 In theory, the week six NFL DFS main slay should be pretty good because we got Patrick Mahomes, Lamar Jackson, Justin Herbert, all these really fun guys, Kyler Murray in great situations, potential shootouts in spots we like. We've got some potential value running backs as well. The problem is that there are reasons for concern for every single person in this player pool. Name me one guy who does not have a red flag. Maybe Mahomes. But like it is. Just call me. Okay, fair enough. You can go with that if you want. But it is a tough slate to dissect. There are risks, paths to failure for everyone. So we're going to break down those paths of failure and let you know who we are using despite those risks and let you know our favorite plays for the week six main slate. Welcome on into the heat check fantasy podcast powered by number fire. That's right here on the fan dual podcast network and number fire.com. My name is Jim Sonnis. I am a senior writer and analyst for number fire.com. Join here as always by branding and new law. He is the managing editor for number fire.com and Brandon. Not sure why you're here because your role is the Chris Conley whisperer. You neglected to tell us that he had the baby narrative in his favor last week. He scored. So what do you do here if you're not going to let us know when Chris Conley is guaranteed at least one touchdown. Yeah, that's my one job. I guess you guess. Yeah. That's all. Hey, well, look, now that we know I'm done for the you got the next hour and a half. So yeah, my deuces. I don't want to talk about this later by myself. So I need you here. Well, Chris Conley also was I think like third worst in PPR points per snap again during last week. So for may culpa but forgive me, you know, I think it was a little bit forgivable because he's out there running a lot of wind sprints as they say. But you know, it's good, you know, got to get that got to get that work in after the baby. So I get it for sure. But happy to have you back here today because I think this is a difficult slate for me to diagnose because. I mean, like I we're talking beforehand, I think I say the phrase paths to failure way too often on the show. Like every play I look at here has a path of failure outside it again of maybe the chiefs Washington game. But overall, there is a lot of risk on this slate. So how are you feeling? Are you more optimistic here? Am I overblowing it? Or are we on the same page? I don't know if I've ever been optimistic about anything, but I mean, so when we saw or when I saw that this was a 10 game slate. When we first looked at this thing on Monday, I was like, okay, there's some games that look good. It's going to be a pretty easy one to figure out. All we're going to have to do is narrow down the quarterbacks that we really want to play. Well, all the quarterbacks that we kind of settled on were the top six in salary. And they pretty much all have wind concerns. Yeah, we had some value at running back. But now we have value at running back plus, you know, assuming Christian McCaffrey back, but also a really loaded like 7000 tier. So we now have too many running backs to try to figure out. And if two of the value, you know, we have really two extreme value backs with Devontae Booker and Daryl Williams. And if those guys kind of, you know, get us 17, 18 points, you really need to make sure that the 7000 backs like overperform that, which is kind of harder to do for running back. I mean, unless they're getting 25, 30. So like, you know, it's you look at every position and it's like, it's kind of tricky to figure out what to do. So I don't really feel optimistic about the slate, but I do feel good because the more and more we talk about stuff, we figure things out, things start to click. Yeah. So I feel pretty, I feel optimistic that we'll figure it out by the end of the show. And now I feel like there's a lot that we need to talk through that, that, you know, justify our concerns. Yep. And we will do that in just one second. But first, a quick reminder to make sure you get yourself entered for the listener league this week as always Fanduil.com slash league slash listener league Fanduil.com slash league slash listener league to get yourself entered. It is a $5 entry with three entries max and no rake. So it is the best kind of contest you could possibly enter. Again, Fanduil tends to lose money on these contests. So go to Fanduil.com slash league slash listener league, take their money and run because you should Fanduil.com slash league slash listener league. We just kind of went through the slate over you, but I do want to ask you again. I feel like to me, this slate boils down to deciding which of the studs to prioritize after factoring in the red flags and deciding which of the value plays. Have the least concerning red flags. That's kind of the key thing for me. What about for you? What's in it out here? Yeah, so you kind of have like, okay, I'm just going to say these six quarterbacks. We have Patrick Mahomes, Kyler Murray, Lamar Jackson, Dak Prescott, Justin Herbert, Matthew Stafford. I have interest in all those guys. I don't have a whole lot of interest in anyone else, which feels kind of your boy. But I mean, maybe, but, you know, I know it's kind of like disappointing to hear that we just like the high salary quarterbacks because it's not very fun. But these guys all have, when we talk about past, they have past the 30 that other guys don't quite have. And, you know, sure, maybe Taylor Heineken can get to 30, but that's a little bit generous. And I understand that salary comes into play. But, you know, at a certain point, like we say, you have to score points eventually. So I think that overall for me, the main, main takeaway is how I'm viewing running back because I'm either trying to save some salary with backs and allocate that salary elsewhere. Or I'm saying, no, Christian McCaffrey is going to go for 30. We like Austin Eckler to, you know, take your pick among the 7000 backs and that, you know, Devonte Booker and Darrell Williams specifically are just going to be fine, score maybe 12 points. And like, that's, that to me is kind of the decision I have to make. And yes, we can mix and match, but I usually get a little bit more specific with my running back pool. Yeah, I think that that's kind of the key thing for me is you said 12 points for Booker and Williams. And as we've discussed plenty of times in this podcast before we need more, we need 20 realistically from a value play at running back and you've run your sims. We were talking about this before you've got Darrell Williams at 10% to top 20% or 20 pfando points and Devonte Booker is at 11%. That's not zero. It's 11% and 11.6% for Williams and Booker respectively. But, you know, by contrast, Antonio Gibson is at like 19%. I know the salaries are there, but, you know, you look at, if you know anything about probabilities and trust me, I know very little. I'm an English lit major, but you run, you know, a nine player, including defense, you know, line up and you have, you say, this guy's got like a 10 to 12% chance of hitting it big. Your probability for your whole lineup goes that it's going to hit big goes down and, you know, we kind of have a lot of things at this point. But one thing that we do say a lot, especially with NFL is you need to have guys who can make up for your mistakes. And someone like Antonio Gibson can help make up for a mistake a lot more easily than someone like Darrell Williams. So, you know, you and I are probably just going to be a little bit lower on those two specifically, not to say that we don't like them. Yeah. It's just, yeah. Sometimes there are value plays that are very difficult to see failing like Alexander Madison, very tough to see him falling short in both his situations when he was there. It's very easy to see those guys go short. But I'm still going to use them. I want to be very clear about that. I will still be using both of those guys because I have to. But I also don't want to go 60% exposure to them. Yeah. And I want to be able to wait so be it. Yeah. So like what I was alluding to was, you know, are we going to play 60, 75% of these guys like we did with Najee Harris was 6100 in week two. I played 100% Madison whenever he's low salaried. I'm not there. Yeah. And a key reason for that is a little bit lower on those two specifically for Williams is more about the what workload he's going to get. And I used this example before the show, but if if Clyde Edwards, you layer was 5200 I'd play him. So I'm not going to say I'm not going to play Daryl Williams. We have some offensive concerns potentially for the Giants and Devonte Booker. But the big issue that I keep coming back to is we have a lot of running backs. It's not that we need value. So that's kind of my key issue with this late. And maybe those guys just make it work kind of consider them your flex plays so you can get up to McCaffery again. I'm cool with that. But I think the to sum it up the best way that I can is like you said, you know, is it a week where we go 60, 70, 80% for those guys. And I'm saying no, I agree. We'll talk about injuries here in just one second. But first, the puck has dropped on a new NHL season. And Fandula is celebrating with an NHL Parley insurance offer. All you have to do is place a four plus leg Parley and NHL games between now and October 19. Exactly one leg of your bet loses. You get a refund inside credit. Kick off the NFL or the NHL season the right way by heading over to Fandula Sportsbook and placing an NHL Parley. Must be 21 plus at present Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia or West Virginia. Refund issued as non withdrawal by site credit that expires in seven days. Max refund $25 per day. Restrictions apply. See terms at sportsbook.fandula.com. Gambling problem called 100 gambler. Visit fandula.com slash RG in Indiana. 109 with it for confidential help. Michigan 102 707 117 in Tennessee. Call the red line at 1-800-89-979 in West Virginia. 