Daily Fantasy, Daily Life: Volume XXXVIII - Chalk Hits Again
If the New York Post was a tabloid that just covered the DFS industry, the screaming headline this past Monday morning would’ve been plastered over a picture of Josh Jacobs and read …
CHALK HITS AGAIN!
The subheadline would’ve been something like, “Another week, another victory for the chalk!” And make no mistake: Chalk hit again, for – by my count – the fourth week this season.
One look at the Milly Maker on DraftKings is all you need to know, with Jacobs’ ownership coming in a mind-melting 46.71%.
That is bonkers. I mean, just consider the raw numbers: That means out of 221,921 entries, 103,660 people played Jacobs. At home. Against the Texans. For $6.5K. He was, of course, in the winning lineup, which also featured Joe Burrow at 17%. Kenneth Walker at 32%. Austin Ekeler at 21%. JaMarr Chase at 15%, and the Jets defense at – wait for it – nearly 44%.
Look at that: Six out of the nine spots were legit chalk. Cumulative ownership is already at 176%. Sheesh. The lineup was rounded out with Mecole Hardman (2%), Parris Campbell (2.6%) and Hayden Hurst (8%).
OK. So what can we glean from this?
Well, for starters, a chalky lineup can still win all the money provided a few low-owned plays hit. In this case, two low-owned plays in Hardman and Campbell. Also: Everyone who plays GPPs with any ounce of DFS strategy is banging their head against a wall because everyone knows playing chalky lineups in GPPs is for fish and donkeys, two species that have gotten fat and happy so far this year.
And finally, this: Playing chalky plays and winning big money is going to come crashing down. Maybe. I think so. Perhaps.
Here’s the thing: This whole “play the chalk vs. don’t play the chalk” argument is like looking at one of those optical illusions, where you either see an old woman or a young lady.
Jacobs was an objectively awesome play. He was coming off back-to-back games of 37.5 and 33.3 points, was rested due to a bye week, was at home, was playing the worst-ranked rushing defense, and was underpriced.
Clearly, Jacobs was a must-start, no matter how many people were playing him. But … Jacobs was an objectively terrible play. He was coming off back-to-back games of 37.5 and 33.3 points, was rested due to a bye week, was at home, was playing the worst-ranked rushing defense, and was underpriced.
Clearly, everyone was going to play him, and so you had to bench him in favor of Davante Adams at $8.7K, who came in with 8.6% ownership. If Adams has a big game, it could very well come at the expense of Jacobs, and you’d skip past nearly half the field.
Of course, we know how this turned out. Jacobs smashed to the tune of 39.5 points, Adams had 17.5 points. But what if Jacobs scored “only” two touchdowns, and Adams got one of them? Then we’re at somewhere less than 33.5 points for Jacobs, and somewhere north of 23.5 points for Adams. And, just for kicks, let’s give Jacobs one touchdown and Adams two and we’re at somewhere south of 27.5 points for Jacobs and somewhere north of 29.5 points for Adams and we’re sitting here today with a much different headline on the New York Post.
ADAMS CRUSHES CHALK!
So which is it? Which was the right choice? Play Jacobs, or play Adams?
Well, process-wise, Adams was the play. He was six times less owned. Results-wise, Jacobs was the play.
And normally, we can end that here. If you’re a GPP player, you have to play Adams over Jacobs 100% of the time.
But … and I’m loathe to say this … but what if the following is happening: What if, as an industry, we’ve gotten much better at identifying the best plays? Would Jacobs have leapt as much off the page five years ago? Maybe back then he would’ve “only” been 25% owned. Would he have been a good GPP play then? Basically, at what point is a “chalky” player a good play, and how much does it depend on matchup vs. ownership?
I don’t have an answer, but I’m certain we’re going to be talking about it again this week with Derrick Henry taking on the Texans. And, for that matter, Jacobs is going up against the Saints, a team whose team rushing DVOA is ranked 19th and falling. Plus Walker, at home, for $6.5K against the Giants.
I’m writing this before ownership projections come out, but I’ll be shocked if these three aren’t 1-2-3.
Get ready for another chalky week. Fade at your own risk. Fade at your own reward. She’s both old and young. There is no right answer.