NBA FORUM

Comments

  • tonytone1908

    I mean seriously. A “Punt” use to be just that, a PUNT! We were happy to get 10 or 15 points from a punt last year. Now we can’t even consider a “punt” unless it’s gonna give us 30 points. Last year people were taking down GPP’s with 1 and sometimes 2 people with single digit scores. Some nights the winning score was like 270, now you’re lucky to cash with a 300. There was even a viable NHL strategy last year of taking the lowest priced goalie, who didn’t even have a snowball’s chance in hell of playing, simply because at least you wouldn’t get negative points and you could spend up immensely elsewhere. Hell, in MLB many tourneys have been taken down by simply using the lowest priced SP and spending up everywhere else. Which will lead to me to my NBA LU theory, that it all comes down to your 2 low owned punts that absolutely no one else is on. The rest of your roster has 7 higher owned plays? That’s fine, as long as they are the right plays and you can separate yourself enough on your punts. I took a nice cash on an express slate with Bobby Portis on his 1st breakout night at 0.6% owned. Last 2 minutes of the game I went from a $20 cash to $1500, as a testament to ownership %.

    Some people are right a little bit when they say that ownership % doesn’t matter and to just play the right player. They are totally right. There is nothing wrong with having an immensely chalky player in your LU as long as you’re convinced that they will extremely over-perform. Such as tonight with Matt Barnes or Jamal Crawford. I mean, seriously, do you really think either of them are going to match, let alone out-do their last game? Of course not, which should make them easy fades. Because of their perceived ownership because of last game, they need to outperform even more now which obviously is even more highly unlikely to happen. Although for each chalk play you need to counter with a sure to be low owned play somewhere else on your roster. Lesson learned? Avoid the obvious chalk plays unless you’re convinced you’re getting a MINIMUM 7x, since 6x just don’t cut it these days, ESPECIALLY for chalk. See Jamal Crawford and Matt Barnes tonight.

    Last year I was building LU’s just by what I thought were the best possible options at each position. I rarely took ownership % into account at all. Sometimes my insight from watching previous games would lead me to play a sleeper that not many were on and it worked out in my favor and I at least cashed. All I needed was that one differentiating player.

    But at least, I would normally still cash more often than not. I would many times do 20-50 LU’s with Fantasycruncher and without ever thinking about ownership ‘s would more often than not at least recuperate 80 of my entry fees. Most nights I never got close to getting rich but I would at least have 1 or 2 LU’s get in the top 100 of a GPP and I would rarely get slaughtered for the night overall unless there was a 10k guy with a very random late scratch that I had way too much of for the night. I rarely would completely dud on all my LU’s for any particular night. This year, it’s not the same.

    I don’t blame it on algorithms or scripts. It’s not that at all. Trust me, I looked at many winning LU’s last year. I’m sure I’m not the only one that remembers people winning with absolute ZEROS in their LU’s! Maybe not in full slates, although I’m sure I seen them, but in turbos at least, it was happening all the time. Hell, I seen many tourney winners that were either less than a month old or had less than 5 wins in 4 years. I swore up and down FD had bot players because hell, if a bot takes down a 100k top prize that’s just more money for the bottom line right? I seen many LU’s at the bottom of tourneys with crap players and people said no it was just someone’s placeholder LU or they won a ticket and never changed it. No way, if you seen those LU’s you would never had played them ever. Contrarian is contrarian but this much? Uh uh. Which was even stranger because they obviously weren’t placeholder LU’s, they were just WHACK AZZ LU’s! But what wins it most times? Whack azz LU’s! Shoot, look at the last few LU’s from the shot tonight. Not totally out of line but I don’t care what optimizer I had, those LU’s would not get money out of me.

    I’ve just led myself to the opinion that I need to make myself play the opposite of what I think is the right play. Think about it, when is whatever you think the right play end up being the right play? NEVER! I watch a ton and a ton of basketball. I read, eat, sleep, research, eat, sleep BASKETBALL. I’ve realized that it just never, ever makes sense.

    I guess you just do your best to avoid the chalk, find the sleepers, cross your fingers, and hope for the best!

  • tjabchs6

    @Mindofigor said...

    I think it could be a combination. More information available so more people are getting quality picks, but maybe, just maybe, sites like bbm are starting to get things wrong. Phan is gone and maybe some of the good value plays end up bombing due to bad predictions.

    I know they’ve been high on Shelvin Mack and Pressey for quite some time but these players friggin SUCK.

    DANNY GREEN. Awful projections on him each day for bbm. He’s improved lately, and thus the bbm projections for him have improved, but the first 3 months have been terrible projections for some players like him. However, still pretty good projections overall.

  • cedric19

    I keep reading good, thoughtful posts but a lot of them refer to alternate strategies or an inability to adapt.

    There is a point at which a certain level of overall player field competency means all strategies and adaptations cannot overcome the rake. We are getting close to that, if not already there.

