This article is part of our Ask the Shark series.
As someone who focuses on cash games in DFS with a conservative-leaning playing style, I'm always a big proponent of rostering players based more on their propensity to accumulate peripheral points than their goal-scoring ability. Sometimes, however, the player pool, texture and size of the slate calls for "chasing goals" in order to remain competitively positioned in contests. Selecting the safest "floor" players across the board in your lineup may not cut it.
This strategic shift arises primarily in three situations: short slates, wildly uneven slates and/or a thin forward pool. Regular players of DFS soccer are very aware of the first, as short slates are a fairly common occurrence in the sport. When there are only four teams from which to select players (and only two favored or at home), it's nearly impossible to avoid rostering one who is typically goal-dependent for points. For cash games on these slates, many times choosing the player with the highest goal-scoring odds is a completely viable strategy. Between just two games, not many goals will be scored overall, so the players who do earn those top-level points are definitely at a premium.
Wildly uneven slates are when there are one (and occasionally two) games that involve an extremely heavy favorite and/or a significantly higher goal total relative to the others. Since the greater proportion of that game's total fantasy points are expected to come through goals and assists rather than peripherals, it may be imperative - even in cash contests - to
As someone who focuses on cash games in DFS with a conservative-leaning playing style, I'm always a big proponent of rostering players based more on their propensity to accumulate peripheral points than their goal-scoring ability. Sometimes, however, the player pool, texture and size of the slate calls for "chasing goals" in order to remain competitively positioned in contests. Selecting the safest "floor" players across the board in your lineup may not cut it.
This strategic shift arises primarily in three situations: short slates, wildly uneven slates and/or a thin forward pool. Regular players of DFS soccer are very aware of the first, as short slates are a fairly common occurrence in the sport. When there are only four teams from which to select players (and only two favored or at home), it's nearly impossible to avoid rostering one who is typically goal-dependent for points. For cash games on these slates, many times choosing the player with the highest goal-scoring odds is a completely viable strategy. Between just two games, not many goals will be scored overall, so the players who do earn those top-level points are definitely at a premium.
Wildly uneven slates are when there are one (and occasionally two) games that involve an extremely heavy favorite and/or a significantly higher goal total relative to the others. Since the greater proportion of that game's total fantasy points are expected to come through goals and assists rather than peripherals, it may be imperative - even in cash contests - to increase your probability of attaining them. These games are prime targets for forwards to bag braces or hat tricks, and depending on their ownership percentage, it could completely knock you out of contention by not having them.
Lastly, there are sometimes slates, whether it's due to the specific matchups, injuries, squad rotation, etc. in which there are simply a dearth of adequate "floor" players who are forward-eligible. You pretty much have no choice but to roster one or even two highly goal-dependent players in cash contests. In these situations, be more inclined to select those who provide the best value salary-wise when compared to their anytime scoring odds. This could lead you to the top-priced stud forward as much as a low-tier striker playing for a home underdog - but either way you have the solace that your opponents are stuck in the same strategic situation as well.
Of course, if you feel as if you're "chasing goals" in cash contests way too often, then it may be your general approach to lineup construction that needs to be reassessed.
Onto this week's question!
When should you follow your 'gut feeling' over statistics and bookmaker odds, or should you never/always do so? - David Ugolini, @DavidUgi
If you're going to rely on "gut feeling" as your primary method of playing DFS, be prepared to have a very empty feeling in your gut when you go broke. There's a reason why top players apply an very analytical approach to games of skill: because in the long-term, mathematics will always triumph over pure luck.
Leveraging statistics and sportsbook odds are the prime ways to back up your DFS play with actual, relevant data to support player selections that provide the highest expected value. More importantly, the main purpose of utilizing these tools is to remove as much psychological bias from the equation. Even if you might not be aware of this bias, we're all human, so some amount of subjectivity exists in everything we do. Haven't you ever had a predilection towards a specific player because his hat trick helped you win a GPP in the past, or on the other hand, despise a certain player because seemingly every time you roster him, he puts up a dud? Delving into the data and focusing on that over your "gut feeling" will eliminate much of these biases, even if they're well hidden.
Player and team data are constants that are non-debatable in factual terms, however, sportsbook odds, are not. They're practically built to be fallible to bias. The misconception that many have about sports betting lines is that they're somehow bestowed upon us by an all-knowing, benevolent handicapper. They're not. While the opening lines do indeed factor in a ton of statistical variables to determine a probabilistic outcome, their sole purpose is to best ensure the sportsbook will receive equal action on both sides of a bet, and the lines will then *move* through the course of a week based on this action.
It is the sentiment of the general betting public - the tens or hundreds of thousands of people wagering on the outcome - that are reflected in the sportsbook odds. Much of this action has an absolute ton of bias that comes with it. Yet, as with any set of large numbers, quite often the individual biases even each other out and regress to the mean, the concept widely referred to as the 'wisdom of the crowd.' Sometimes 100,000 "dumb" people can end up collectively being more correct than a single, sole expert.
As a DFS player, though, it's your job each slate to determine how much you should weigh this information in your play, as with any other types of news, injury reports and so forth. Regardless, the quantifiable nature of both sportsbook odds and raw statistics are likely a much better option to hinge your DFS success on than the erratic nature of human subjectivity.
If you would like to submit a question for this weekly column, feel free to either post it in the comment section below, tweet it to me @blenderhd, or email me at jordan@fantasyflush.com.