100 gambler.net or in Arizona. Call 1-800-NEXT-STEP or TEXT-NEXT-STEP to 533-42. Let's run through injuries impacting the main slate here. Chris McCaffrey was limited in practice on Wednesday with his hamstring injury. Everything points towards his playing despite the fact that Matt Rule is a liar saying that there is a 50-50% chance he plays this week. Pretty sure he's lying to you. We'll talk more about the Panthers with McCaffrey in the trend section because I'm pretty sure he's going to play on the other side of that game. Dalvin Cook got in a limited session Wednesday. They've got a buy coming up and I think that does impact things a bit here. But how are you thinking about Dalvin against Carolina assuming he's good to return this week? I feel like we're maybe we're looking at the buy differently, but I feel like maybe we're a buy week away from a full workload for Dalvin. I don't understand. It's frustrating for fantasy, but Alexander Madison is good and the offense is fine with him playing. I don't know why there would be a need to play Dalvin Cook, his full alignment of snaps. So that's a little bit worrisome. I think I'll probably be underweight on Dalvin this week. So what are you thinking with that buy? What were you alluding to? I think that they might. I think that that increases the odds that he sits entirely because I would buy to potentially give him an extra week to rest. But if he plays. Yeah. I think the complicating factor here is that they're two and three, I believe, and they almost lost to Detroit. And Mike Zimmer thinks that they need Dalvin Cook and Madison did fumble at the end of that game against the Lions, which is almost why they lost. I think that that adds up to his potentially playing a more full workload than he did the first time he came back. With that said, is that worth prioritizing? When I could pay 1200 more to get to McCaffrey, who I do feel better about, which may feel weird, but I do feel better about him. Is it worth prioritizing Dalvin over Austin Neckler in a tremendous game? We know there are no injured concerns there and the role is amazing. Is it better than Zeke? Better than Chubb? I mean, we've had our concern of the Nick Chubb, but like he keeps producing and at some point that matters. So I don't know. And is it better than peppering that 7000 range, which I love at running back this week? Probably not. So I think I'm on board with you or even though I think there's a decent chance he gets good work this week because they feel like he gives them the best chance to win. They need wins. I still think I'm okay being on board with you and potentially being underweight on him if he does come back. Yeah, at 8800, there's not a whole lot of wiggle room for error. So we talked about guys getting us 12. If he gets us 15, that's a swing at one of those studs. And the reason that you want to allocate salary for studs is because they have slate altering upside. We know that McCaffrey has that. Echler has shown that once you dip down into the 7000 range, it's a little bit less. But if you take away Dalvin's ability to run away with the slate, then there's not as much appeal to roster him at 8800. And it's not just Dalvin over Echler. It's Dalvin over Tyreek Hill, Devonte Adams, Cooper Cupp who are all in Mike Williams who are all in really fun games this week. So that's the other issue running into there. The Giants are super banged up. Saquon Barkley, Kenny Galladay, Daniel Jones, all this practice Wednesday. Barkley and Galladay seem almost locks to sit. Jones might be able to go. He was like going rogue and in full uniform and then Joe Judge kind of looked like he wanted to kill him, which just might be like the resting Joe Judge face of like, I kind of want to kill this guy. Like, I think that might be just the way his face works. But it sounds like they think he's got a shot to get cleared in time for this game. They do seem like they'll be getting Sterling Shepard and Darius Slayton back. Kaderius Tony should be able to play through his ankle injury. A lot of play of the Giants will talk through them in the trend section. The Browns were down a bunch of key guys of practice on Wednesday. Nick Chubb, Kareem Hunt, David and Joku all sat out as did Miles Garrett. Doesn't seem to be a big concern about any of those guys. And we'll talk about them and Kyler Murray's shoulder in the bookmaker section. Kyler was limited on Wednesday due to a shoulder injury. Final one, Joe Mixon got in a limited practice on Wednesday after not practicing at all prior to Saturday last week. So an improvement there. So Majae Piran is on the COVID list. Are you willing to buy back in on Joe Mixon against Detroit? Yeah. Full. I mean, how can you not? How can you not be? His workload is great. I think the one, we're talking about past the failure. And I don't want to talk myself out of this game, but... Pace? Well, there's pace. But I'm thinking about this. And this could be one of those spots where I don't know what time of day this game is. It's noon. Everything's at noon. Or sorry, one. Wow, I went back to Minnesota time. Woo-hoo! Is, am I going to be sitting there at three o'clock? I mean, like, yeah, Joe Burroughs can't really make calls and they're doing all these hand signals and it just makes the offense. Yeah, Joe Burroughs is going to be a little bit quieter than Rosa. Yeah. Rosa has a lot to say about Joe Burrough in his throat. So I'm just thinking about one of those, like, you know, I'm digging through all the data, but one of those just like common sense. And maybe he can't, like, scream his adjustments in the offense, like, isn't as snappy with making changes. Yeah. The rockest crowd in Detroit for an 0-5 team. So I think that definitely plays into it. You know, if it were anywhere else with a less competitive team, maybe not. But I think it'll be fine there. Actually, I kind of don't mind, bro. It could be just me getting too worried about stuff. But like, you know, I think he's interesting with Nixon. Worry about stuff as in way into with other quarterbacks. Yeah. With Nixon, like, I'm at 40% right now is in my head. Like, I'm trying to think I have not built like full lineups yet. But like in my head, that's where I'm at. If you give me a full practice Friday and take him off the injury report, we're pushing 60. Like, that's where I'm at on Joe Nixon right now. Yeah. I could see that. It's a look. I really think that this slate for me comes down to nitpicking through the running backs. And I really can't nitpick Nixon aside from the fact that his quarterback might be a little bit limited with the way that he can make adjustments both Detroit's defense. I don't think it's going to matter. So Nixon's not one of one of the guys I'm concerned about. So I'd say about 40% sounds sounds right for me too. And every practice rep he logs that number goes up. We'll talk about the again, the injuries we discussed before throughout the podcast for today, the ones we did not expand on there. So let's move to bookmaker info for this week. The highest total on this slate, deservedly so, is Washington hosting the cheese. That's up to 56 now at the cheese favor by six and a half. Two bad defenses, two offense like move the football. I think like in terms of nitpicking, this is the one I can nitpick the least. The issue is salary. The cheese guys obviously very high salary. Terry McClaren is not low salary. We have guys like Daryl Williams, Miko Harman, Ricky seals Jones and Tony Gibson, who are not super high salary. But if you want the studs, you got to pay for them. Does that influence how you're doing this game at all relative to other ones? Or is it the top one to stack regardless that the salaries are high for the chiefs? No, I mean, that's always the case with the chiefs and it's generally worth the risk. We've seen consistency from the homes. We've seen some up and down from Terry Kill and Travis Kelsey a little bit. But that's what you expect from the chiefs is that the salaries are going to be high. The question is always, can we bring it back? And you mentioned the guys who make these stacks a little bit more appealing with Ricky seals Jones, Daryl Williams and Miko Hardman. So I don't have any real issues with this one aside from potentially the weather. Yeah, it's not bad. It's a 13. That's not high enough where I'm worried yet. I would worry if it got higher. So I'm not worried yet, but that's one of the ones that's a lower concern for me. And I have this one second in expected pace or average pace. It's not really a calculation of expected pace, but average pace. So I like that. So this is the week of the red flag meme on Twitter. If I were to allocate red flag emojis for this game, it's a half red flag. Cleveland and Arizona has like six. So this one's a half. It's out of however many I need to allocate it. This one's just a half. I figure 17 or so. Yeah, roughly. We might get there with Arizona, Cleveland. But this one's at a half red flag. And I think that's fine. I'll take a half red flag. I think this is the best game to stack on the slate. Even after considering salary. If you put in Mahomes, Tyreek, McLaurin, you're at 5817 left. I can make that work. It does mean I have to be okay with Booker. It doesn't mean I have to be okay with Williams potentially being included in this game stack too. That's fine. I will make those constellations to get to Mahomes, Tyreek, McLaurin. Not fine with that. What's your A, first question. What's your prioritization in terms of the higher salary guys? Are you going, is it a Tyreek week or is it a Kelsey? Is it a Kelsey week? Honestly, I think I'm to the point where it's always Tyreek because he's the guy who can get you 40. Kelsey, I know, has to be compared to other tight ends. But we have Mark Andrews on the slate and his combo of some upside and value, I think, is really unprecedented. Darren Waller, at least ostensibly, still has the ceiling. Feels a lot like last year where big game early, like good usage. Lulls us to sleep. And I'm like, no. Bam. Yeah. And nobody cares about my season long team. But in a very important matchup, I ended up facing Darren Waller, both of those weeks. So I'm sure a lot of people got that end of it based on how scheduled it was. When do you face him next? Just so I can... Well, I haven't been one league, so that's been pretty well. Okay. That helps. But yeah, I remember that vividly and how dispersed those big games were. I think for me, it's going to be Kelsey's second behind Tyreek. And I want Terry McCormick, but he's not really on par with the two chiefs guys. Where are you with those two? I think... I go Tyreek over Kelsey, too. I agree. McCormick... If I'm thinking about overall exposure levels, I'm likely to have more McCormick than Kelsey. So I guess I technically might be higher on him, but it's not because... I think that McCormick is under-souried, despite the fact that he is 7-4. And we got a lot of good dudes in the slate. I think he's under-souried still. Is that fair to say? Or is that me being too into McCormick? I think he's about right. I would start to hesitate if he was like 77 or 78. I'd still play him, but not to that point. I feel like this is probably a fair number. I know he'll be relatively popular, but he's coming off of an 11-target, but 4-catch game. So that might keep things a little bit in check if people are just looking at box score