 The theme of the week 12 main slate for DFS was pain. And I should say the week 12 in general, not just the main slate, because Thanksgiving was a lot of the same as well. I mean, pain from a literal perspective, a lot of really annoying injuries for these players, you know, is they get dinged up constantly, which I'm sure is frustrating for them. A lot of guys who are very popular for daily fantasy getting injured as well, which is less than they can serve, but still a thing worth noting for us. And that leads to pain in our bank accounts. A lot of guys we were on and got hurt during this week. So we're gonna break down the implications of injuries, what that means going forward, what to do with potential replacements and much more. Welcome on into the Heat Check Fantasy podcast powered by Number Fire. That's right here on the FanDuel Podcast Network and NumberFire.com. My name is Jim Sonnis. I am a senior writer and analyst for NumberFire.com. Join here as always by Brandon Gedula. He is the managing editor of NumberFire.com. Brandon week 12 is mostly in the books. How are you doing today? Oh boy, I could be better. I'll say that much. Obviously the injuries to, you know, more NFL players than we're gonna discuss because we're talking about the primarily fantasy relevant players. It's always bad. So it's hard to like relate how I'm feeling compared to that stuff. And I wanna keep that in perspective, but I lock buttoned Tom Brady this week. We discussed potentially doing that on Thursday's show. That's where I wound up the Buccaneer scored 38 points. Tom Brady, not nearly 38, 12.24 on FanDuel. One of the lowest outputs since 2000 of any quarterback who played snaps on a team that put up 38 points. So I mean, I think the process was probably there, just the touchdowns didn't go his favor, but that is the path to busting for these past only quarterbacks that you and I are generally wary about. We just didn't have a whole lot of rushing quarterbacks to go for this week. Yeah. So I had like, I had a lot of Leonard Vornette, but a lot of it was tied to Tom Brady because when I had Brady, I had Evans or Godwin. And those were high salary guys with Michael Pittman for the most part. And I needed lower salary backs to make things easier. And Vornette was a way to do so. And I thought, okay, you know, like they're not going to double dip too much, which they did get one touchdown double dipping. But like, you know, Vornette is $7,100 should have a good day. So like that negated the Vornette big days. I had a decent amount of Joe Mixon, even in like some of the high dollar stuff, but it got negated by Tom Brady and Mike Evans. So my mistake erasers were there, but they couldn't erase the mistakes because the mistakes were too great and a lot of points. And I think that was, you know, it definitely happens. The Christian McCaffrey stuff, that was, you know, that happened, Miles Sanders happened, Dalvin Cook got banged up late in that game. And those were all core plays for me after we lost, A.J. Dillon is beating like a, you know, key focal point if we didn't have Jeff Wilson as being key focal point. So it followed me towards more, Miles Sanders, it did follow me towards more Vornette, I guess, which is good. But either way, why would it be a pretty disappointing slate Thanksgiving the same for me as well? How did Thanksgiving go for you? I just extremely forgettable. I mean, it's the slate that I always know is, look, I can put in a lot of prep for it and I do and I look forward to it and I really think differently. And we go over things like optimal trends in three game slates. And, you know, that longterm should help us make better lineups, but that's not a guarantee to have great lineups on a three game slate just because things can go pretty crazy. So, I mean, it could have been, I mean, that really wasn't that close, I guess. I went pretty heavy Tony Jones and I also played him in season long spots, which really burned me. I went pretty heavy DeAndre Swift. Once we knew Jared Goff was starting, I went pretty heavy on Darren Waller. A lot of fun. Really, well a lot of manny too, but that wasn't an injury, that was just a bad choice on my part. So, yeah, we're ready to move on to week 13, which we will do here in just a bit. But first, FanDuel Sunday Million is now posted for week number 13. It is a $1.6 million prize pool, first place taking home $300,000. All you gotta do, set up FanDuel today, click on the NFL Sunday Million contest, draft your line of players, sit back and enjoy Sunday NFL football. Go to FanDuel.com today to participate in the FanDuel Sunday Million eligibility restrictions apply. Go to FanDuel.com or download the FanDuel app for more details. And are we 12 headliner, of course, is those running back injuries? Because there were a lot of them. And it doesn't seem like a lot of them are like super, super long term things, but they do seem like things that could open up some stuff heading into week number 13. Let's start things off here with Christian McCaffrey, probably the biggest unknown, I would say, as far as his timeline right now. McCaffrey was in a walking boots after Sunday's game when he turned his ankle in the first half. He did play a snap in the second half, but he was out after that. Amir Abdulla played half the snaps to the full game, but just two carries and six targets. Shuba Hubbard may have played more, had that game been more competitive, but I think it's pretty clear recently that Amir Abdulla is definitely the passing game back with them McCaffrey and probably gonna take away some from Shuba in early downs too. So are we just gonna avoid this backfield if McCaffrey misses time? Yeah, I don't really see a whole lot of interest in this offense anyway, especially with how Kim Newton played the 5.8 passer rating. And I wasn't like totally sold on Kim. I did a trend on him leading into the week. And I saw that there was enough there. He had basically league average passing efficiency. That completely went away. So I'm not gonna overreact and say like, oh no, he's the worst passer in football, anything like that. I think he was like, what, five for 22? Something crazy with his completions, but I'm not gonna jump off entirely if McCaffrey were there, but without McCaffrey, I don't really see that there's enough juice to wanna go to anyone in this offense. Yeah, and it stinks because like there are like fun, like DJ Moore is a fun player in this offense. Cam is a fun player, but you know, if there's no McCaffrey to turn to, Cam I think can still have like a 25 point fan duel game, but you need a lot of stuff to go right. He had 27 last week, so like, you know, obviously he can do that, but probably not the right spot to do it versus a Miami defense that we'll get after the quarterback. It's really bad offense line there on buy this week, which may help things for McCaffrey, but we'll see where they're at after that. Dalvin Cook was carted off in the third quarter due to what's reported as being a dislocated shoulder. If we look at after Dalvin left, Alexander Madsen had 16 snaps. He had four carries and three targets. Kenny and Wang Wu had a one snap and one carry. Now the tough dynamic here is we've seen the Vikings with no, with no Dalvin in the past. And Madison was disgusting. He had 26 carries per game, 7.5 targets per game, 162 yards per game, but Kenny and Wang Wu was on IR for both those games. And Mike Zimmer said after the game, they want to get a more run at running back, which is something I thought would happen previously when we talked about this and passing with Dalvin stuff. So I think that to me, Brandon, I would view Madison as like a downgraded version of what he was before, which is still a very viable fantasy running back, but I'm not expecting like 40 adjusted opportunities or so per game. I think that bumping him down a decent amount is fair. Where are you at with at Madison if we assumed Dalvin Cook missed his time? Yeah, I mean, I'm with you where we have reasons to believe that his workload wouldn't be just 100% of this backfield, but I'm curious, because you had this take before with Madison, because I think we had a Dalvin Cook scare that he might miss a game. What was your thought on the breakdown of the post-Dalvin injury? Like why did Madison get so much work there? Like what are you thinking? Because I think you and I think a little bit differently about some. Right, so the thought process would be if they knew Dalvin was gonna miss time, they would get in Wang Wu more practice reps at running back, which I'm guessing has probably not been happening, just because like they have Dalvin, why bother? So like that's kind of my thought process is I do value that practice time, value preparation. It's kind of like we had this conversation a bit too with James Conner, you know, Benjamin, where when Chase Edmonds got hurts, they didn't have a chance to get you know, Benjamin, reps and practice, they didn't really use them during that game. And in that instance, James Conner still had a great role. And I think that Madison could have that here, but that's in the back of my mind because and Wang Wu has speed that Madison doesn't. And that's why I think it's a different dynamic. So I would still, like if I were thinking of a comp for Madison's workload, what I would expect from him, you know, if Dalvin can't go, it's probably like a Joe Nixon type role, which is a very valuable role, but I'm not expecting a, I don't know, like D'Angelo Williams back in the day when Levy on Bell was outside of parole, where he gets every single chance he possibly can. So still a very good role, just not quite what it was. Yeah, I got you. I just wanted you to kind of to clarify just because I think it was, it's a worthwhile thought exercise to like explain