 our second to last weekend of NFL Slates for the 2022 NFL season is here this weekend. It is a very sad time, but it's a fun slate. Fun couple of slates here, both the two game slate and the individual single game slates are enticing, I think, for the conference championships. We're going to break down both those games, let you know our favorite plays and priorities for the two game slate on FanDuel and both single game slates as well and get you set for what should be a fun Sunday football on FanDuel. Welcome on in to the heat check fantasy podcast powered by Numberfire. That's right here on the FanDuel podcast network and Numberfire.com. My name is Jim Saunas. 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, second to last round of slates of this year. How are you doing today? Yeah, some might say penultimate. Some would not. I can't. We've had this discussion not doing it. Yeah, but, you know, I'm not doing it. So quit asking. I'm just leaving. I'm just leaving it there. I'll let you work yourself over. Never, never dress it ever again. The most overused relative to its utility interest and intrigue is the word penultimate. It is aggressively overused. It's awful. This is just wild because visually, you know, visually, it's a great word out. No, no, no, no, it's stupid. Let's say visually, like on the YouTube stream, you're like an all black and you're like coming out like a curmudgeon about that word. I got like a nice curmudgeonly. What? Look, it takes one to no one. So, but I'm wearing my lovely new hat that I won from Jim and our NFL head to head competition. This is also a head to head hat, by the way, bro. I showed up and it's a throwback Denver Nuggets hat. It is by far the boldest hat that I own now. But yeah, I mean, I'm just out here like, look, penultimate's a fun word. We don't get to say it a lot. Stop saying it. Yes, we do. People say it all the time. There's only like one, there's only one chance to say it for sure. No, because there is a penultimate golf benefit here. There is a penultimate NFL slate of the year. Name all the sports. I will. Like there are so many things that use that word and it's not a good word. It's it's it's visually pleasing. So if you're writing it fine, eat your heart out. But like saying it, it's a dumb word. It's overused. People say it every time this comes up and I refuse to be a part of big penultimate. Do you sub vocalize when you read? I don't know what that means. Like, do you hear the words in your head or do you like? Yes. So then how is it fine? So slow. I'm a very slow reader. I've been made fun of for this all my entire life. So thank you for bringing up source subject that I read slow. I figured I figured you wouldn't like reading it if you don't like I don't like read. I'm a bad reader. Like the science portion of the ACT is the one that involves most reading and I did that's that was my worst section by a wide margin. I can't read. I'm like literate, but I can't read. Well, I'll talk about my simulations later. But the only reason I scored well in SATs is because I have a the essay portion of it. Because I purposely picked colleges that didn't take the SATs. So I wouldn't have to take them. I like refused to apply to a school that required me to take the SATs. So again, this confirms your prior that I am pretty hard headed. That began at the young age and has not quit. If you say the P word that you are pushing so hard on this podcast, we're going to dive. Go ahead. Well, I'm speaking of like being stubborn. I'm very excited to hear about how you manually pulled the top scoring the top score for each team on this. Yeah. Well, whatever. Yeah, I did. I did go through each each of the four teams games outline their highest score in each game. It was not efficient, but it's my summer. I can be inefficient and still be fine with it. Also, I learned from the process Brandon. So maybe get on my level. We're going to break down what that data said, break down our thoughts on both these games starting off with 49ers at Eagles here in just one second. But first, a reminder to make sure you are subscribed to the number fire daily fantasy podcast feed wherever you get your podcast because the daily ISO continues on with Tom Vecchio breaking down a daily fantasy basketball every weekday here on the feed. Also PGA USC for select events. Love NASCAR for the Daytona 500 coming up in a couple of weeks as well. So that'll be a good time as always to get all those as they go live. Make sure you are subscribed to covering the spread wherever you get your podcast. And while you're there, if you like what you hear, leave us a rating review. If you want some betting thoughts on the conference championships, I had Ryan Williams on covering the spread today to break down both these games and some jabroni named branding a duel will be on with me tomorrow to break down props over on covering the spread with football season winding down. This weekend is your final shot to get in on the GMC Sierra mountain climber pickup. It's a free contest series. A fan dual GMC are running for a chance at your share of $10,000 in cash prizes. Simply go to the contest and answer questions around Sundays games. The more questions you answer correctly, the higher up the mountain you'll move it during any week. You answer every question correctly for a perfect score. You'll reach the summit and when you're share of $10,000 in site credit, the contest is now live at a fan dual.com slash free slash contest slash GMC today to start climbing the mountain fan dual.com slash free slash contest slash GMC for the GMC Sierra mountain climber pickup. Now, Brandon, before we dive into the 49ers at equals, I didn't want to get your overall thoughts on this slate. And I think when I'm thinking about this, this two game slate or the individual slates holistically, everything for me comes down to making assumptions around injuries specifically with Christian McCaffrey and Patrick Mahomes. I think you got to go in and assume they are either hampered by these injuries because I think both guys should play or you assume they are downgraded and then make assumptions based on that. So that's me is the key thing for the weekend is deciding a how you think they'll how healthy you think they'll be and then be deciding ripple effects from that assumption. What stands out to you as being the overall keys to these two games? Yeah, pretty similar for me. But it's more like taking a stand in a sense like we know that everyone's going to be trying to guess right on the Mahomes injury, Christian McCaffrey's usage, because it's one thing if McCaffrey is healthy, they still might not use it. I know could be last game of the year, you're not going to limit him entirely, but they have other playmakers and so he's not their only hope. So take a stand on, okay, well McCaffrey's healthy, but he's still going to lose high leverage carries to Debo, Samuel or Redzone work. They're going to try to throw the ball more. I think the one stand that is most prominent is, and this will sound strange, but Brock Purdy, like take a stand on whether you think Brock Purdy is like the versus Seattle Brock Purdy or throws for over 300 yards, three touchdowns, puts up production, or if you think that he's limited, let's keep the ball away from Brock Purdy, no touchdowns like under 10 points. Because if you think that Brock Purdy is going to be just like game manager, then you have to allocate, because we only have so many quarterbacks, you have to allocate salary for quarterback and that's going to change a lot of other things. So basically it's not as simple as like if you want to play Travis Kelsey, you're going to have to play Brock Purdy. It's not that simple, but like we have some tight ends who can change the slate. We have receivers who can change the slate. Take a stand on these individual like games, make those assumptions, take a stand on, I think that the 49ers and equals actually despite the defenses is going to be a high scoring game and therefore that changes everything. Because if you just have sprinkles of every different player, statistically speaking, you're going to have a hard time having like a good weekend. Yeah. And the benefit of a smaller slate is you can make those assumptions and you can assume within one, two