numbers. I think this game will be popular enough where it won't matter. So I think that'll be the main factor there. But either way, I think this is a great game. What about the value plays? We've got Daryl. We've got Michael Hartman. We have Antonio Gibson is lower-sourd. Ricky Seales-Jones. D'Yammy Brown sounds like he'll be back this week. What are you feeling with regards to the lower-sour dudes in this game? I like Ricky Seales-Jones because any tight end with a semblance of a pulse is in play. I think it's like a pulse. Have you ever at one point had a pulse? Don't just have it now. Ever? I played Jared Cook last week. I don't even have a current pulse. Just at some point pulse. Yeah. But Seales-Jones, eight targets, three red zone, 99% of the snaps last week, like that. And Meekle Hartman, really good workload. Josh Gordon, I think, got two routes. I think there's plenty of time that remains before Josh Gordon kind of phases out Meekle Hartman if that ever happens. And this is coming from someone who likes Josh Gordon plenty. But I feel really good with Meekle Hartman as a way to get to Mahomes. And so like Mahomes, Hartman plus Terry can really help. I feel good with Darryl Williams. Good enough. Again, like I'd play, I'd play Clyde Edwards-Elaire at this salary. But again, not really someone I'm going to be putting into like 60, 70% of my line. I'm just going to be more of a 30%, a little bit more into not game stack only territory, but much more likely to play him when I'm stacking up this game or at least running it back with Seales Jones or Terry McCormick. And so, you know, that's where I am. I think something that's kind of fun for this game is having chief stacks. So having Mahomes, Darryl, Tyreek, and then not putting Seales Jones in there. Because I feel like the mindset will be, okay, I need to save salary. So I'll put Seales Jones in there. I think like, you know, David and Joku, if he gets to be fully healthy this week and we can get some grants in the win there. Tyler Higby is 55. Sorry. Eventually I'll stop saying his name. I think that omitting either Darryl or Ricky Seales Jones from Mahomes stacks. If you can is ideal because I feel like people are just going to use that, like use that same structure. Okay. Mahomes, Tyreek, saves some salary with Darryl or RSJ. That's right. Yeah. Hardman works too. I'm fine with that. Yeah. That's why I think my favorite is going to be Mahomes, Hardman, Terry. I think that's fun. I like that combination. I can get there for sure. Hard for me to say no to Tyreek, but I mean, it's a very different situation. Well, you can't say yes in every lineup. Right. Correct. Although I have considered it. If I just play him in every lineup, you know, the week that he eventually puts up 40. I mean, again? Yeah. Yeah. Like what's that 30 for the third time this year? Had I just had, if I just locked him in every single week, you know, statistically, I might, might be a good long-term play. Yep. I would agree with that one. I am okay glossing over Diami Brown, despite the fact he's going to be back this week, most likely. Are you on the same page? Yeah. And I'm not like making this a big part of my process, but out of curiosity, I was looking at like, you know, fantasy points per snap. And he's not rated out very well. And he played like every snap the first few weeks and got four, six, two and two, I think targets. So yeah, I agree. Okay. Any final thoughts in this game? I like it. I think it's number one for both of us. And hopefully we have better luck with our number one stack for this week than we did last week. What was number one last week? Cowboys Giants. Oh, man. Which again, was it 64 total points? Could have been awesome. I had like, I had a decent early slate and then say, yeah, we just like, we need to say, we need to say Kwan some, some Tony, we got the Tony, but Keenan have a lot of Keenan, which is a fish move. I know, but whatever. Bummer of the week is the Cardinals Browns game. The total here opened at 53 and a half. It was up to 54. It's all the way down to 49, likely due to the forecast currently calling for a 19 mile per hour wins there. We talked about weather last year and how players typically underperform their projections. Quarterbacks underperform by about 7% in high wind situations of 15 plus miles per hour. So assuming this forecast holds, how does it alter your view of this game? It's got to, it's got to downgrade it. And we're talking about fish moves. It could be a fish move to avoid this game because of like wind, but I feel like it's also a fish move to ignore this. So I think either way, I'm going to play both sides that way I come out on top. I'm going to say it's a fish move either way. You've got both tweets and drafts just ready to fire. Yeah, imagine stacking this game or imagine fading it because of the wind. Correct. Yeah, just typing out both out. Make sure you hit the right one though. Yeah, I just, like we know the impact of wind on passing. And like, I'm still down on the Browns overall, where I get the case for Odo Beckham. It's, it's, I see the case still even after the three target to catch game in that shootout, but he's at like 75% of snaps or so the past two games. He's just coming back from that injury. It's a really high variance player with his downfield work, but the odds he gets downfield targets in heavy wind go down. So, right, you know, and I'm sorry. I'm just, I'm just never going to load up on the Browns running backs. So I'm down on this game. I'm down on like, I don't know how many Browns will actually get to the Cardinals have their markets share concerns. So yeah, I'm down on this one as well. What about you? I think it lowers me. It doesn't push me off entirely, but it does lower me a lot. Like Kyler, if you gave me healthy Kyler with no shoulder injury with Rodney Hudson at center and no wind Kyler would be my favorite quarterback on the slate. Yeah, but like his shoulders banged up now. Rodney Hudson is out and the winds are 19 miles per hour. Like this one is at least six red flags whereas the last one was a half expanding more on wind quickly. Last year, there were 11 quarterbacks who were popular, you know, top three and rostered on the Fandall main slate. The Fandall Sunday million only five of them hit their baseline value for the position. Whereas, so it's 46%. Whereas 77% of quarterbacks in wind speeds of zero to four miles per hour hit their baseline. That's a concern. Also, we don't see a big roster a decrease because 22% of all popular quarterbacks last year were in high wind games. So, or a 10 plus mile per hour wind games. So like, I know people say, oh, people overreact to wind. And it's like, no, they don't, they actually don't react probably enough to wind. So it's not going to cross Kyler Murray off for me. It just puts a situation where like, I know we're trying to avoid having like a 10% play at quarterback in terms of exposure. I'll probably be there with Kyler this week because if I take, you know, his baseline projection at lower at 7%, then I still want to get some because Kyler Murray, but I lowered a bit more because of the shoulder injury. And I get down to like a 10% situation. And, you know, that might not be great process, but I think that there's still a path in being good. I just don't want to have a lot of it given that there are a lot of red flags around this game. Yeah, I mean, this is like, this is one of those spots where this game could erupt and then people will remember it as like the time that everybody reacted. But like, that's going to, like that, that happened. That's why I look almost primarily at ranges of outcomes and just see like what is to be expected because Christian McCaffrey is not going to lead this slate. You know, let's say he's healthy. He's not going to lead the slate like guaranteed. It's not a lock button that he leads the slate and Fandle points. It's just not how it works. So like there within the range of outcomes for this game is that it hits the over that there's a lot of points still, but long term over a big sample. As you mentioned, as we talked about last year, I think in more detail, like it's better to play games in domes. I talked about that one. It's better to downgrade games in wind and there's still an edge according to the data that you cited. So I think that I'm going to be low on this game. Will you have like sweet? We're lowering Kyler. Yeah. Like does this lower your enthusiasm around like many stacks of like Deandre Hopkins and Nick Chubb, Deandre Hopkins, Odell Beckham, Ron Dan Moore as a one off play. It does just because the way that I'm thinking about probability at this point is the market shares are now they're starting to favor Deandre Hopkins again, which is what you want to see, but it's still pretty low. I think it's 22 ish percent for him or something like that. But you know, talk about probability from a dispersed market share that goes down. You know, talk about probability from Odell Beckham, who is really reliant on downfield targets, which he hasn't really reeled in right now. If that all clicks. Yeah. Great game. And we can be kicking ourselves for downgrading it, but probability wise, everyone gets downgraded and also probability wise, like Kareem Hunt is substantially over performing on a per snap basis. Like I don't want to be chasing those situations, especially when I don't like the game. So I'm not considering. So I don't need to talk about him with a number of hits in the air. I think you needed to be thinking about that. And so now I've got 18, 12 yards and screenage per game. That is. 11.2. Fando points with no catches. Well, which is probably accurate for him with no catches and no touchdowns. That's not bad. That is number two on the slate behind the cavalry in terms of yards and screens per game and the Cardinals rush defense can get a little leaky. So I think that if I'm looking at the a good stack in this game, I feel like Chubb will be the first place I'd go to. