 This year's Thanksgiving in Daily Fantasy Slate is kind of booty, but a kind of booty slate can still be a profitable slate If we play things well, everyone else dealing with the same bad stuff we are So we're here to try to win some money, have some fun during some bad games on Thursday And get you set for what will hopefully be a profitable Thanksgiving in 2021 Welcome on into the heat check fantasy podcast powered by Number Fire That's right here on the FanDuel Podcast Network and NumberFire.com My name is Jim Sonnis. I am a senior writer and analyst for NumberFire.com Joined here as always by Brandon Gedula. He is the managing editor of NumberFire.com Brandon, happy early Thanksgiving to you. How are you doing today? I'm good. The slate is not flawless by any means. We'll have to think about certain things, go over some strategy But honestly, you know, and I say this on Tuesday, November 23rd But I feel good about the slate because there's not really an obvious way to go We have two quarterbacks who obviously have a bigger upside than others But after that, I mean, we have running backs to choose from. We can make the case for a lot of, you know, low volume receivers We got tight ends in the mix, so you don't really have to be locked into any obvious value plays I think a couple years ago we had, it was like Caden Smith at tight end It was like 4,000 and we just kind of, there was nobody else or something and we just felt like we had a plant Has it like Tanner Hudson too or something like that? Something like that, but I mean, yeah, we don't have that this year And we have, like we have running backs, we have tight ends, tight ends actually pretty good this week You would know how to determine, it's still not bad Yeah, so I mean, we get a lot of flexibility this week and that's what Thanksgiving Slate is all about And it gives us some strategy discussion, which we'll talk about We'll go through general short slate discussions and how to alter things to that We'll go through each game and give you what we're seeing there And just talk about the slate as a whole within those games as well throughout the podcast for today A quick reminder though, you're looking for our week 12, week 11 recap podcast, that went up on Monday Find that by searching for the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed Our week 12 preview for the main slate will be recorded tomorrow Wednesday at 10 a.m. on the FanDuel YouTube page Find it there and also up on the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed Immediately after that, search for the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed Wherever you get your podcast, hit subscribe, leave us a rating interview if you like what you hear We appreciate those of you who have done so already Hey soccer fans, this season FanDuel and Captain Morgan are teaming up to give you a one-of-a-kind soccer contest Introducing Captain Morgan's soccer pick'em, a weekly fantasy contest that is entirely free to play The contest is simple, all you gotta do is make quick predictions for Saturday games this soccer season You'll earn free points for each correct pick Free points for correct? I said that wrong, the forward free was not in the read For some reason I put it in there You'll earn points for each correct pick, compete for a chance to win $3,000 in prizes every single week Head over to FanDuel, enter the Captain Morgan soccer pick'em today Must be 21 plus 2, participate for more details as at FanDuel.com or download the FanDuel Fantasy app Eligibility restrictions apply, and don't forget to make your game day more delicious and sub in the Captains Let's start things off here with a short slate strategy for this week because it is a three game slate And hopefully you're playing a lot of like 1pm only, afternoon only slates because they're pretty fun But for some people this may be the only time a year where you play a shorter slate outside of the playoffs So Brandon, you've run through optimal lineups on shorter slates And try to look for trends, try to look for things we can note in terms of roster construction for Thursday What stood out most to you in those optimals? Yeah, so I have slates, optimal lineups from slates with 2-4 games from this season Just because it's a larger sample to look at than just past Thanksgiving slates which are just kind of arbitrary Three game slates anyway, but some key takeaways I think we'll probably have a bit of a back and forth So that if you rifle through all these it's hard to maintain some of this information It's even hard for me staring at these notes to construct what all this means But in terms of salaries I think this is a big one that will just lead to a very clear deviation from what we typically do on a main slate Where you don't really want to waste a lot of salary because it's probably just a poor expected value play long term But across the optimal lineups from 2-4 game slates this season The average salary for those optimals has been just under $57,000 That's a big drop from $60,000 if you're building lineups Like I know it's like oh it's almost $60,000 but like if you're really building a lineup and you're leaving over $3,000 on average That is noticeable when you submit that lineup None of them have spent all $60,000 so far $13,000 though did spend at least $59,000 so this isn't to say hey always leave a lot of salary But 68% of these lineups spent under $58,000 and 23 spent under $57,000 So the easiest way to get different we talk about this with golf a lot would be to leave salary on the table That's a little bit less needed because you have so many options to go to But on a 3-game football slate we still only have six quarterbacks, seven, eight running backs However you want to spin that So leaving salary on the table is an automatic way to put yourself in contention to be different Which matters in tournaments So what are your thoughts here on salary allocation and what it feels like maybe to leave a lot of salary on the table Yeah I mean like $3,000 a lot I wouldn't necessarily be looking for that but like not going to the full $60,000 is probably going to be the way to go And honestly like there might not be a lot of builds where you get to the full $60,000 just like from building it out So I think that basically it's like I think the overall takeaway is don't feel bad leaving salary on the table Like for a full slate you should probably feel kind of bad if you're leaving like $500,000, $600,000 or so on the table But I think here just like know that it's probably optimal to leave some That's one way to be different though is the thing that I would say is it's not the only tool in our chest There are other ways we can be different for your combinations and stuff like that But that's one route to getting there and I would say it's not the only route That's kind of the thing that I would say personally Yeah yeah and along with that I think what this ultimately means in practical terms for this slate is If you don't play Josh Allen or you don't play Stefan Diggs you were going to have salary pretty much assuredly to play Darren Waller So a lot of non-Diggs non-Allen lineups will naturally have Darren Waller because you have the salary to get there You know again you have that cap it's possible but and I'm not necessarily advocating fading you know Allen Diggs and Waller in the same lineup Which I will have but it's it's it's those like hey man I got 8500 left I need a receiver like let me just plug in Stefan Diggs A lot of people will make that decision so those guys could actually see their popularity numbers inflated So I think that's another reason to consider just eating some salary for these slates Did you have something? Thor is yours Okay now moving into quarterbacks because quarterbacks obviously are the building blocks of your daily fantasy lineups The average salary from these perfect lineup quarterbacks is 77.55 Only seven of the 40 quarterbacks on these slates had salaries below 7,000 So again only seven of 40 below 7,000 19 so virtually half had salaries greater than 8,000 This just tells me and reminds me and I run simulations constantly High end upside primarily almost exclusively exists from star quarterbacks The case to be made against Dak and Allen is that if they put up 18 to 20 Fandall points Derek Carr, Andy Dalton I'll leave it at that They can match that but if Josh Allen Dak put up over 30 like you really are going to have a hard time getting back on track So that's the only thing I would really say about value quarterbacks for this week is you have to sell yourself on the fact that Dak and Allen bust You're not selling yourself on car or Dalton blowing up because like that's not really something they do It's more so what are the odds that Dak, I think 18 is actually probably a good number What are the odds Dak scores 18 or fewer, what are the odds Josh Allen scores 18 or fewer, what are the odds they both do it at the same time Kind of go through that thought process for yourself and then allocate your exposure to Derek Carr slash Andy Dalton based on that number I think that that number is going to be bigger than we