game line, if you can assume, I think the Eagles role in this one, I think that the Bengals role in this one, you know, kind of map that out and ask yourself who benefits in those scenarios, you know, to make the same sometimes I just made, but like, you know, kind of map it out that way. And if you're doing that, you don't have to be that weird to be different because very different players will benefit from very different scripts. So kind of map that out in your head and decide, okay, for this lineup, I assume X and Y happens across these two games and allow the lineup to fit your line of thought there. Let's dive in here to the 49ers at the Eagles, the first game on in this slate right now. Eagles are two and a half point favorites and the total is 46 and a half. Injuries in this game, Christian McCaffrey and Eli Mitchell, both missed practice Wednesday and McCaffrey has a calf injury. Mitchell's is a groin. I think McCaffrey is good to go. I haven't seen a ton on Mitchell. I knew he was proclaimed as being day-to-day earlier on this week. A little surprised by him popping up here on the injured port. I was surprised he mentioned on Monday and didn't expect him to be here. And I think that that does impact things a bit and could benefit Devo Samuel. Devo Samuel was expecting to set up practice yesterday, but did get in a limited session with an ankle injury. Sounds like it's a lingering thing. It's not a new thing, which is fine. He had ankle injury late in the season, came back week 18. Sounds like he'll be good to go. A.J. Brown not listed on the injury report, despite suffering a hip injury in the divisional rounds. So, Brandon, when you look at this game, what is the key thing that stands out to you? Again, I'm going to go back to Brock Purdy in the sense of what to expect from the 49ers offense. Honestly, these smaller slates are harder to break down because you take more detailed notes and there's less of a natural flow and you kind of start anywhere and then things can get overlooked. But if you look at this team in their matchup, like Philly is the top-adjusted past defense in football according to the number of virus metrics. They're a bottom five rush defense, so everything says run the ball while we just talked about the running backs being hurt. So, like, what are they going to do there? Now, this team, since week 14 with Purdy, I have their adjusted seconds per play at 32.8. They're a slow team, raw pass rate of 47%, pass rate over expectation of about five points, below zero. But if you look at games for San Francisco against bottom 10 adjusted rush defenses, their pass rate over expectation on the whole season is like a team, drops to negative 9.1. So, like, they're already run heavy. If you adjust for game context, they're still run heavy. And then if you look at, like, what they've tried to do against, like, beatable rush defenses, they've run the ball a lot. And so, yes, I'm talking about, like, Brock Purdy and clearly we're not, like, itching to play Brock Purdy with three high upside quarterbacks. That's not really what I'm getting at. It's, is this team going to try to take the ball out of his hands, grind the clock and have this game have as few plays as possible. Because if that's your assumption, you can still say, well, I think the Bengals role, but I think like Mahomes is still doing stuff and like with his pass catchers and his goal position players, it's actually better than what we're going to get from the 49ers and Eagles because that game is just going to be, you know, like a 17, 14 game and the other game is going to be more prominent. So I think for this game, it's trying to figure out what to expect from the 49ers. Yeah. And my total model does kind of back out the thought process of this game might be a bit more disappointing, both due to the rush heavy nature, but also like two really good defenses. I had the total in this game at 44.7. So under the total of 46.5 right now. And then the other game I have a 48.4 that is with a downgrade from Mahomes in there. Both these games have similar wind concerns around nine or eight miles per hour. So that's not a huge factor, but there's a four point gap between these two games. That's decently big on a two game slate. So I think to me, this is the less appealing game from an overall game and environment perspective, which does impact my view of Jill and Hertz relative to Patrick Mahomes, Joe Burrow. I still think he's firmly in that discussion because he's a very good passer. His rushing has been great, but that's the concern I have there. And also my numbers of the 49ers is like a slight favorite. That's kind of weird, I think, but it's noteworthy, I think, for the game overall. I think the big thing in this game is tracking Christian McCaffrey's injury. They said on Monday it was a calf contusion, which is a bruise, which is odd, because he had like this thing on his leg on the side. I'm sure you all saw. And it sounds like that's more so used for like cramping and for like muscle strains. So that's not a bruise. That is odd to me. So I think that we say this a lot. If then, if Christian McCaffrey gets in a full practice on Friday, then I will make him a priority once again, because, you know, Eli Mitchell is also banged up. We saw McCaffrey still get a lot of high leverage work in that game last week. And like you said, they might go pretty run heavy here. So if then on McCaffrey, if he's full in practice Friday, full steam ahead, if he is limited, even if he's taken off the injury port, but listed as limited Friday, I will be lower on him. And I think the other takeaway for me is as a result of those two injuries to Christian McCaffrey and Eli Mitchell, I am going to be very high on Debo Samuel. And I think that across the two game slate and across the single game slate, there is nobody in on this weekend who is more under salary than Debo Samuel. You can make the assumption that the 49ers go run heavy here, which I think is a fair assumption based on the stuff you said about what they do against non-elite rush defenses. I think that's a fair assumption, but Debo still benefits there. So that's why I am drawn towards him. If we're looking at the most relevant sample on this 49ers team, it's the games with McCaffrey healthy and with Debo healthy. In those games, Debo 7.6 targets per game, McCaffrey at six targets per game, Brandon Naik 5.7, George Kittle 3.9, and Joanne Jennings 3.7. So Debo is getting good work, even though they have been generally pretty run heavy. So I think to me, Debo is the priority across all the slates this weekend. And McCaffrey, if he gets in a full practice Friday, will be firmly in the MVP discussion for single game slates. I think it could just be just him and Hertz. If he gets in a full practice, if McCaffrey doesn't get a full practice, I might just go Hertz in every line of MVP for the single game slate. Or maybe Debo, I guess. Maybe a sum Debo. Yeah, I think you could look, it's one of those situations where you can kind of make a case for a few options in any game that has viable candidates on a single game slate, especially in the playoffs, where everyone's going to be getting in on things. Would it surprise me if, would surprise me if Miles Sanders was MVP, but it wouldn't really. So I don't want to take too many guys off the table. But as a priority, my simulation model is, let's just say, more than half the time Jalen Hertz is projected to be the top scorer in that game. McCaffrey, like while limited, scaled back a bit with his projection, it's about 25%. So kind of do the math where at least 75% or so of the lineups should probably have one of those two. Still leaves 25%. And obviously, you want to take advantage of being right whenever consensus is sort of wrong. But yeah, I mean, as priorities in this game, McCaffrey still, even if limited, has the potential to be a true MVP candidate. It's because Eli Mitchell is also banged up. So like, you know, we don't know how healthy he is. Right. If he were fully healthy, it'd be a different discussion, I think. Yeah, I'd be worried. I think that that is an under discussed aspect of all of this is Eli Mitchell. How big, let's say, McCaffrey gets in a full practice on Friday, how big of a priority for you would he be on the two games late