NBA FORUM

Comments

  • Dirtycop

    Anyone else getting there butt kicked in NBA DFS? I spend much more time on NBA than lets say golf or baseball, but NBA requires a large amount of time to be anywhere close to even $$ in my eyes. That being said, if you are good at it, you have a Huge advantage versus those that work 9-5 jobs. I’m about to quit as I realize I’m wasting money. Maybe I’m just terrible at it, but I’ve listened to over 100 hours of crunch time/morning grind/etc., and I’m not getting anywhere. I think those guys are great and it fills up an hour or two of time at work, but they are mostly giving general ideas of the upcoming slate. They help me more than anything so I want to make sure I’m not portraying them as the reason. I use Rotogrinders tools and chrome extensions. I understand a reasonable loss, but in NBA, I’m getting crushed. I also understand variance of tourneys and realize getting a top score is essential for pulling ahead if you are playing gpps, but my scores are just low too often.

  • jilesofthetrees

    • 2016 NASCAR Live Finalist

    @NoLimits0 said...

    By your argument then no one knows if they are +EV or -EV…even if you lost so much you can just argue I’ve been unlucky since I need a large enough of sample size.

    Here’s an interesting fact which another poster posted in an earlier that I found. Youdacao and Awesomo could have WON a Wildcat and still be down for the year. Still don’t think that’s enough proof?

    Fair enough so let’s just assume everyone’s +EV then. If you make money then you are +EV. If you lose money just blame it on not enough samples. So everyone’s +EV. Oh wait…see the flaw if everyone’s +EV?

    Let me help you. What you meant to say was, “well yes those limitations are true, but it isn’t apparent to me how to better evaluate performance?”
    How can we simplifiy this problem? What if we assumed that all top 1 percent lineups were random, and the skill was how frequently you placed in the top percent? Then you could easily calculate anyones top 1% EV. Repeat every percentile down. There’s nothing special about 1%, you could bin by lots of different amounts the power is yours to decide.
    You too can win all the sklansky bucks.

  • Jsnyde6766

    Trolls, do you guys even play neither of you have a screen name attached to your account.

  • anilprao88

    • 26

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #3

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • 2017 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • 2018 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    Jiles has some gems in here. If you look at the results of people who crush at NBA or MLB, or any of the daily sports where you can get much bigger sample sizes, you will find that if you just randomly pick a consecutive 17 slate sample even they will be more likely to come out negative than positive. When you add to this the fact that NFL contests are much larger, and more top heavy in general, it should be fairly obvious to see that trying to judge whether anybody is +EV or -EV in NFL, based on their results from 1 season is foolhardy.

    Edit: Obviously, I’m only talking about GPPs here.

  • sochoice

    • 2017 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2017 FanDuel WFFC Champion

    @NoLimits0 said...

    I’ll be honest with you. The majority of people are not profitable in DFS. In fact more than half of the max entry pros this year were not profitable in NFL (ranked top 50) and from my rough estimates (not as accurate as NFL), that is also true for the NBA. So for a person working a 9-5 job to be profitable you either have to be insanely good or lucky beause most pros aren’t even profitable. Some pros (SaahilSud AssaniFisher, aejones, CSURam88, etc) have either quit or reduced their volume massively since they lost so much.

    Going back to the beginnng, in very basic terms, how do you “know” if a certain player is profitable or not? What are you basing your calculations on? Just curious.

  • buka521

    My biggest problem is i never kw what night im gonna go off.i will have some insanely good nights or weeks but not play alot of money that night.then on other nights completely eat it.do you guys stick to a set amount a day?

  • jcrebs

    I think that this is a great thread, thanks to the original poster for starting this, and to all of the other posters. I have been playing salary cap since the season long days at Smallworld and TSN and Fireleague, then on to dfs in it’s early days, mostly Draftstreet. I was always a little profitable in season long , and in the early days of dfs. Now, have not been profitable over the past two years, DK, NBA, single lineup, single entry GPP, or 3 entry max. I avoid the max entry contests, thinking that will help, but It really is very tough competition now, and frankly my take at this point is that I am just not good enough to be +winnings, but I love the games, researching/building rosters , so I will keep playing, but I only play $10- $20 per day, so for the season I am only negative about $150, so that is acceptable entertainment costs to me. However, in the season long games, participation dried up, and the sites shut down the games, so it could also happen to dfs if player profitability is so hard to achieve, and players keep dropping out. I am probably in the top 1% of one category of dfs players, age, will be 74 in about a month, so this is my retirement entertainment, and I certainly hope that the sites find a way to keep going.