think like oh you know they're guaranteed like you know So I think just go through that thought process Dak's had some down game this year Josh Allen's had some down games like it can definitely happen But just you do that I think that's the thought process I would use in terms of how often do I deviate from those two guys Yeah that's um that's a big question I don't have 18 points but I have 20 points here I have Allen getting to 20.62% of the time so that would be what 38% where he doesn't get to 20 and then for Dak I have at 53 to get to 20 It's about 45% of the time for him to fall shy which you know these could change a little bit but they're not going to change drastically So that's still a pretty solid chance that they're just okay and it's going to feel scary if you're a little bit underweight on those guys But if you could Sorry, no good I haven't done math in a very long time but I'm pretty sure that means there's a 17% chance that they both fall short at 20 Did you multiply them together? Yes Okay I thought so too Is that wrong? It's been a while Well if they're independent so that should be it should work that way So again I'm an English lit major I'm just I did journalism we're not supposed to do math I used to be a staff major that didn't go well so it changed So that's kind of sizable where you can say that these guys don't have to have it Now that's also I think the flip side is it says you'd probably have Dak or Allen in 83% of your line That's gonna say 83% of the time one of these guys is gonna have a pretty solid game So you know it's all about playing the probabilities and I know like you said maybe this is someone's first time playing a small slate There is a lot to go through and think about But you can always just play Josh Allen if you want or you can just play Dak and say that's the most likely outcome But if you're really trying to you know improve upon your large field DFS thought process Thanksgiving Slate's a perfect time for it Yep okay what else you got here Alright moving into stacks only three of the 40 lineups didn't have a wide receiver or a tight end with the optimal quarterback I've heard MVP because I'm usually talking about single game Slate with the optimal quarterback So you're gonna want to stack 17 had at least two wide receivers or tight ends and three had at least three And there's some slate overlap because just like depending on the slates that are offered On Fandall like you'll get some similar names in multiple slates within the same week But all three of those instances with at least three pass catchers were from different quarterbacks in like different slates So that's kind of appealing it's so then like as likely that you get three pass catchers as zero But you're gonna want to stack consider two pass catchers with your quarterback And I think that's obvious but the way to differentiate really isn't to isn't not to stack Of the 40 lineup six brought it back with at least two opposing wide receivers or tight ends 23 had at least one 11 didn't have any so you don't have to bring it back It's about a 25% chance that there isn't anyone worthwhile on the other side within these two to four game Slates But you know in general this just means you want a quarterback with at least one pass catcher Maybe two and generally at least one player on the other side Basically you're asking yourself will there be one game that stands out from the rest And if the answer is yes then you know get five to six guys in that game So like let's say you like Dallas Las Vegas a lot more than others go Back to pass catchers probably Zeke honestly you could get four I know you'll have stuff on running backs later on But like get Dak Zeke to pass catchers or Dak Zeke Pollard and then run it back with at least Waller potentially I don't know someone else but yeah that's the that's the thing is so how does that apply practically you say Maybe for you it's Bill Saints you say this is the game where we're gonna have I know Jim It doesn't like that game at all except for Dallas Vegas I know but we'll be under in that game what does that say But it means like yeah if you if you're taking a stand that we'll just we'll make it simple Raiders Cowboys is the game And the other games just don't have a whole lot of points there the optimal set the optimal analysis I've done says There is like that's a viable strategy where you get just a lot of pass catchers from the same game So don't be afraid of that if that's the standard you take Moving in to defense and running back stacks which I think are very common overall but probably especially so on a short slate 26 of these 40 lineups had a running back stacked with the defense so it's you know over half We've talked about this before this season is really not a must it's not always correlated It's not as strong as a lot of people think it's not bad if you can do it feel free But definitely don't feel like you have to lock in your running back with with the defense you choose Yeah, we I talked about it being kind of a negative on fuller slates because if the defense scores a touchdown which You need for an upside type game then that takes away possession from the running back I think on this situation you don't always need a touchdown from your defense to be optimal so it's less of a negative So I know that's a different way to think of things and we typically talk about but I I tend to wind up doing it not because I'm seeking it out but because like I think that's the most logical path Yeah, and about 60% of fantasy points come from sacks and turnovers So if you saw yourself on hey Zeke's gonna have a good game run the ball score put the Raiders into negative script Then they can get sacks and turnovers as far as defenses versus offensive players because this is a big one 31 of the 40 lineups did have an offensive player against the defensive team Five of the 11 on three to four games late. So if we cut out the two game slates, which is almost a lock Five of the 11 did not so I think if you can avoid it still avoid it But if you can only build lineups and you need a defense that has an offensive player in it Don't don't delete that lineup and start from scratch necessarily Yeah, especially, you know, I think that if there's a massive like value you really want this situation just think of like Can this player pay pay off if I send the defense does well and a lot of times the answer is yeah, that can be fine So like waller against the Cowboys defense. I think that's a viable option this week Yeah, that's definitely the case and the final note I have is on flex positions Across these 40 slates 14 of the flex positions were running backs. So that's 35% 14 actually were tight ends and 12 were wide receivers. That's 30% On the 11 three to four game slates. We had four running backs to tight ends and five receivers. So that means it's much more likely on a two game slate that you can get a tight end there because there's not as much yardage to go around and just a touchdown can I'll get you there or the value opened up by a lower salaried play at tight end gets you access to a higher salaried skill position player elsewhere and those guys have bigger ceilings. So if you think that Detroit and Chicago is just too bad Consider a tight end because that would effectively make it like a two game slate. So you and I I think maybe once or twice this year week was one or two weeks we've considered going against like away from running back at flex Small Slates very different conversation and I'm open to just building the best lineups I can Yeah. And I think typically I go I tend to go away from running backs on the smaller slates because like the reason you do it on a full slate is because you got a lot of options that running back and you want to, you know, get exposure to as many as possible. That's not as true on smaller slates, but I think with this specific slate, the strongest positions are running back and tight end. And as such, I'm most likely to flex a running back or a tight end. We talked about We talked about being different in other ways than salary allocation. I think that, you know, using a tight end in the flex is one way to be different, different combinations stuff like that. But I think that like having both Darren Waller and Dalton Schultz in the same lineup or Darren Waller, Dawson Knox, that'll probably be pretty unique. And like Dawson Knox compared to the other $5900 wide receivers. How much of a difference is there? I don't know. So I think that that's something I'm very receptive to this week. Receiver depends on what like my combo for like that game stack is, but like I'm receivers not great this week. Yeah, I think that's going to be a big deviation for me this this year is really considering the double tight end lineup just because of who we have at tight end. And then if we if we do that, we can play just about anyone. So it's it's it's strange. If you're if you're just coming into this, but I love I love small slates. All right, any final thoughts for you based on the data or should move on to bears versus lions. Let's move on. All righty, let's do it here. We got bears