why, hey, Madison had so much work, you know, what's going to be different. And I agree with you. Now we'll say that they play the Lions next week. So if Dalvin's back, we're going to play Dalvin. Yep. If not, I still think that there's going to be some interest in this backfield unless you think it's a full on committee. So name that salary for Alexander Madison against the Lions in weeks 13, 13. So my projected workload for him against the Lions would be worthy of like an $8,300 salary. That's what I would say. Okay. So that's higher than I would have expected from you. I would have said about like 79 or so. Okay. Just in that range. He is 87. So they are on it. I'm like, he's $700 left in Joe Mixon. Joe Mixon is a comment for me. If I'm like, you know, I'll take discount Mixon, although I think Mixon's worth that. This is 94. Yeah. Well, he's sorry. I didn't mean to look ahead, but he's facing the Chargers. I think that's a decently big part of it. Yeah. I mean, it's impossible to pull up the slate and not see anything. Yeah. I think Jonathan Taylor's 10-5 against the Texans. As he should be. Oh, you're wearing a Texans shirt. Is that because of Chris Conley or what is that? It's because it was a TJ Maxx for like $3. Okay. I have a Santonio Holmes jersey that I got for $10 for the same reason. So we're similar shoppers, which is disconcerting. Anyway, I think the 87 is like a fair number for him. It's high enough though, where I'm not saying lock button type situation. Like that is, you need to actually think about it 87. Right? Yeah. I think that's actually a really great like preventative salary for Madison. I agree. The Cowboys may consider sitting Zeke Elliott to do his knee injury. Apparently they have not approached him about this. Just reading about this now. They have not approached him about it yet, but it's something we should at least discuss. Tony Pollard had 10 carries on Thursday and added four targets. Zeke still got usage. Just didn't do a lot with it. The Cowboys play the Saints on Thursday night. We know how to handle this backfield. Actually, we don't probably know how to handle it if he plays because like it's kind of weird right now, but how would you view Pollard as Zeke where to sit? Like is this, how high is the ceiling here? Well, okay. So two things. I kind of saw that they would just kind of scale back as workload for Zeke. Okay. I'm not necessarily sit him outright, which they could do of course, but I think that if Zeke is active, he's going to play some, but definitely not his full allotment. So I think that makes Zeke untouchable because even if he wants to play, if they don't put him on the field, he's not going to get fantasy points, which also kind of just speaks to like, they sometimes, like Tony Pollard might, people a lot of people think he's more talented, but if he's not on the field, it doesn't matter. So, so I would say without Zeke, Pollard would be, I mean, we've seen him be pretty unleashed. He looks phenomenal. If he were on the main slate, I would say like 9,000. Yeah. I agree. I think that's kind of like the role he would have. If we get him with like a limited Zeke, then Pollard, I still think it's worth like 75 or so because the way he gets touches is so valuable because it's not like just handoffs. It's like creative handoffs, creative targets, and there's a lot of juice in those. So it's not because, I mean, it is because he's talented, but it's also because they use him in fun ways. So I would say 75 or so is like where I'd be thinking if Zeke were to be like scale back, I think is where I'd kind of land there with Pollard. Realistically. Yeah, I mean, it's a really good situation though for Pollard to be and kind of thankfully we'll get some clarity on a non main slate, at least for us, but. Right. The question is, do they scale back Zeke because it's a shorter week and then when they had the long week, they're scaling back up. I don't know, it's a headache. Hopefully like just let him rest. Like you've got good backups. Just like lean on them for a bit, let them heal up, but you know, whatever. DeAndre Swift banged his shoulder against the Bears and is considered day to day. Jamal Williams had a 67% snap rates and that was with Swift playing about 20%. So like basically Jamal had everything. 15 carries and five targets for 83 yards. It is a very bad team, but they showed they will lean on him. So hypothetically, if DeAndre Swift misses Minnesota game, how are you viewing Jamal Williams there? Okay, so we've seen Swift without Williams and Swift was basically just a full on feature back. Williams probably would get a similar workload, but not be quite as explosive. This offense is not particularly good. Their implied team total next week is 20.25. Just higher than I would have expected. It is, 47 and a half point total, seven points spread. They are at home, so that's helping a bit. I think the question is, where would you put Swift and then scale it back from there within this matchup? I think that's fair. So I probably put Swift at like, just because the offense, I can never go super high on him. He's probably close with that workload of like 8,000. So Williams maybe like 75, 76. That's exactly what I always said on both. Personally, I think that that's correct. So let's check out here. For that Minnesota Detroit game, Jamal is 65 and DeAndre Swift is 72. Okay. So we're gonna be talking about this backfield one way or another, I think. Yeah, if it's Swift, we'll talk about him. If it's no Swift, we'll talk about Williams. Cause like we know Dan Campbell wants to run. We know they're on 10 days rest. We know the Vikings rush defense has lost like 16 different guys past week or so. I also kind of think they've looked better offensively with Josh Reynolds. I know it's like a one game sample with him in golf, but golf sufficiency numbers actually weren't bad on Thanksgiving. So like maybe Josh Reynolds helps lift them a bit. I think we're gonna talk about the Lions on Thursday and I'm a little bit, I'm not talking about Reynolds. I felt a trend coming. I don't want to. I don't wanna. But I mean, honestly though, at this point, like we're gonna talk about the three bookmaker, three games in the bookmaker section. So that's like six of the best offenses on the slate. Yeah, your palm. And then we're, it's an 11 game main slate. Two, four. One of the highest totals on the slate is Las Vegas versus Washington and I wanna vomit. Thanks. Yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, we're gonna be talking about, well, I mean, speaking of this game, 11 games on the main slate, this one's fifth and over under 47 and a half. Oh boy. We're gonna be talking about Lions on Thursday. What could go wrong? Speaking of what could go wrong, me using a lot of Miles Sanders. In this one, like he looked good, but he tweaked his ankle against the Giants. You know, he tried to come back in, he came back in for like a play, but mostly Boston Scott. Then Boston Scott lost a fumble on like a key drive and Kenneth Gainwell finally played. All it took was two injuries and a key fumble Kenneth Gainwell got snaps in the final drive. Overall, Boston Scott had a 51% snap rate, 15 carries and three targets. Gainwell had four targets in that game. Basically, I think play just the final drive, but Sanders just came off IR, retweaked that ankle. I would not be shocked if he misses more time. We don't know the timeline on Howard, doesn't seem like he was close to playing this week. So if we don't have Sanders and don't have Howard, how are you viewing this backfield? So that would leave it to Scott and Gainwell. That's a better situation than with what Miles Sanders really had entering this week. So where would I put Sanders and then maybe bump it up for Scott? Because I think Boston Scott's a really good running back. So they're playing the Jets. They're on the road, seven point favorites. I'd probably put them in the 65 range too. Yeah, I think that's appropriate because I think that there's a chance with that late fumble they decide to give Gainwell more run. I wouldn't expect that, but it's kind of like the NWANGWU stuff where it's in the back of your mind where it's a possibility. Do you think that's right? 65, yeah. He's 66. I almost said 66, but I think there's still question marks within this offense. Yeah, you think? Yeah, so I think if we get no Swift and no Miles Sanders within the matchup, especially for Scott, a lot of the optimizer lineups are gonna have Scott Jamal Williams as sort of core plays. Of course it's between those two. I mean, workload wise, I prefer Jamal Williams. I do too. And I think that matters a lot. Adjusting for the offenses, even with that, I still think I prefer Jamal Williams because the path for Jamal Williams to be in a 50-50 time share seems almost zero for Boston Scott. He could be just playing back up to Kenneth Gamel for all we know. Kind of surprised my numbers don't like the Jets more in that game. Anyway, we'll check back on that later. That was a really, I was excited for that game, that Giants Eagles game. It was a nightmare. Like it's just a nightmare to watch. That was bad, terrible across the board. We'll see if things change once I get the updated numbers in there from this week. Okay, so those are the key running back injuries for this week. Again, thankfully seems like most of them are more short-term things. We'll check back on those later on. Other injuries to discuss here is moving to the injury section. Debo Samuel, my beautiful son, left early with a groin injury. He sounds like he's more day-to-day-ish. He said he didn't think it was a big concern. He's dealt with the groin injury pretty much all year and he said, hey, he felt the tightening up and called out of the game. So maybe he doesn't miss