Big Money
Not many things can sink a daily fantasy sports tournament lineup quicker than your high-priced stud laying a stinker. If you pay up on a player, you’re hoping that he’ll crush his salary-based expectations.
Recently, FantasyLabs Co-founder Jonathan Bales qualified for the DraftKings Fantasy Football World Championship in New York. He described his roster construction philosophy like this: “An elite passer. Chalk (mostly) at running back. Low-owned receivers with upside. A contrarian defense with sack potential.”
That seems simple enough but it got me thinking. Is paying up for an elite quarterback always good? Can you survive eating chalk at running back? At what position has spending big historically been most profitable? And how heavily have those high-priced players been owned in guaranteed prize pools?
To answer these questions, I used the Trends tool here at FantasyLabs. Because player salaries were very different in 2014, I eliminated that season from the sample and concentrated only on games played in 2015 and this season. Next, I looked at the results of the players in the top quintile of salaries at each position.
The Results
DraftKings
| DraftKings | PPG | Plus/Minus | Ownership |
|---|---|---|---|
| QB – $7,800 | 23.45 | 2.43 | 8.90% |
| RB – $7,800 | 22.57 | 3.19 | 21.50% |
| WR – $8,600 | 21.84 | 1.96 | 17.70% |
| TE – $6,900 | 16.3 | 2.57 | 13.80% |
| D – $4,300 | 8.17 | -1.76 | 7.30% |
QBs priced at $7,800 and higher have historically produced the most DK points per game (23.45 PPG) and a solid +2.43 Plus/Minus. An added bonus: They’ve done so at an average ownership of less than nine percent. Paying up for an elite passer appears to be one of the better ways to get a solid return on investment at low ownership. These QBs have had some big games: 10 of the 42 scored at least 31 DK points and six had at least 35.
RBs at $7,800 and higher have produced fewer DK PPG (22.57) than QBs, but they’ve traditionally provided the highest Plus/Minus (+3.19) of all the positions. The RBs have also been owned at the highest percentage by a wide margin. With 69 percent Consistency, these RBs have historically been a very safe investment: 24 percent of the sample scored at least 30 DK points.
I’m somewhat surprised at the results of the WRs. Because of DK’s point-per-reception scoring, I expected WRs to provide more bang for the DFS buck. Also, I was surprised to see just how expensive as a cohort the top quintile of WRs ($8,600) is compared to the QBs and RBs ($7,800). When you pay up for WRs, you really pay up, which means that you’re spending more money on a position that has produced fewer DK PPG (21.84), the lowest Plus/Minus (+1.96), and the second-highest average ownership (17.7 percent) of the three positions. Importantly, 20 percent of the 86 WRs in the sample scored fewer than 10 DK points: Julio Jones scored fewer than six DK points three times.
TEs at $6,900 and higher have been solid: They’ve generated 16.3 DK PPG and a +2.57 Plus/Minus. The position’s upside, though, has been limited: The TEs have scored more than 25 DK points on only five occasions since 2014 — and all of those games were produced by Rob Gronkowski. (May his 2016 season rest in peace.)
Spending large to roster a defense ($3,800) has generally not been profitable. Defense is the only position that has yielded a negative Plus/Minus (-1.76), and 36 percent of the sample scored no more than six DK points. They have traditionally been owned at a low 7.3 percent.
FanDuel
| FanDuel | PPG | Plus/Minus | Ownership |
|---|---|---|---|
| QB – $8,700 | 21.38 | 1.17 | 9.10% |
| RB – $8,500 | 16.62 | 2.44 | 14.60% |
| WR – $8,600 | 16.2 | 0.73 | 19.30% |
| TE – $7,300 | 13.3 | 2.99 | 9.40% |
| K – $5,000 | 8.48 | 0.12 | 5.30% |
| D – $5,100 | 8.6 | 0.23 | 11.10% |
FD QBs priced at $8,700 and more have done well: The quintile’s 21.38 PPG is nearly five points higher than that of any other positional quintile. While the +1.17 Plus/Minus is not gigantic, the QBs provide a solid return at relatively low ownership (9.1 percent). Paying up for elite passers has often provided owners with tournament-winning scores: 32 percent of the sample scored at least 25 FD points, and 14 percent scored at least 30.
RBs at $8,500 and higher have not provided as many FD PPG (16.62) as the QBs, but they have delivered a very solid +2.44 Plus/Minus. More surprising is their ownership (14.6 percent), which is not nearly as chalky as that of their DK counterparts (21.5). Nearly 30 percent of the RBs scored at least 20 FD points.
As is the case on DK, paying up for a high-priced FD WR ($8,600 and up) has been risky business. More expensive than the RBs, the WRs have generated fewer PPG (16.2) with an uninspiring +0.73 Plus/Minus. Their 19.3 percent ownership is the highest of all the positions. They have also been erratic: 17 percent have scored 25 or more FD points while 21 percent have scored fewer than 7 FD points.
TEs priced at $7,300 and higher have been very steady, producing 13.3 FD PPG. In fact, their +2.99 Plus/Minus is the best among all the positional groups. They have also been owned at the second-lowest rate (9.4 percent) among all the positions. And, unlike DK, FD is not a Gronk-heavy platform: 26 percent of the TEs scored 20 or more FD points, and some of those performances were by dudes not named Gronk.
Paying up for a kicker ($5,000 and higher) sometimes could be a contrarian move (at least according to the Kicker Whisperer and their 5.3 percent average ownership), but not many kickers have delivered enormous upside. They have averaged 8.48 FD PPG while yielding a small +0.12 Plus/Minus. Concerning is that 24 percent of these kickers have scored five or fewer FD points.
High-priced defenses ($5,100 and up) have been owned at 11.1 percent, which is higher than both the high-priced QBs and TEs on FD. They’ve averaged 8.6 FD PPG with a +0.23 Plus/Minus. Only 16 percent of the sample scored 15 or more FD points.
What We’ve Learned
Apparently, this Bales character knows what he’s doing.
Paying up for elite passers on both DK and FD has been a sharp move. They produce more PPG than any other position and have the lowest ownership among the skill positions.
Eating elite chalk at RB is a fine practice. These RBs have provided what you’re paying for on a fairly regular basis.
Avoiding high-priced WRs is generally a sharp move in GPPs.