versus lions to open things up on Thursday the bear three and a half point favorites total one total is 41 and a half and it's going to be Andy Dalton starting this game for the bears Justin Fields has bruised ribs. He didn't practice Monday nor did Alan Robinson who missed week number 11 as well. Jared Goff has a strained oblique. He is reportedly unlikely to play. He did practice on Monday though it was an estimated practice report. He was limited. So I'm leaving the door open for it to be golf versus Tim Boyle. I would assume it's Boyle, but like maybe I don't know. So that's where I'm at right now. Brandon, what is your overall view of bears versus lions? I don't like it. I don't like it a lot. I like some individual plays here. I could not see myself playing Jared Goff if he's good to go. I think that would certainly help me because Tim Boyle was horrific last week with his passing efficiency according to number fires metrics and every other metric known to man he was terrible. So that would just help me feel better about TJ Hawkinson and DeAndre Swift. I think I might and I've been historically high on Swift I think relative to other people. I'm probably lower on Swift at his salary within all of the context of this game with the matchup with the quarterback issues at his salary of 8000. I think I'll be a little bit low because he has overperformed with those 130 plus rushing yards and I know this stuff can get lost but the first time he did that two weeks ago was an overtime game with no Jamal Williams. He got there last week because he's a good player. That's why I like him. But I think he is over-salaryed and that might be one of the bigger stands I take is just being under a weight on Swift for this week. I think that's our map to assuming that Boyle starts just because like the Swiss had weird yardage upside to with Jamal Williams. And I don't mean like good yardage upside like questionable yardage upside. It's been very fluky like 70 or 140 basically is where he's been. And like the Aussie hits a 70 burger with Tim Boyle in there pretty high relative to you know dropping 140. So I think that I probably will be underweight on him as well. The guy I want to be overweight on is David Montgomery 95% snap rate for him in week number 11 which was his highest of the season highest for most running backs any week any year. He has had some yardage upside this year. He's had 100 twice. One of those was against the Lions earlier on this year. He had 100 on 23 carries and then hurt his knee and left the game. But you know he's 84.2 yards per game 38% red zone share for this year across six games. That's not an elite workload overall but it's decent for this slate and it's better when you put it up against a Lions defense that is pretty bad despite playing better the past couple weeks. So I think that Montgomery is like the focal point for me in this game. I would like to be in on him pretty aggressively and despite the discrepancies in their workloads I would go Montgomery over Swift by a decent margin that could be stupid on my part to you know it's a match up but like it's valuing match but valuing team context all that stuff where you out of Montgomery versus Swift. I like Montgomery a good bit. I list him as a core play same with Swift it's hard not to I mean I'm nitpicking Swift it is salary kind of anticipating some regression. I think ultimately that would come down to expected popularity numbers really really assume that Swift is more popular than David Montgomery for a lot of reasons even at that higher salary because for the most part salary doesn't exist so long as you're not trying to I mean I could do this just click on literally the highest salary guide every position and see what happens but yeah for me it's like I like Montgomery I don't know if I like him more straight up it's more it's extremely close and assuming that Swift is more popular I would I will have more David Montgomery his snap rates been awesome to really good like individual match up so I like Montgomery plenty he might be he might be the RB three for me on the slate at salary. Are we assuming Khmeris it's insane assuming Khmeris it's yeah you would be my RV three in that situation as well behind Zeke and Ingram to be clear I can talk about those at a time I think it's Zeke one Ingram to and then Montgomery three in that scenario I would put Swift for but I think there's a decent little fall off from three to four in that scenario just because it's so hard to trust like he could go for 130 yards again but like touchdown odds are low when Tim Boyle is your quarterback even with no Khalil Mack even with the Keem Hicks I think missing practice again on Monday to like it's still a pretty grim situation as far as the past catchers in this game go the obvious one is Darnell mooney 16 targets in week 11 no Al Robinson six of those were deep one is in the red zone they're playing indoors actually all three games are indoors this week which is part of why I like the slate like a week or three weeks ago before everything went to poop. Mooney really good target shares Dalton showed last week he'll actually go downfield a bit and that to me was a key deviation from what he had done previously. Dalton this year is at point one oh passing that expected points per drop back for context league yards about point one three this year for quarterback. So what's that it's down to point one one oh Tim Boyle we're starting to get worse when we get to boil brought that puppy down real fast. Okay. So Dalton's at point one oh should probably projected around like point one five against Detroit or so I would say actually I can tell you just kidding. I'll pull that up later. Anyway, I think that Mooney makes a lot of sense. I'd have a hard time. Like this is the cool thing about the slate is Titan is not bad so I don't have to like talk myself into cool commit at 5000. I think he's fine. But like, I'd rather find the salary to get the other guys I think I can get there. So to me it's really about Mooney and Montgomery on this team the question is do I prefer Mooney over Michael Gallup. I probably for Gallup but like, you know, I think that Mooney is in that discussion at least. Yeah, I'm big into Darnell Mooney I think will be one of my most popular plays, probably not alone in that just because the salary is very affordable and the role is really good. I like what I see from him his target share has been pretty phenomenal recently but especially without Alan Robinson there's a big path to volume and, you know, as much as we will want to get cute with selling ourselves on well. What if he gets like eight targets and doesn't do a whole lot but this other dude gets two targets and cash is in on a deep pass and so that's why I'm not going to play Darnell Mooney. We're not going to get a whole lot of guaranteed volume from any pass catcher on this slate. So it's really hard to go away from that. And again, you can really still play Darnell Mooney and be different elsewhere because you have a salary freedom to do virtually anything and then you can make those conscious decisions to eat some salary or do some weird combinations that are maybe a little bit minus EV on a bigger slate but could work in a small slate. What's your interest level on Marquis Goodwin at $54? Assuming there's no Alan Robinson again Goodwin last week eight targets 104 yards and a touchdown has a long kind of fluky touchdown I guess I would say. But like you know hey he's a sprinter he can he's on turf that's good stuff there. Interest level for you on Goodwin relative to guys in that salary range. It's honestly pretty high. He had five of the 23 targets from Dalton last week which was 22%. He had 80 area yards which is 30%. It's if Andy Dalton is just going to let it go. That should be good for Mooney and Marquis Goodwin. I think I might prefer Goodwin straight up to Cole Comet within their respective positions just because Comet has been a little bit of an afterthought here on the past few weeks and it's not necessarily the best. The best like thing to look at is just results in recent weeks but the targets are a little bit concerning and if I'm projecting low offensive output. That is harder for a tight end because tight ends really just need a touchdown. Of course receivers need a touchdown to but they have other paths to getting production with the yardage. Yeah so Goodwin is in the same salary range as like Brian Edwards. I prefer him over Edwards assuming that Robinson sits. He's by a Montrose Brown like I prefer Goodwin by Decent out there. Cedric Wilson if there's no lamb I prefer Wilson over Goodwin. We got Cole Beasley at 57. I think that's kind of a toss up. Maybe preferring Beasley despite the fact that Goodwin does get downfield looks. Marquis Callaway is 57. Kind of same thing but Goodwin is a consideration down there as well. The one question I have with Comet is like what I consider flexing him at $5,000. I'd put him in the tight end because he's playing in the early game so mention that. Also worth noting you should late swap on Thanksgiving because you actually have time to do so and you can do so pretty. You