time, but like there is a chance that he does. Other key headline for this 49er scene that Eli Mitchell had eight of nine carries after Debo left. He had six targets total for the entire game, which is absurd. So two questions. First, if Debo misses time, we'll just start with this one first. How does it impact your view of the rest of this offense? So this is one where, and because it's the first one of the show, here's the difference between like NBA DFS and NFL DFS. There's gonna be more opportunity for guys like Brandon I.U., George Kittle, Eli Mitchell without Debo Samuel, but the offensive efficiency is going to go down a lot. However, we still have George Kittle. We still have Brandon I.U. who's very clearly a good NFL wide receiver, Eli Mitchell kind of moving the needle as a running back. So while this would downgrade the offense, I do not think that it turns them into even close to cross-off territory or really even like concerned territory. Like they have their own issues with how they want to run the ball. So it's a volume issue for I.U. can Kittle for me primarily, but that should actually get better market share-wise. So I'm kind of good there. So my impact of the offense is kind of a wash to some degree because the volume should help overcome the efficiency concerns for the only guys that we would really be interested in. And as far as Mitchell goes, really, really promising usage, his main concern was they just didn't throw him the ball. I think he threw his first four starts. He had four targets, two games with no targets. So this is really, really good usage. And coming through that, like with that finger injury, there were reports that he couldn't really hold the ball and then they sort of figure out a solution and then they just like featured him. So I think that it's kind of wheels up for Eli Mitchell too. Would that be, how much would Michael Hasty playing impact that for you? Cause I like, I honestly have seen nothing of that Hasty that says Hasty would back soon, but like, so he might not play. They showed previously they wanted to use Hasty as a passing game back, but honestly like, I think they liked Mitchell enough where they might consider just using in the passing game anyway. I don't know, that's just reading into it. I don't want to try to read Kyle Shanahan's brain because that is a dangerous place to be. Yeah, so I don't want to try to assume that Eli Mitchell holds on to passing usage. I would rather approach it and say, hey, he's probably going to lose a lot of these targets, but he should still have the heavy majority of carries and a very, very run heavy offense. And a good rushing offense. Like they're juicy carries. We talked about that before someone else like, but like they're like Pollard, but they're not like three yards in a cloud of dust. There are six yards and maybe a linebacker gets a hand on you. Yeah, so I would basically, if we get Hasty back, account for that where I'm saying, okay, what would I, how would I roster? How would I view Eli Mitchell if he loses all the passing game work? And if I'm still cool with the salary, I'll be there. If I need to sell myself on, he's got to have this passing game work for me to want to play him, then I'm probably going to back off if we get Hasty back. So hypothetically, no Hasty. Where are we at on Eli Mitchell next week, salary wise? 79. I'll also say eight, 76. Not bad. Not bad. I think that 76 is low enough where if Hasty plays, I'm still going to be in on Mitchell. I would lower exposure stuff because like it's the path to fit. There's one more path to failure there, but like I'd still feel pretty good at 76. Pretty good. I would not feel great, feel pretty good. Yeah. And like if I look at a stat line or like a lengthy multiple per game average and I see like 18 carries, one target, I'm like, that's not really enough for me, but within this offense and with Eli Mitchell, it's a bit different. It's also not 18, it's 27 and 27 the past two games. Yeah. But like, I'm not going to project anyone for 27 carries in a game. You can project Ebo for that apparently. Yeah, that's true. Oh yeah. If we lose Ebo too, I mean the ceiling is the roof with Eli Mitchell's carries. Wheels up. I hope Ebo plays. I want that for sure. But Eli Mitchell, he's a fun player getting fun usage and I like that. What about IU can kiddle for you? I think that what you said was correct where it's like close to a wash, I would say a slight upgrade. So I think the kiddle is 7,000. That's what I would say. He is 63 though. Yeah. Okay. I know he didn't do much this week, but IU could 7,000, that's also fair. I think that IU maybe not like a cash game type play just because they are so committed to the run, but he'd be a consideration at least, right? I think so with pretty nearly guaranteed volume. Kiddle 50, 34 and 13 yards is past three on seven, four and two targets. He's been boosted by touchdowns, but we know that right before that he had a hundred yard game, 92. I don't worry about yardage upside with George Kittle. Nor should we. Darren Waller heard his knee against the Cowboys, sounded like he may have avoided any major injuries. It is possibly this is time. Hunter Renfrow got some downfield targets. Like Derek Carl lobbed it long and I saw Renfrow and I was like, oh no. So I didn't have enough of Thanksgiving or any. Hunter Renfrow tied a season high with nine targets. Two of those were deep. Zay Jones had seven targets while Foster Moreau had five. So I think Waller is a piece where we would downgrade the offense. Like you said with, you know, talking about this in terms of like efficiency overall, I would downgrade the offense with no Waller, but how would it impact your view of Renfrow, Jones? I guess hypothetically Deshaun Jackson, Foster Moreau if Waller can't play. I'd be, this is a big injury for me on a team where I really needed to convince myself for reasons to like them. I talked a few times about Derek Carl's efficiency and ability to move the ball without Henry Ruggs. Just kind of being problematic. You take Darren Waller off the field, even though they don't always throw him the ball for whatever reason. I think the one takeaway here, pass catcher-wise because Josh Jacobs is a bit of a different conversation, would just be that Hunter Renfrow, if the salary is below like 68, I think he would be moving into like 10 plus target cash game, like if he's 66, I can kind of put him into a cash game lineup and feel pretty safe. He's 64. Like that. I know we don't, I know we have our concerns, but within that range of receiver, nobody has anything close to a floor. And receivers don't really have floors, but he would almost guaranteed to have a floor. Yeah, and they finally got some downfield looks, which is like my one concern of them. So like, if I can't cling to that, if I can't cling to yardage upside, what do I have to like talk myself out of it? He's 64, so I don't know. And it's at Washington. Yeah, it's a high total tight spread. I don't want to do it, but I'm gonna have to, I think. Hopefully I can talk myself out of it by Thursday, but you know. Yeah, maybe, okay, yeah, maybe with the salary scroll one cover. I hope so. A bounce of full 6,000 range of receiver, which has never been the case all season. Please be the case. Please be the case. Like put Tyler Lockett at 58 or something stupid like that. Like just save me, save me from this. Dan Arnold, speaking of, should have saved me. Dan Arnold left after five snaps because of knee injury. He is someone I actually did use this week, didn't really want to, but like I needed salary savings to get to Christian McCaffrey. So I bumped down to Arnold and a couple lineups from Friar Mewth. James LaShawnessy played 82% of the snaps. He had five targets. LaViscus and all did lead with nine targets, but shocker, shocker, shocker, 33 yards in those nine targets. He was out snapped by LaQuon Treadwell, 61-52. LaQuon Treadwell had eight targets. Tavon Austin had a touchdown. What year is this? Marvin Jones had seven targets for 43 yards, like the Island of Misfit Toys. There have been three games this year where a Jaguar had at least 80 receiving yards. So can we just cross this entire team off now? I had like, I had a couple of shares of Marv too. I had a couple of shares of Arnold because like, hey, the matchup's good. Nope, it wasn't. Yeah, so this is like the team I keep looking at every single week. It's like, okay, there's some value here. Like there's gotta be some value and there's never results. We talk about Marvin Jones every now and then. Dan Ardo I think was still a good process play with his really strong market share. I cannot play LaViscus and all. I think I need to see like three years of data on Chanel doing some stuff where I would really change my tune. James O'Shaughnessy is his salary's 4,500. So that's at least punt level noteworthy. No. I mean, come on. No. Well, I don't know what- Is it the Daniel Jones thing all over again? No. Well, I don't know what we have at tight end yet. We're gonna have Kittle under salary, Dwef, Mark Andrews, Darren Waller's teams on the slate. Your boy Tyler Higbee. Don't call that. I'm done. I'm done. I'm not saying that name anymore. Gronk. Gronk again. Oh, what's Gronk's salary? Well, Gronk's getting the Falcons in the dome. Oh gosh. Gronk 8,000. 