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I mean, and it's weird because it goes against our process. He has two, one, zero, one, and one targets, which is conveniently one per game. That's not what we try to get exposure to because a target is worth twice as many fantasy points for running back on average. So, you know, like he's going to get 20 carries, probably going to get maybe one target. That's like, he's got to have the yardage, it's got to be there. And he needs a touchdown. It's just a really narrow path for Nick Chubb always. And that's why I don't play as much Nick Chubb as a lot of people. Yeah. The narrow path does exist, though. And I think that's a good thing. Yeah. Especially in this game. It could be there. Other thing I know with Nick Chubb, he actually has 41% of the team's red zone touches or opportunity so far this year. Cream Hunt's at 25%. Chubb just hasn't converted. So that's going to swing back towards him eventually. I don't think Chubb is anywhere near a cash gameplay. He's a 15% tournament play. I'm fine with that. I think that that's kind of where he fits. Let's talk about the other game here. The total has been up a bit for the Chargers and the Ravens. Open at 50, slowly steadily inching up some weather concerns here in terms of the win, but similar to the Chiefs and Washington where it's not overly concerning. Just kind of something to monitor for right now. Ravens are three-point favorites, which is ideal for stacking. High total, tight spread. Where does this one grate out for you and how are you looking to stack it? I think probably second behind the Kansas City game. Looking to stack it a lot of ways, honestly. Lamar and Mark Andrews is probably the standout stack for me. Lamar's rushing is still there. The passing efficiency is now there, which is what you've always wanted. Everyone's always wanted from Lamar from a fantasy standpoint. Mark Andrews up to a 27% target share of the past three games for Baltimore. His salary is still low, just like he's got. I was down on Mark Andrews after his slow start. I don't feel that way anymore, so that's going to be my primary stack and I'm going to bring it back with any number of the Chargers with Eckler, Kenan, and Mike Williams. I'm probably going to do it most often with Eckler and be second on Kenan, who has a lot of aggression coming his way, which makes me sound low on Mike Williams. And I'm not. Love Mike Williams, but the salary is a bit harder to get to. So I like a lot of this game, and honestly, it's probably what both quarterbacks Eckler, Marquis, both Chargers receivers and Mark Andrews. And like, that's all we have to consider, which is like enough options to do it to stack it up differently and differentiate, but not so many that we're just guessing. Is that about right? Yes, I agree. I think that's why it's firmly to and you could you could talk me into putting it cheese at above cheese, but I wouldn't do it personally. But I think it's like in that same tier. I think those are the top two in terms of tearing things out. I agree that Lamar and Mark Andrews is a superb stack. I think Andrews is amazing as a one off as well as like, I think a fun construction, given how many tight ends will be used in Chiefs, Washington stacks. A fun construction is Mahomes, a quarterback and stack in that game, but putting Mark Andrews at tight end because I feel like that'll be a like we talk about combinations. I think that combination is going to be pretty unpopular this week, which I like a lot. So I think that's pretty interesting to me. And like if I have a single lineup, they're tempted by that. If I don't put Lamar as my quarterback there, which I will. The reason I'd favor Andrews over Mark East Brown, despite the fact that Mark East Brown is getting really good usages because Brandon Staley's like he tenant is like not letting up deep balls. And that's where Mark East Brown wins. He wins on deep balls, constantly open downfield somehow. I don't think that'll happen as often against his defense. So I still think I will use Mark East Brown in game stacks, but I want to prefer Mark Andrews. As far as the Chargers guys, I might go Keenan over Echler. It's very close just because Echler's salary has gone up. I think that's justified. It should go up like it needs to. But like Keenan is going to hit eventually, given the targets he's getting from a really good quarterback against the secondary that just got shredded by a large receiver, Michael Pittman, which does fit for Mike Williams, too. But I think that that all adds up to be where I think a I think going in on Keenan once again is probably where I wind up. I don't know. It didn't. I think it was the wrong process to do that last week because Williams come up from a poor game. He wasn't super high salary. I should have been more on him. I was on him, but I should have more on him last week. I think 7700. What's that? Mike Williams was 7700. You have these games because Monday nights they didn't price it down. So I should have been on him. But I or more on him. I should say. Yeah. But yeah, I mean this week. So I have I run some regression stuff, which is not like the least surprising thing ever. But I have Mike Williams overperforming at the second highest rate in expected touchdowns among receivers and Keenan underperforming at the highest rate. So, you know, eventually, if that turns around, then it's going to be a Keenan game because the volume is still there for Keenan Allen with eight plus in every game. So I'm high on Keenan Allen regardless. I'm not bumping down Mike Williams because he scored touchdowns. But, you know, we know, again, long term, it probably makes sense to scale back on expectations for Mike Williams if he's overperforming there. Guys can overperform for a whole season. Better players can overperform that the guys at the top are always like Devonte Adams, Tyree Kill and expect the touchdowns because they're very good. But I'm totally in on Keenan and I did not want to make it sound like I was down on him. Yeah, I will say that straight up Williams is better because he gets more downfield targets. So if I were picking straight up with Mike Williams, and that's why I'm not saying to avoid him, which is what you're saying, too. But that's the reason why I like Keenan a lot or why, you know, I think the Keenan still grades that really well here. What about Justin Herbert? We love Lamar. I think I can put orange in your mouth there. Where are you out on Justin Herbert this week? I like him. He's he's part of that top six. Again, I know it sounds like. Who are these donkeys just talking about this? The six highest salary quarterbacks of the guys they're playing. But it's really hard not to like their some of the like there are 10 games on this slate. Some of them are just not very appealing. Like I don't know, man. Those Derek Karstacks looking pretty saucy this week. So, you know, we don't want to do that. We're not going to like we always are hating on Kirk Cousins, but I'm not going to play Kirk Cousins whenever I can have some of these other quarterbacks. So with Herbert, he might be he might be Lamar's probably number one, my home's two at salary. Herbert very easily could be number three, Herbert or Dak. So that's it's almost a toss up, but I'm probably living in Herbert. I never really like to go against Patriots, just because you never know what's going to be cooked up there. I'm probably going to go Herbert. There is my it's my number three. Very tempted by Dak. I think that's really interesting this week. I might go him above Herbert, but that's not the Herbert. It's just very pro Dak. I think that they're both very. I'd agree that there are the guys competing for a third right now. It's like we're on the same page there when it comes to quarterback. OK, let's move now to the trends discussion. Taking a look at some things impacting our lineups this week. You are looking at the Patriots market shares because we both like that game, that Chargers Cowboys or the Patriots Cowboys game. But the problem is not when he's Dak, when he's Amari, I want to use Zeke. I don't know who the bleep I'm supposed to run it back with. Tell me what to do here. Well, we're we're talking about like quarterbacks and stuff. And, you know, we have a great game from a pace standpoint and we have Mac Jones in there at like 6500. And it's like, OK, great game, low salary. Maybe there's something here. But like here's why we're not playing a lot of low salary quarterbacks this year. So I'll just start from the overview. Like we talk about pace a lot and. Like the pace here is the tops for the main slate, according to my average pace stats, which weed out garbage time scheme has a high total. We want it, as you mentioned, we want to play the Cowboys. So I feel like I have to do my due diligence. And that's going to lead me to the Patriots here. To to exam, not not leaving the Patriots to play necessarily, although maybe there's something here. But the quarterback, Max Jones, again, 6500 on Fando is his salary. His passing efficiency thus far, according to number, fires metrics have met a passing net expected points per drop back of 0.00, which sounds like it might be average, but it's not because you actually should expect to put points on the board when you drop back to pass, not stay a neutral. The NFL average this season has a point one five to have been a very efficient start to the season in terms of passing. So we don't have that for Mac Jones, even if you adjust for his opponents, he's at a negative point one per drop back. So he's underperformed when you include context. Now, the eight odd for Mac Jones is actually seven point four, which is almost the NFL average, but he had one game in week three where he threw 14 times downfield, which we consider 16 plus areas from the line of scrimmage. If you remove that game, because it was a clear outlier because he's had four or fewer such attempts in his other four stars, his eight odd is five point six, which is not good. That's like end of career drew breeze where he's just, you know, basically throwing handoffs. So I can't get to Mac Jones despite the low salary in the good game because there's not a whole lot to like. So I want to make it clearer why we why we were separating so much with these high salary quarterbacks. Some like Mac Jones doesn't really have the the win juice to get up there in and fantasy points. So juice. Yeah. Now, we generally know by now that Jacoby Myers is the team's wide receiver one. He's at a 25 percent target share, 29 percent of the air yards that works out to nine point two targets per game adjusting for some context there with downfield and red zone work. It's it's worth about 11 targets per game. But after that, nobody's above a 15 percent target share. So it's kind of just Jacoby Myers in that from that context from the season long standpoint. Last week, however, Hunter Henry did leave the team with 29 percent of the targets. He had eight targets too deep in one red zone. He has a 19 percent target share over the past two games with two combined high leverage targets per game in that sample. This despite just 58 percent of the routes, but that target per route rate over the past two games ranks him fourth among tight ends behind just Dalton Schultz, Mark Andrews, and coincidentally, teammate, John Oosmith. Is that because John Oosmith is no longer allowed