should always do it but like you know you got more time to do so here. Make sure players playing in the earliest games are in like the positional slot. So if you're using a running back at flex make sure you're early starting running backs or in your RB slot. Latest ones are in the flex slot. You know that just reminding you to do that for this weekend. Okay Comet at $5,000 versus the receivers at $5,000. Maybe that's tipping point where I go Comet because it's like to Sean Jackson, no. Zay Jones, no. Josh Reynolds actually I don't hate so like maybe I could go Josh Reynolds. But like if I really need that salary savings I could see myself getting to Comet potentially there. But like over the tight ends like over Knox, Schultz, Waller. Not really quite getting there but over the receivers in that range. Sure I can talk myself into that one. Thoughts on Khalif Raymond and I know you I know your Amon Ross St. Brown's biggest. You mean Khalif Cup? Yeah. I was gonna say I don't know what the opposite of biggest fan was I don't want to say hater because you're not really a hater you're just disinterested. He's the dustiest rookie of all time anyway. I think that my interest level is much higher in Josh Reynolds. He ran the most routes for them last week. His first game with the team made his debut. If we get golf I actually wouldn't mind Reynolds at all at $4,900 because you know the Rams days they've got that got that going for them. But I think otherwise I'd probably just avoid everyone like that applies to Hawkinson that applies to Reynolds that applies to Swift. I'd be fine with Swift still but like I would just be lower on him so like I would need golf to start and if I if he did start I would go Reynolds above those other receivers. Okay so let's say you're playing 20 lineups that's reasonable. Tim Boyle starts. You will have no Lions aside from some Geondra Swift. I would probably wind up with some Reynolds. I'd probably just because like 20 lineups is still enough or I'm okay taking a stand and you're like no. Right right. Yeah. It's enough where it's not like two lineups but it's not a hundred. So I might be with you. Yeah I mean what we saw from Tim Boyle was abysmal short week high pressure to just to playing on Thanksgiving. Those aren't the things I typically look at but like yeah that's not necessarily going to help. Yeah. So that's tough. Where are you at in Hawkinson if we assume Boyle starts? He would just be sort of a rotational piece. I think he would have to be so I have him. I mean he's not that much different than anyone other than Darren Waller in terms of high end upside. I have Dalton Schultz more likely to lead the Slade and tight end points than Hawkinson. Hawkinson's honestly about the same as Dawson Knox so he'd just be kind of an afterthought. He'd be like a differentiation piece. I don't consider him for the double tight end lineup if I need to. Sure. If I'm really pepper in that mid-range of receiver already and I don't have anybody else to go to. So he's 61 like Renfro or Hawkinson. I don't think I'm just going to go Renfro there. I like Drake on Smith. We'll talk about him in that last game. Yeah. He just doesn't do enough with Tim Boyle. If there's golf I think that especially puts the double tight end lineup in play though. Yeah. Probably right. Yeah. Because like Waller Hawkinson would be pretty decent then. So I think that would help for sure. Yeah. And some just final thoughts I think for me if we get golf I'm going to rank the receivers Reynolds, Raymond, St. Brown won't actually get to St. Brown. I would consider Cully Freeman in a in a lineup if I feel gutsy and say hey maybe the Americans put up some points and this game is actually not completely terrible. Where would you use Swift relative to Montgomery if golf plays? I think I'd have to flip the script a tad and put Swift above him then. Me too. I agree. Even though I think he's a little bit over salary because he's got that production. Yeah. I think that would turn me to Swift. I would agree. Jared, golf upgrade. This is great. I think that if we get golf I would go Swift prioritization won Hawkinson to Reynolds 3 in terms of this team. Hawkinson to me would still be below Waller but he would be actually I probably put him below Schultz too but I put him above Knox in that situation. One final thought on Komet quickly. I'm guessing there will be some buzz for Joanne Johnson this week with no Adam Troutman among like if I really need to like save salary among the tight ends I prefer Komet over Joanne Johnson because the Saints despise passing and probably are not going to want and like Johnson's been an active a couple of games recently so I would go Komet over Joanne Johnson. Do you agree as far as the low salary tight ends? Yeah. Komet is like if we didn't have so many tight ends I would be talking myself into Komet. Sure. He's got athletic potential. We've seen him more involved than he is currently but yeah between the two it's definitely Komet. Boy I feel like I'm going to have a double tight end lineup. Probably. Probably. Final question for you on this game. Andy Dalton, yay or nay. If I'm built let's say I'm building the 20 lineups I could see myself with about five lineups that aren't Josh Allen and Dak Prescott. I might at that rate go with Dalton over Derek Carr who has really struggled these past few weeks without Henry Ruggs. I'd probably go, well I'd go three lineups. I would go two Carr, one Dalton. There we go. There we go that way. Any final thoughts for you on this game? No. Although I'm going to give one final thought. It doesn't project well but that doesn't mean it's completely off the board from being somewhat reasonable especially if you're like Jim and think that Bill Saints is a terrible game. It is. So let's move now to Raiders at Cowboys. The one kind of non-terrible game which I still kind of like the under for it is Cowboys versus Raiders. The total here is 50 and a half. It has come down a point. It was 51 and a half yesterday. Now down to 50 and a half because it's moving the right way. Cowboys are seven point favorites. As of right now, I'm assuming Amari Cooper and CD Lamb will not play. With that said, Cooper's out. That's done. You know, whatever. Lamb though, they're still saying he has a chance to play. He has a concussion. They were saying this morning on Tuesday that he still has a shot to go. So we'll make that in. You know, talk about what we do if Lamb does play. Tyron Smith is likely to play for the first time since week eight. Celebrate, party, get your hats on. This is great. Tyron Smith is back. We can be happy about that. And I would also say that it was a weird situation last week in Kansas City where they had their full game plan in place and then on Friday they lose Cooper. So you have to like scramble last second to account for that. I thought Tyron Smith is going to play that game too. On Sunday, find out no, he's not probably because of the short turn around stuff like that to today or to this week. And then they lose lamb at halftime. It's a very different situation to know you're going to be out those two guys and get Tyron Smith back. So I think I am not down on the Cowboys despite that bad game last week. So that's where I'm at right now with this game is I'm hiding the Cowboys. And I think this is the best game on the slate. Where are you from a an umbrella perspective on this game? As in umbrella on this game or on the slate? Porcanola's Dose. Okay. This game is naturally my favorite. It's the best one to have access to. It has the offense I like most overall with the Cowboys, but it's also got a Raiders team that I'm concerned about for a lot of reasons. We actually discussed the Raiders efficiency splits without Henry Ruggs. On last week's preview show that didn't get a whole lot better in week 11. Derek Carr has a 7.1 yards per attempt rate with negative 0.09 passing that expected points per dropback over 108 pass attempts over the past three games without Ruggs for touchdowns for picks. Prior to that he was at 0.28 passing that expected points per dropback. So he was basically one of the league's best passers. Now it has been I won't say the one of the worst passers, but like in that bottom like core like at the top of like the bottom tier basically with that efficiency. That's pretty rough. And I don't think that's something that we just explained away from small sample variants. There's a very clear shift within this offense that hurts and if I don't believe so much in an offense. I have to have natural concerns with the other side of that game. That being said it's though obviously my favorite game, but that doesn't come in the form of two quarterbacks. Like we talk you and I all the time on main slates about this is a two quarterback game. We don't have any two quarterback games on this slate for me unless I'm saying like sprinkles of Derek Carr would be fine. But again, I kind of think I prefer Andy Dalton to Derek Carr, which sounds kind of weird. But you know, I guess maybe I should put Carr over Dalton because of this easy stack ability with Darren Waller. But yeah, I don't really