7,000. He's 7,000. Oh, he's joking, okay. That's probably fair though, honestly. We'll talk about that in role changes. Let's start now with the role changes though and stick with the Raiders. I'll go back to them briefly here because we typically talk about run pass ratio and philosophical changes. I think this one belongs in role changes because it directly impacts Josh Jacobs. The Raiders said they wanted to recommit to the rush and they did. They had a 43% early down first half pass rate against the Cowboys. They had been at 56% in their first three games with no Henry rugs. And they led to Josh Jacobs getting season highs in carries, adjusted opportunities. So carries plus two X targets, snap rate and yards from scrimmage. He had six of 11 red zone chances. This is a legit role change for Josh Jacobs with this happening. So how are you altering your view of Josh Jacobs with this shift in philosophy for the Raiders? Yeah, I mean, the air is up. Jacobs is one of the backs who I think you and I are, I don't know if consensus is really high on him but even with that, I feel like we're in line or lower than consensus on Jacobs just because the yardage upside historically not really there. Part of that can be workload related if he's not getting a whole lot of targets but also just kind of a rushing efficiency situation. But if you're gonna run the ball and it makes sense for this team to run the ball, that helps. He's had yardage over expectation according to next-gen stats model in four games without Henry Rugg. So like there's enough here. I'm not gonna say that he is on par with some of the other backs we talked about but air is up. I would like to hear your thoughts on Josh Jacobs while I really formulate a salary that I would wanna pay for next week. Yeah, my concern with him, we talked about the volume being pretty good for a bit but like it doesn't matter if you're doing nothing with it. And like I think that's legit concern because like we talked about having juice with Pollard and Mitchell, not a lot of juice in those carries for Josh Jacobs. Well, that's him or the scheme. I'm not sure, but like it's true. There's not a lot of juice. That's different now. The target sharer has been good. He's been getting some work in the passing game. So I would say previously, I thought that 68 was probably the right salary. So I think that bumping up to 772 somewhere around there is probably appropriate. What about you? Okay, so I was gonna say low sevens. And I didn't know if that felt too low for saying, hey, the arrow's up. But we have to keep in mind that he went from like upper sixes here, not like mid sevens already. So yeah, I would say low sevens. I would be comfortable with, but if they're gonna run the ball a lot against Washington, that's kind of promising because they should be able to move the ball through the air and get into the red zone. It goes to 7,000. That's appropriate. I think that's very, very appropriate. I think we're gonna have some mid-range backs this week, which I'm pretty excited about. Between, we talked about Jamal, we talked about the Lions guys, I think while I was in mid-range guys. And I think that Jacobs is at least in that discussion. He may not be a priority, but like, you know, he's not discussion for sure. Let's talk about another previous mid-range back. Not sure if he's still there, but that's the letter for Nets. His snap rate spiked. We know the touchdowns, but like the snap rate is kind of the key thing for us. 81% snap rate. That is his highest in a game where Giovanni Bernard was active. Gio, I don't know if he got hurt, I didn't see anything on him, but he didn't be barely played. Letter for Nets, 33 adjusted opportunities. That is his third time this year, topping 30. He also had 131 yards in scrimmage. The touchdowns are awesome, but the peripherals were also super encouraging. They were already good and they turned to being great on Sunday. So they get the Falcons on the Mates late next week. Name that salary on Fortud Lenny. So the question you have to ask here is, what are the odds that he remains an 80% snap rate back and a really good offense? And I know the workload's phenomenal, but what are the odds he's got legitimate touchdown equity still in a team on a team that historically has thrown the ball a good bit at the goal line. I still think that those concerns are just nitpicky, but it's fair to nitpick whenever you're really considering putting a running back up into the upper echelon of elite running backs from a DFS standpoint. So I don't think I'm quite there where I put him in that tier one or tier two, like depending on if we get like McAfrey and JT or tier one, but I would say probably like 8,000. I was thinking 77 just because I think the yard is upside is still a bit annoying is the word I would say, and he's exactly 77. So I think that's fair. I like it's an increase, but I think it's a justifiable increase and a necessary increase because his role got better. He's in a very good offense. I think that to me, 77 is very appropriate and I have no real concerns about that and I'm okay going back to him next week again. I think that's fine. I mean, he's got a, okay. So this is total red zone opportunity. So carries plus your targets compared to your team. So he's got 31% of Tampa Bay's red zone opportunities. Zeke is at 31.2%. Josh Jacobs, 31%. Aaron Jones, 31%. We can round up. Damian Harris, the guy who has, this looks the only games where guys were active. Damian Harris, whoever loves his red zone role 30%. So I guess it's actually been better than I realized all season. Maybe he hasn't converted. So maybe he was a touchdown regression candidate after all. Yeah, I mean like, I think the touchdowns are still like the biggest, which is weird to say after a four touchdown game, that's still his biggest flaw, more so than the yardage stuff. Oh, I went to Josh Jacobs. Why don't I search Josh Jacobs? That was stupid. Subliminal. Apparently. Okay, so his red zone share had been below 40% and four consecutive games before this week. It's been above 40% now three times this year. So they're still like, that's still, I would not expect him to become this touchdown monster, but I think the yardage upside is enough where I could still get it. 40% opportunities or rushes? Opportunities. Isn't that a pretty good number though, 40%? Not for an individual game. It's fine for an individual game. Like he's had it three times in individual games. I'm like, that's just kind of like whatever. So, I don't know, 81% snapper. I think it's the most encouraging thing. What? I have my spreadsheet sorted by red zone opportunity share and I've Jonathan Taylor at 52%. That went down. Derek Henry at 46% and then Austin Walter is 46%. You have like six goal line carries this week alone. I was wondering how much like traffic player profiler got like Austin Walter player profiler via search on Sunday. It was several, then were from me. Rob Gronkowski led the Buccaneers in targets with 10. He was the only buck to go over 31 receiving yards. Woof. In games, which Gronk has played relevant steps of tossing out the Tampa Bay game or the New Orleans a game where he barely played. Mike Evans has a 19% target share. Gronk is at 18%. Godwin, 17%. Evans leads with a 28% area share. The Buccaneers might be getting Antonio Brown back in week 13. So are we concerned that there are too many mouths to feed in this offense? Yeah, I think so. I don't know how you look at this. And I know that you were lower on Chris Godwin than I was this week, which kudos to you. Still used him. But I don't care how good a passing offense it is. Guessing right on potentially, let's call it even, I won't even consider Antonio Brown in this conversation, three guys with, and we'll call it just 18% target shares. You can call it 20% target shares. 20% target share is pretty low unless you're passing like 60 times a game. And for a ceiling game in DFS, you need volume. But you also need that efficiency. And all these guys are capable of outlier single game efficiency. Mike Evans can score three times on five targets because he's Mike Evans. Grant can do, he can have huge yardage outputs for a tight end. Godwin can score at a high rate within single games. But whenever you really step back and look like, this is gonna be difficult to stack Tom Brady. And that makes it really difficult to play Tom Brady in tournaments because even if he goes off, if you tie that to Chris Godwin, and he gets four fandal points because Gronk and Mike Evans got 15 each or whatever, that's tough. So it weirdly does lower me on the past catchers even with just the three because they're not even getting like, if they were all like 23% it'd be different. But, you know, and it sounds like maybe splitting hairs if people don't really look at market share numbers, but 23 and 20 is a big difference. Yeah, it is. So, okay, talk to me about this trio if we don't have AB. And then if we get Antonio Brown back, could you, what would it take you to play any of these guys with a monocle of confidence? It lowers me a lot of them for one offs, but I'd still stack them with Brady. I think that's the way I'd view it. But I think like my preference might just be to go Brady plus Lenny at that point. Like kind of similar to what I did with like Dak and Zeke a lot of times previously, because like, oh, like it's possible none of them has a huge game and Brady does. So like, I think realistically, I could just go Brady with Lenny and hope that Ronald Jones doesn't score again. That happened too. I forgot about that yesterday. I think that's probably the way I'd navigate around it. But like, I would still stack them, but like as one offs it really hurt. You wanna hear salaries? I looked them up because I already knew where I was gonna put them. Yeah. And they're about where I thought they would be. Godwin is 76, Evan's 74, and Gronk as you said is 7,000. Like those numbers are not high enough where I like need to, I can't stack them with Brady, but it's high enough where like as one offs like, is that really where I wanna go? Stuff like that. I mean, this would have been, one of the reasons that I just like lock buttoned Brady was you could stack him with, like if you wanna play Tom Brady, you think Tom