  • superstars92

    • 492

      RG Overall Ranking

    @NoLimits0 said...

    Ok instead of me answering how about you tell me how you know youdacao is positive expected value?

    I’m not insulting him. I’m just stating facts. Those are the facts. He’s down in NFL this season by a lot over 300k total. It’s just a fact not an insult. It’s actually one of the facts I used to show he is -EV but apparently it’s not good enough for you

    So yes please inform us. How do you know he’s positive expected value?

    And please your answer better not be “he submits good lineups.”

    I would love to know the answer to why you think he’s a +EV player when I’m assuming you think most of us are -EV.

    Bro we talked about this on the other thread.

    youdacao is ranked 2nd overall and 4th in the NFL. He must be positive EV!

    Also Awesomo is ranked 1st overall and 2nd in the NFL. He must be positive EV too!

    Can’t you see why people think they are positive EV? It has nothing to do with results…it’s all confirmation bias. People on this thread don’t seem to understand the very definition of confirmation bias.

    Look I can help our your argument. Had youdacao won 200k in the NFL, people wouldn’t even question whether that was lucky or not. He would automatically be assumed to be +EV. Now, since youdacao actually lost 200k in the NFL, people will make an alternative excuse like “given 17 samples he is more likely to lose anyways” or “he could have had a good process but he just got unlucky.”

    So essentially you aren’t gonna win. Youdacao wins 200k -> positive EV player. Youdacao loses 200k -> positive EV player still. Youdacao loses 1 million -> positive EV player.

    It’s called confirmation bias. People just assume he’s +EV to begin with so no matter the result, he’s +EV.

  • superstars92

    • 492

      RG Overall Ranking

    @sochoice said...

    Going back to the beginnng, in very basic terms, how do you “know” if a certain player is profitable or not? What are you basing your calculations on? Just curious.

    He has plenty of ROI data which he has shown me and others on here and I have no issues with what he’s saying. The best way to measure how good of a player is long run ROI. It’s the most objective way to measure it. He also has shown me NBA data (which btw has more samples, if that was the argument to begin with) which I asked about in the past and it has shown the same max entry pros losing too. In golf, I’m almost positive most of the max entry pros are down for the year so far too, although I have no numerical proof of that.

    If you can think of a better way to measure if a player is actually good or not that is not long run ROI, that would be great, but I don’t think there’s a better alternative solution.

  • superstars92

    • 492

      RG Overall Ranking

    @anilprao88 said...

    Jiles has some gems in here. If you look at the results of people who crush at NBA or MLB, or any of the daily sports where you can get much bigger sample sizes, you will find that if you just randomly pick a consecutive 17 slate sample even they will be more likely to come out negative than positive. When you add to this the fact that NFL contests are much larger, and more top heavy in general, it should be fairly obvious to see that trying to judge whether anybody is +EV or -EV in NFL, based on their results from 1 season is foolhardy.

    Edit: Obviously, I’m only talking about GPPs here.

    Yes, so for positive outlier this is true. I think everyone’s missing the point here. If you have a huge positive outlier, that can easily be explained by the top heavy payouts of tournaments. But for a huge consistent negative amount? No, that is definitely statistically significant with the amount of entries they have for each slate, even if it’s only 17 slates.

    I think NoLimits0 repeated what I said in another thread above, but the point is had youdacao won a WC (which in itself is hard to do), he still would be down for the year in the WC. Remember what I said about positive outliers? Well I’m giving youdacao this positive outlier, and he would still be down. That’s statistically significant in the sense he clearly is very -EV in the WC for the year and probably going forward for him in the NFL. If anything, I would advise him to completely stop playing the WC next year or cut down his entry amount, like with SaahilSud.

    As for what jiles said, I can’t answer for NoLimits0, but I’m sure if you do the percentile thing, you will still see youdacao and Awesomo or whoever is down a ton in NFL. If they were consistently getting top 1% and top 5% cashes, they wouldn’t need like 1.5 WC wins to make back their WC PNL just to break even.

  • superstars92

    • 492

      RG Overall Ranking

    Anyways, I think the overall point to the OP’s question is NBA is hard. Math is hard too. So are algos.

  • awesemo

    • 1

      RG Overall Ranking

    • Ranked #1

      RG Tiered Ranking

    • x3

      2018 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    • 2017 DraftKings FFWC Finalist

    I had a great NFL season; I wasn’t in the red or even close to that. Sure I lost some of it back in the Wildcat but that’s only one tournament. I feel that the data you are making these assumptions from is limited.

  • superstars92

    • 492

      RG Overall Ranking

    @Dirtycop said...