to run routes and now is a tackle? Yeah. So like, again, we're we're always hating on tight end. We like this game. Hunter Henry's been more involved the past two weeks. It's a new team. It kind of makes sense that it might have been a little bit of a slow start. I really don't want to look at the running back. So I'm just going to skip over that section. Works for me. Now, I'm not saying I love this offense, but between possibly Jacobi Meyers and Hunter Henry, like there's some bring back appeal. Is there enough for you with this offense to feel like this game can stay competitive and therefore keep the Cowboys relevant? And is there enough for you, most specifically, with those two guys to consider bringing it back with them at all? So, do you know Hunter Henry's salary? I think it's like fifty four. It's fifty six, which is pure booty. He should be forty nine. But like, you're right. He'd be number two in terms of whom I'd want to target here. But like, that's just a lot. The yardage has been pretty good. So I think that like, I'll use him. But like, it's a bad salary and I'm annoyed by it. Other question for you is if you had to guess, I have roto grinders projected roster rates pulled up right now. If you want to guess where Jacobi Meyers is ballpark it. Like 18. Twenty one point eight. That's that's high. I've got. And so like, I would take the under on that number just because. Seen a lot of tweets about how Jacobi Meyers can't square touchdowns. And I feel like that will linger in people's minds, much like it has mine. So I think he's the obvious spring back here. And then Hunter Henry is two. And then there's no one else I want to use on this team, which is reassuring. But the problem is like, I don't think I'll be alone in doing that, which is pretty annoying. So people tend to like to admire is a lot more than I do. I just like this game a lot. So I think it'll naturally funnel me towards that. But I will also say if I get to Dak, I'm OK. Having lines where there is no bring back. I did that for like the first time all year last week with Kyler a couple of times, which didn't work out because, you know, Kyler kind of let us down, but I'll do it again this week with Dak. I think that I'd rather. I'd rather have no bring back than force myself to have every Dak line of tied to either Jacobi Meyers or Hunter Henry. Yeah, that that was going to be the counter argument to all of this is that it's really important if you're building stacks, maybe you're using an optimizer and you're saying, hey, if Dax, if Dax in this lineup, I want to bring back, but I'm only using these two guys and both of them just bust. Then Dak eruption games are going to be again, you can still have a good good day. You can still win tournaments depending. But the probability of that just drops a ton if you're taking a brick in in one of those spots. So there's enough for me to consider both of those guys, which is more than I could have said probably before I really dug in. But again, just going to be a little bit spotter with that. So and again, like you said, not not stack in every lineup that has Dak with those two guys. How are you in the Cowboys offense here? I think the Dak is really intriguing. The one downside that I have is I think the spread is shorter than it should be. It's not three and a half. I have it at like seven. Partly because I have home field being a little bit less. Also, because I think the Patriots suck. But like, I think this game is less competitive than it's being billed as. So I still like Dak. And I like Mari in CD lamb. That's like the one kind of hang up that I get. I'm still going to use them, but that does kind of make me interested in Zeke, too. So what's your thoughts on this game that paid the Cowboys side of this game? Yeah, I like those four specifically. I don't know if I'm going to play Dalton Schultz this week, because I'm pretty sure his salary is like still elevated 65. That's a lot for a game of women. I think it's competitive. The saving grace for me is the pace is high and that helps me. If I had to rank them, I'd probably go with a Mari number one kind of, which is weird because the salary is there. I love building around those like high six, low seven thousand dollar receivers because those are typically the guys with good roles, but who have underperformed and for Zeke himself, it's more running backs loaded. So I feel a little bit less like I have to go there, but I'm going to play all four of their top guys. Yeah, running backs loaded, his role is not as good as Eckler's. So, you know, if you're in that range and plus like I'd rather just get to McCaffrey at that point. So that's the two arguments against him, but I'll still use them. I think that there's a good path to him being really solid here. But overall, I think Dak is in contention with Herbert to be number three. The reason I might go Herbert is because the odds that game is competitive are much higher. I've got as like a pick, whereas this one I do favor the Cowboys by decent amount. Let's move now to my first trend here, talking about the Giants, because we don't know who will quarterback for them yet. Obviously that influences how we view their offense and the Rams. Let's go through Daniel Jones and Mike Glenn and decide how to handle things here, depending on who starts a quarterback. If it's Jones, I think we can feel great about this game and stacking both sides. Jones is a 0.22 passing that expected points per dropback across his five games this year. After adjusting for schedule, the Giants rank 10th in Schedule Adjusted Passing Offense. The Rams defense has taken a step back this year. They rank 13th in Schedule Adjusted Pass Defense. So Jones plays, I would say, fire up Devontae Berger with confidence. We can feel good about Kaderius Tony, et cetera, et cetera. It is a downgrade of Mike Lennon, but it's not the end of the world. Last year with the Jags, Glennon averaged negative 0.04 passing that expected points per dropback. That was between Gardner-Minshew at 0.11 and Jake Luton at negative 0.21. Glennon was willing to let a rip. His 8-out was 8.0, which is decently fun, more fun than Matt Jones. And he was pretty similar to what he did with the Jags last week in relief of Daniel Jones. Glennon is at 0.02 passing that expected points per dropback. 8-out was 8.2. That was with no Shepherd and no Slate and who should be back for this week. So if Glennon starts, he'd likely be below average, but not a disaster as a passer, and he'd be willing to go deep. That means that while we downgrade Booker and Tony, I don't think it pushed him out of play on a slate where we really want value. I think the bigger takeaway is that it might lower the appeal in Cooper Cup, Robert Woods. Dara Henderson remains fine, wouldn't impact me on him, but I don't think it'd be a big enough law where he would lose targets. So I'd be fine with him still, but Woods and Cup would be tougher. So that's for a bet on these guys, Brandon. How are you viewing the Giants under Jones versus under Glennon? Yeah, you mentioned Glennon's passing that expected points per dropback last year. I have it a lot worse once you adjust for opponent, unfortunately. So that's a drawback that I'll have that might be overstated. So a better situation with this team than with who we had last year to throw to, but obviously with Jones, we feel a lot better. I think the big thing for me is gonna be where we land with Devonte Booker. And I think that's the best point here because if it's Glennon, I could really see myself just avoiding Booker and hoping that he does bust. Sorry, Devonte for watching all the best, but I feel like I'm higher on Daniel Jones than you are and maybe lower on my Glennon, but I'm gonna play the Rams regardless just because I like what their passing offense does. Like I guess maybe it's not the hugest gap between these two, but I really want Daniel Jones to start and I feel like he's going to. So in that sense, I'll have a lot of stacks of this game and it could creep up to number three for me if Jones plays. How high are you on this game? Where would you rank this game with Jones and where would you rank this game with Glennon? If it's Jones and we assume that the weather holds and Kyler's shoulder can just be a concern, I might put a third too. Well, Patriots, Cowboys maybe. It'd be in the top five though, I think, right? Let's just top half. Yeah, but yeah. That's true. Glennon, if it's Glennon, I would say I'll be in on Darrell Henderson. I'll still use Booker and still use Tony, but that's kind of it for me. Whereas if Jones goes, I will use Booker, Tony, Henderson, be okay with Woods and Cup, maybe I guess I'll use two. So I think that if it's Jones, it opens up more guys in the game, but I'm gonna use guys on both sides regardless. Okay, yeah, I'm kind of the same place. I'll use a little bit of both, but I mean, so if it's Glennon, is it just Tony for you? Yeah, I mean, like you could definitely make a strong case for Shepard because they clearly value him. He'll still be on the field with Tony emerging, $600. I would probably not get there, but like I think he's still like in consideration and someone I would look at at least. Yeah, I mean, it's a reason why I would say Dallas, New England would take preference for me, if it's Glennon and put that game third. Yeah, I agree. If it's Glennon, I affirmly agree. If it's Jones, I think it's a consideration between those two. Yeah. Also, I don't think you're too much higher on Dan on Jones and me anymore. I was before, but I'm there now. Let's move to your second trend. Talking about that, Bengals, Lions, again, this game is a doors, which is good because no end, we hope, unless something goes very wrong in Detroit, but it's slow. So what do you see with this game? Yeah, so this game could be number three, depending on how some things fall. I have my pay stats, which look at just plays, passes and rushes doesn't include things like field goals and punts. And I don't know if other stats do that or not, that's probably why my stats are a little bit different than what I find elsewhere. But based on pace, my numbers say to stay away from the Big Cat showdown here with the Bengals and Lions because it rates with the second slowest average pace on the main slate, besting only the Raiders and Broncos by just a 10th of a second per play. So it's close to being worst. I don't like that, Jim, I'm not a fan of that. It's not great, Bob. But it is worth noting as well that the trends here are bad with the Bengals play volume. If you exclude overtime, they've averaged 52.4 plays per game, which I'm including just passes and rushes, that's 10 plays worse than the NFL average