NHL FORUM

Comments

  • Morley

    Hey guys, so I’ve been getting more regularly involved with NHL this year. I’ve been doing very well with skaters but have been particularly flummoxed by goalies.

    1. Is there merit to paying up in cash like with SP in baseball?

    2. If model prefers a player going against your goalie in cash, is this a problem? (Medium and large slates only)

    Given the variance and often minimal difference in projections between goalies of significantly different pricing, I have a tough time justifying paying up unless there are some real bargains elsewhere and just happen to have the extra cash or they have an ideal matchup – even then it still feels like a coin flip.

    Then let’s say I view MacKinnon as top C but he’s priced as 5th but then I also really like the goalie he’s facing. Do I scratch one or stick with it. For GPPs it’s pretty obvious but in cash it seems rather overly optimistic to be avoid optimal baselines out of fear MacKinnon gets a hat trick and your goalie gets pulled or MacKinnon gets shutout but Malkin who was same price gets a hat trick. Obviously these are what we look for in GPPs but in cash, wouldn’t it be better to just accept that nearly all goalies are going to let in 2-3 goals each night so you shouldn’t get too worried if one goalie let’s in 3 goals for 10 points and 2 were from MacKinnon vs a pivot goalie doing 3 goals for 9 points or a pivot C getting one goal.

    I often think about this, I’m sure others have too. Would love to hear how others treat their cash lineups in these situations or if they just split em up.

  • hautalak

    @Morley said...

    I often think about this, I’m sure others have too. Would love to hear how others treat their cash lineups in these situations or if they just split em up.

    I haven’t played too much cash in NHL but have started lately with playing triple ups and use a more “cashy” lineup. Unless the goalie is in a smash spot (I think more specifically a shutout situation and that has to be a feeling anyway b/c nothing can substantiate predicting a shutout). I have been “paying down” for the goalies I think will win or have the best chance. Last night that was Bobby Lou. EDM had played 8 games in 13 days so I was ok targeting them. Those are also the situations you want to look for.

    IIRC I believe you play mostly on Yahoo correct? On Yahoo since you have to play 2 Gs going against one of them might not be the worst thing. It seems I do this but on about 4 game slates. I will say there are a lot of times I see lineups like this work for the reasons you stated. I probably wouldn’t go and make this a common strategy but using it for a night where you like a guy but you think his team will lose so going against the goalie won’t hurt too bad. You do have to consider the points you’re losing for the goal though.

  • Blahaaron

    On a short slate using MacK even though he’s going against your goalie is perfectly fine. He does get a ton of shots most nights and a point. Wouldn’t do it on a slate with a lot of games though.
    You wouldn’t want MacK and the rest of COL1 to go off on your goalie

  • cdenny99

    #GoalieDoesn’tMatter

  • MotownGreek

    When it comes to cash it’s very simple, look at the Vegas lines and see what teams are projected to win. If there’s a team on a -200 line, go with that goalie, if there are a couple then pick the cheapest one. In cash you want the W, I don’t chase shutouts or a ton of saves, just want those 3pts for the W, that simple.

  • sirrobert6

    • Blogger of the Month

    side note: this is all DK scoring relevant.

    Q:1. Is there merit to paying up in cash like with SP in baseball?

    A: A lot of this will depend on the slate. For cash goalie, very simply, you need the win. If your goalie doesn’t win you need some sort of random situation (or, a GPP scenario) in order to still be relevant. So, get the safest win. This is where the slate to slate comes in, you need to determine for each particular slate what the best “winning goalie” is. This will be determined both in the goalies salary, salary compared to the other goalies, and how the salary allows you to build.
    For example: If you think Jimmy Howard at home will beat the Coyotes and he costs 7.2k compared to whomever at 8.3k who wasn’t as safe of a win (in my/your opinion) then there’s nothing to stop you from playing Howard at that cheap salary other than how he scripts your card. Say, what ends up happening is the guys Howard allowed us to afford didn’t do much, and we were better off taking the expensive win for 1-2 less fantasy points from our goalie. Sure, we could have left salary on the table, but needless to say that isn’t really optimal. So, a lot of it is slate dependent, but generally speaking, you need the win, and whatever win allows you the best card is what you should go with. Some slates you should spend up at winger and down other places, whatever is best with that goalie win.