at that point? Full by Friday. Yeah. Very big because the only other, you know, I don't want to box like Jerick McKinnon, Isaiah Pacheco, and Miles Sanders into some sort of like low upside box because they have paths to get there. You probably can put them in that box. But I think I can probably put them in there. And then, you know, I don't want to get ahead of myself on like Joe Nixon, but in this reality where McCaffrey is full by Friday, great band name, great movie title as well. But there's just nobody who can touch him. It's like a Travis Kelsey at running back situation, but more predictable in a good rushing matchup. Right. And we also will get him at a reduced roster rate as a result of the fact that he was being subbed out late in that game. Even if he does want it being full on Friday, I think people will still be scared of him as a result of that. I think that's going to keep his roster rate in check regardless of what happens, which is a good thing for us. So I would say McCaffrey does become a full priority because it just means it's one less running back slot I have to fill with someone who is lower upside than him. Well, somewhat hurts on the two game slates. We do have Joe Burrow and Patrick Mahomes. Hurts obviously has a big edge in terms of rushing projection for this week. Also has decent, I would say, passing projections because they did go, they have been at times decently pass heavy, more so than you might think, I guess anecdotally. Where are you on Hurts? We like him for the single game slate. What about the two game slate? How does he grade out to Burrow and Mahomes for you there? Yeah, so he's pretty easily the best projected play for me whenever you look at a combination of floor and ceiling projections at salary. I just have him, number one, pretty comfortably. I'm not that concerned about the matchup. I'm more concerned about the overall game flow. It could be stupid to be a little dismissive of the matchup itself, but for me, I'm a little bit more like this game, they might not run a ton of plays. This is one of those games where I DVR a lot of games. I don't like to watch a lot of live games. I'll watch the games live this week, but if I was going to DVR it, it'd be one of those where it'd be over before I realized it, or after a few clicks of the button between plays, it's like, oh, it's already, there's three minutes left in the second quarter. And I feel like there's been a quarter's worth of action because the clock's going to keep running. This game is 20 to 17, are you surprised? No, not at all. I would be infinitely more surprised if each team scores like 30, not because of efficiency. I am worried about the defenses to a degree. It's more like the combination of that plus the clock moving, and these teams wanting to keep the clock moving, but still run some plays. I think for me, the issue isn't the matchup. It's simply whether this game is limited or not. Yeah, I think that's the same plays that I come from. Fully agree with you there. Let's talk about the 49ers non-debo pass catchers. We have Brandon and I, you get $6,000 on Fandom for this week. George Kittle's salary comes in at $6,800. Then you have Juan Jennings with a salary down at $4,900. I think Juan Jennings on the single game side is very interesting because his salary there is down at $7,500 for someone with his role. He gets some deep work, stuff like that. For the full slate, I might be underweight on every single one of those guys. Ayuk is very interesting at salary at $6,000 to get some deep work, but the matchup is pretty tough here with the Eagles outside corners, and I agree with you where I think they'll be pretty run heavy. Kittle's salary is pretty high for what kind of volume he gets. So I might want to be underweight on Ayuk and Kittle. Where are you on the non-debo Samuel pass catchers? Yeah, so through two playoff weeks, we know like George Kittle had that sweet catch, gave a nice post-game interview, but two targets, five targets for three and a half. Hasn't scored in the playoffs, but it's a two-game sample there. I'm not that concerned about scoring potential. It's more just overall volume. He's really taken a backseat, and he seems like he's okay taking sort of a backseat, but his catch rate over expectation through the playoffs is plus 33%. Again, we're looking at what seven total targets. I understand how that can fluctuate, but if he didn't catch all those, he would not have... Again, I understand the takeaway good plays and guys aren't going to score points, but there's a big risk in playing George Kittle and having him see three targets, and I don't think that it's like that unlikely that he does. I would probably rather play a different tight end in this game. We can talk about that in a second. For me, I can't really get to Kittle. Ayuk, I'm more alright with just because I need three receivers, but boy, I'm not feeling great about... Again, it goes back to the Brock Purdy situation. You might see it differently, not you, but anyone might see it differently. I just feel like we're going to see limited Brock Purdy in two games against top 10 past defenses. He's got 25 and a half attempts per game. It's like beneficial, but it takes sacks that can kill drives. I want to find ways to move away from the 49ers' past catchers. I'm sure everyone wants to do that. So a very easy thing to do is play Brock Purdy, Brandon Ayuk, and George Kittle, and you'll be very different. It's not the dumbest thing to do because there is a path for these guys to maybe play from behind even. So I don't know. I think I'm just low on the past catchers in general outside of Debo. I agree. In the single-game slate, again, I like Jennings at 75. I think he's pretty interesting there. But Ayuk at 95 is right by Dallas Goddard at 10,000. I think Goddard is a pretty easily superior play there. Miles Sanders at 11,000, superior play to Ayuk. And I think he's better than Kittle too at 11,5. So I think both for the single-game slate and the two-game slate, those guys, not really high on my list. Speaking of Goddard, you mentioned him as being a guy you may turn to in this exact game. Goddard's salary this week is $6,400. We have Devontae Smith at 77, AJ Brown, 8,000. I think the Goddard is really fun relative to that salary. For both the single-game and full slate, where are you on the Eagles past catchers? It's so easy to play them because it's just three guys. And you could probably say the 49ers are three guys, but these are three guys we feel good with. And there's not Christian McCaffrey lurking in the backfield. So Goddard last week, 88% of the routes, five targets, 58 yards, the touchdown. Three red zone targets. You don't copy and paste that. Like I understand that. But the role itself, frankly, is a lot better than George Kittle's in terms of route volume. But not that Kittle's run 82% of the routes in the playoffs. I'm not trying to say that it's a cavern. But if I could bet Dallas Goddard to get more targets than George Kittle, I would. Minus 140 probably somewhere around there. And there's more to it, but Dallas Goddard has yards after catch potential. He's a good player too. Yeah, he's good. So I think for me, I'm going to play a lot of Jalen Hertz. And I think I might take the stand that Jalen Hertz just has a good game despite the defensive matchup. And then therefore I will play all three of his pass catchers. And I would not rule out flexing Dallas Goddard. You know, I put him at tight end and then someone else in because he plays earlier. But if I need to tight ends, I think that that's viable this week. Yeah, you're kind of comparing Travis Kelsey at 85 to the receivers 85. That might be tougher with Jamar Chase being there. But Goddard at 64 compared to like Ayuk and Julius Mishooster. I might go Goddard over both of those guys. Sure. Straight up, I'm going to take Jamar Chase over Travis Kelsey. But there are realities where Travis Kelsey outscores Jamar Chase. And so I'm going to flip that around sometimes. The other guy worth discussing in this game is Miles Sanders. And Sanders has been disappointing so far. And he hasn't seen the rolling crease. I thought he might get. Part of that last week was due to script because in the first half Sanders had a 59% snap rate in the first quarter, 