in that sample. For the Lions though, they're actually seventh, it's 66.6. So the pace might not be great, but the Lions can still kind of move some things around in terms of place per game. Despite that, this is one of the more appealing main slate games to me. That's kind of slotted in as fourth behind the games we've already talked about. And if we get my Glen and it might bump up to third, honestly, the total is 47.5 points. It's in a dome, which you mentioned. I talked a few weeks ago about the positive impact of dome games and how we'll get windier games throughout the season. We kind of have that this week. So we got to bump that up for whatever reason, could be variance, but I've looked at performance based on over under and 47.5 since 2015, seems to be like a pretty key number where we get some extra points. So it could be a little bit closer to a 50 point over under than something like 44.5 if we want to bump it up three points. So I think this game has a lot of ways to be good. And you mentioned maybe liking Joe Burrow. I like Joe Burrow plenty, not 100% sure I'll get there, but he's had plus passing efficiency after opponent adjustments. Jerry Goff has not, but he's been kind of fine overall, at least not bad enough to avoid the entire offense. And if we can trust that these offenses won't run 50 plays each against each other, puts a lot of options in play, Joe Mixon we talked about, but that salary of 7,000, 25.3 adjusted opportunities per game, which just carries plus two X targets prior to week five. That's good. Jamar Chase, 23%, the target share in three shared games with T Higgins, who's at 24% himself, but last week it was Chase leading the team with 27% with T Higgins at 19%. The line surprisingly horrible and adjusted fandal points per target, a lot of the receivers. The other side's a little bit trickier with Deandre Swift, I feel really good. It's 7,100, I'm gonna play a lot of him. The workload's been great. But we also have some value potentially with Amon Ross saying Brown at 5,200. He's at eight targets in both games. That's 20, or the past two games, which works as a 24% in that sample, three and a half high leverage looks per game in that sample as well. P.J. Hawkinson's a little bit more of a concern. His red zone share has really dropped off the past three games. It was 44% through week two and 8% the past three games, but even if you tell me we've got Joe Mix and Jamar Chase and Deandre Swift alone, that's enough for me to mini stack this one. I could see myself getting to these other options though. So ultimately what are you seeing with this game and where are you kind of ranking it? Yeah, I think that I'm okay at ranking it lower, but like just because of the pace, I think the pace is a big concern. It should get better with the Bengals finally passing now because there's heavy overlap between passing and pace and they were very run heavy the first couple of weeks when Borough was coming off that ACL. I think they feel more comfortable opening things up now, which might be good, but it's still not something that's super optimistic about there. So that's a good thing. I think that Chase makes a lot of sense. I think that I love Mix and obviously, Mixon or Swift for you? Probably Mixon just because you should have less competition for anything, but I loved Deandre Swift. I think I'll go Mixon too. But I think Swift is definitely in consideration of that very, very good tier. We're not Swift or Daryl Henderson. Probably Swift. I go Henderson because of the offense. Do you want to bet there? No. Okay, fair enough. I don't feel good enough about that. Fair enough. I figured I'd at least try it. I have Henderson over Swift, but I think both are really good options for this week. As far as the Lions, I have to apologize. I scoffed at you when you brought up in Monras St. Brown on Monday as being someone who could benefit with Quintessifus being out. That was wrong because my checklist at receiver is you need to be able to get 85 yards or two touchdowns. The 85 yards is in play. He had three deep targets think two weeks ago, facing the Bengals. The Bengals defense has played well, but they're not infallible by any means. So he's like not the highest upside guy, but he has the potential to get some deep targets. So I think that I'm more open to it now, especially given how values strapped I think will be on this slate. So to me, love mixing okay with Swift, but rank it below mixing in Henderson and St. Brown. Now a guy I'm willing to get to just because I think they will need the salary savings there. And where are you with Hawkinson? Because we're always looking for tight ends. I'm not using him. Nope. Andrews is $100 lower salary. I've got Seals Jones. I've got potentially in Joku. No. I'm with that hair though and his, he's hurt man. You know, that shows the head and the hair, but it doesn't show the ankle or whatever it is that's that's ailing him knee. Sorry, his knee. I think it's a legit thing. So I'll pass. Let's move now to my second trend. Talk about the Panthers offense with Christian McCaffrey. He was limited in practice Wednesday. He's gonna play they, he practiced last week. Rodney Smith was released on Monday and he's gonna play. It does alter this offense pretty dramatically. McCaffrey played two and a quarter games before his injury. That was partly against the Jets and Texans, but they also faced the Saints in there. So wasn't all easy defenses, but with McCaffrey on the field, the Panthers average 0.30 EPA per drop back according to next gen stats, it held the negative 0.16 without him. And that gap is, it's overzealous to say the least. It won't be that the same over a larger sample, but it is very fair to say, which you said on Monday, that McCaffrey does positively impact the passing game for this team. That matters. Everybody benefits from a more efficient offense and it makes this game more attractive if he's in it. Nelson really narrows the Panthers targets down from being just a two-man team in the two full games with McCaffrey, DJ Moore has 28% of the targets. McCaffrey is 22%. Nobody else is higher than 14%. And it does mean that there's no value, but I'm okay with that. We know where the ball's going here. As such, I think that getting stacks in this game of McCaffrey with Justin Jefferson, Jefferson to DJ Moore is pretty attractive. Dalvin, we've talked about a bit where I don't know where I sit there, but I think getting some many stacks here of McCaffrey, running it back with Justin Jefferson or DJ Moore with Jefferson, I think that's kind of in play this week. But in general, my takeaway here is, I want to be high on the Christian McCaffrey. If you look at the yardage, totally yardage per game, for running backs in their most relevant samples on the main slate, Christian McCaffrey is 50 yards ahead of everybody else on this slate. With no Derek Henry, he's the guy. So Brandon, I want to get to Christian McCaffrey. I want to actively try to be overweight on him for this week. Where are you out of McCaffrey and this Panthers offense? Love McCaffrey, believe it or not. He's the big dog. With the big dog playing Monday night, he's the big dog for this slate. You should be the skinny cat, I think. Skinny cat, if we're gonna call Henry the big dog. The big cat, he's not really skinny. No, no, skinny cat. He's a little skinny. Skinny cat because skinny cats are cool. As long as they're well fed and well nourished. All cats are cool, man. But yeah, all cats are cool. Yeah, McCaffrey is, if he's good to go, he's the play of the week. It's just he's 50-50. So, you know, I can't get, I know, I know. I can't get- Matt Rule, okay, sorry. Matt Rule said last week they were hopeful he'd play. He was doubtful. This week, he's 50-50. You don't go from hopeful to doubtful or to 50-50 unless you're just, you're a liar and trying to throw the other team off your scent. Like he's lying. If McCaffrey sits, my fault, I'm sorry. But you'll know before kick off anyway, so who cares? He's gonna play. That's the big thing here. And in his two full games, just dominant. Six red zone carries per game. Seven and a half targets per game. Like if he's healthy and he plays, we're gonna play him. I feel like it's very different than if Dalvin Cook plays. I would have a lot less concern that McCaffrey would be limited than Dalvin Cook just because the Vikings have Alexander Madison, the Panthers don't. So, yeah, I mean, for me, if McCaffrey plays, he's 70% potentially, which means that I'm gonna be low on the value-backs unless I pair McCaffrey with the value-backs and then gloss over the 7,000 tier, which I know already I'm not gonna do that too much, so. I think the issue I'll have with getting that high on McCaffrey is that I want my homes, and that's gonna be tough to get both. Unless I go hard, which again, that we mentioned is in play. If you go Mahomes, Hardman, Seals, Jones, you can make it work, but I'll be a little bit lower than 70% on McCaffrey, but I wanna be actively overweight. I would guess McCaffrey, unless we get really good news before Friday, probably gonna settle in somewhere around 10% because people tend to be pretty cautious that the guy's coming off injury. So if I go 30%, I'm 3x the field on him, that's fine with me. I will try to get higher than that if I can, but realistically given the lack of trustworthy value on the slate, I might have to settle for 30%. I'd like to get higher though, I'd like to get higher. Yeah, I think, okay, so maybe 70s over zealous with, to use a word you just used. Did I say that? Yeah. 50, I'd say. Okay, sure, yeah. Either way, we wanna be high on him, we wanna actively target him and be overweight in the field, correct? Yeah. All right, perfect. Let's move now into the weather for this weekend again. A lot of wind to monitor this week. And again, the overall thought process with wind is don't cross guys off, but lower quarterback expectations about 7%. If you still like them after lowering them 7%, cool, be all in, that's totally fine. With wind speeds between 10 to 15 miles per hour, you lower them like, I think it's a three or four, three to 5%, which is lower. So just keep that in mind. The big one again is Cardinals Browns, wind speeds currently 19 miles per hour there. We also have 14 mile per hour winds Baltimore for the Ravens and Chargers. It's five miles per hour lower, which makes a big difference. High enough to monitor, but not freaking out as much there. Wind speeds in Chicago for the Bears and the Packers are currently projected at 13 miles per hour in Jersey for the Giants and Rams. Wind speeds are projected at 13 miles per hour. And wind speeds in Washington as they as achieves are 13 