanted the points. Khalil Herbert 72, we talked about that before with the Montgomery situation. If Monty can't go, that could be enticing, but it seems like he will. Javante at 69. I have not dug in enough to that game yet, but 25 adjusted opportunities again last night. 15 carries five targets. That might be interesting at 69. I don't know. What was his snap rate yesterday? Great question, Jim. We should look it up. I will. Thanks for asking. The snap rate for Javante Williams was 44%. Yeah, I remember I was watching that game with my wife. My wife? Yeah, and it was a train wreck, so we were making fun of it, but multiple times I was like, why is Mike Boone on the field? Like they already have two guys. Mike Boone is awesome. No, no, let's not. Look, let's not just disparage Mike Boone in the process here. They have two guys who, they need to split work between, why are they throwing in Mike Boone as well? Don't poop on Mike Boone. Oh, sorry, there's seven, seven. Okay. Anything else? Honestly, no running backs are jumping out to me. Saquon. Maybe. Saquon at 81. I think Dobbins at 58 might wind up standing out because there aren't a lot of running backs who do stand out. Yeah, maybe. So. Let's bump over to receiver, I guess. Okay, at wide receiver, not a whole lot. Salaries are pretty low at receiver this week. One name I want to look for is Rashad Bateman. 36. Okay. 66, not bad. I just figured it wouldn't be super high because he didn't do much last week. That whole game seems really stackable. We talked about Gabe Davis at 65. We talked about Dobbins, Bateman 66. Like you're going to pay for digs. He's 87 and Andrews is 84. But it makes game stacks easier. Especially if you don't have the quarterback. Let's say you have Hertz at quarterback. You can still stack this game pretty easily. Yeah. Which is reassuring and fun. Two guys. London salary is still $6,300. You might be right down again. I'll just use them again. That's fine. I don't care. Okay. You guys could get a lot of volume. Cortland Sutton and CD Lambo is 68. Mm-hmm. Don't care about the lamb part of that without DAC. You can't pay me. Is it really better for Cortland Sutton? What's that? Nothing. Okay. Scrolling down further into the 5,000 range. Traylon Burks is 57 facing Indy. Did you have that good route rate? Obviously not a lot of targets, but that means he probably will not be popular. I'm not there yet, but it did get my attention, at least. Are we out on the Washington receivers now after last week or is that an overreaction? Who do they play? Dallas? No, I think that they're viable. Again, Curtis Samuel out of Red Zone Rush, because all that I require for a guy to be viable for DFS. So yeah, I think that they're still in play. I would say if I were ranking them out, let me pull up their target shares here really quick. I would go, man. McLaurin ain't McScorein any points. He is not. He has 10 deep targets though, and nobody else is more than six. Dotson has two in each game so far, which is kind of nice. What's McLaurin's salary? He is 67. Samuel is 62. Dotson is 57. I don't think any of them are bad plays at those salaries, right? No, not bad, but not super appealing. Yeah, okay. Anything else for receiver? Dorchard 53. Yep, fair call out. Yeah, unless David Sills goes nuts tonight. What? It's just a, it's not a very fun inspiring slate. No, it'll be fine. It'll be fine, perk up. Perk up, Buttercup. If you are not using Mark Andrews, you are basically betting he fails. Like that's kind of, it's one of those slates because there's no Kelsey on the slate. Darren Waller is on the slate, but is he really, you know? Yeah, he's gone for over 20 in consecutive games, seven, 11 and 13 targets. I'm guessing Kyle Pitts catches a lot of steam this week at 61, which means it's probably not a week to use him. I think it's kind of one of those situations like a Mario Cooper back when he was with Oakland, where you were like, okay, use Cooper when he's lower roster than he usually is. I don't think Pitt's someone who wanna use this chalk right now. No. In Joku at 57, you talked about his target numbers before. 10 targets this past week, five weeks before that, facing off against Atlanta. That's not bad in Joku at 57. No, it's not. I'd probably rather play Zach Erz. At 55? That could be silly. I mean, it's probably fine. Yeah. Tonion is 49. Talked about that before. I think that's low enough to at least be somewhat interesting. Yeah. I'm noting this for people who may have listened to covering the spread earlier, which I'm not sure how you did. I guess you could listen to this podcast version. Anyway, if you listened to covering the spread earlier, the person who will score the first touchdown tonight is $4,100 on next week's slate, Tanner Hudson. We're already taking so much time. I did not expect that to be what you said. Well, who do you think it was going to be? No, I didn't think you were going to bring up a Monday night football prop score an hour and 40 minutes into the show. Oh, yeah, sorry. Tanner Hudson's going to score tonight. 11 to 1 anytime touchdown. Just letting you know. If you listen to this Tuesday and he doesn't score, please ignore me. But just saying. Okay, this looks bad. It's not good. It's not good, but we'll figure out how to approach it. Yeah, at least I think the one positive is that the Buffalo Baltimore game is stackable based on salaries there. That helps, but a note to future me. What are you writing down to future Brandon for this week? Play Drake London again and probably Gabe Davis. And for me, it's place sake one. I think depends. Again, this could look really stupid on Tuesday morning. So we'll see. But sake one 81 did stand out to me as being someone who is under salaried and give long consideration to running backs in imperfect roles if the salaries are forgiving because there aren't a lot of running backs in perfect roles on this slate for this week either. That is all that we have here for this week three recap podcast. A lot to cover with all the injuries there for sure. But I think we got through all of it. We'll go through the week four preview podcast coming up on Thursday, 10 a.m. Eastern on the Fando YouTube page and up on the number fire daily fantasy podcast feed right after that. So make sure you are subscribed wherever you get your podcast. Brandon, people have questions for you on Twitter. Where can they find you there? I'm on Twitter at goodwill13gdula13. And I am on Twitter at Jim Sonnis. J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S. I forgot I had stopped spelling it and I stole it again out of habit. I, I don't know. It's on the screen. If you want it, it's in the description. You can find it anyway. I stopped spelling it, but I went back to it. Anyway, at Jim Sonnis, you can also follow the Fando podcast network Big thank you to everyone for tuning in for today. Good luck to you on your Monday night football, single game slates, whatever else you may be playing. We'll talk to you once again Thursday to preview a fun week four slate. This has been the heat shack fantasy podcast powered by number fire.