    Q:2. If model prefers a player going against your goalie in cash, is this a problem? (Medium and large slates only). (Mackinnon vs. your goalie)

    A: Once again, this totally depends on the slate, but I will say while it can be done it’s SUPER sub-optimal and needs a very particular set of circumstances to take place in order to work out. Moreover, a lot of it has to do with the cost of the player going up against your goalie, and what you need to accomplish from that player to still be successful in cash (which ties into the aforementioned set of circumstances needed to take place).
    Ideally, the person you want going against your goalie doing what they need to do (floor) without ruining their salary demands while still not hurting your goalie is best done with cheaper, less salary demanding players. Simply put, MacKinnon getting more than 2fpts off of anything other than blocked shots and shots on goal, and you’re ruined, where as anything less than three fantasy points from the exact same kind of non-scoring production, or you’re ruined. See? Not ideal.
    So, basically you are hoping for a script where MacKinnon gets a million shots and doesn’t score, while at the same time nobody else in the entire slate can do more or enough to make MacKinnon’s not high enough fpts compared to his salary finish irrelevant. Rather complicated. You should just stick with one.
    Can this happen? Sure, just the other night Ovi had a ton of shots (like 4fpts on DK worth) and didn’t score, making his score not horrid and at the same time the goalie not ruined. But, what he also required was his surrounding salaries of Kane, Forsberg, and Kessel combining for 5fpts. If any or all of them started to outscore him, Ovi’s ownership would have been ruined.

    Unless it’s a super small slate and you are absolutely forced for value, there isn’t really a reason to take both MacKinnon and the goalie he’s against unless you expect the rest of the slate to screw off, because one of them would have to be “too cheap” for this to make any sense at all. Like I said, it’s possible because you only need his floor, but you are looking for a very particular set of events when if he starts to take steps past his floor your idea is almost ruined unless he goes stupid crazy at no ownership.

    Q3: Wouldn’t it be better to just accept that nearly all goalies are going to let in 2-3 goals each night?

    Well, yes and no.
    If you are just looking for the win at any cost, Yes. Accept. Especially if they are cheap.
    No if you are looking for the best possible result. Demand more. Especially if they are expensive.
    If you think it’s Rinne at 8.4k or Howard at 7.2k that will get you that super card win it makes no difference who it is, ideally you should never be taking a goalie you expect to let in three or four goals in the first place, but it depends on your card. It’s very slate dependent in that sense where if you think your card can sustain -3fpts from goals and still beat everyone, that’s fine, but it’s going to need to either be a sick af card of have the slate do boring things.
    It’s just not an optimal decision, but needless to say you absolutely can’t in GPP because nobody can’t theoretically hit a ceiling.

    Most nights my goalie pool is really, really small. In the sense where other people say goalies don’t matter (I disagree) I think how many goalies you play doesn’t matter; in the sense of too few. Your goalie absolutely matters, but in the sense of variance kicking your ass it’s better to stick tight with solid options or go completely beserker with one or two in GPP, rather than take mingling, kind-of options. It important tho to pick the right goalies, and not to go all over the place looking and taking on more issue than you needed. Especially, don’t anti-correlate your goalie picks. Like, don’t have a GPP here with the Avs goalie and a GPP there with the Wild goalie when it’s Avs v Wild and have only one winning card at the end of the day. Keep your pool tight, and keep it relevant. Have two cash goalies max. Let them work in either format for you, because again, in order to win all you need is someone who is going to get you the win. Anything else on top of that in cash is gravy, and in GPP is kind of necessary to takedown. So, I try to take goalies that I can play in both, because shutouts are always relevant in either format, and should be a massive part in your process if you are caring about the best goalie score. Goalie is one of the few places I look for the best score.

    Hope that helps.
    Editing this a thousand times, be patient lol

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

Use our links to sign up and deposit on sites listed in this thread to get these bonuses:

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. Our goal is to help all of our members make more money playing daily fantasy sports!

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