Brady's in line for a huge game. I think at this point, you either need to be open to the idea of missing out on the stack. Like if you play three Tom Brady lineups and they're all with Mike Evans, you just have a chance that you miss out on the top fantasy point output from a pass catcher. But if you're willing to play all Tom Brady lineups, you can really get access to all these different opportunities. And then, but that's only a multi-entry thought process there. I think what we'll wanna do is dig into the bucks and ceiling games when they have all these guys active. Yeah. Can they still generate like a ceiling? If so, we take shots. If not, we don't. I think we'll look, that's probably an assignment for me this week. Maybe not for the show on Thursday, but for situations to monitor potentially. And we'll talk about that. I'll try to get that. I can do it for Thursday if we really want. Yeah, I can group that in. Try to get that figured out. Aaron Jones returned to play 47% of the snaps to the Packers. He had 10 carries and a target. Now, Jones played a lot early on, did not play late because they were ahead. A.J. Dillon was doing A.J. Dillon stuff. Dillon had a 53% snap rate, 20 carries and five targets. It was a positive script, a Dillon script. They have a I coming up, Jones is banged up. I think that those are reasons to think that what A.J. Dillon did this week is not what we should expect going forward. With that said, do I think that it's very, very possible slash very, very likely A.J. Dillon gets those clock killing carries late in games going forward? Abs a freaking Lutely. So that's where I'm at with this team right now. What about you? Yeah, this feels weirdly like a Dalvin Cook situation where like when the Vikings were just steamrolling teams, but he wouldn't play in the fourth quarter. Yes. And so like he could have big games, but be kind of capped too. So, and I would honestly just view Aaron Jones' role as worse than that because it wouldn't surprise me if A.J. Dillon scored like a second quarter goal line touchdown either. Like he's gonna have a Dalvin Cook role where he's playing 100% of the snaps until the end of the game. I think I sent, I think I was telling things up. It was like a 65% snap rate at halftime for Aaron Jones. So you're right where it was his backfield primarily. And I know we get a buy, so we'll probably forget a lot of this by the time that they're back on the slate on in week 14, but I'm gonna have a hard time playing Aaron Jones with like confidence unless his salary is really low. So let me make a comp for Aaron Jones. Aaron Jones of old. No, well kind of I guess, but like I think that his role is going to be very similar to that of Kareem Hunt when Kareem Hunt has been healthy. Do you buy or sell that comp? I think it'd be better, but by how much? Not really, right? Well, Hunt gets like a 44, so I actually have this note in games where they've played with Nick, he's played with Nick Chubb, he's had a 44% snap rate. I would put Aaron Jones at a majority snap rate. Snap rate higher, but actual like volume. I could see this, yeah, I could see that. Maybe a little better in Kareem Hunt. Like Hunt plus? Okay, we'll go with that. So Hunt's, I think 17.7 adjusted opportunities per game in the games that he's played with Nick Chubb. I would at least put Aaron Jones at like 19, 20, but not substantially higher. Yeah, with a ceiling of like 25, I think. That's the big issue is like, he's probably not gonna get to 30, like adjust opportunities. And I think that's the big issue for me. Let's talk about Kareem Hunt. He came back, the Browns backfield, pretty split. Nick Chubb's workload is scaled back. It was a weird usage, like they had a key third down and through to Demetric Felton. I think it was only a snap of the game. Chubb played 49% of the snaps. Hunt played 39%. Chubb had eight carries and four targets. Hunt had seven carries and one target. But look at the six scheme they played together. Chubb is at a 51% snap rate, 19.3 adjusted opportunities per game, 40% overall red zone share. Hunt is at a 44% snap rate, 17.7 adjusted opportunities per game and a 25% red zone share. So I think they're on buy. So Baker might get a little healthier, which should probably be for the best. Where are we out on Chubb and Hunt given that they're both healthy now? They are on buy. I think they're back to where they were to start the season and that was not a whole lot of interest unless the matchup is phenomenal or the salary is too low for Nick Chubb. It's a really good gain stack, something like that. Something like that. But other than that, it's just not, it's not the type of workload that you allocate as much salary as it generally takes to roster Nick Chubb. Yeah. I tend to just, which is a convoluted way of saying he's generally over salaried for the workload, but salaried appropriately, really for his ceiling. Yeah. And like he could still, if you told me like, hey, next time Chubb is out there, he goes for a buck 30 and two touchdowns. But like, yeah, that makes sense. I can totally see that. But like the range of outcomes is very high and the odds of hitting his ceiling are lower because of Karim Hunt's presence and the fact the offense is not that great right now. So I think over salaried will be my baseline assumption going into week 14. Oda Beckham had a full integration game for the Rams. He actually tied for the team lead with 10 targets. Cooper Cup also had 10 targets. Van Jefferson had nine. Beckham was a full-time player. Beckham also had three out of 10 deep targets. One out of two red zone targets, I will say that he did not lead in deep targets because Van Jefferson did, of course. How are you viewing Odell in this offense? But also, let's talk about Cooper Cup, let's talk about Van, just overall this passing offense for the Rams. Yeah, so Matthew Stafford ended up having one of the better fan-to-outputs of all quarterbacks this week. He seemed to be pretty banged up entering the week. So I was a little bit concerned. I didn't, that's what really got me off of Stafford himself. But with three very viable pass catchers, Van Jefferson's awesome. Cooper Cup's very good. Oda Beckham very good as well. I can't use the better adjective for Van Jefferson. I just caught that. But yeah, so we have just discussed the buccaneers and target share concerns. We have a one-game sample here with Odell really being in the offense to the degree that it matters. But he had a 26% target share, same as Cooper Cup, Van Jefferson at 23%. If you gave me that with the three guys from the box, I'd be like, yeah. Rex, there's no Cameron Brady here. There's no Tyler Johnson. There's no whoever and that helps a lot. Yeah, and that's typically what we've seen from the Rams historically or like at least recently. And that's, that is a huge difference. So I wanted to kind of point out why I view this situation differently. Yep, I'm gonna play Van Jefferson if his salary remains low. I don't know what it will be after he finally cashed in. You seem- Finally, how dare you? Well, I mean, he cashed in. How dare you? Yeah, thank you. Good. I think Odell's back on the menu. Cooper Cup, I know his salary is gonna be problematic. Yeah. No matter what. Are you downgrading him at all or no? I mean, he had 10 targets, but like 10 is a downgrade for him. That's true. He had the worst weighted workload of the three. So I would probably, okay, I'll just be honest, I can barely play Cooper Cup on Fandle because the salary's too high for me to wanna allocate to a wide receiver. I got him this week. It's not like I never play him, but he's never someone I can prioritize. If I can prioritize someone like Devonte Adams instead and save like 800 in salary, I'd just typically end up doing that. So Cooper Cup salary comes- It's M.V.S. All my guys are here. It's a very big gym week. Yeah, very big gym week. But yeah, downgrade from 9,500 because I wasn't there anyway, but that's a little bit dismissive of saying like I'm just down in Cooper Cup. So name a salary for Cooper Cup and then we'll name a salary on 9,000. 9,000 still. I do think it gets a slight downgrade, but I think it's not worth that. They face the Jags next week, which is worth mentioning. The Jags rush defense is pretty good and the Rams rush offense is pretty bad. I think that helps a lot in terms of the spread for this game because I don't think Jacksonville will move the football. I think they're gonna get crushed, but the Rams might have to throw a decent amount still just because I don't think they can run. Like they're pretty bad from a rushing offense perspective. I think we'll be pleased. I, yeah, I saw. Okay. So yeah. Odell's salary is 6,000, Van Jefferson 58. Do you prefer one over the other there? I'm gonna prefer Van by a hair. Might as well. I think Van's amazing. He had pulled it out twice as long. Yeah. Almost had that sick touchdown from Cup. He's so volatile, but like he gets some like bunnies too. Also everybody on this team, everybody in this game is junior. Odell Beckham, junior, Van Jefferson, junior, Marvin Jones, junior, Laviscus, and all junior. Are there any like the fourths? Why isn't Bennett Scoronic the fourth? Like if your first name is Bennett, you should be the fourth. I think that's like by law. Anyway, I think those salaries are very appropriate. They help to me offset some of the Stafford injury stuff because like they've converted on that volume. I don't think that concerns me them. It concerns me with him and betting like Rams spreads and stuff like that. Yeah. We also have a Daryl Henderson, junior in this game. So. Do we? Allegedly. He might be the new T Higgins. He might be the fake player. Anyway, we've moved to situations to monitor. What other stuff stood out to you this week? Yes. These are just some smaller observations that aren't really role changes. But for me, Jonathan Taylor's role being so good in like the stone worst situation against the elite rush defense was awesome. 