want to play a quarterback because I can stack them with the receiver more easily. That feels wrong. So for context on Derek Carr being at negative 0.09 per dropback without Henry rugs. Sam Darnold is at negative 0.06. He's been worse than Sam Darnold in three games without Henry rugs. I don't expect that to continue. But like, so in my numbers, I put in a downgrade for lamb downgrade for Cooper downgrade for no rugs. And despite that, the silk rates out as the, the six best games in term of projected efficiency for the entire week. So out of 15 games this ranked sixth. Bill Sains is 13th and bears lions is 15th. So this one is far and away the best game. And that to me says why I should prefer Carr over Dalton by a hair. Again, I think that they're pretty close, but I think that for Carr over Dalton, that's also why I can feel good about the Cowboys offense. He didn't, you know, do some stuff here and try to operate at a high level throughout the entire game. The one concern I have with that, and this will play a factor in a lot of my decisions on this slate is I think the Cowboys could just like say, if you were going to pound the rock here and just go full in on running the football. And that could lead to a lot of rushing attempts for Ezekiel and 20 part in part because like they can do that because they've got the dudes to do it, especially with tyrants that theme back. They did this makes two through five this year in those games. That was a 27 pass attempts per game. He had 241 yards per game, which is not that high. He was hyper efficient. Like he had 2.5 touchdowns per game, but like you don't expect that in terms of like projecting things forward. It led to 117 yards per game from Zeke 93.8 from Tony Pollard, which I think is very interesting. Zeke had a 44% red zone share Pollard is at 15%. So I think to me if I if I take that mindset and that we talk about assumptions. If I make the assumption that Cowboys run the football a Zach or Zach, a Zeke Pollard stack, the word stack is in my brain. The Zeke Pollard stack in the same lineup with Josh Allen at quarterback because that is probably not going to do as much in that situation. That's pretty in play in a way to get a bit different because I don't expect people to use Zeke and Pollard in the same lineup. But given how run heavy they were in those games and how run heavy I think they potentially could be here. I kind of don't mind that as a pairing as a way to get a bit different. Is that psychotic? No. That's very much within the conversation for this slate because all of these games could hit the under and that means just generally fewer yards and obviously most specifically fewer touchdowns and then you're getting guaranteed touches from Zeke. People really overstate how involved Tony Pollard is. Yeah. It's because when he does touch the ball he's very good but I don't know. This is probably not the place for it but I feel like a lot of people will say hey coaches know what they're doing and if you just look at data you're dummy and you're not an NFL but then I hear a lot of like coaches don't know what they're doing and they should get these people more involved so I don't know. I never know which one is correct. Both can be correct. Coaches can be inefficient but people on Twitter can be overconfident. Yeah. So I don't know. But yeah I think that's actually one of the spots that I identified. I kind of broke down each six offence, each of the six offences in my Helper on Number Fire which is where we have content sometimes as we talked about on yesterday's free. As alluded to previously. I actually got to the point where I was like hey I think you could play both of these guys together within the right game environment like the game environment for all three games like the Slade environment and then on Slack like five seconds later Jim said that he was considering doing that too so that made me feel confident but yeah especially then you know you would go away from the chalk of whatever value we had like if we if we don't get CD lamb this is much more in play to the run heavy script and then if we don't have CD lamb Michael Gallup and Cedric Wilson are gonna be really chalky so this go this is like a natural defense against that if it works out so I love that call yeah it's not my default to be prayer like but I want to have lines where I do that in order to get a unique combination on a small slate where we're you know we've got some pretty obvious plays so that's the way I do things there is it's a combination I want to make sure I have some my default though let's talk about DAC here I think the DAC is my favorite quarterback on the slate despite having said what I said about the run heavy script we look at the DAC in games where he's missing at least one of the big receivers he's at point two one passing that expected points per drop back that's still really good and the numbers I alluded to before with the overall game efficiency account for that and even if I like add in the downgrade for Cooper and for lamb Dallas still projects the second best offense a week 12 overall and like no other offense let me find the number I think no other offense like the top 14 Buffalo's 14th so like what that's low no it's not we'll fight about this later it's not low they're bad anyway they're not bad I'm kidding but in the second half with no CD lamb don't look at me like that are you kidding I'm kidding they're not bad they're facing a good defense that's my out in the second half with no lamb Cedric Wilson at seven targets three deep Michael Gallop had just three there but a 10 total for the game I think those would be the two most logical pass catchers here but Dalton Schultz also had eight targets in that game so we have three viable pass catchers with DAC I think that like if I've got to build one line up for this slate and I'm not thinking about popularity and stuff like that I am going DAC Zeke Gallop and then either Wilson or Schultz I am going heavy Cowboys with four guys there where are you at on like Cowboys relative to the rest of the offense is on this slate I could definitely see that this is again like by default my favorite offense of the week I would have to think that they're a little bit chalkier with the value options with Pollard included in that than the bills just because this game sets up with such a higher total easier you know match up overall and again just like a combination of the bigger names but the the value with it so I think outright this is my favorite offense but I think I might end up with a lot more bills from a game theory standpoint it's not to say I'll have more bills than Cowboys but that that gap is going to narrow because I want to get some leverage on the bills and I mean it's early it's Tuesday November 23rd so we could get some info that people just love the bills and hate the Cowboys and in that case then I'll just stick with the Cowboys but that's not really the way that I would anticipate it works with the over under being what it is well I think that like looking at like optimizer numbers right now I would not be shocked if the bills wind up getting more popular just because like digs project so well relative to other receivers same thing for Josh Allen so I wouldn't be shocked if like that's the like optimizer stack of the week is those two guys together with Gallo probably still in there too but like I think I wouldn't be shocked if it does drift that direction so I think to me it's probably fair to assume that the Cowboys are the offense of the Slates and if that's the case you know I will be okay going with like my Zeke Pollard lineup with Josh Allen a quarterback but in a vacuum I prefer Dak so we'll see the way that goes but I do think he grades out well there pass catchers go what are your thoughts on them for Dallas yeah so in the second half did you go over your second half numbers yet yes okay I listened usually I'm the one who doesn't listen so I can't be mad I got a lot I got like a lot of windows open if I sent you what I got open you would I know I know good but I got my I got more detailed notes on these games open and trying to follow along in your game notes and you know I just get a little bit lost sometimes I think for me Gallop despite the fact that he didn't get as much work as Cedric Wilson in the second half last week still to play there's a reason that he's been other number three receiver I'm just a huge fan of Michael Gallop and I know you are too as a talent I'm just really hard to pass him up at 6500 with or without CDLAM I almost probably prefer him with CDLAM to take a greed attention away from him and improve this offense efficiency so I'm sure I'll hit the lock button on a few running backs if I really well actually maybe not there might not be a lock button running back necessarily like in every single lineup no I agree so Gallop might be the closest thing to a lock button which is a little bit scary because he's a receiver and especially a receiver who can be a little bit volatile with the downfield work but I think he might be the become the best overall play at that salary Cedric Wilson will be in play