  • TheRyanFlaherty

    Tonight will be another fun case test.
    If Hezonja goes for 30+ than prepare for another sky-high cashline. If he goes for 10 watch things settle down.
    There’s a couple others…The Lowry news was sure to raise DeRozen’s ownership and made Joseph a viable play. And Oladipo will be even more popular with the promise of a higher usage rate…Those couple lineup changes, and the resulting production will likely be the difference between it take 270-280 or 300+ again to cash.

  • yh4j

    @Mindofigor said...

    sites like bbm are starting to get things wrong. Phan is gone and maybe some of the good value plays end up bombing due to bad predictions.

    Do you use Fantasy Labs?

  • TheRyanFlaherty

    Or it’s as simple as this – 18 of the 50 entries currently cashing in my 50/50 have one of 2 identical lineups.
    Every 50/50 I’ve been in the past few days has had between 16-24% of the field consisting of 2 identical lineups, and they’ve won each night.

    I’ll only mention this once here because I’ve gone on at length in a couple other threads, and for whatever reason, a large percentage of people seem to not think this is an issue, but if you want to know where the edge has gone…There it is. 16-24% of the field who can’t even bother to build a lineup are now profitable players.
    As I said, I’ll only mention this once here, as I won’t turn this thread into a crusade about this…but if you are someone that does see the issue in this, I would hope you make that displeasure known and contact the sites.

  • cedric19

    @TheRyanFlaherty said...

    I would hope you make that displeasure known and contact the sites.

    I did this awhile back and got a vague worthless answer

  • tjabchs6

    @TheRyanFlaherty said...

    Or it’s as simple as this – 18 of the 50 entries currently cashing in my 50/50 have one of 2 identical lineups.
    Every 50/50 I’ve been in the past few days has had between 16-24% of the field consisting of 2 identical lineups, and they’ve won each night.

    I’ll only mention this once here because I’ve gone on at length in a couple other threads, and for whatever reason, a large percentage of people seem to not think this is an issue, but if you want to know where the edge has gone…There it is. 16-24% of the field who can’t even bother to build a lineup are now profitable players.
    As I said, I’ll only mention this once here, as I won’t turn this thread into a crusade about this…but if you are someone that does see the issue in this, I would hope you make that displeasure known and contact the sites.

    They’re not profitable.

  • cedric19

    @tjabchs6 said...

    They’re not profitable.

    They don’t have to be profitable to destroy the integrity and profitability of single entry cash games

  • Meatacus

    I was definitely more successful last yr than this yr, however last yr I made my majority of money in Mar & Apr so hopefully that’ll be the same this yr.
    This year, I’m basically down 11% which is pretty much equal to rake as opposed to roughly 30% gain I had last season.
    Last night for example, I was shocked how many were on R.Anderson, sure he had a great matchup and was starting for AD but I definitely didn’t expect he’d get up to 80% owned in Cash and 40-50% in tourneys. I still had high hopes for Dieng, Randolph and Aldridge so I only went with 40% of RA expecting that would be equal or slightly higher than the public. If it wasn’t for the failures of Dieng/Randolph and the monster of RA, I would have been fine Instead it turned out that every LU that I had RA in, won and very few of my other LU’s cashed. I think it just happened to be one of those days, but yes last year and previous years you would not have seen such a high ownership of RA.

    I think what has made this season more difficult is:
    1-more informed players
    2-increased rakes
    3-ease of entering multi LU’s

  • tonytone1908

    @Meatacus said...

    I was definitely more successful last yr than this yr, however last yr I made my majority of money in Mar & Apr so hopefully that’ll be the same this yr.
    This year, I’m basically down 11% which is pretty much equal to rake as opposed to roughly 30% gain I had last season.
    Last night for example, I was shocked how many were on R.Anderson, sure he had a great matchup and was starting for AD but I definitely didn’t expect he’d get up to 80% owned in Cash and 40-50% in tourneys. I still had high hopes for Dieng, Randolph and Aldridge so I only went with 40% of RA expecting that would be equal or slightly higher than the public. If it wasn’t for the failures of Dieng/Randolph and the monster of RA, I would have been fine Instead it turned out that every LU that I had RA in, won and very few of my other LU’s cashed. I think it just happened to be one of those days, but yes last year and previous years you would not have seen such a high ownership of RA.

    I think what has made this season more difficult is:
    1-more informed players
    2-increased rakes
    3-ease of entering multi LU’s

    I’m thinking you’re dead on with #3. I realize the pros had scripts that would rework hundreds of LU’s for them and that was fine with me because it was still a pretty small amount of entries I was facing. But man, I remember last year if I wanted to do 50-100 LU’s it would take me an hour or 2 just to enter them all, making it very tough to react to last minute news. Now it’s a lot easier for more people to enter dozens or hundreds of LU’s in minutes and you’re able to wait it out a little longer before entering them all.

    That’s a huge advantage. I’m blaming it being more difficult on this. My only other excuse is because of these ridiculously high scores this year I’ve forced myself to try and be more contrarian but the idiot in me doesn’t want to allow me to do that. I hate loving a pick early and swapping it out for someone I feel is safer and it bites me in the ass. My first instinct is there but my follow through sucks. Yet when I do stay contrarian I end up on the wrong side of it that night too.

