INDUSTRY FORUM

Comments

  • sirrobert6

    • Blogger of the Month

    I’ve predominately been a cash player for the past few years. Last year scoring seemed to go way up, and with that my balanced cash lineups were useless. Adapted, went more ceiling-heavy in cash and took more cheap risks, but I still wasn’t finding results to be content with. With the duplicate trains and overall better foundation of knowledge for players I’ve been finding there’s no longer any edge in cash.

    Mostly, and generically speaking, a lot of people are now playing cash as if it was a GPP and I’m getting smashed. Full team/game stacks to be specific (something that shouldn’t be in a cash game, no?), I get in NFL/MLB case the totals, but in NHL and Soccer where all the vegas totals are generally the same this can get complicated, and doing the same process for building a balanced, spread out card, simply put, week to week doesn’t work anymore.

    What’s worse it seems the people who are finding most success in cash are the ones who, for lack of a better term, really don’t know what they are doing. I used to make content so some people, new and experienced, (at their own risk) ask me questions and I’ve been helping them. I’ve come to find out today one guy I’ve been helping build GPPs has been (unknowing to me) putting them into the double ups and he’s cashed every slate this season. After today he’s hit 6/7 $25 double ups for this season’s EPL. I, on the other hand, building generic cash cards, have found no such results. My cards are still decent enough, but they aren’t smashing. His GPP cards are.

    What I’m after here is; have people have moved away from generic cash builds in cash to more GPP spreads? Am I being -EV for fighting the change? Am I wrong for thinking cash meta shouldn’t change this significantly? I’m shook to my DFS core over this and slightly unwilling to go quietly into the sunset and start abandoning everything I’ve known to be true about cash. I’m even prepared to admit I was never right and just lucky for a few years lol.

    Things adapt, has cash? Because this doesn’t look like cash to me.

  • SkateFiend

    People still play cash game, but to me cash games are mostly dead. The online DFS advice from 2016 that touts cash games as a safer bet or a more reliable way to build bankrolls are severely outdated. There’s so much offense (at least in NBA and MLB) right now that finishing in the top 50% is way harder than the math would seemingly indicate. And more often than not, cash lines in cash games are almost identical to cash lines in GPP contests.

    I used to play 1 or 2 dollar double ups at Yahoo in 2015 and would cash 4 times in a week easy. This was from a bygone era when 2,3 aces of the slate could reliably shut down 2,3 teams, and a few no.2 starters would also suppress offense. And back then someone like Carlos Carrasco was considered no. 2 starter. The formula was simple enough – pay up for pitching and make judicious picks on offense. Since points from pitching was stable, the variance was limited to offense.

    All that’s out of the window. If someone semi chalk double dongs (which happens a lot now) and you don’t have him, you’re halfway dead in all formats. You could pay 10,000 for Kershaw at DK and he may cough up 14 points. The NBA is even worse for reasons that are self explanatory.

    A possible solution is a 10-12 player (random order) snake draft cash games. It would put an end to duplicate or optimized lineups (for the most part, I assume) and give someone a shot at monopolizing on a score that would put you in the top 50%. Some adjustments would be necessary depending on the slate and the sports. For NBA the lineup might have to be limited to 5,6 players.

  • Smallchimp

    @SkateFiend said...

    more often than not, cash lines in cash games are almost identical to cash lines in GPP contests

    This is the worst part about cash at the moment, you’re essentially playing against GPP lineups where the players picked both have a cash floor and a GPP ceiling. You check your opponent’s lineup and somehow they have a hyper-efficient game stack that happened to hit. NFL is a difficult sport because there’s enough information to where the typical person isn’t making outright wrong decisions, they’re at worst playing safe plays that won’t be a dud.

    Like Skater said, there just needs to be a format where there’s only one player owned per contest so either you make a move to specifically own them or you don’t. When a play like Dalvin Cook vs. Atlanta comes up, either you go all in on him or you miss out, there’s not the freebie “tout ___ said to play them, might as well plug and play” issue. The site Draft seems pretty cool with that, but I wish it were a little more wide-scale and there were more roster spots. 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR/TE makes it seem a little too easy for everyone to have a solid team, especially with super small tournaments. Auction and snake formats are cool at the very least, it’s annoying playing against premade lineups that don’t require much more than finding tout info. NFL is just so saturated with armchair touts that the edge is more so knowing specifically picking the right combo of players rather than identifying good plays from scratch, at least in cash.

  • Pandamonious

    • 809

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #86

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • Moderator

    • 2020 Blogger of the Month

    Not trying to rattle any cages, but times change, things evolve. If cash lines in cash games are higher, but people are playing like “they don’t know what they’re doing” well that just doesn’t make sense. What it means is people have realized playing cash games like people did 3, 4, 5 years ago wasn’t optimal There was better ways to do it. The days of “safe,” “balanced,” “consistent,” “high floor” are archaic. Ceiling is everything. If I make a roster in whatever sport, say 8 guys, and they’re all risky, but 3 hit their ceiling, 2 bomb, 2 hit a median type projection and one does slightly better than a median projection, you’re probably outscoring the guy who went safe and balanced and has a roster full of median results.