even with LAM because you would assume that he still out there running routes in a game with a 50 point 50 and a half point total and Dalton Schultz I think he might be the tight end too like Darren Waller so far ahead of everyone else but my Sims do have Dalton Schultz second although it's not a huge gap over anybody else would that change if LAM goes that's tough because that just helps Schultz's touchdown probability and he had a target from the first half last week when LAM was out there I mean we're still yeah the thing is we're still losing Cooper like that's that we know yep so it's not like having LAM back returns this offense to its original form so I think he would probably still stay the number two for me I'd agree and I think that like if we're looking at Schultz compared to we keep doing this because tight end flex is very viable Schultz compared to the high 5000 receivers I prefer Schultz over Hunter Renfrow at $6200 do you do you disagree I think I go Renfrow there you want to bet sure okay that was stupid anyway whatever who cares I think he's comparable to Trayquan Smith probably have a slight preference for Manny does this mean then you have Trayquan Smith over Hunter Renfrow let me look just let me look here quick I mean if I'm hearing you right because I'm trying to listen again for once yeah I think I actually do do you want to bet on that maybe I should rethink that no I want the Dalton Schultz one think about her Dalton Schultz over Trayquan Manny is tough I think I prefer Manny I prefer Manny I should say that defend I prefer Manny over Dalton Schultz so like Schultz isn't that discussion though I think it's the key takeaway here right yeah he is and that opens things up again to the double tight end lineup that we've been talking about forever again we see that in small lineups and small slates and if you really think that bears and lions is terrible it's like a two and a half game slate so that would make it even more likely that we get a double tight end option like if you think it's a terrible game where David Montgomery and DeAndre Swift fall short then it's like Zeke and Ingram and then like right that's I think you go Waller Schultz and feel good about that so I think that Schultz grades out pretty well there let's talk about the Raider side of things starting off with the past catchers in the games with no with no rug we talked about the efficiency it is what it is but like from a volume perspective Darren Waller is at a 25 percent target here in those games 24 percent of the deep targets and 21 percent in the red zone Hunter Renfrow is at 21 percent with 12 percent deep and 26 percent in the red zone so good red zone work for Hunter Renfrow I think that like with Waller he just don't I don't really feel the need to nitpick it honestly like he's just good and he can be good and I don't need to like poo poo it too much he's just good that's fine as far as Renfrow goes even with those really good target shares I think he's had like 49 49 and 30 something yards in those games like his eight odd is Rondale Moresk he's not had more than 58 yards since week three he is not top 77 yards all year he is $2,600 he's like Adrian Peterson we're like he could kill me with two touchdowns but like I kind of still don't want to go there so I think to me it's it's like it's just Waller and then like I don't know after that sell me on on Renfrow go I mean it's it's literally this is our favorite game he's got a 21 percent target share very relevant sample two 1.7 red zone targets per game in that sample 0.7 end zone targets per game in that sample that's as many end zone targets as Darren Waller more red zone targets than Darren Waller I know the eight odds 3.7 yards in this split but this would very easily lead to like a I mean let me just outline 6 catches on 7.3 targets about 42 yards per game 11.3 faddle points 10.3 expected faddle points so a little bit of an overperformance there but you give me 12 faddle points on a slate where there might not be like only one game might be relevant that could be enough at 6200 for him to make an optimal boo and we're not just looking at someone who has a low a dot who comes off the field in the red zone he has a red zone and end zone the potential so his max is 77 yards how many times Dalton Schultz is top that 3 he has 53 1454 yards the past three weeks and Hunter info is not top 15 that time maybe Dalton Schultz is better maybe maybe maybe I'm still skeptical on run for I get the case does it change anything for you I catch popularity due to optimizer stuff I'm not sitting here saying like Hunter Renfrow is my lock of the week okay cool I don't know where you I just think that from a floor and plus still a ceiling projection of some sort he has volume which can lead to upside he has red zone volume which can lead to upside that's that's the case for Hunter Renfrow and the other case he's in the best game of the slate fair enough running backs, Josh Jacobs and Kenyan Drake Drake I don't think I'm going to use I can see the case for it kind of because he's a little bit Tony Pollard-esque because in the three games with no rugs he does have 4.3 targets per game with 53 53.3 yards per game 15% red zone share I didn't cross him off immediately gave it some time to get there but like you know it's worth mentioning that he's like doing some stuff Josh Jacobs actually has a pretty good passing game role he's at 5.3 targets per game with no with no rugs only 64 yards per game but like you know yardage can be kind of fluky maybe it's not in this scenario 26% red zone share I feel like to me it's like if we assume there's no chimera Monty or Zeke Ingra Monty Swift Jacobs Pollard but the conversation between Pollard and Jacobs is one where I'm actually like not totally off the idea of putting Pollard above Jacobs but I also think I'm going to use him I think I want to say that where he at in Josh Jacobs Yeah I mean you mentioned the good receiving workload in this sample without Henry rugs the 5.3 targets is 15% that's pretty phenomenal it's a good game again maybe I'm losing my my touch with understanding what goes on in your mind but I figured high scoring game under dogs 15% target share good overall workload would get you pretty excited about a Josh Jacobs on a small slate and I know the yardage upside hasn't been there but you said yardage is fluky but you're listed off Dalton Schultz yardage as if like those are Gospel Gospel so project like a for 150 maybe maybe maybe I'm just losing my touch with Jim but I mean you look you give him his workload from last week the nine carries 37 yards 7 targets 5 catches 24 yards that's not anything amazing you say he falls into the end zone because this game is a little bit higher scoring and the team moves the ball a little bit better that gets him up to 14.7 I guess if it's a one yard touchdown at 6700 that could be plenty and that's not even really a great stat line so where does he grade out for you relative other running backs despite all that like I still rank them similarly although I think that Jacobs is overpowered for sure okay it's just we have look running backs are so easy to talk about because it's just volume based so we it's not like we there's one team where we're not looking at any running backs and that's the bills so we have at least five running backs we can discuss Jacobs is within that conversation but I do think that at a certain point I gotta I can't play all five running backs because I'm not going to play 10,000 lineups so I would be open to going Jacobs over Ingram if I'm trying to get cute like I think it's close enough fair process wise process wise he's last for me out of the the top five backs yeah but I don't think it's so far that we like write him off he does have a lot of similarities and like his overall aesthetic to like I mean like overall workload resume situation to David Montgomery and which means as well within his range of outcomes to score David Montgomery therefore it's worthwhile to have exposure to Josh Jacobs so I do want to get there but the concern is I'm not sure if the yardage situation is going to go away I think he's pretty limited there because talent is you know whatever and they also just can't run the football which matters too so maybe I'm higher than Josh Jacobs and I let on just you know I was down playing the artist I think it's probably going to stick but like two touchdowns that could happen so no even one even one touchdown yeah yeah for sure yeah yeah so there is that any any thoughts on because we're just talking about all the value receivers Zay Jones Brian Edwards they've not been they've been on the field running sprints not getting a whole lot of work would you consider them at all in game stacks so they can catch a deep ball I don't like that analysis ever I'm more okay with it on a short slate I guess because like you know Zay Jones catches a deep ball for 60 yards and a touchdown that's like 13 points that can that can be enough between the two I prefer Zay Jones he has three targets per game without rugs with five deep targets in that time Brian Edwards 2.7 targets per game four deep