70% snap rate. A pretty efficient 16 carries and five targets. So the only concern I think we could have had for Jonathan Taylor was like, could he still be scripted out in a bad situation? And he wasn't, which is fun. Miles Gaskin wound up playing 49% of the Dolphin snaps but that game was out of hand. He had 10 of 14 running back carries in the first half. One of two running back targets. He's not the most efficient player but it's still a pretty good workload for a running back. And I know we're talking about other value running backs. So are they on the main slate next week? I get the Giants. I will not lie. I was looking into dolphins like playoff stuff last night. And I was like, why am I doing this? There's no point in this. But like, they're five and seven and face the Giants. They have a buy then they get the Jets. They could be seven and seven. So just don't listen to me. But like, I just, I looked into it. Sounds like you read my power rankings piece on numberfire.com. Did not, did not. I was, I had nothing, nothing else to do last week and decided to skip it, you know, not a busy week at all. Yeah. But Gaskin 6400 in that situation, I think his salary is going to remain in that range. The ceiling's not immense. I know that, but it's, it's noteworthy. I think his role is pretty solid for a back in that range, which we don't always get. Let me just pull up something quick before you move on. Just check something on him. Cause I actually did, I haven't, I think I've used him in two lineups all year before this week and I did use him a bit this week. The key shift for me was that he was starting to get some more red zone work, which he had not been previously this week. Five at 15 chances. Some of those, I think we're late with Phillip Lindsey. Just two targets, you know, I think it's an okay role. I'm warming, but I'm not fully in. Two targets in the red zone? Two targets overall. Yeah, but he played half the snaps cause they, Yeah, that's true. I want to look into like first three quarters. Actually, I can do that now while we're here. Let me do that. I mean, I got first half numbers in my notes. Yeah, the third quarter matters too. Okay. So first three quarters, Gaskin had 14 carries. Lindsey did a seven. We'll note that. Gaskin had only one target in those first three quarters. Did get one later on. Well, it's kind of not a thing. I love how 10 of 14 first half carries gets written off for in favor of a third quarter numbers. Okay. In the first three quarters, he had four out of six. He had four out of, oh gosh, math, four of 11 red zone chances. That's a weird probability was, they were up 11 points or when probability was 82% at halftime according to the next chance that's. Yeah, but like, I don't, I think that they were still trying in the third quarter. So. All right. I mean, again, this is all. No, the third quarter stuff actually helped your case. It helped you. Like, Phillip Lindsey had seven carries and like, you know, I'm noting that, but I think that like he had a decent red zone roll those first three quarters. Things fell off in the fourth quarter. I think it helped his case to look in the first three quarters. I think for a salary. As someone who bet the dolphin's money line, I didn't feel good about it until like, there was no time left because they scare me. Also, I'm out here for 9am Mondays looking up just specifically first half workloads and it's not good enough for Jim. Correct. It's never good enough. Just learn that. It's very easy. It's very easy to learn that. Just learn that. Oh, well, okay. You want to talk about something not good enough for Jim. Let's talk about T Higgins. I'm going to mute myself. T Higgins now has one more target than Jamar Chase in games that they've both played in. It's a 24% target share for T, 24.0, 23.7% for Chase. So basically the same, I'm not saying it's drastically different. The ADOT for Chase is better at 13.2 compared to Higgins at 11, 11.0. But Higgins, I know Jim hates him. I still think there's a good case to be made for T Higgins most weeks. I am preemptively annoyed that that is going to be a good game stack this week. Good game to stack this week. It's T Higgins versus Bengals. 66, we don't get receivers there. T Higgins or Hunter Renfrow? T. That's the easiest question you could have asked me. T. I needed to see how far your T Higgins hate went, so. Not that far. I'm not a hatred. I just don't think he's a real player. I don't think he's actually a physical human being. Like, I see that he gets targets, but can I confirm that he does? No. We love T Higgins. I did, but that was before they had Jamar Chase. Jamar Chase kind of matters, you know? Well, T Higgins has more targets than games they both played in, so. I'm going to use him this week. I just don't. I just wanted to point that out. My level of self-hatred goes pretty far, so it's fine. I would obviously, T Higgins has a better role, is better than Jamar Chase. This is really similar, and it reminds me of, I guess, last year with AJ Brown and Corey Davis with the Titans, where, like, AJ Brown was the better play all the time, but their workloads at times. But Corey Davis actually did stuff. T Higgins didn't do anything until this week. I'm just going to move on and talk about someone who Jim loves, and then we'll get back on Jim's side with Cordero Patterson. I took a wait-and-see approach with Cordero. He had 108 yards, two touchdowns on 16 carries, played 49% of the snaps, same as Mike Davis, so that was a little bit of a concern, but Patterson had three or four red zone carries. We know that Patterson, even if they scale back his snap rate, he's going to get really high leverage looks in the red zone, get some receiving work, so I'm still going to have a hard time really allocating massive salary to him, which is what it generally takes to roster Cordero, but I understand the case. I just don't always want to bank on, like, elite efficiency on a per carry basis or multiple touchdowns to get me there, so I'm probably always going to be lower on Cordero than I would like to be otherwise. DJ Amor, despite everything going poorly for Carolina, had 10 targets for 103 yards, so his role has still been pretty good in games with Cam Newton. If the salary keeps dropping, DJ Amor has a good enough talent to want to get there, and then in his Patriots Titans game, we have a lot of like waiver wire fodder with running backs. The snaps for the Patriots, 35% for Damien Harris, Andrew Montrey-Stevenson, 33% for Brandon Bolden. I can't get to Damien Harris. He was at like 40% last week. I'm not going to play him hardly at all. I think he'd have to be like in the 5,000 range, which he's never going to be for me to want to consider him. And then for the Titans, it was a 50-50 split for Dantro Hilliard and Deontay Forman, and this might be the worst offense in all of DFS. Yep, I agree. I had a non-zero number of liners with Desmond Patrick this week. That was stupid. We're just going to get all my bad takes out there. I just might as well dump them, you know. I told JJ and Brandon that T against is a fake player on Sunday morning, and he almost scored two touchdowns with 116 yards. So we're just going to dump all the bad takes out there. I'm guessing, oh, this is my situation to monitor. Should note that as being a podcast host. I'm guessing Givante Williams will get some steam this week. Not entirely sure his role changed. His snap rate was a season high at 58%, but Melvin this time with injury, Givante had just one more adjusted opportunity than Melvin. They had a super positive game script. Givante also had a 27% red zone share compared to Melvin at 36%. So don't know if there was really a role change there and would note that for them going forward. Marquez Valdes, Scantling's role is becoming less volatile, which I love. He has five plus non-deep targets in consecutive games. So not like these weird deep shots that typically don't hit. He's getting likes and bunnies. He is up to an 18% target share in games with Aaron Rodgers and Devante Adams. He has a 43% deep target share. That role is improving rapidly and I'm very into what he's doing. They're on buy this week, but noting that for after that. Devin Singletary's role did expand with Zach Mossen active. It was more so him than that Brita. Singletary, 68% snap share, 15 carries. Still had just three out of 11 red zone chances, 48 yards. So the concerns we've had with Singletary in the past are still there. Just noting that. Don't have to care about like non DeAndre Swift, non TJ Hawkinson Lions, but Josh Reynolds has earned a role at least. He had five targets. Two of those were deep on Thanksgiving, 70 yards and a touchdown, that's not too bad. I'm not in on him right now with how run heavy they are, but I think it could dent TJ Hawkinson's target projection a tiny, tiny bit in that offense. Now there's finally an actual like NFL level wide receiver on that team. The, finally the Titans passing game without AJ Brown was a hot mess. Cody Hollister and Nick Westbrook, Akinae led in snaps and routes. Cody Hollister's Fandal picture is the worst. So I can't ever consider him. Don't look it up. Neither had more than five targets or 25 yards. So like you said, the Titans are the worst. So we can skip over that. Let's go to philosophical changes in this past week, starting off with the jets. First game with Zach Wilson back. The jets early down first half, the pass right was 45%. They were at 57% entering this week. They were actually able to move the football on the ground a bit. They had a four player committee. So I'd expect them to keep it up. The four player committee means we were probably not going to anyone on this team from a DFS perspective. I also think that the rush heavy nature should impact the way we view Elijah Moore once Corey Davis is back. Brandon, do you agree where we should be wary of this jets passing game given how run heavy they were? Yeah, I think this might be one I'm willing to miss out on. They do get Philly next week. So if Davis were to miss again, I would at least consider Elijah Moore, but I would need the salary to be a little bit lower. What would you need the salary to be? 58 probably. 