50% second quarter, 33% third quarter, 12% fourth quarter. So as the game got out of reach, his roll scale down. I am going to go into this slate, the single game slate and the two game slate, assuming that he gets a rolling crease and a more neutral script. A roll increase, I think will still be below a 60% snap rate. But I don't think he needs a 70% snap rate to pay off when his salary is down to just $6,200. I think Sanders is my preferred non-McCaffrey running back play on this slate. The favorite guy I like there, the $6,200 on Fandu. I do like him on the single game slate too coming in at 11,000. Am I dumb to have confidence in Miles Sanders given how mediocre his fantasy season has been? Um, no, I'm not going to like fight you on having Miles Sanders second. I don't know that he's like a big jump above the two chiefs backs. I guess the case you could say as well, there's two of them and one of Sanders, but there's also like the one B is just two guys for the Eagles too plus Jalen Hurd. So like, I would think that Mahomes is not going to run. I mean, I know that he like showed the willingness to do that, just assuming there's a lot of shotgun for the chiefs and kind of a little bit higher on like Pacheco as a result of just assuming there's a little bit more rushing. But I see the case for Sanders, I see the case for having him scale up. I would be surprised though if he has a whole lot of yardage here, it'd be more of a touchdown play. So my question to you is, are you more in the more in the mindset of playing Sanders along with Hurts or playing Sanders as a way to get away from Hurts and like Hurts doesn't throw the touchdowns or run for the touchdowns? Like, are you more likely to pair them together? Assuming a huge game or more likely to play Sanders so that you can play Mahomes or Burrow instead? Single games play to probably go them together, just because I'm kind of assuming that the Eagles get out front. Full slate, probably separate, more likely, because if I have Hurts, I'm because of Goddard's role, I'm likely to pair him with Goddard, likely to pair him with Devontae Smith, Ajay Brown. And at that point, if Hurts gets a rushing touchdown and it's throwing touchdowns to them, the odds of Sanders also pays off for a bit lower. So I would say Hurts, I'm more likely to pair with Pacheco, but because I like Mahomes and Burrow a bit more than I like Hurts, I'm more likely to have them at quarterback. And as a result, that puts me a bit higher on Miles Sanders, if that makes sense. No, it does. And like, I know that our playoff podcast kind of come down to like, well, however you want to play it is like more than likely fine, especially in these games, like statistically speaking, Hurts plus one of the Chiefs backs is probably the higher floor play. But we know that there are situations in which it's Burrow or Mahomes plus Sanders that is the right play. So like there's no right answer. What's important is thinking about, you know, like not just jamming in Miles Sanders with Jalen Hurts. Of course, that could be in the perfect lineup. But that's whenever you say, I think Hurts is either going to throw for four touchdowns and Sanders will like run for two or no running backs or score any points. So it doesn't matter. Like you got to think about why you're playing guys together or not. Right. Especially because you can on this slate, you're not forced to do anything. You actually do have options. So I think that is a fair way to think of it. Before we close up here, do want to talk to you about the ancillary running backs in this game. We're generally not super enthused about the running back options on this slate, which could increase the thought to saving salary on some like Eli Mitchell at 56. You got Kenneth Gainwell 54. Boston Scott 49. Gainwell was the guy who closed out the game last week. But his overall role is not great. He does get some passing game work, does operate in the red zone, a decent amount. He's in it back. There's a path there. Mitchell would be like kind of assuming, A, he's healthy. Like I would want a full practice Friday before I go super high on him. And B, the 49ers get ahead. And Boston Scott, I can't really envision a scenario where he is a difference maker. So I won't go to Scott. I'm unlikely to go Gainwell. And I need a full practice from Mitchell Friday to get there. Where are you on the secondary running backs in this game? Yeah. So Gainwell ended that game last week with a 36% snap rate to Scott's 23%. In the first half though, it was 26 to 21 for Gainwell over Scott. So Scott didn't really like change a whole lot. Gainwell got that surge as Sanders got scaled back. That roll shift that you talked about. So there's not a whole lot there. As to the point of like, I can't see Boston Scott being a difference maker, it's like I agree with you. But if Boston Scott scores a two yard touchdown and Christian McCaffrey does not like have a good game, having Boston Scott in your lineup and hitting on like Kelsey and Jamar Chase stacks with like Borough or Mahomes, that that is a difference making play, which we're not accustomed to on like a full slate because that's not enough. But if the nuts, like if the nut stack is like Borough or Mahomes and like Chase and T Higgins and Kelsey, like in that case, Boston Scott scoring like seven points is a difference maker. So in that scenario, are you going to use Scott or Simaj P Rine at 53? That's like kind of assuming that that game shoots out. Yeah. So like, I'm not talking, like I'm not talking about Boston Scott. I'm just saying like it's easy to write off Boston Scott, but it's a bet against Christian McCaffrey and like Joe Mixon and saying that no running back score points. Well, no, it's also bet against McKinnon, Pacheco and Sanders. So those guys can do and Mitchell too. Like I think, I think you're betting against enough backs where even some lower salary backs where I it's not a bet I'm going to make personally. All right, let me see here real quick. If I go like never mind, I can't do this all on the fly. It'll be too boring. So Boston Scott in the 16 games he's played, 3.8 carries per game, 0.4 targets, 16.5 yards per game. Gain was a 30.8 yards per game and his most relevant sample, P Rine 26.5, Mitchell 53.8. So I think if we get Mitchell as an option, like if he's full of practice, then I see no reason to consider these other guys because his paths to a good game are so much easier to envision. So if you go like high-salary stack, you want both of the top receivers on the slate, Jamar Chase, AJ Brown, with Kelsey. I know this is sounding like too many high-salary pass catchers, but you go Joe Burrow who's the lowest of the quarterbacks. You need two running backs, a receiver and a flex and you're down to like 56.50. There is a reality in which like Burrow, Chase, Kelsey, AJ Brown have good games. No running backs do and you really can't just say, well, I'll play Pacheco and like Miles Sanders. In that case, like if you're saying these certain guys go off, Boston Scott's like four points might be enough to make it work. Again, we're not like saying that's a priority, but I guess what I'm saying is there's not a big difference between Scott and Gainwell and Pirine and it's a lot easier for me to envision them doing well with him. Sure. Yeah. Like I'm with you. I'm probably not making that clear enough, but usually we're writing off a Boston Scott or a Somaji Pirine. The situation in which you play them is because you're banking on the Pascal, which is obvious, but it's not how we talk about slates usually. So I think it's important that we like clarify that. Okay. So for you on the two game slates, who in this game is a priority for you? And then on the single game slate, who were you dealing a priority there for this game? Okay. Priority on the two game slate from here. I do want to put, well, McCaffrey if he's full. Correct. Debo either way. Agreed. Dallas Goddard. I would say Goddard on the single game slate is a borderline priority at 10,000. I want to say Hertz, but I'm going to be okay going with the quarterbacks in the AFC game. Yeah. So single game slate, I would say Hertz is a priority. McCaffrey with Hertz would be a priority if McCaffrey gets full practice because their projection is so much higher