targets in that span I feel like people won't use Zay Jones because Brian Edwards tends to get more Twitter love I would prefer not to use them honestly like you can make a case of them I prefer not to use them but like I guess I would just go Zay Jones I don't think anyone will use them yeah that's the like it's just the five ball in that sense and it goes back again to or the other games low scoring because even yes a 60 yard touchdown would be awesome but like two 30 yard catches without the touchdown if there's not a whole lot of fantasy points going around yeah you know that could be enough so they're in play they both have 20 plus yard 8 odds in this three game sample it's super high variance it's more the passing volume that is the bigger concern because they have not seen enough work to kind of bank on that but we're talking about all these receivers I think that within game stacks I could see myself plugging in a Zay Jones or Brian Edwards that's fair um some asking one more question but I forgot it was do you prefer one over the other um probably Zay Jones I think I agree okay any final thoughts for you on this game I know that's what that's the last thing I wanted to bring up all right let's go to bills versus planes bills here 4-point favorites total it's 46 and a half key injury here is Adam Troutman gonna miss 4-6 weeks due to a knee injury we talked about him on Monday his role is getting good that stinks Alvin Camaro missed another practice on Monday seemingly putting him on track to miss this game as well which does influence things a lot with regards to Mark Ingram also worth noting Tron Armstead practiced on Monday it was an estimated practice report so he didn't really practice but like they thought he would have uh Ryan Ramcheck did not that means Ramcheck probably gonna sit Armstead may play which is a good thing because the bills defense despite what Jonathan Taylor did to them still very good so I think that like that's one thing I want to keep in mind with Ingram is that offensive line not at full health bills defense still very good that's why I feel firm putting Zeke above Ingram if Camaro sits but like the volume is still very good and he's $6600 so uh overall view for you on this game what are your thoughts on Mark Ingram etc etc etc so I have this game essentially tied for second on the full slate um in pace right I mean Dallas and Las Vegas is number one but this is a fact it's fourth overall but it's basically tied for second it's fifth and pass rate which is actually better by a range than the Raiders and Cowboys that's all the bills though yes um I like I get that argument here the total being lower than what we have for Raiders Cowboys is why I assumed this game would have less popularity but as you said it's all the bills so that puts me on okay the bills are really easy to justify what is there with the Saints is there anything and I think Rosa knows it's Trayquan Smith right that's what I heard her say Trayquan Smith I think is one of the best overall plays of the week again there's gonna be a lot of variance in that so I'm not guaranteeing a big game but it's $5900 he's got a real path of production in a game where they should be trailing um in these games with Trevor Simeon starting and without Avin Kamara he's got a 21% target share which is tied with Mark Ingram coincidentally for the team lead Adam Trautman would be vacating a 20% target share of his own Smith has seen three of the 18 downfield targets in that sample Marquez Callaway is getting more downfield work but the combination of volume and downfield leverage belongs to Smith is very easy to plug back in with Josh Allen and Stefan Diggs I think it's a very easy case to be made this week for Trayquan so yes a lot of the appeal comes from the bill side but if you are cool going back to Trayquan Marquez Callaway there's no reason that Alan Diggs Emmanuel Sanders or Dawson Knox plus Callaway Trayquan Smith stack is better or so much worse than a DAC Gallup Darren Waller Zay Jones like Dart Throw I don't see it as that big of a gap so I think the real leverage here is going to come from if you're okay building back up with the Saints which I think I would be Trayquan versus Manny and Beasley what you got I can tell you here with my Sims okay so I would have floor wise Manny Cole Beasley Trayquan ceiling wise Manny Trayquan Beasley it's not that far give me that one I want that one I want Manny Trayquan Beasley that's my ranking of those three guys because I think that your case for Trayquan makes a lot of sense he ran the most routes last week he had 64 yards he's got some some yardage juice in there as well you mentioned the combination of overall work with some deep work that's good and the overall work should likely increase with no Adam Troutman I'm just regurgitating what you said but like that's fine I'm agreeing with you so I think that Trayquan does grayed out pretty well and I do like him a decent amount here I think that he would be the number two bring back behind Mark Ingram Ingram is the number one obviously but I'd put Trayquan number two but I would put Manny higher part of that is obviously a revenge game but also like you think about Marshawn Lattimore facing out of Staphon Diggs that doesn't lower me on Diggs but maybe it shuffles a target and a half away from Staphon Diggs over to other guys and it could be Manny and we've seen number two pieces in offense do really well against the Saints defense this year Manny in the games with Dawson Knox is third of the team in targets behind Diggs and Beasley Manny is at 16% and Manny has a 28% deep target share in that time whereas Beasley is at 5% shocker so I would go Manny as my favorite receiver with a salary below 6000 above Cedric Wilson I would go Manny Trayquan Cedric Wilson I think with three guys if we assume Lamb sits if we put Wilson in that discussion where does he slot in for you assuming Lamb sits I still might have him third because Manny in theory is the number two or the 2A with Dawson Knox and Cole Beasley just kind of thrown in there together you never know with that team with Cedric Wilson he's not going to be the number one either way it's going to be Michael Gallup potentially Dawson Schultz over him Trayquan should be the number one so the offensive expectations are enough for me to keep Emmanuel Sanders aka Manny aka Emmanuel Sanders as the number one for me out of those three but I would put Smith over Wilson me too I think that's where I'm at as well so I think that we're in agreement with this mid-range receivers talking about Stefan Diggs Diggs in the games with Dawson Knox 27% target share 31% deep 32% in the red zone but he's salaried as if that's the case $8300 that's a lot but also again he's there for a reason he is the one stand out on the slate if we don't get Lamb and if we don't count Gallup as being that I think Gallup's kind of you know whatever where you having Diggs relative to other high-end guys in the slate and that means I'm including Zeke including Waller in terms of stud prioritization where does Diggs great out for you there so he is effectively the the slate breaker and what I mean by that is that Darren Waller unless he has like the Darren Waller out of nowhere 30 30.18 target game you know his ceiling like his 75th percentile ceiling is 16.8 points in my Sims other guys are around 12 or 11 like you know if he gets you 20 of course if he gets 20 in all the other tight ends boss that's one conversation but if anyone is going to get 30 plus points on this slate outside of the quarterbacks it's very obviously to me going to be Stefan Diggs because of the way that he can accrue fantasy points on splash plays but also be really involved near the goal line and the the thing for me that it keeps drawing me back in is that it's got a 29 percent target share over the past two games that was after a four straight games with below 25 percent so we were kind of tracking that and the workload has just been so good I kind of wish the results weren't so good on that way he would be a little bit less popular but maybe the salary would come down as a result so either way his salary doesn't matter and I have him as 32 percent likely to lead this slate among receivers in fantasy points that feels right just because of the high variance nature of wide receiver that might be around where his popularity number falls but the one thing that I can really see bumping up Stefan Diggs his popularity numbers is the sheer fact that like you can just kind of get back up to him and honestly one of the biggest things I'm struggling with is like if I have 8300 left for a receiver am I always going to plug in Stefan Diggs because I feel like that's almost a lock for a duplicated lineup right so like do you just go gal up in that lineup and leave salary the table I think that's an option I would say come on CD come back that'd be fun that would be cool I think with Diggs I have I don't really care too much about the Marshawn Latimore stuff personally like he's a very good corner in that that's good but like also I trust Brian Dable to like get Stefan Diggs the ball in creative