miles per hour. So again, grading them in terms of like concern, Cardinals Browns easily won. And like half a red flag of concern for Baltimore, Los Angeles, for Rams Giants, for Washington Chiefs and for Bears Packers, which has different red flags outside of the wind for that one. So let's move now to our position by position plays for week number six on the fan dual main slave, Brandon. Who stands out to you for this week? I'm gonna go with Patrick Mahomes, I know. That's bold. Boldly correct. You know, I don't care that the salary is 9,000. And now that I scaled back my initial exposure expectations on Christian McCaffrey to about 50%, I can get to Patrick Mahomes a little bit more. I just, I was looking at McCaffrey's workload compared to everyone else's. And I was like, how's this guy not 70% but I wanna play Mahomes the rest of the season because the Chiefs need to be winning. And that's not gonna come through anyone other than Patrick Mahomes. So he is second in the NFL and adjusted passing that expected points per dropback behind only Matthew Stafford, who I think is fine this week as well. And we really talked about him much, but Washington's 24th against the pass according to number fires metrics. I said one game against the bottom half past the offense so far this season, 343 yards and three touchdowns on 31 dropbacks. You like to see that. My second love is going to be Lamar Jackson at 8,200 on fan dual. Love him this week. My data actually says he should have more passing touchdowns than he does because he's been pretty efficient. Yeah. He's so good. It's a top five pass defense that he faces but not quite a true outlier. So I'm not that concerned. Also 11 carries 68 yards per game on the ground. That's pretty nice. That's one and a half passing touchdowns worth of fantasy points plus. And it has two clear stack candidates now. That's always been the issue with Lamar. It's Mark Andrews. It's Marquise Brown. As you did mention, the Chargers do limit down for passing. They're second in yards per target allowed on down for passes. So that's a little bit concerning but that's why I put Mark Andrews number one. And just because I think we're both talking about some higher salary guys, if I had to pick anyone below, below 8,000, let's say Stafford, but below Stafford, I'd be cool with Heinecke or Burrow if I had to. Yeah. I think I'd go Burrow there. I probably would too, but I think Heinecke's a consideration. So I'd go Burrow by a hair, but I agree that those are the two guys you consider down there. I also love Lamar Jackson, Shocker for the same reasons he mentioned. So I don't need to belabor that too much. The one good thing with the brand silly defense again is they want to limit deep balls and Lamar can win in other places. So I think that even though they are a soundly coach team, sound philosophy, it's still Lamar. He's my favorite quarterback of this week. I also do love Justin Herbert on the other side. I consider going Dak here as number three behind Lamar and Mahomes, but the difference for me is that Herbert is an underdog and we historically see the public under roster, underdog quarterbacks. And again, I view the scheme as being closer to a pick between the Chargers and the Ravens. The Ravens defense not as fierce as it once was. They ranked 20th overall and 20th against the pass. The Chargers are ranked fifth in passing offense when I combine my pre-season priors with what they've done so far in 2021. We know where Herbert's throwing. It's to Keenan, it's to Mike Will and it's Dakler. So he's easy to stack. Lamar is easy to stack. I still think that it's number two behind Chiefs Washington, but it is firmly in the same tier. I think Herbert's pretty good. I will agree that Stafford is in play. I think that Dak is good too, but I think because this game is likely to be the most competitive of those, I'll go with Herbert over them for right now. Let's move now to running back. What you got there? I'm going to go with Austin Eckler. 8400 ranks, six on the slate in adjusted opportunities per game is fifth in my expected Fandal points per game model. Baltimore is 29th in adjusted receiving Fandal points per target, allowed to running backs, which adjusts on a player level basis. Samples can still be small there, but that's good for Eckler. They're middling and rushing efficiency, allowed to running backs. I love McCaffrey. If I can't quite get there, I'm totally cool with Eckler as my number one. I also love DeAndre Swift at 7100. I've been really high on DeAndre Swift this season because of the targets he's been getting, which again, almost like a cheat code where you can just double up target or carries with that number. It's getting 17 per game. So again, that's worth like 14 carries. It's a 19% target share within this offense. Those rank, the seven targets and 19% target share rank second and third respectively among running backs. I do like this game despite some pace concerns. It's indoors. The targets are good. And Swift also has 2.4 red zone carries per game. My third love is going to be Darrell Williams because I, here's the thing that I can't get away from. I don't imagine his role will be significantly different than what we saw with Clyde Edwards-Elair. If Clyde Edwards-Elair was salaried at 5,200, I'd just suck it up and play him. Hope for a multi-touchdown game. That's about it. CEH played 28% of the snaps last week. Williams was at 41%, got a red zone carry, five total rushes, plus five targets, one in the red zone. And he did run almost 40% of the routes again with Edwards-Elair playing about a third of the game. So the routes really helped me think that this isn't just a full-on committee. He's got the potential for 85 and a touchdown, which if I hit everywhere else, I get that I'm advocating against that, but I do think that there's a path to 18 if things fall his way because the offense is so good and because the game's so good. If he's 10% to get 20, that means that if we, he's like 30% to get like 15, or that's way too high. But like, if he gets a 15, it won't kill you at least. It's not gonna be the perfect lineup, but it won't kill you. I've meant 20, 20.4 to get to 15. It's pretty good. So I think that you, what I would say with Williams is you allocate your exposures based on that number. Like if he's 28% to get to 15 points, use 28%. Yeah, and the thing is, it's 5,200 is an outlier. It's not 6,200, it's not even 6,500. And we're talking about 15, 15 at 5,200 is a really rare number to get. Like 5,200 is rare for starting a running back. So it is a bit different. Yeah, I agree. I think that's the way to view it though, is think about those odds and allocate your exposures based on those odds. My first love that running back is Christian McCaffrey. He's $10,000, but like, I think everything points here to a full workload, everything. They released Rodney Smith. They practiced him last week. He practiced again this week. This is the same plan that he used last year where they, you know, practicing the week before didn't play him in the first game back, brought him back. And he had, I think like 18 carries and 10 targets in that first game back got hurt. So they could be more reserved, but like it was a different injury. It was not a re-aggravation. That I think is reassuring. The first two games, 162 yards from scrimmage per game. 65% of the red zone chances. There is a massive gap to him in the field. So if I have one lineup, Christian McCaffrey will be in that lineup. My second love is Jill Nixon. I'm hoping he gets in a full practice by Friday because if he does, I'm gonna go bananas. He was averaging 25.3 adjust opportunities per game. It is for healthy games. He had 40% of the red zone chances. Facing Detroit a defense, he should be able to shred. He's $7,000. So I drink him above Swift and above Henderson, but like, I'm not opposed to them. I wanna ask you, Antonio Gibson really quick before I talk about my value play. Gibson 67, is he Game Stacks only for you or will you have some standalone plays too? I'm just always a little bit lower on Gibson than most. He's close to Game Stacks only. I prefer other backs and I'd rather get there. So, I'll put it this way. If I'm building a single entry lineup that doesn't have like a my home stack, Gibson's not gonna make it in. Yeah, for single entry, yes, I'd agree. My top value above Williams by Harris Devontae Booker, he should get a healthy chunk of the work. He has, last week, 24 adjust opportunities. He had half the red zone chances for the team in that full game. There's the potential for Danny Jones to play and I prefer him over Darrell Williams despite the gap in offenses. I think that like these guys have similar limitations where they might not score for Williams because the Chiefs don't use their backs in the red zone for Booker, it's because the offense might suck. But I think just because Booker will be on the field more, I'll put him above Williams, but the gap is pretty minimal. So my exposure level between the two should be pretty similar, I would say. Yeah, like I'm with you workload-wise where I'd feel better about Booker, but salary-wise. Sometimes it does go a long way, right? It does. So again, I know that we advocate basically against, like we need to make sure that our guys can put up points. I especially feel that in like the 6,500 range, like let's call it with running backs. So, well, he's lower than that, but James Connor, like. His ceiling is 14 points, he scores twice. The, yeah, it's just, I want to be clear because I might sound like we're, or at least I'll say myself, being a little bit contradictory. Backs below 6,000 have a lower threshold that they need to get to. Players above that is whenever you really need to like, that's why I don't play a lot of Jonathan Taylor, like I know he has paths just to upside, but if he's not breaking a big play, he doesn't really have that, so. Yeah. Okay, let's move to wide receiver. What you got there? Keenan Allen, talking about paths to big games. He's got that because the volume's there, eight plus targets in every game. That's just kind of what you expect from Keenan Allen. He ranks top five in targets while inside the 10 or in the end zone with 10. According to my data, Allen is also the biggest under performer in the touchdown column among receivers. So something has to give eventually with that workload. A second love is Amari Cooper at 6,800. I liked the bounce back ish from Amari in week five. His target has been really low, but he had 19% in week five. Six targets, two downfield, two red zone. That works out to closer to nine targets rather than the six because of the added value of where he was getting those targets. By