than everyone else. Yeah. He leaves you 91, 67 left. I can get there. That's fine. Like go to Juwan Jennings 75. I can make that work pretty easily. So that's what I would say for the single game slate. And then I really want to get to, I think Eli Mitchell is great for the single game slate at 8,000 if he's full in practice. And then Mitchell with McCaffrey, totally fine. It requires a specific script, but in general, not opposed to that. And then I do like Miles Sanders in both formats as well. Not a priority on the two game slate, but I don't really think there is a running back priority outside of McCaffrey if he's full. So that's the reason for it. Yeah. You can bet against the running backs doing anything relevant and everything just split up. Okay. Any final thoughts for you on this one? I think we covered it. Should we ever, should we talk defenses at all? No. Let's talk about Bengals at Chiefs. And I had to change the graphic for this game midstream because the Chiefs are favored. Once again, a fan dual sports book. It is now the Chiefs minus one. The total in this game is 47 and a half minus 112 on the over minus 108 on the under. And the reason why we've seen this move is because Patrick Mahomes got in a full practice on Wednesday. He's going to play. He may not be 100%, but everything I see tells me he'll be decently effective. Like I have a downgrade in and I saw the Chiefs favor by 2.8 points. So I don't know. I can't, I can't go super far with this. I think Mahomes is healthy and I'm going to work on that assumption. Michael Hartman, limited in practice Wednesday. Clyde Edwards, E-Layer continues to practice. He has not yet activated, but could be before Sunday's game. Alex Kappa and Jonah Williams, the Bengals, they're offensive line on this practice Thursday or a missed practice Wednesday. Zack Taylor left the door open for them to play. So it's not a lock. They sit. I think if they play and if Mahomes continues to do what he's been doing, this game has legitimate like full slate shootout potential. And that's why I'm higher on the two quarterbacks here. So let's talk about Mahomes first, Brandon. I'm comfortable with his health to the point where I will go into this slate, making the assumption on the single game slate and the two game slate that Patrick Mahomes is 80% himself. And if I make that assumption, he's a pretty good play. And everyone on the cheese is a pretty good play. And this game is more likely to shoot out. Are you comfortable enough with Mahomes health to make a similar assumption? Yeah, if this is how they're playing it, you know, then that's pretty telling. They could have probably been, you know, with with the high ankle, like they could have been more coy if they wanted and, you know, but I think it's like a, no, we're ready to go kind of statement. And that's awesome because the Bengals keep being the chiefs. So they probably want to try to impose some sort of dominance before the game, but you know, this is very different than when Mahomes got hurt in game, like they can now game plan around. I will lose it if he goes under center again for like the first snap after he came back. That drove me nuts. They did end up, according to my data, in the second half in that game have an 87% shotgun rate. Their season rate entering that game was 79%. So they did bump that up, but I just don't know why they were having him, you know, drop back from under center. They should stand him back there, hand it off to Pacheco, throw it to McKinnon, throw it to Kelsey, just kind of do all this. So like they have, they can prep for it. And I feel confident that they'll figure out ways to do it. They did play a little bit slower in terms of pace, even if you would sort of try to adjust for, you know, game context. But I don't really think that's an issue, especially compared to the other game, like everything's contextual in two game slate. Their raw pass rate wasn't super high, but their pass rate over expectation in the second half was over 10 points. So I'm with you like this game. And I'm just in general going to play the angle that the Eagles and 49ers, not to say like it's going to be a terrible sort of offensive game. I think there'll be some efficiency, but I think that they're just going to keep the clock moving to the point that there's not enough points to contend with this one. And as much as I would like to say, yeah, that's obvious. That's how everyone's going to play it based on the totals being as close as they are between these two games. I don't necessarily know that it's that obvious. So I'm with you, like my homes, feel good, love, love my homes in the Chiefs this week. Yep. And my hope is that people, like last week with the Bengals, people got super fixated on the offensive line stuff, which I love offensive line play. I typically am on board. It got out of hand to the point where I believe Brock Purdy was more heavily rostered than Joe Burrow on the four game slate, which is absurd to me. And I think we might see something similar this week where we've seen everything is pointed to my homes being healthy for this game. And so I want to make that assumption. And I'm hoping that the public is wary of the Chiefs, wary of my homes because of this injury. And it keeps things suppressed. Now, you were talking about them going to Chaka more often. And I find that interesting because I have interest in Isaiah Pacheco for this week. And more traditional running backs typically suffer when a team operates from shotgun versus under center. And that's true for the Chiefs backs too. If we look at the Chiefs this year, when the Chiefs are under center, Jarrett McKinnon has a 44.8% success rates. It's a very good number. Pacheco is 53%. So he's an amazing runner when they operate under center, which makes sense to get a running headstart stuff like that. When they go shotgun though, Pacheco's success rate is still 47%, which is pretty good. Whereas McKinnon's is 26%. I think that we'll see McKinnon's snap rates increase as they go more shotgun. We saw that in the divisional round where his snapper is around 60 something percent, whereas Pacheco was under 30%. But I still think that Pacheco can be effective. And I still think they'll be willing to use Pacheco in the shotgun if they do decide to go that way. So I was talking about Sanders before. I think that Sanders is the second best running back behind Christian McCaffrey if he's full on this slate. I would put Pacheco right near him. And I think I could be stupid in this, but I'd probably put both those guys above Joe Mixon at $80, $100, mostly due to salary. I think that Mixon has played well recently. I think that his role might be understated by a snap rates because he got it, you know, 23.5. He's just starting to use per game. Since he came back from his return, he's at 85.8 yards per game. That's not bad. It's a little high for 81. And I'd say Pacheco, though, in nine full gains that CEH is at 87 yards since he was per game. So he's actually higher than Mixon, despite having a lower salary of almost $2,000. So to me, even with the thought process, they may go shotgun more often, which could in theory in theory hurt be more like rush first back in Pacheco. I still think that he is at worst the third best running back on the slate above Joe Mixon. Where are you on Pacheco McKinnon and Mixon in this game? Like the chiefs backs. Okay. So I was trying to pull this up. It just took a while because I have a lot open. The chiefs from shotgun. Do you have a league high pass rate over expectation of 16.4% for a raw pass rate of about 71%? Despite that, I'm with you because I don't think it's the same sort of shotgun. They're not going to abandon the run entirely, especially with Pacheco seemingly getting more involved with this offense, whether that gets truly buried out. It just feels like his fingerprints are more in this offense. Well, too. So that's the thing is like he's playing well. I don't think that he's going to be taken off the field just because they're playing more out of the shotgun. And again, there were still 13% of the snaps in the second half alone. If my home is actually full, then they'll kind of go back to private closer to like 80 and 80% shotgun rate. But like, I'm not that concerned. With his rushing