    I guess I’m playing it go big or go home. I’m fine with losing most of the time as long as it comes through for me once in a while in a big way.

  • mattyice522

    I just followed your advice and stacked 4 Spurs players in a LU.

  • JMToWin

    • x2

      2014 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2016 FanDuel WFBC Finalist

    An interesting side note here: as cash games become tougher, tourneys can sometimes become a bit easier. That’s my feeling, at least, as it can become easier to differentiate when you know most players are going to be making fairly “sharp,” by-the-book moves.

    I think this is especially true in MLB, where pivoting becomes a bit more viable given the unpredictable nature of hitters (or, just as importantly – and probably even more valuable – the misconceptions many people have regarding pitchers).

    With that said, I think the crazy negativity surrounding DFS during the second half of NFL also hurt a bit in terms of profitability for non-elite NBA DFSers. Without all the scandals and negativity, we would have had a much larger carryover from NFL to NBA than we had. But with everything being worked through over the next year or two, with legislation and whatnot, I do think we’ll return to a place where NBA becomes softer again. Sure, there is tons of quality information out there, still…but once DFS starts seeing another rise in players, there will be a drop-off in the percentage of players who are accessing and paying attention to this quality information.

  • jimfred82

    • Blogger of the Month

    @JMToWin said...

    An interesting side note here: as cash games become tougher, tourneys can sometimes become a bit easier. That’s my feeling, at least, as it can become easier to differentiate when you know most players are going to be making fairly “sharp,” by-the-book moves.

    there is some logic to this, as it is possible that the tourney cash line is getting lower just as much as the 50/50 cash line is getting higher. I don’t think this is a “six of one, half a dozen of another” scenario, either, as one thing that has really changed about tourneys is that the cash line has gone down to include about an extra 5$ of the field. Just too years ago, most tourneys paid out top 10%, but now 20% (and crappy little 2x pay outs) is borderline norm. If you’re bumping down the amount of people cashing to include an extra 10% of the field, the line will obviously go down… and it’s not like a 50/50 is made of people who half suck and put up like a 150 instead of a 300 to cash.

  • SkateFiend

    At some point in the last 3,4 weeks or so, a whole lot of low priced players became a huge factor in DFS. Aaron Gordon and Myles Turner were both under 15 bucks (Yahoo pricing) fairly recently and sneak “burger” players like Trevor Ariza and Parsons are still under 28 bucks. And more affordable, fresh talent are coming – DJ Augustin, Alex Len, Bojan Bogdanovic and Bobby Portis are all under 13 bucks at Yahoo. Eric Gordon cost as much as KCP and he’s candidate to score 30 points.

    These players are dirt cheap and their floor is usually safe. A few of them also have a deceptively high ceiling, and there’s almost NO risk in taking a flier on at least one of them. At Yahoo everyone hordes the same cheap or mid priced players who consistently do no worse than reach their floor. I could pick Jabari Parker, Mirza Teletovic and Trevor Ariza and get close to 90 points. Maybe Ariza will get me 50 points. But that won’t put me on top, because the half the field have those players, or they mixed and matched them with some other cheap options and produced similar results, if not better.

    It’s become incredibly easy to build a solid base on budget players, and on any given night one of them will play WAY over their head. That pushes back on balanced lineups that used to reach cash lines in double ups. You played safe and produced a good lineup with no duds, but someone else had a value forward or a PG who slightly outperformed your 35 point output from Kyrie Irving, so you lost.

  • cleanslate

    OP, yes, I agree it’s much harder now. This is my 4th year doing NBA DFS and each year the edge narrows a little more. I think the overall skill/knowledge level of players has risen to the point where most people are just losing to the rake at this point in the season.

  • tjabchs6

    @cleanslate said...

    OP, yes, I agree it’s much harder now. This is my 4th year doing NBA DFS and each year the edge narrows a little more. I think the overall skill/knowledge level of players has risen to the point where most people are just losing to the rake at this point in the season.

    Agreed – the edge is definitely narrowing. Along with a lot more public information and resources, a lot of this can be attributed to the industry being shaken up and newer players being turned off – while medium and high volume players continue to play. Sharks remain very high volume players while new players continue to make their way into the same category, so the average skill level continues to climb.

    I’m starting to get to the point where I’m basically just breaking even in cash games now.

  • Cityworkout

    Just look at people playing ABC with Lebron that was a sharp move. I played more KAT/Gordon than Len/ABC but managed to break even. Though I was sleeping on ABC because of how I set my lu early on but value opened up with Grant and a few other guys and it was easier to play ABC with Lebron. ABC was basically a Lebron yesterday if you thought he was in one of those paced up games he excels in and you probably did fine if you had ABC and Len.

  • 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.

Bet with your head, not over it!
Gambling Problem? Call 1-800-Gambler