    Anyone else getting there butt kicked in NBA DFS? I spend much more time on NBA than lets say golf or baseball, but NBA requires a large amount of time to be anywhere close to even $$ in my eyes.

    Bro let me help you out here. You just simply haven’t played enough of a sample size to know you are a bad NBA player. You need to play more samples for you to really know. How much do you play? Like 50 times this year (that’s about how much I’ve played I think so I think we are about similar). And like 5-10 entries a slate?

    Clearly you don’t have a big enough sample size to know if you are really good or bad. Keep playing for another 2 years or so to really know. That’s the best advice I got! I learned it on the forum from the previous posts. Learn from the pros! That’s what I do!

    Also, remember, if you really are a dirtycop, “King Kong ain’t got s*** on you.” Inspired by Denzel Washington.

  • sochoice

    • 2017 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2017 FanDuel WFFC Champion

    @superstars92 said...

    He has plenty of ROI data which he has shown me and others on here and I have no issues with what he’s saying. The best way to measure how good of a player is long run ROI. It’s the most objective way to measure it. He also has shown me NBA data (which btw has more samples, if that was the argument to begin with) which I asked about in the past and it has shown the same max entry pros losing too. In golf, I’m almost positive most of the max entry pros are down for the year so far too, although I have no numerical proof of that.

    If you can think of a better way to measure if a player is actually good or not that is not long run ROI, that would be great, but I don’t think there’s a better alternative solution.

    Ok, so where is this ROI data and how is it gathered? For instance, how does one capture H2H or cash game data? Small (less than 100 person) gpp data? Or even get a complete look at one player’s total play on any one weekend? That is what I am asking about as it seems like gathering a total look at one player’s success/failure even on one weekend is impossible.

  • Jvanspro

    @SkateFiend said...

    I’m definitely intrigued, because I was wondered if snake draft DFS was available anywhere.

    Is the upcoming slate’s draft available at around 10 PM pacific time? I like to make my lineup as soon as possible.

    The site says the draft should take no more than 2,5 minutes or so, but at the top of my head (max 20 second, 12 players, 5 rounds) it should take a bit longer than that? Unless everyone just knows exactly what they want, but players tend to milk the clock in snake drafts.

    It really depends on the contest you enter. If you enter a 10 man it will take a little longer (15min or so). I do a lot of 3 mans and they take about 2-3 mins.

    Like I said earlier though. I pre-set my rankings and enter multiple drafts and let the system pick based on my rankings. It works out well. Most people tend to draft based on drafts projections. You can definitely exploit that. Pay close attention to position scarcity each day though. If done correctly, you can gain a large edg.

  • superstars92

    • 492

      RG Overall Ranking

    @sochoice said...

    Ok, so where is this ROI data and how is it gathered? For instance, how does one capture H2H or cash game data? Small (less than 100 person) gpp data? Or even get a complete look at one player’s total play on any one weekend? That is what I am asking about as it seems like gathering a total look at one player’s success/failure even on one weekend is impossible.

    No there’s some huge confusion on this forum. I’ve addressed this last week already actually. This thread seems to be a repeat of the other thread. I’m only talking about GPPs here. The OPs question was also centered around GPP profitability, which is in line with my posts and the data shown here. You have to PM NoLimits to get his data. I sent him a PM a long time ago and he sent me some stuff and I think a lot of people ended up using his data on here. I have checked his data for 2 weeks and it seems correct for those weeks, so I assume it’s overall correct, but I could be wrong. Technically, you should check it for all 17 weeks I guess if you really want to be sure.

    I think Awesomo just responded. My point isn’t even these guys are making or losing money overall in cash games, etc. The point is simple. In GPPs, most of these guys are down. This is a fact. I don’t know what Awesomo is talking about above, but in the most prominent GPPs, it’s a fact that he and youdacao are down for the 17 regular season weeks of the year.

    However, guess what those GPPs do to rankings? They still boost the rankings. So you can actually be down in the NFL GPPs that contribute most to the rankings, but also be up in the overall rankings (like top 5, top 10, etc.).

    Cash games are irrelevant for what I’m saying at least. I have no idea exactly what NoLimits is trying to say, but I think he is also alluding to GPPs. The fact is this.

    Rankings only take into account GPPs. In the largest GPPs, half of the guys ranked in the top 20 were down this year. The rankings are clearly flawed. There’s no disputing that. It doesn’t matter what you do in cash games because cash games aren’t taken into the rankings either.