61. Okay, a little high. Smidge high for Van over Elijah Moore. At their respective salaries. Probably Odell, you know. Yeah. The Titans, just one more thing on them. Full establishment, 37% early down first half pass rates. Woof. So the Titans just to cross off. You had a couple of notes on some pace here. What did you see there? The bills were outside the top 20 in pace for the past two games on their plays with pre-snap win probability between 20 and 80%. So just excluding garbage time. So again, outside the top 20 in pace, similar to their numbers through week five when they were slower, they sped it up in the middle of the season from week six through 10, but they might be slowing it back down. So an offense that should not really have a lot of issues, but kind of does have some issues. Just kind of worth noting. Houston in games finished by Tarad Taylor of average 28.1 seconds per play with a 57% pass rate. That would rank over the full season second in pace, 20th in pass rate, which isn't terrible. So they've been playing faster with Tarad Taylor, which helps keep those games a little bit more fun for teams that aren't, like for a team that's not really relevant itself, keeps games a little bit better. They get indie next week too, that's a good thing. And then Tampa Bay, since they're by top six in pace each week, their average ranked before that was 18th, so some promising numbers there. I think that's a good thing. I think the Houston stuff is noteworthy because we could have some like game script concerns around Jonathan Taylor next week. If they're gonna play fast and like be decent, that's less of a concern. So I think that's a positive for next week for sure. Okay, let's get into the salary scroll for week number 13. We go to the FanDuel Sunday million for the next week and go position by position, just shout out things that stand out to us in terms of salaries starting off at quarterback. What are you seeing there? No high salaries. Lamar leads at 85. Well, that's not for 81. I'm gonna go back again and I'm gonna regret it. Oh yeah. 81 in the dome against Atlanta, absolutely. Yeah buddy. Matthew Stafford 78 at the Jaguars, I think he's back on the menu after what I saw this week. Joe Burrow is 74. I don't like using guys against the Chargers because they are so good at limiting big plays but like I'm not gonna cross him off at that number. Also Russ is 73 if he does anything Monday. That could be interesting. Not the most appealing quarterback slate by any means. No, it's not terrible though because we do get Kyler back. Lamar is on the main slate against Pittsburgh. Like that's not a good matchup and he kind of struggled obviously a little bit last night kind of maybe an understatement. Hire salary for you. Andy Dalton or Ben Rothesberger? Cause it's Andy Dalton. Rothesberger salary is 6,500. Jared Goff is 64. Okay, so the standouts were Lamar, Brady, maybe Burrow or Russ. And then maybe yeah, Burrow or Russ. Probably shouldn't go Russ but like I'll keep an eye on him on Monday. I'm not going to watch that game. I need DK Mac after a fall shive, like seven points. So it's a locket game for us, right? Yeah, let's hope. Quarterbacks better than this week but still not the best. Let's go to your running back. Jonathan Taylor is 10-5, that's where he should be. I think that's fully appropriate. Mixon is 94. He's had a lot of upside games. Yes. Like a lot. If you're for Mixon at 94 or Echler at 9,000. Mixon's targets have been 4-0, 5-5, 0-6. So like some games in there with not a whole lot. I would say, I still think I would go with Mixon. I do too. I would say the same there. I think the mid-ranger running back is going to be a pretty big thing this week. Naji Harris' salary is down to 8,000. He has not done a whole lot lately. Facing a good defense that offense has not been functional. I don't think I can get there myself. Yeah, I'd be okay missing out if it burns me. Like for for net over Naji at that rate. Probably, yeah. I mean, the reason we would have favored Naji previously was because of targets but now for nets basically James White. So, you know, James White or James White were yoked and getting a lot early down work. Yeah, in the mid-range we have for net, we have Mitchell, we have someone I'm going to skip over. If there's no Chase Edmonds, James Conner at 73. Yeah, I don't think he's on the map. Yeah, I think Edmonds might be back the following week. Well, he's eligible now, I think, right? Or did he, no, because we had the one game where he basically didn't play but was active. So it's like, I think you're right, it's been two games. So I'm pretty sure you're right where he wouldn't be back with. Seyquan is $7,200, 86% snap rate this week, 23 adjusted opportunities. Basing my yards, 53, he had 30 of them on one carry or 34 or something like that. But there's no Fletcher Cox, that's good. Oh, I'm gonna be there probably. I think running back lets you get anywhere you want. Yeah. Like you can play Taylor, Mixon, Eckler, you could talk yourself into Madison without Cook, Lenny, and then we have the low 7,000 guys. You can justify Cordero at 74 in a game that should have points, even though the rushing matchup isn't good. I just saw the dude Mark Hummery at 65. I should probably just go him over Seyquan because are they actually different players right now? 85% snap rate, not the best yardage upside. Are they actually different players right now? Maybe I should go Monty. Maybe I should go neither. Well, doesn't Dave Hummery have the leg strength of Seyquan Barclay or? Yeah, he's got the athleticism of Sony Michelle, which is the biggest slap in the face of that. It's the feet of Seyquan. Yeah. The vision of Leavion, strength of Zeke, and athleticism of Sony Michelle. Oh, boy. Boston's got 66, Montgomery 65, Jamal 65. I bet we get something viable in that range. Also Gaskin 64. We'll probably get something there. It's possible too. We'll look at receiver. I know we have George Kettle at 63 already, but with like Lamar, Tom Brady, potentially the higher-salard receivers that we would want to stack them with, depending on where, I don't know, Marquis Brown. We haven't talked about him, but it could honestly be a two-value back week by Sunday, depending on how good these roles actually should project to be. I would not be shocked at all. Also, just noting this, I'm not saying I care. Antonio Gibson is 62. I had a feeling that was coming. Like he's gotten more volume recently, not necessarily as a receiver. I'm noting it. I'm not saying I want to get there, but like, you know, I'm noting it. That's all I'm doing. You can note it. Yeah, that's fair. Let's go to receiver. What stands out to you there? Only three guys have an eight or nine in front of the shallot. That's Cooper Cup at 9,000, Debo Samuel at 82, and he might not even play. And then Justin Jefferson at 8,000 against the Lions, which is kind of appealing, but then it's down to 76 for Chris God when I'm feeling. So I guess not a whole lot of opportunities to allocate massive salary to a receiver, unless you're saying you're going to roster three guys in the 7,000 range, which of course would fit that bill. I think the advantage of that is we can use the value backs to get to Jonathan Taylor at 10, five, or Joe Mixon at nine, four. Yeah. So I think that's actually probably a positive for us. Yeah. DK is 73. Let's hope he gets good uses this week, but like doesn't do a lot with it. We can save your team, but we can use them next week. How about that? Is that a fair compromise? Look, I would take the eight targets 31 yards or the eight targets 26 yards to the past two games. Yeah. Like DK should not be in the same range as Deontay Johnson and Terry McLauren. Like from a sour perspective, he should be. Like they're doing the right thing, but like you should never see someone with Russell freaking Wilson as a quarterback in that same range as those guys who have like Dustballs as quarterbacks, but like I get it at the same time. Marquis Brown another 10 target games, that's four straight with double digit targets. Yeah. Five of the past six double digit targets hasn't done a whole lot with them the past two games. So that could keep the, and the, you know, divisional matchup, but it's the first time that they've played. So I think he's interesting for our Lamar Stacks just so that we don't know what we're looking at entirely. The high six range Brandon, it's back. It's not bad. We get Lockett at 69, Jalen Waddle at 69, Michael Pittman at 68, Darnell to the Mooney at 67, redacted T Higgins at 66. Cooks, baby. Nope. Nope. Yeah, he's oversaturated. He might be the new T. Oh gosh, Mike Williams at 65 in a game we're probably gonna want to stack. His role is actually bad now, but he had eight targets for the first time since October 10th. So he didn't do a lot with it. Mike Williams or Hunter Renfra? How dare you? Please leave. Can I eject you from the call? I know I can. I took you out of the culvert. I saw the power move. The people listening in the audio version like what's wrong with these guys? Are they on drugs? No. Devonte Smith at 63 against the Jets. I'll give it some thought. I'll give it some thought. I might be willing