potential, and if you play the angle of like, Kansas City is going to get ahead because my home is efficient, there's still like a lot of leverage there. So I think Pacheco and McKinnon I'm higher on than Joe Mixon. Because of the role and because of the salary, my question to you though, and I'm not like trying to put you on the spot with this, but sometimes whenever I talk about a certain player who I think is over salaried and I say, I think he's over salaried because of what like the role is. And you say, well, we know what the ceiling is. And this, I don't care about the floor. I want the ceiling. Do you think that Joe Mixon no longer has like a three touchdown, two touchdown, like 125 yard ceiling anymore because of the role? I think he saw that. Okay. Because we kind of saw shades of that last week, I would say. And in the six games since he came back, 32.8% red zone share, that is not great, but it is better than Pacheco at 27.7 and McKinnon 22.3 even my standards are 25%. So he's better than all those guys in that regard. So I mean, because you touched on upside, there is a script where the Bengals role in this game. And he'd benefit, I think from that, even with Samaj P run, getting a healthy amount of passing game work and running more routes than Mixon. Mixon is still getting targets, 4.8 targets per game in this time. So I think he saw that upside. I think his odds of reaching it are slimmer, slim enough to the point where I'd rather go with those guys. And the other thing too with Mixon is that he is $8,100. And in that same range, you have Devontae Smith at 77, AJ Brown, 8,000. I mean, Jomar Chase kind of there at 86, Debo at 7,000. If I'm decided between Pacheco in the flex and a receiver in that range, unless that receiver is, if less I can get to T at 67, I prefer Pacheco. Like I prefer Pacheco over JuJu Smith, Schuster, Brandon Iuk. I don't prefer Mixon over Devontae Smith, AJ Brown, Debo, Jomar Chase. I think that's the only thing for me is when I compare them to the wide receivers, I think Pacheco grades out better relative to those guys and Mixon does to the guys in his range. Yeah. So we're like on the same page, but I think you know, once the final buzzer on the slate goes buzz. What? Yeah, what a buzzer does. Yeah, as buzzers do. Big buzzer boy over here. Like there, like Scala 1 to 10, how surprised would you be that a Joe Mixon game happens? Any scores? Like let's say, let's just copy paste from last week, like 19.3. Joe Burrow has like two touchdowns because Mixon is like more involved. Scala 1 to 10, how surprised am I? That like Mixon has a good game and is therefore the best pure running back play of the slate. Three and a half out of 10. So not that surprised. Again, it's comparing him to the receivers. That's the kind of thing that hangs me up. How surprised am I if AJ Brown goes nuts on a Scala 1 to 10? Is there some squeaky wheel with AJ Brown too? Yeah. They weren't saying if he was like Max, he wouldn't get back in because of his hip injury or if he was like Max, he wasn't getting the ball. I think there is a bit of squeaky wheel there. I don't know if squeaky wheel matters in the playoffs though. And I think that AJ Brown's 90th percentile outcome is probably better than Joe Mixon's. Maybe you can actually fact check me on that, which I will allow you to do if you want to. But what do we got here? 90th percentile outcomes for AJ Brown versus Joe Mixon? I have, this is just the spreadsheet's like so big it's hard to sort. And I might bust because this one tends to bust when I sort it. All right. I got Mixon like 24. They're basically the same. Okay. Who do you think will we have a higher roster rate? Well, I guess AJ Brown probably will because you have to roster three receivers. So probably him, but I'm a little bit more surprised. I think it's like 3.5 for Mixon, three for AJ Brown, three and a half to four for Devontae Smith. Yeah, so this is basically one of those where like it sounds like we're low on Mixon and we are, but not to the point that like if I was building a one lineup and trying to be as like different without being silly and like not rostered, you know, a four string tight end just to like be weird. Mixon might be part of that. Sure. He's a he is someone you should give thought to in that in that equation. Yeah. Which again, I don't know if that sounds obvious like he had Joe Mixon like obviously, but like for us, we're coming at it from like his role has been pretty bad. Therefore, he's over salaried. That being said, it's a two game slate, not a 12 game slate. And so he's still playable in that context. So I think he's probably the most fascinating, despite like my home, I think Mixon is probably the more fascinating play from a game theory standpoint for this one. I think that's very fair. Let's talk about the past catchers in this game, starting off in the Bengal side, Jamar Chase, $8600. We have T Higgins 67. T buddy, please save me. Tyler Boyd is 53. And then we have Hayden Hurst at $5400. I'm going to keep beating my head against a wall and using T Higgins. I think that's 67 for him is way too low. I know it's been a long time since we saw a team, but I still think that's that's within his range of outcomes. And he is the lowest salary guy before a teardrop. I think Debo is amazing at 7,000. I think that T is a little bit less amazing, but still very good. And then the drop off to Juju Smith, Schuster, and Brandon Ayuk is precipitous. So I love T Higgins. I want to get to Jamar Chase. And if I don't get McCaffrey, I'll be able to get to Jamar Chase pretty easily. So despite the fact I am going into this, assuming that Mahomes is fully healthy and I want to be heavy on Mahomes, I'm higher on both Jamar Chase and T Higgins than any Cheese pass catcher, including Travis Kelsey. Stupid as that sounds. Where do you settle in on those two guys? Chase and Higgins. Yeah. And then Tapa Boyd and Hurst as well. Yeah. So in the playoffs, this team's like gotten, I mean, this team's been fairly concentrated with their routes. The targets don't always follow necessarily, but like Chase is at 97% of the routes. Higgins at 90%. Tyler Boyd at 93%. I think he could do a lot worse on a two-game slate than a player who's on the field in what game, presumably for like for us, we think is the higher scoring game. Hayden Hurst, 74%, which is more than viable for a tight end tied to probably like the best pure quarterback play from like a passing standpoint this week. If you have questions about Mahomes. So like, I don't really, I think that all four in play, this is a big reason why I like this game more than I like the first game. For me, I'm going to prioritize that the contrarian in me says I want to prioritize Jamar Chase over Christian McCaffrey regardless. I don't think I'll get too scared to do that in as many lineups as I would like, but Chase with his workload right now is pretty phenomenal. 14 weighted targets, like if you give proper context to a downfield target and a red zone target, 14 weighted targets per game in the playoffs up from 10, just raw targets. Like it's a really, really good workload. We know how good he is. And in the snow, they were throwing him like, they're throwing him the ball, throwing some like tight, tight targets in the end zone, despite a flurry. So it's clear that they trust him and they're not going to go out this season without. So like, whether they score and play from ahead, Chase is going to do that. If they fall behind, it's kind of a misnomer that you want to chase volume. There's no way that like Jamar Chase doesn't see eight targets on the low end. I'm sure that'll haunt me. Do you think that T is a trap at 67 or no? What, what makes you think he would be a good play? Let's say, let's start there. Ceiling. Ceiling. In the games where they've had Chase, Higgins, and Hearst and Boyd all healthy in Mixon, I have Mixon in there too. In the games that everyone healthy, Higgins, 21% target share, 29% deep and 13.5% inside the red zone. That's a good role. And they've had Jamar Chase for all those games. I think they are prioritizing Jamar Chase in the playoffs. I think they should prioritize Jamar Chase in the playoffs, but scale of one to 10, how surprised am I, if T Higgins goes for 100 yards on Sunday? Two. Not surprised at