contrast, he was averaging 5.1 weighted targets per game from makes two through four. Love this game overall, Amari has nine targets while inside the 10 or in the end zone. So it's a great role despite the targets not being as high as we would like. And again, a game that I like this week. My third love is gonna be Miko Hardman at 5,500. Just really easy way to get exposure to the Chief's offense. The role to me is not reflected with the salary in such a good offense. Hardman has a 19% target share the past two games. Had 12 targets last week, which is good for 24% within that offense. Included a downfield target and two red zone targets. And again, Josh Gordon was not a factor yet. And I feel like it's gotta be weeks away if at all that he kind of makes me whole Hardman irrelevant. We are years away, bud, I'm pretty sure. He looks like, he looks huge in like a good way. Like he looks jacked, but I'm not sure if it's really conducive to like being super speedy at wide receiver. He's been hit in the weight room a lot, which is good for him, but I don't think he's gonna unseat Harbin for snaps anytime soon. My first love is also a Amari Cooper and it was your second, but he's my first. You're gonna low. What? You're gonna low if Cooper's your top guy. It's influenced by McCaffrey in the Homes. That's the, I need to find value. And I like Cooper a lot. If we look overall this year, he has 21% of the overall targets, 33% deep and 30 in the red zone. I initially went into this thinking I'd talk about CDLAM, but like Cooper is actually getting better workloads, question mark. He's also getting healthier, further move from the hamstring and the rib injuries. He's $6,800. I like him a lot. I want to be into the Mara Cooper. My current lineup that I have built has Mara Cooper in it as like a single entry tournament lineup. He's in there. I think he's pretty good. I like him Mara Cooper a lot this week. My second love is Kaderius Tony. The Giants are getting shepherd and sleight in back, but I just don't think you can put the genie back in the bottle. Most of his production last week came with Mike Glenn which should mean that he isn't playing no matter who starts. He's $6,000. It's really hard to get his upside at this salary very often. So I think that I'll take that salary. At $6,000 go to him. I will say if we get the wind to come down a bit, I will foolishly use Odo Beckham again, but maybe the wind will save me from myself. Come on wind. Come on mother nature. Make me not do stupid stuff. My third love is a guy we have not discussed yet, but Darnell Mooney. We have not seen the bears in a negative script yet because Justin Fields, the past two weeks with Bill Laser-Con plays, has thrown 37 passes. 33 have come when they've been tied or ahead. Four have come in a negative script. That's a good reason to potentially check out the Packers defense or bet the Packers and lay the points, but it also means we could see more Darnell Mooney this week. He has 28ths of the targets and the three starts by Justin Fields. So if the passing volume increases, he would benefit a pretty big way. We saw the Packers get shredded deep by Jamar Chase last week with no Jair Alexander. So I do think this is a good spot to go to Mooney once again at $5,600. His salary is frozen there and I'll take it. I think it makes sense to go back there once again. I did mention to Monterey, I'll say Brown. If you really need to save salary, I can get there. Yeah, I know, I know, I know. I'm a hypocrite. Oh, well, let's move to the side, Ed. What'd you got there? Yeah, I mean, and you make a good point with the McAfrey thing. Like I had Eckler as my top running back. And if you get to, if you have Eckler as your top guy and you don't play McAfrey, which, you know, basically is going to be if you're not playing McAfrey, you get to Eckler like have a lot more salary. So it's really going to depend on, I think, three things, the two, the three things, three players, the two value backs in McAfrey, that's going to depend on, that's going to dictate a lot of stuff. But for me, either way, I want to make sure I'm getting to Mark Andrews at $6,300 at tight end. For the most part, it's a pretty weak position, which is typical. We do have Travis Kelsey on the slate and I'm not saying I'm going to overlook him, but it's kind of hard to get there, especially whenever we have Andrews. I would say under salary now with his combination of salary and upside. It's just, he's like the lone standout to me. As someone who's under salary, he can actually put up legitimate points. He has a 27% target share over the past three games and the chargers are 28th in adjusted fandal points per target, a lot of tight ends. My second love, not surprising, will probably be chalky, but it's Ricky Seals-Jones at 5,000. 99% of the snaps last week, 86% of the routes, eight targets, three in the edge zone. I will take that and it's a good matchup as well for him. RSA is great. Don't care if he's chalk, he needs salary savings. So I think that I'd agree with that. He's one of my loves as well for the same reasons. I think Mark Andrews is the best tight end play on the slate, so I want to say that too. So Andrews, Ricky Seals-Jones, if I'm not going there, I don't mind. Tyler Higby, stop me. Again, it's kind of like Odell, please make me stop doing this. Hey, play him in our head-to-head. I'll take it. No, I'll play RSA there. I'm gonna actually play Andrews in that. Actually, yeah, it's probably smarter. No, I was gonna block you. Okay, Higby though, $5,500. The Giants have given up seven plus targets to a tight end in three of their five games this year. Higby is $5,500, plays every snap in a good game, on a good offense, facing a bad defense. I want to get off eventually, but like $5,500, man, really hard for me to say no. So I'm gonna just keep on giving it a shot and see what happens. Let's finish up with defense, what'd you get there? Well, I do have the Packers. They're 4,200, it's a good enough salary for me. Justin Fields has been better after his really bad start to the season, but probably not 100% after his knee injury. I thought he wouldn't even play, but it's kind of... But he has an NFL high sack rate overall. Even if you look at just the past two starts, it's still above average. The Packers, again, should play from ahead, and that should put a, probably not 100% Justin Fields into negative script, and I like that. Yeah, I think that, I'd agree that. I like the Packers. I also want to mention that the Browns were in play if Judevii and Clowney and Miles Garrett play. They both sat on Wednesday. Clowney couldn't play last week. It really impacted their defensive line. With Rodney Hudson being out, I think that the communication issues could be most impactful with Clowney. So if Clowney plays, I'm going to use the Browns defense at times. I've seen the Browns rate out projections-wise really well. Pretty much everywhere. I hate that. It's because of the sourd. So I'll talk about the Cowboys. I think the Cowboys should be favored by more than three and a half here. The Patriots offensive line is super banged up. They rank 30th in Schedule Adjusts offense. They almost got beat by the Texans last week. The Cowboys third ranked defense, that's fluky. It's heavily influenced by turnovers. So that's not going to stick. But like, they're a league average defense facing a beat up offensive line and a bad overall offense. Like, I think the Cowboys are pretty good. I do like the Packers as well, the Spychirex, Andrew being out. And I will use the Browns and other teams to note here. Carolina, I'll use at times against Minnesota given, I mean, Darisaw played a bit last week. So like the offensive line, not as bad as it was previously, but it's still, the Panthers are a good defense, I think. Would you play Minnesota against Carolina? I mean, it's Darnold, so sure. Yeah, why not? $3,700, sure, let's do it. Yeah, I think that's probably the, where I'm looking the most, I would say. And can you play the Chiefs? $3,800. No, okay. Yeah. Are you allowed to get a turnover? Are they allowed to pressure the quarterback? Also, I'm pretty sure Heinecky has a really low sack rate. He's kind of de-gaffy, so that is kind of conducive to like, to defenses, cause he does, he has some Jameson in him, he's got some Fitz Magic in him, but you know, not, I just don't think I can use that defense, but let's go RSJ, feel fine about it. Okay, that is all that we have here for today. Brandon, any final thoughts for you before we send the good people off to fill out their week six lineups? We covered a lot. I know it's a little bit back and forth, but as I mentioned at the top of the show, there was a lot I needed to figure out about how I was feeling about things. I still feel really good about the mid-range running backs. Oh yeah. I wanna make sure I get McCaffrey. I'm okay with the value backs. More likely than not, I will have more Darryl Williams just because the salary savings open up more, but I really would imagine that the value backs will be chalky-ish, and that could be some amazing options in the 7,000 range just overlooked, and I do wanna take advantage of that. I agree. Really good week to get to them, but also good week to get to McCaffrey, and a good week to get to Darryl Kill, so I'm very conflicted. We'll see how things play out once we're building stuff on Sunday morning. That is all that we have here for today. As a reminder, we are here every Monday and Thursday. Recap on Monday preview on Thursday up on the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed, and also live on the Fandal YouTube page, so make sure you are subscribed in both places to the Fandal YouTube page and to the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed, NHL's back with Tom Vecchio, NBA back just around the corner as well, so a lot of good stuff here on the feed. Make sure you are subscribed, and if you like what you hear, leave us a rating and review as well. Brandon, if people have questions for you on Twitter, where can they find you there? I'm at Goodwill13, G-D-U-L-A-1-3. Check out Brandon on our Thursday Night Football preview show today breaking down the Bucks and the Eagles on the Fandal YouTube, Twitch, Facebook, and Twitter pages at 4 p.m. Eastern until 4.30, getting your single game line upset for tonight. I am on Twitter at Jim Sonnis, J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S. You can also follow the Fandal Podcast Network at Fandal Podcast. Big thank you to everyone for tuning in for today. Good luck to you in week six. We'll talk to you once again on Monday. Wrap it all up. This has been the Heat Check Fantasy Podcast powered by Number Fire.