to forgive Jalen Hertz at that salary. There's gonna be a lot of nitpicking we have to do at both running back and receiver. Is there options in each tier at both positions? So we're really gonna have to think through. Like you can talk to yourself into a Devonte Smith, but let's say Devonte Smith and Leonard Fournette or Miles Gaskin and like Chris Godwin, Jamar Chase. Like you're gonna have those two V2s that you can do every lineup. So I think it's really gonna be one where I gotta figure out which tier I'm building around. It's not gonna be the middle of both, absolutely. I wanna have access to the higher upside guys from the top of each salary range or each position, sorry. But boy, this is gonna be one we gotta really dig through. Yep, Odell 6000, we mentioned that before. We have Van at 58 as well. Both those, very interesting. If Tony plays these 56, I don't tend to like using receivers against Miami all that much. And I think Miami could give the Giants offensive line some issues just with like how Daniel Jonesy they can be. But you know, it's there. Don't pass up T.Y. Hilton against the Texans. I would like to. That's his time to shine. Where are we at on Baitboy? He's $5,500. Yardage upside hasn't really been there just four targets this past week. No touchdowns yet. Those will come, I think, with the way he plays. I think that's kind of where he can win. If you believe in regression, yes, they'll come. I was still touched on regression, wasn't real. Yeah, the low 5000s are pretty booty, but everything else, the high 5000s are pretty good and the 6000s are pretty good. That's fine because the low 5000 range really feels like that's where it's like, it only takes one. If this guy gets a big game, big games don't really come from these guys very often and they're even surprised harder to predict. So, correct. Yeah, really limit your exposure to guys like this because they can bust the lineup pretty easily. I do need to apologize though. I said there was nothing in the low 5000s and your boy Ashton Dulan fresh off a 62-yard touchdown in one target. He's down there. So I'm sorry, Ashton, dedicated listener. I feel bad. Your guy, Josh Reynolds, 51. I don't need that. He's the best of that range, but I don't need that. I don't need that. I don't need your guy. That's worse than the importer. Like, let's not be doing this. All right. Okay, tight end. Laquan-Treadwell, 4900. Nope. Nope. I do think a lot of people would just be like, would you rather Laquan-Treadwell or Viscasinole? That's the question. Oh boy. Um, probably Treadwell for the yardage upside because he had 53 this week. Is LaVisca allowed to get to 53? He didn't want. I think he got the 99 ones this year. When? Was that the DJ chart game where you left early? Yeah, everyone went nuts, I believe. Nope. Okay, tight end. Mark Andrew, 73. Gronk, 7000 to leave things off. Boy, George Kittle is gonna be so chalky. That's fine. Good jock. Kyle Pitt, 62. What does he do? Rollers. Yes, 30 yards. Boy, he had 119, 163 yards and then since then, 13, 62, 60, 29, 26. One touchdown this year, still. Geez, oh man. I'm gonna have him in one of my fantasy teams so I should have known that, but Get Sticky is 6,000. Dallas Goddard, 58, didn't do anything because I had decent amount of him this week. He had one reception for zero yards. He has not had more than 14 fan dual points this year. Yeah, three targets, which is probably a 30% target share on the Eagles. You played him in our head-to-head. Did I? And I won by like 0.8 points. So. I hate the Eagles. Why did I use him? I was really surprised. Well, I liked him. So I'm not, by the way, I think this is something Jim would do, but it's nine to three through 12 weeks in our head-to-head, so Jim's gotta win out to force a tie break. Not that I've never done that before, right? Yeah, it's coming. That pain of golf so haunts me. Friar Muth is 54. I know, I think he's in concussion protocol, I believe. So he might not be able to play. If he does, I think he's fine at 54, but it's so hard to have any positive sentiment towards that offense right now. Correct. I do think that, I do think that we will have to be realistic with the rest of our lineups so that we can allocate some salary back up to tight end. Yes. Because we have Mark Andrews, Rob Gronkowski, I won't even count Darren Waller, George Kittle can still throw in Kyle Pitts because we know what he's capable of. T.J. Hawkins in if we're like believing a little bit, Mike Kasicki, Dallas Goddard. That's like even five if you cut off two of those guys you don't really believe in. Those guys statistically are gonna, some of them are gonna put up solid games. So. Yeah. The one exception I would say is Foster Moreau is 5,000 if Waller can't go. That's a pretty good salary for him given that he played a massive role the one game Waller missed. Five targets Thanksgiving didn't do much with them, but like, I would say he would be the one viable guy at 5,000. That, and then James O'Shaughnessy for you. No. Okay. Gerald Everett at 50 or 49 is, I will say his name. Sure. Because Pete Carroll was like, we got to keep getting Gerald Everett the ball. He said that this week. He also gets like rush attempts, which is fun. Not that that matters a lot, but like, you know, it's kind of debo-ish. He also is like the top athletic comp to Derek Henry on mock draftable. You just look at all positions. If I, if I were playing Madden right now, put Gerald Everett at running back, see what happens. That's what I would do. I 100% believe you would do that. Yep. If I didn't have like Leon Washington to use that running back, or Trenton Cannon, I would use Gerald Everett. Okay. Madden, are you playing? Well, older ones, but Leon Washington was great. Trenton Cannon was great. Do not be smart with them. Defense, just scroll to the bottom and see what pops out. Oh boy. Okay. I'm just going to spit this out. Disregard the next five seconds. The Jets are $3,500 against Eagles. Okay. Back. We are back. What do you see in here? Yeah. I mean, defense isn't really my thing. I would say Dolphins at $4,000. Houston at $33,000. Yeah. Like if you really are looking for a punt, I think they're the one that stands out to me most. I think defense is similar to tight end. We're probably going to allocate some salary to it this week. To feel good, yes. So if I put in like Kittle and the Dolphins and just like, I think, so typically what I do is I'll put in like the lowest salary defense I can tolerate so I know what I'm working with. And then I'll go up from there, you know, depending on how things work for the rest of the lineup. I might need to lock in defense and tight end this week to make sure I, because like I am guilty of getting my lineups that look awesome. And then you have 1,900 left for your defense. No, not quite. But guilty of going down to Dan Arnold at tight end because I needed the salary savings. So I feel like I agree with you, where I do need to allocate enough salary to tight end. Unless I go with Foster Miro, if there's no Darren Waller, that'd be the one exception for me there. Any final thoughts for you on salaries? Oh, no, I think that's that's my like first read on things. I like that we added this because it helps me start to think about the slate and not just the recap because we want to recap stuff but spin it forward. That's the point. And doing this for myself is it's really, really helpful to start thinking about next week already. Speaking of next week, let's do a note to future me. I think to me, the thing that I would say is dig into the mid range at each position, decide which mid range is the best and be comfortable building around the mid range. I think it'll probably be running back, if I had to guess. But that's what I want to look at this week. What about for you? Yeah, I really want to think through the guys like Jamal Williams, Boston Scott, Josh Jacobs, Miles Gaskin and really, really look at their upside and their paths to 20 Fandall points relative to the stud running backs and see what that kind of gets me. But I think I'm also going to do a lot of like 2v2 swaps in comparisons and see what that kind of gets me. Maybe even 3v3 with tight end. If I consider Everett, Moreau, maybe James O'Shaughnessy and see like what I feel best about and that might actually help lead me towards the freedom to start building my lineups after all. Yeah, I think that's the right way to do things. So we'll talk a lot about those mid ranges on Thursday. Maybe there'll be a trend, the workload of the mid range running backs. We will talk about that as a thing for this week. Speaking of which, that is on Thursday at 10 a.m. back to our usual time. I just turned off the background for some reason on the show anyway. It'll be at our usual time 10 a.m. on the Fandall YouTube page and up on the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed after that. So make sure you are subscribed to the Fandall YouTube page. Also for watching YouTube right now, hit that like button because that does help us out a bunch and also hit subscribe on the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed. Wherever you get your podcast, NBA and NHL daily via Tom Vecchio PGA back after the New Year and Austin Swain back with some UFC later on this week as well. Brandon, if people have questions for you on Twitter, where can they find you there? I'm at Goodwill 13 GDULA13. And I am at Jim Sonnis, J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S. You can also follow the Fandall podcast network at Fandall Podcast. Big thank you to everyone for tuning in for today. Hope that your Thanksgiving was great. Hope the week 12 will well for you and let's spin it back and do well in week number 13 as well. This has been the Heat Check Fantasy podcast powered by Number Fire.