all. That's why I think he's a good play still. Yeah, I think he's a good play too. That was like not a trick. It was just more like, let's clarify what it is that we're seeing here. Right. Right. Frankly, one of the things I tried to do a better job of this year was tracking like when guys were down. He hasn't scored in four games. I did a trend earlier this year about what that means. It's going to lower the salary. It's just been a minute since we saw a T game that does not mean that it will, it's not due necessarily, but that doesn't mean that his new baseline is under 10 fandal points, which is where he's been for, well, like four straight games or so. So I mean, I'm in on T, love the salary. I might end up honestly having as much T Higgins as anybody else this week, just because of the salary being what it is. Yeah. With the way salaries break down a wide receiver, I think that that could be me too. And this should be obvious, but I have no opposition to Perry and Chase and Higgins in the same lineup. Don't care. That's totally fine. What about between Tyler Boyd and Hayden Hearst? If you've got Joe Burrow and you want to have a lower salary piece in this game, I prefer Hearst because he feels tight ends. He actually has a higher target share than Boyd in the aforementioned sample with everyone healthy. Hearst is at 14% Boyd, 13.7% Hearst, 19% Red Zone Share, Boyd 11%. So I actually prefer Hearst over Boyd in large part because he feels tight ends, but Boyd will be less rostered this week than Hearst after the two touchdown game. So what's your thoughts on those two guys? Yeah, some really strange like tight end splits in terms of defense for this week. Like the, the Chiefs is out of nine touchdowns to, to tight ends, the 49ers, despite the black hole of five, and then the other two teams have led up three, but there's been a lot of end zone targets against the Chiefs and the 49ers specifically. So there's some weird stuff, but for me, Hearst makes a lot of sense because he does feel that void. It tight, well, that's actually not true. There's not a void at tight end. There is a very scary, very scary name. Supernova tight end. But you're probably not playing Kelsy in every lineup. If you are good on you, I won't, I would never fight anyone on that. But yeah, Hearst is just a natural pivot away from three tight ends who do have a hundred yard multiple touchdown upside as someone who recommended like Dallas Goddard, not over Kelsy, like in a vacuum, but as someone who was a great pivot from Kelsy, I was watching closely, he could have scored multiple times last week. So like you are kind of going to risk getting exposed because there's three slight changing tight ends, but I think I would lean Hearst over void because there's the touchdown equity tied to this and I like Tyler Boyd. I think he's like a fine player, but I don't think he's got two touchdown upside. Hearst seems to have that. Yeah, I'd agree with that as well. Weirdly, Boyd's touchdown odds at Vandal Sportsbook are shorter than Hearst's. I just saw that the money line on the cheese got back to 116, which is where I took it and I no longer feel like a moron. Neutral CLV, baby. Do not ignore the route that it took to get there. Ignore that I got a bad number. Ignore it. You've been transfixed. You will ignore Jim's bad bets, but now it's no longer a bad bet. Okay. Anyway, let's talk about the cheese pass catchers here. You could not pay me to roster Juju Smith Schuster at 61. I know it's a two game slate. I don't want it. Cadarius Tony's snap rate sucks. He ran 12 routes last week, but it's very clear that when he is out there, he is going to get the football. I would also say that Miko Harbin at 55, if he gets a full practice in by Friday, could have a similar thought process where they've got these Dutty Dudes, then he playmakers and Tony and Harbin get that job done. So I had way too much Tony last week. It was a mistake given that his role did not increase, but I'm going to make that same mistake again. And I will also do with Miko Harbin. I would say I prefer Tony and Harbin over Juju Smith Schuster. I prefer them over Marquez Valdez Scanlon, despite his touchdown last week. I'm a moron. You can tell me that, but like how big of a moron am I? It's just funny because podcasting with you has its own intricacies. I'm sure podcasting with me is not fun either, but sometimes you'll have a stand on something and I'm like, well, clearly I'm the moron because I'm not seeing a certain thing. And so then I start to believe it. And this is not- Did I talk you into Tony last week? Yeah, I mean, sorry. But you make the right points where when he's on the field, he's getting work, which is very important. His opportunity for snap rate is really strong. He's like a true wide receiver, one for this team. But in the second half, he did get targeted four times with Kelsey at six. Nobody else had more than two. So I'm not against Tony. I'm just not as high on him as you. If you were, let's do a Tony scale. You were at 10 last week, full Tony. Where are you this week? Four, Max. I can't find the four. It's a combination of what happened last week with those 12 routes and Nikol Harbin being back. Because I don't know who did it back most. I have no idea what this team looks like with Nikol at Harbin Healthy and Kidarius Tony Healthy. I have no idea. I have no idea. And I need to account for that. So if I am at four Tonys at a 10 on Kidarius Tony, I am at three and a half Tonys on Nikol Harbin. I think both of those guys have a path to a 20 point game that might sound ambitious, but I think both of those guys have a path, a singular path to a 20 point game. I'm not sure if Juju does right now. So I think to me, I need to put a lid on my exposure to both, but I can put a lid on my exposure to both by cutting my, like, okay, I have a Tony lineup here. I'll do a Harbin lineup next. I want to make sure I don't have one of them in every lineup because they could both be bad. But I think that I think both guys have a path to a ceiling. I think Tony's floor is still decent because of the... Who are you? I know. Sorry. It's different than a two game slate. You're right. You're right. But like, I think he'll get work no matter what because he's too talented not to. And that's a very bad pitch. It's a pitch that's led people astray many times, but he's going to... $5,600. He's not $7,000. I hate that argument. I mean... No, I get it. So like, if you look at just routes from last week... It's barely plural when you say routes with Tony. He was 12. I have 11. Oh, wow. Even worse. Good. So, Juju and Kelsey at 87%. Marquez Vaudez Scanlon, 65%. Jerick, 57%. Justin Watson, your boy, 49%. He was my boy for like one game with Tampa Bay like three years ago. Does that count? No, a gray. Your boy, 46%. No, a gray is my boy. I will take that. So like, you know, I complain sometimes about like teams that have one viable like past catcher. And I say it's too hard to stack this game because I have one route. The Chiefs have just sort of become over the years. Like, you know, when it was when it was Tyree Kill and Travis Kelsey, it was like, what's one of those two? But now it's basically Kelsey and then everyone else has spread out to the point that nobody's getting elevated workloads aside from Kelsey. And so it's really hard unless you are just rolling. Like, I wouldn't fault anyone for building a lineup that they like, that has one of these like tertiary guys from the Chiefs and duplicating that and then subbing in someone else. That I understand. Other than that, like building around these guys specifically, I have a hard time wrapping my head around. So... Yeah, they are not priorities for me. My preference is to stay at T and hire a wide receiver. And I can do that with McCaffrey. It's not easy, but you can't use Kelsey. But what I had was I was Burrow, T, Debo. I had both Sanders and Pacheco in there. I had... Was it the Bengals defense? I don't know, something. And then if you put McCaffrey in at running back, you've got 71 left for a wide receiver. So you could go... I don't know. You have to reconfigure a bit. But like, you can have a lineup with McCaffrey without using a lower salaried wide receiver. I almost said scrubbed, but I refused to call. Kaderis, Tony, and