    Now, whether a player is +EV or -EV, I have no idea (because we can’t see cash game results), but honestly if you guys say 17 is not a big enough sample, then 170 isn’t a big enough sample either. So even if we played 10 years of NFL, no one can truly know if they are +EV or -EV. So at this point (since there hasn’t even been 10 DFS NFL seasons), the fact is absolutely nobody in the world can claim if they are +EV or -EV in the NFL. Nobody.

  • sochoice

    • 2017 DraftKings FBWC Finalist

    • 2017 FanDuel WFFC Champion

    @superstars92 said...

    No there’s some huge confusion on this forum. I’ve addressed this last week already actually. This thread seems to be a repeat of the other thread. I’m only talking about GPPs here. The OPs question was also centered around GPP profitability, which is in line with my posts and the data shown here. You have to PM NoLimits to get his data. I sent him a PM a long time ago and he sent me some stuff and I think a lot of people ended up using his data on here. I have checked his data for 2 weeks and it seems correct for those weeks, so I assume it’s overall correct, but I could be wrong. Technically, you should check it for all 17 weeks I guess if you really want to be sure.

    I think Awesomo just responded. My point isn’t even these guys are making or losing money overall in cash games, etc. The point is simple. In GPPs, most of these guys are down. This is a fact. I don’t know what Awesomo is talking about above, but in the most prominent GPPs, it’s a fact that he and youdacao are down for the 17 regular season weeks of the year.

    However, guess what those GPPs do to rankings? They still boost the rankings. So you can actually be down in the NFL GPPs that contribute most to the rankings, but also be up in the overall rankings (like top 5, top 10, etc.).

    Cash games are irrelevant for what I’m saying at least. I have no idea exactly what NoLimits is trying to say, but I think he is also alluding to GPPs. The fact is this.

    Rankings only take into account GPPs. In the largest GPPs, half of the guys ranked in the top 20 were down this year. The rankings are clearly flawed. That’s a fact. There’s no disputing that. It doesn’t matter what you do in cash games because cash games aren’t taken into the rankings either.

    Now, whether a player is +EV or -EV, I have no idea (because we can’t see cash game results), but honestly if you guys say 17 is not a big enough sample, then 170 isn’t a big enough sample either. So even if we played 10 years of NFL, no one can truly know if they are +EV or -EV. So at this point (since there hasn’t even been 10 DFS NFL seasons), the fact is absolutely nobody in the world can claim if they are +EV or -EV in the NFL. Nobody.

    Ok fair enough. On another note, seems like it takes a lot of effort to track other people’s GPP success/failure. Personally, I care only about my own performance and lineups, but that’s just me.

  • superstars92

    • 492

      RG Overall Ranking

    @sochoice said...

    Ok fair enough. On another note, seems like it takes a lot of effort to track other people’s GPP success/failure. Personally, I care only about my own performance and lineups, but that’s just me.

    I agree here. I have no idea why people would do this, but I guess I even did it for a few weeks just to make sure nothing was out of the ordinary. Over the long run, unless you are using it to like sell that data (which might be useful to some), I feel like it’s useless unless you are a high-stakes player looking to target other high stake players in GPPs.

    Anyways, the conclusion to the OP really is actually either

    1) He needs to play a bit more to get a big enough sample (like my post above about Training Day was a joke but in a way kinda serious)
    2) If he feels like it’s already large enough of a sample, then he should try to treat this more like a hobby and don’t invest too much time/effort and if he wins, that’s great but if he loses, just realize most people lose.
    3) If he really still wants to win, then I advice him to try to get back from work ASAP and then use all the tools most pros would use like Twitter feeds, auto-generation of lineups, etc. (I don’t even do that and I play ok volume so that shows you the dedication it takes to be a great player). Also, I would say build some models that can spit out things beforehand so you don’t have to do all the research at once in the 1 hour making lineups.

    That’s legit advice. Irrelevant to the rest of the thread but to the OP’s point.

    But point 2) is important. I think most people lose in general, which includes a lot of pros in GPPs, so don’t get too discouraged. I’m currently losing in golf this weekend in my GPPs (even though I thought I made good choices) right now so I know how it feels. I can attest to the cash game argument though because I did make it back in cash games, but it won’t be shown in my GPP losses this week.

  • bhdevault

    • Lead Moderator

    • Blogger of the Month

    @sochoice said...

    Ok fair enough. On another note, seems like it takes a lot of effort to track other people’s GPP success/failure. Personally, I care only about my own performance and lineups, but that’s just me.

    100% agree.

  • btwice80

    Despite all the doom and gloom, I’m having my best NBA season ever, and my best season of any sport since 2015 MLB. Quitting cash games (and single entry contests in general) to only play GPP was the best DFS decision I ever made, not to mention a huge stress reliever to not have it all riding on 1-2 lineups. I should note I’m not a max entry guy; I either play between 20-40 lineups in the $33-$44 and $8, or 4-6 in the $400 (DK only).