  • sirrobert6

    • Blogger of the Month

    @Pandamonious said...

    Not trying to rattle any cages, but times change, things evolve. If cash lines in cash games are higher, but people are playing like “they don’t know what they’re doing” well that just doesn’t make sense. What it means is people have realized playing cash games like people did 3, 4, 5 years ago wasn’t optimal There was better ways to do it. The days of “safe,” “balanced,” “consistent,” “high floor” are archaic. Ceiling is everything. If I make a roster in whatever sport, say 8 guys, and they’re all risky, but 3 hit their ceiling, 2 bomb, 2 hit a median type projection and one does slightly better than a median projection, you’re probably outscoring the guy who went safe and balanced and has a roster full of median results.

    All that’s totally fair, no worries! My don’t know what they’re doing was more in reference to less experience people making -EV decisions and consistently finishing higher than the more experienced players with outdated build styles.

  • Jvanspro

    I used to play mostly cash. As the information and industry changed. I did too. I now play 100% GPP. No more cash for me.

  • Smallchimp

    @Pandamonious said...

    Not trying to rattle any cages, but times change, things evolve.

    It just seems like the differences between cash and GPP are blurred. Compared to other sports, it just seems like the difference between “pretty good” and amateur players in cash games is a lot less defined. It isn’t like NBA to where either you know how to use tools like CourtIQ/NBAWOWY or you don’t, for the most part, “chalky” plays have been vetted past the first layer of mistakes that could be made and then it takes out half of the error by default. There’s always an edge of knowing the sport/“hidden” stats, but NFL touts seem to be more willing to share them. NBA players seem to be more frequently a step or two off of being a good play, like it’ll be something where the player looks good on the WOWY inquiry with only inactives removed and that’s the recommended play. At least with that you’re at an advantage because you can make the available tools dance a little. For the NFL, it seems like plays come a lot more ready to plug and play.

    IDK, obviously the game and audience has evolved and there’s going to be that frustration from people who were taught that cash is a way that they can build a bankroll without just depositing more money.

  • SkateFiend

    @Pandamonious said...

    Not trying to rattle any cages, but times change, things evolve. If cash lines in cash games are higher, but people are playing like “they don’t know what they’re doing” well that just doesn’t make sense. What it means is people have realized playing cash games like people did 3, 4, 5 years ago wasn’t optimal There was better ways to do it. The days of “safe,” “balanced,” “consistent,” “high floor” are archaic. Ceiling is everything. If I make a roster in whatever sport, say 8 guys, and they’re all risky, but 3 hit their ceiling, 2 bomb, 2 hit a median type projection and one does slightly better than a median projection, you’re probably outscoring the guy who went safe and balanced and has a roster full of median results.

    Meeting the ceiling only sort of moves you up if the risky player hit two homeruns or something. And at sites like DK, a fourth outfielder who was called up from the minor might be 10-12% owned if he was priced 2,500, because everyone is looking for salary relief. I used to stack the Royals and Marlins consistently in the quarter games. Even when they sore 10 runs and the ownership of these players was less than 2%, that lineup won’t place all that high. Because the offense in baseball is through the roof, enough to dilute stacks and contrarian plays that worked out.

    If there’s someone risky who theoretically has upside, the field will be on him like white on rice. It’s inevitable, the information is out there. If I started Martin Maldonado at .5% ownership and he hits a grand slam, all it would take is a 14 point night from Clayton Kershaw to severely limit that lineup’s potential. When there are like half a dozen teams piling on runs, you lose edge even when you guess right.

    If a GPP approach is necessary for cash games in a high scoring environment and you can only play one cash lineup per site, you might as well stop playing cash games. You won’t be able to cash 4 times in week to grind out a small profit long term. And at least 2,3 times a week, cash line will be around 140 at Yahoo or DK.

  • jimmyquinella

    • Blogger of the Month

    Cash is dead as dead

  • Smallchimp

    @SkateFiend said...

    If a GPP approach is necessary for cash games in a high scoring environment and you can only play one cash lineup per site, you might as well stop playing cash games

    This summarizes it to a tee, if the optimal strategy is to approach with a mostly-GPP strategy, that takes away a lot of the appeal of cash. Obviously it was never going to be a money printer forever, but when the strategy shifts to basically be GPP-lite, it makes more sense to chase a tournament payout than cash payout, especially considering that min-cashing is nearly as good as a H2H/double up payout anyways.

  • drewcrawford03

    • 2019 FanDuel FantaSea Finalist

    • 331

      RG Overall Ranking

    • 2018 FanDuel WFFC Finalist

    100% dead. Every sport, every site.

  • CUTiger81

    I don’t think you can play cash games as a living anymore but I’ve been profitable in NFL cash over 3 years (this year included) and had my best year ever in NBA cash this year across a crap ton of slates. I’m sure there’s very little edge at nose bleed stakes but under the $100 entry point there’s still a ton of inefficiency.