ways get him away from them so I think that if I had 10 Josh Allen lineups I've got Diggs in 6 I've got Manny in 3 I've got I think that's the distribution I have what about you well I'd even go higher than that because I would have multiple guys in the same same but like it's like the default and then I filter in from there sure but like I just wanted to make sure it was clear because that's usually the game we play on a main slate but I'm just going to give sentiment I guess yes yes yes but yeah that sounds about right for me that means no Colby's Lee although it's an indirect Colby's Lee revenge game plan on Thanksgiving not for the Cowboys so he's mad that he isn't playing for the Cowboys in Thanksgiving therefore he wants to stick it to him by beating you should want to lose to the Saints in terms of like NFC playoff positioning I don't know if it matters to the Cowboys but like I'm trying to galaxy brain this like hey man you're the narrative guy I was just running out there I'll workshop it don't worry we'll workshop Matthew Stafford once for Sunday too but I think that you know I'll pop on but he's not a building block stack so like if I have a digs manny stack sure I'll tack Beasley on there I wouldn't say he's like a focal point or like a an Alan Knox stack stuff like that so let me ask you this you build a lineup you like and just for simplicity you have your flex left you've got 8400 left you could plug in Zeke you could plug in the font and digs 차�決y swift I'll even go 9000 let's take a miracle let's not take a miracle you know to finish the question you have 10 lineups like that how often is it Zeke Oh that's a good question so 10 lineups I go 6 Zeke I go 4 digs if lam plays no swift plays I would go, honestly I might go like four Zeke, three lamb, three digs then. But Swift isn't in that combo for you, like to that degree. I think the digs and Zeke put him to shame honestly. Yeah, I'd probably go five and five with Zeke and digs assuming no lamb just because digs has that upside of busting things open. He also has the downside of busting because he's a receiver. But I think that Zeke's potential is more easily replaceable at running back than digs would be. That's the thing is like, I don't think anybody, if we get us to find digs game, there's nobody who can touch that. Yeah, that's, well, yeah, Gallup could, maybe that's just optimistic thinking there. Okay, that's all about Josh Allen in terms of like how we're viewing him relative to Dak. We've mentioned that like probably 83% is where we want to be with those guys combined. If we just expand this to be 100, what I hope someone's just tuning in and it's like, yeah, we already established 83%. What are they talking about? So where do you go if you have 100 between Allen versus Dak? So I'm just, I'm only playing those two. Sure. Is that what you're saying? Yeah. Okay. I was just trying to comprehend. So if I'm only playing Josh Allen and Dak, I would say 60% Allen, 40% Dak. Probably the way I should do it, but I think I'll flip it, 60 Dak, 40 Allen, unless we get a read that Dak is going to be the chalk quarterback of the slate, because I think that roster rates matter more for quarterback on this slate than they do for any other slate because you just get funneled roster rates higher due to the smaller slate. So default is Dak at 60. How would that change for you as CD land plays? It'd be closer to 50, 50. Okay. I'd probably be closer to 65, 35 then just because it decreases the odds the Cowboys go super, super run heavy, which is like my one concern with Dak. So even though I like to make jokes about Josh Allen, it's kind of jokes like 40% is still a lot considering I like Dak. I just think that it's tough. It's a really, it's a good defense he's facing here with the, with the Saints. We haven't seen Josh Allen against a lot of good defenses this year. He's had two games versus above average past defenses out of 10, two out of 10. One, five passing that expected points per drop back in those games. So after you account for expectations, he's been above average is good. 23 and a half fan dual points per game did have one dud from a fan dual perspective in one of those games. So he's been good in those two matchups. It's only two matchups. You know, I think that that that does matter to certain point. I will say it's good that he's indoors because typically Josh Allen deals with a lot of stupid weather will not be the case this week. That's a bump up for him being indoors. So I'm at 60, 40 Dak right now. I think if that were to move, it would move in Josh Allen's favor. Like if I were to cut, if you were to come at me at 12, 25 on Thursday, like, Hey, how did things change between Tuesday and Thursday? I would say I probably became sweeter to Josh Allen than I was. I can see that. I think the thing that would really change for me is that I just am more open to the idea that Allen and Dak don't have big games. And then I just try to differentiate with either Andy Dalton or Derek Carr. I don't think there's any situation where I would play Trevor Simeon or Tim Boyle or Jerry Goff really. And then I have to decide between Dalton and Carr. I think I would just take the extra leverage there and just go Dalton at that point. This is the origin story of how Brandon went 70% Andy Dalton. Yeah, I mean, I've done worse and I've done stuff like this. But again, I'll post simulations, ranges of outcomes up on number fire. And you can kind of look at them and see what the odds are of certain things happening. We know that it's not a lock that it's Josh Allen or Dak who lead this late in fantasy points or go for big games. So that kind of stuff really matters more whenever you only got six options at quarterback. Any final thoughts for you on this game? On this game, I mentioned I love Trey Cuon. I think Callaway is a good a good play as well. The bills are really easy. Oh, I guess we should at least brush on the bills backfield. No, even with my brush, even with three games. I don't think there's any way I would play the bills running backs unless you literally say there won't be any points scored on the slate and, you know, Zeke's Zeke and Pollard are just going to be in like a 50-50 time share. And the only way to score all the points is that you punt at running back so that we get like you need Josh Allen, you needs the fun digs, you need CD lamb, you need Darren Waller in your lineup. And there's just not enough to get to like the other backs in terms of fantasy points. So I can't talk myself into that. So in that situation, I'll go Kenny and Drake. Like, yeah, or Tony Pollard. Yeah, yeah, Kenny and Drake, Tony Pollard. I'd rather do that personally. OK, any final thoughts for this slate now that we talk through it all, we kind of know where we're leaning. Any final thoughts for you before we send out the good people to fill out those beautiful, beautiful lineups? I would say really like for anyone who tuned in late or if you're I guess if you just tuned in late, we talked over a short slate strategy and some some trends with those. I think those really matter more on a slate like this size. But for me, it's going to be really prioritizing Josh Allen and Dak Prescott because that's typically what happens on small slates. Yep. And for me, it's going to be, I say this every week, but like ranking out the running backs, deciding how you want to prioritize them. I would do the same receiver this week because you can because it's a short slate and then doing the same at tight end. You know, hand ranking things gives you a good vibe on like sentiment. And that's why I like it was good for me to have the like Trey Quan versus Dalton Schultz discussion because it helped me realize I'm actually decently having Trey Quan. So have that discussion with yourself, hand rank things, decide how you want to play it because it does help you a lot in terms of prioritization, decision making and overall filling out your lines, be receptive to tight end of the flex. And I think that that is the thing I'd mentioned for this week. That is all that we have here for today. With the thanksgiving preview. But we are back once again tomorrow on Wednesday at 10 a.m. on the FanDuel YouTube page, breaking down the Week 12 main slate to get that hit subscribe on the FanDuel YouTube page. Those of you watching right now, hit the like button, too, because that does help us out a bunch. Thank you to those of you who have done so already. Again, tomorrow, 10 a.m. FanDuel YouTube page and up on the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed after that, hit subscribe there, leave a rating and review and to get all of our other stuff, NBA, NHL, UFC, PGA back after the new year as well. A lot of good stuff here on the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed should be a fun ride. Brandon, 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 FanDuel Podcast Network at FanDuel Podcast. Big thank you to everyone for tuning in for today. Have a happy Thanksgiving. We'll talk to you once again tomorrow to break down the week 12 main slate. This has been the Heat Shack Fantasy podcast powered by Number Fire.