Miko Harbin scrubs without using one of them. But who was the tight end in that lineup? Hurst. So yeah. So I think the most obvious build route is like Burrow or Mahomes. The tier two receivers take the savings with like Hurst. So it's basically like Burrow or Mahomes, and then the tier two receivers, and then take your pick between like Kelsey and all value backs or like McCaffrey and Hurst. So I think that alone is what makes me want to, ultimately at the end of the day, like if I was building one lineup with a combination of good process, but also being different, it would be to build around like Jamar Chase and Travis Kelsey. Sure. Because people aren't going to do that by default necessarily. If you do that, you need a value wide receiver. Who would be your pick among the guys? Who's your favorite? I think it would depend on what the rest of the lineup looked like. In that case, I'd probably be playing Burrow. So I might go Tyler Boyd. Okay. I don't think Tyler Boyd's Dusty is going to be running routes. And if I like that game. So I think like all of this talking for an hour about two games, it's not really overkill because there's a lot to talk about when one game theory comes into play. I think going out of my way to prioritize Jamar Chase is looking very fun and not as obvious as some other routes. Because Debo and Tee are great plays at salary. That's not to say I wouldn't play Debo or Tee in that same lineup, but like Chase and Kelsey, I guess specifically seem like guys I would like to prioritize. I want to look quick to see some projected roster rates. Obviously it's Thursday and things will change based on the calf raise health and stuff like that. But as of right now, Chase is around 48% projected roster rate for the two game slates. McCaffrey also 48%. What's Kelsey then? Travis Kelsey is 33%. So maybe just Kelsey. Like look, the range of outcomes for a running back versus a receiver versus a tight end news really like a receiver. Those are all very different processes to figure out what the, we'll say floor. Yeah, it's more likely if Christian McCaffrey swole these scores more points than Travis Kelsey and Jamar Chase. But there's a big difference between one iteration of a game and what happens in that game. So maybe Kelsey, maybe he's the real leverage play here. Does having Debo at 37% and Tee at 30% with Jamar at 47% dissuade you from making Jamar Chase the priority? I think you're right. I don't think that's a big enough gap. No, I think you're right. Yeah. You just kind of decide which value play you want to use. And there are enough here between the lower salary backs. I think that Boyd is fine. I think that Harbin and Tony have passed the upside. MBS is a person. Juwan Jennings is someone viable at 49. So like you've got guys you have to use, but you have to like, you have to use one of them there. And that's fine. So I think this goes back maybe to put a bow on everything from the start, like the Slade overview is taking stands like, look, you can build 20 lineups that have five of each quarterback and like five, like five of each of the four tight ends and like mix it up and do all that odds are you might have a lineup or two that's like relevant. But the other ones by nature will not be good. Like I think taking a stand with like, look, I think Jomar Chase is going to get like 15 targets and be very good because he's Jomar Chase. I think Travis Kelsey is the only pass catcher that Patrick Mahomes trusts to throw the ball to. Like, I think this stack hits and so I'm going to round up my lineup with the rest of the core plays and then I'm going to have some value like that I need to fill and then you kind of just rotate a few. And so yeah, you're really exposed to Jomar Chase and Travis Kelsey. And if they don't have a good, good day, then sure, it's not a great weekend for you. But if you just spread that all out over all your lineups, it's going to be the same, like, sort of the same result. You might feel a little bit better because you have exposure to everyone, but at least that's how I look at it. So yeah, I mean, everyone has their own process. But I think that the process of using everyone is probably flawed. So the process of loading a bunch of Jomar Chase, I think is defensible. So I think the other, the counterpoint would be the one situation where it's okay to use everyone else. If you are going hard at assumption lineups, like if you assume, sure, yeah, like, if you assume in this script, and that script leads you to having different players in a different script, fine, you know, go that way. So it's a bit different in that regard. But outside of other than that, I think that, you know, having Boston Scott to have Boston Scott, that's flawed or having Brock, Brock Purdy to stab Brock Purdy is flawed. So like, you could say, all right, I think that Brock Purdy throws for, you know, 300 multiple touchdowns. His, his, like his Fando output is somewhat similar to what the other quarterbacks, you know, produce. And that, you know, the, the, the Bangles in Chiefs game is not so good. But like, even if you're building like, let's say 20 lineups, therefore you have five of each, your Brock, your five Brock Purdy lineups might hit. But like, if you go with Jamar Chase in one, T Higgins in, in one, like Ajay Brown in one, like, that's when think the mathematically things get squeezed. And so you, if you're going to say, I think Brock Purdy is good, you might want 10 or 20 of your chances to try to hit the right combo. So like, you know, they're not doing that Brock Purdy though, to be clear. Right. But again, I think that Brock Purdy is kind of fascinating from a game theory standpoint, because there are realities. Once, you know, things, once kickoff hits and the realities just start to filter into the, the multitudes, like there's, there are somewhere Brock Purdy's the QB one on this slate. Sure. Good luck. I'll clip this for you and put it on Twitter when he does. So yeah, just me talking about like multiple realities. But I think ultimately I'm feeling really good about Joe Burrow and Patrick Mahomes. I think that's kind of the takeaway. Yeah. Takeaway for me is I'm going to be hiding Mahomes assuming he's healthy. I'm going to be hiding McCaffrey assuming he's healthy. If he gets in the full practice by Friday, I'll build my lineups based around those assumptions and see where that leads me. Any final thoughts for you Brandon, before we close up for this two game sleep? Man, I got into like multiple realities. Parallel universe talks and stuff. I think, I think I've said all I had to say, but this is basically been a one hour and 12 minute trailer for Ant-Man, Quantum Mania. So I don't know what that is. You're welcome, Disney, for that. And we'll see how things play out on Sunday. What? Actually, the one, the one thing I would say is like, I don't know if we talked enough about like AJ Brown. Like we talked about him, but he's like kind of lingering below the surface. He could be a very, very fun play. Might be. Maybe he is. Maybe he's not. I'm going to play, I'm going to play Chase and AJ Brown lineups. Oh yeah, that's fine. I like that. Okay. That is all that we have here for today. We will have a single game helper for the Super Bowl coming up week of, don't know what day. Don't want to decide right now. We'll figure that out later on. But the way to get that as it's posted is by subscribing to the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed. No guesswork there. It'll pop into your podcast feed as it is posted. So just search for the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed wherever you get your podcast to get NBA, PGA, UFC, NFL all in the same place wherever you get your podcast. Brandon, if people have questions for you on Twitter, where can they find you there? I'm on Twitter at Goodwill13, G-D-U-L-A-1-3. And I am on Twitter at Jim Sonnis, J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S. You can also follow the FanDuel Podcast Network at FanDuel Podcast. I want to thank you all for tuning in for today. Good luck to you with your conference championship lineups. We'll talk to you once again in two weeks before Super Bowl, whatever number this is, we'll talk to you then. This has been Heat Check Fantasy Podcast powered by Number Fire.