    You can’t tell me there’s no edge in cash games when, in my opinion, anyone who’s doing any detailed work and is thinking clearly would’ve lock button Gallman/Ekeler/Keenan in cash this week and they were 45, 60 & 60% respectively in the big single entry double ups.

  • mrmoz555

    Couldn’t be further from the truth.

  • jlowery73

    2012 DDC Main Event Champion

    • 2014 FAFC Finalist

    • x3

      2015 FACFC Finalist

    Have played DFS since the inception years ago. I mostly stopped playing cash 3 years back in all sports for reasons stated above. What’s the point? You win some weeks, you lose some…rake grows. Overall I just don’t see the profitability anymore. It used to be very high the first 3 or 4 years of DFS….nothing like that anymore.

    Also, to say Gallman was “lock button” is simply hindsight. Guy is not good at football and basically did well because he scored twice. No one that understands football would have blinked if he scores 9-10 fantasy points at the end of the day.

  • Njsum1

    @jlowery73 said...

    Also, to say Gallman was “lock button” is simply hindsight. Guy is not good at football and basically did well because he scored twice. No one that understands football would have blinked if he scores 9-10 fantasy points at the end of the day

    Off topic, yet this is both true and false. It’s true Gallman is not good, he’s not. On Gallman’s receiving touchdown he was Dimes 5th read in the progression. Speaks to how good Dimes is, as a rookie getting to his 5th read. And then he fell over the goal line for a 1yrd run.

    Still….take away his 2 td’s and he still scored 17 DK points. For 4600 seems like a cash play to me. (I don’t play cash) I wasn’t sure on what to do with gallman which is why I was 20%. I liked the opportunity, yet I know he’s not good.

    Keep in mind, Dimes makes everyone better. Imo, and I could be wrong, within a few years, barring injury, I think we’ll be talking about Daniel Jones as a top 5-8 nfl QB.

  • thedude404

    • 2015 FanDuel NBA Playboy Mansion Finalist

    After reading your initial post, I have just one question. Why are you helping people? You’re helping people who in turn are taking money from you. But to answer your question, cash games have been dead since about 2016. Don’t play them unless you feel you are in the top 5% of all DFS players.

  • noddy

    So if you can’t make money in cash games how can you grind and win some money?

  • thedude404

    • 2015 FanDuel NBA Playboy Mansion Finalist

    @noddy said...

    So if you can’t make money in cash games how can you grind and win some money?

    As we all know, roughly about 13% of all players make money in a given month. Just want to be realistic here. But you need to be playing Gpp’s. You need to figure out if you are better at single entry or multi entry. If you are better at single entry, generally I’d be entering the highest dollar single entry contest you can afford within your bankroll constraints. If you find you are more profitable at multi-entry, you need to figure out if you are more profitable at 3 max, 20 max, or 150 max or whatever and max out your entries in that contest, within bankroll constraints. Have realistic expectations. You arent going to hit every week in say NFL….in fact you might only get 1 decent score in a season. But if you are playing the long game your ROI should be positive over the long term. And if you are staying within bankroll constraints, this shouldnt be a problem. If you find that over thousands of entries you are not profitable, you might need to be realistic and realize maybe DFS isnt for you, or just treat it as a hobby with no expectations of being a winning player.

  • CUTiger81

    @jlowery73 said...

    Have played DFS since the inception years ago. I mostly stopped playing cash 3 years back in all sports for reasons stated above. What’s the point? You win some weeks, you lose some…rake grows. Overall I just don’t see the profitability anymore. It used to be very high the first 3 or 4 years of DFS….nothing like that anymore.

    Also, to say Gallman was “lock button” is simply hindsight. Guy is not good at football and basically did well because he scored twice. No one that understands football would have blinked if he scores 9-10 fantasy points at the end of the day.

    It doesn’t matter whether he’s good or bad and whether he scored 6 or 26 DK pts is irrelevant to the discussion. The volume and the matchup is all that really matters IMO. I couldn’t come up with any good reasons to not use him in cash. I guess if you went CMC/Ekeler and just preferred Kerryon to Gallman then that was probably ok but that would be the only good explanation.

    I had Gallman’s touch floor at 12-13 carries and 2-3 catches. If he got me 13/40/0 & 3/30/0 in a 20th percentile outcome I’m ok with that at 4.6k. Take away the two TD’s and the volume alone produced 16.8 pts. I think you’ll find 90% of the sharpest cash players in the industry rostered the 3 guys I mentioned.

  • X Unread Thread
  • X Thread with New Replies*
  • *Jumps to your first unread reply

Subforum Index

RotoGrinders.com is the home of the daily fantasy sports community. Our content, rankings, member blogs, promotions and forum discussion all cater to the players that like to create a new fantasy team every day of the week.

If you or someone you know has a gambling problem, crisis counseling and referral services can be accessed by calling 1-800-GAMBLER (1-800-426-2537) (IL). Gambling problem? Call 1-800-Gambler (NJ/WV/PA), 1-800-9-WITH-IT (IN), 1-800-522-4700 (CO) or 1-800-BETS OFF (IA). 21+. NJ/PA/WV/IN/IA/CO/IL only.