  • NoLimits0

    Well my original post was just to tell the original poster of this thread that it’s ok to be a losing player in NBA or DFS in general. I used the max entry pros as an example showing that people who work all day and have complex models can still lose money, so don’t get your expectations too high if you are working 9-5.

    But instead I guess people want to disprove the notion that youdacao lost money in NFL this season or he’s really +EV despite the losses. So I tried answering why I didn’t think this was the case but people say my arguments are flawed.

    So I ask you guys. Prove to me youdacao is indeed +EV. I’ll patiently wait for some good explanations of how you know he’s +EV since you don’t like my counterarguments. I’m sure since people here are so smart they should have no issues explaning why he’s +EV in NFL.

    Otherwise nothing I said was factually incorrect and was used in the context to let the original poster know almost everyone loses in the long run in DFS and that’s simply ok.

  • TeamTwerk

    @anilprao88 said...

    Jiles has some gems in here. If you look at the results of people who crush at NBA or MLB, or any of the daily sports where you can get much bigger sample sizes, you will find that if you just randomly pick a consecutive 17 slate sample even they will be more likely to come out negative than positive. When you add to this the fact that NFL contests are much larger, and more top heavy in general, it should be fairly obvious to see that trying to judge whether anybody is +EV or -EV in NFL, based on their results from 1 season is foolhardy.

    Edit: Obviously, I’m only talking about GPPs here.

    I think this is a great post. I would like to hear nolimits response to this claim that the very best players that crush MLB and NBA DFS will be more likely to come out negative than positive over a random consecutive 17 slates of NBA or MLB.

  • NoLimits0

    @TeamTwerk said...

    I think this is a great post. I would like to hear nolimits response to this claim that the very best players that crush MLB and NBA DFS will be more likely to come out negative than positive over a random consecutive 17 slates of NBA or MLB.

    Crush NBA? Have you seen these guys ROI in NBA? Hint it’s negative for like half of the max entry pros this year. But of course you will say sample size isn’t big enough.

    Again prove to me someone like BrandonAdams or flavorflav are +EV. I would be impressed if you could for these 2. For youdacao you have a slightly easier time but I’m still looking for the proof.

  • TeamTwerk

    @NoLimits0 said...

    Crush NBA? Have you seen these guys ROI in NBA? Hint it’s negative for like half of the Mac entry pros this year.

    I don’t know who’s good or who’s bad, or if the rake is too high to even have the game be beatable but I know with the top heaviness of tournaments a player could be putting is sharp +ev lineups but still have a – roi for half a season of NBA, possibly multiple seasons.

  • jilesofthetrees

    • 2016 NASCAR Live Finalist

    @sochoice said...

    Ok fair enough. On another note, seems like it takes a lot of effort to track other people’s GPP success/failure. Personally, I care only about my own performance and lineups, but that’s just me.

    I think you think this means something mature about yourself. At best it just means you’re lazy. At worst you lack the foresight to think of what benefit would come from knowing answers to questions like…..
    What is the maximum winrate for the contest I am entering?
    What implications does variance have on the specific contests I’m entering?
    Are players distributions of scores unique or are we all the same with different means?
    If I decide a contest is +EV for me, am I bankrolled for it given relative likelihood of all possible outcomes?
    How likely could I go (#events) and end up at profit/loss value x?
    It’s possible to do this analysis with a motivation other than reassuring yourself that other people aren’t better than you. Also there’s nothing really wrong with being lazy so w/e.

  • NoLimits0

    @TeamTwerk said...

    I don’t know who’s good or who’s bad, or if the rake is too high to even have the game be beatable but I know with the top heaviness of tournaments a player could be putting is sharp +ev lineups but still have a – roi for half a season of NBA, possibly multiple seasons.

    By your argument youdacao (or BrandonAdams, Assani, SaahilSud, flavorflav, etc.) can never be -EV. Just read what you just said. You can have -ROI for multiple seasons and still be +EV. As a result there’s no way to convince you he’s -EV.

    You know what’s funny. You still haven’t proven to me he’s +EV. You just say my arguments suck but you haven’t shown me one piece of evidence he’s +EV.

    If your argument that he’s +EV is because he’s made money in the past few seasons, that doesn’t work because according to your own words having a few years of sample size isn’t big enough.

    Notice in the group of players I listed above I didn’t list people like ChipotleAddict and papagates or chedibisque or RexGrossman. There was a reason for that.

  • 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.