I recently asked my fellow Daily Footballguys for their opinions on multi-stacking teammates in tournaments. It struck me because I see a few reasonable Week 4 options to do it, like in Green Bay, where Randall Cobb and James Jones are likely to just dominate the Packers passing game. I got a solid battery of responses on the effectiveness of the "power stack" and when it's typically best to be rolled out, and I wanted to share it with you guys before lineup lock today:
Justin Howe: Who
among you likes (or is generally willing) to double-stack two high-usage
wideouts? Something like Rodgers-Cobb-Jones (with Davante Adams out), or
Manning-Thomas-Sanders, guys likely to double-team and dominate an entire pass
game? Or do you find yourselves shying away from it due to the negative
correlation and riding just one of them?
Justin
Bonnema: I
don't mind rolling with a power stack when the situation is right. You just
have to be timely. Brady/Gronk/Edelman in Week 2, for example, would have been
killer. Early last year, Manning/Thomas/Thomas, or Manning/Thomas/Manny was
solid. But man when those lineups tank, they tank.
Alessandro
Miglio: I
like it when the market share is high for the pair. Cobb-Jones with Rodgers qualifies
with Adams dinged and the tight end not a big component of the offense.
Gronkowski-Edelman is the same way. Peyton-Sanders-Thomas similar. I am
selective with triple stacks but they’re worthwhile.
Matt
Harmon: The
Palmer/Fitz/Brown stack has been rather profitable for me this year so far,
even with Brown rarely pulling his weight. I do it more to differentiate my lineup when I want to use a
popular player(s). I'll infuse Michael Crabtree into more than a few Carr/Cooper
stacks this weekend, and might do a few of just Carr/Crabtree as well.
Chad
Parsons: Arizona
is another one. Only a huge game from Michael Floyd or Darren Fells really
affects it. It's almost betting
against the other receiving options on the team as much as banking on the two
receivers of choice.
Steve
Buzzard: I
think the double stack is especially good for the more expensive quarterbacks
like Aaron Rodgers, because if you think about the points they need to amass to
win a GPP, it is typically going to be insanely high. In order to score that
high amount of points they will often need to receivers to have great games;
hence, I tend to double-stack them more often.
Jeff
Pasquino: The
double stack is good for leagues and smaller GPPs. It is a rare situation
where all three can hit 5x value (the target for a big GPP).
On DraftKings, I want
at least 4x value, and probably 5x within reach. If I can get two
receivers (even better, a TE and a WR) for $10-11K. To get 60 points from these
two I need a similar line (15-200-2 with one bonus) to get 50 points.
Another reason to
consider it is when there are 2 receivers on a team and virtually nothing
else. Remember last November, when Denver had only Thomas and C.J.
Anderson and virtually nothing else? That's a reasonable target for a
triple-stack.
So the bottom line for
me – triple-stacks need to be cheap on DK and within a 5x realistic
attainability range, which likely keeps my 2 receivers at $10K or less.
Dan
Hindery: I’ve
written about this in the past a couple times in the context of reviewing
Millionaire, but my take is that if you’re in a very large GPP and paying up
for one of the top three quarterbacks, most weeks you'll need 4+ passing
touchdowns from your guy to finish at or near the very top.
If that’s your
realistic goal and you assume your lineup is nearly worthless without four TDs
from your QB, then it makes plenty of sense to double-stack. Especially if you
can get a secondary target that is relatively cheap.
Off the top of my
head, there were at least two or three double-stacks that won the million
dollars last year. One was Rodgers-Cobb-Nelson. One was Romo-Bryant-Witten. I
think there may have also been one with Manning-Julius Thomas-Demaryius Thomas
but I would have to look it up to confirm.
Already this season,
we’ve seen some double stacks that had top 20 finishes on DK.
Brady-Gronk-Edelman carried multiple guys to top 20 finishes.
Rodgers-Cobb-Jones last Monday earned a top 20 finish.
Justin Howe: I've spent awhile looking into it tonight, and
I'm not sure if what I've landed on is my actual take yet, or just the devil's
advocate viewpoint against some sound reasoning from this thread. But here's
what I think I think.
All told, I think it's
a bigger risk than it seems. You're effectively predicting the top two options
in a passing game, of course, which is doable in a few offenses. But it just
seems the combo of rarity (few offenses fit the profile) and variance probability
(a third option asserts himself and/or vultures a TD or two) should give us
pause. Even in a confident match like Rodgers-Cobb-Jones, doesn't it feel like
there's a decent enough chance that the Packers go Lacy-heavy, or Richard
Rodgers steals a TD, or Ty Montgomery steals enough from Jones to make him
remain a role player? Palmer-Fitzgerald-Brown seems solid and predictable, but
isn't there a solid chance the Cards keep running in the red zone, or some
other happening that prevents all three from going off? Which they have to do;
as Jeff pointed out, what are the realistic odds that all three post 4x or 5x
value simultaneously?
Dan Hindery: I think if you’re trying to win the whole
thing in a large field GPP it makes sense...
Is it likely that Rodgers
throws five TD passes this weekend and four of them go to Cobb or Jones? Nope.
Definitely not.
But it’s also not
likely that I put together a million dollar lineup either. I think sometimes we
start thinking of this stuff in terms of what is most likely to happen, when
really in these types of scenarios, we should be asking if there’s a 1% chance.
And if there is, it’s a smart play.
I still think that
when you start looking at the numbers, the odds of you hitting that
one-in-500,000 lineup are higher if you stack a pair of WRs with a QB and hope
that (1) your QB goes off for his best game of the season, and (2) you picked
the right two targets. If so, you are well on your way. And it’s really not
that rare. One of the top 20 lineups last week had Andy Dalton paired with A.J.
Green and Marvin Jones. Dalton threw three TDs. All three went to his top two
WRs. And then the guy had plenty of cash leftover for some chalk plays like
Julio Jones, Adrian Peterson, Devonta Freeman, etc. and he turned his $27 into
$200,000.
B.J. VanderWoude: I had a nice payday last year on the strength
of a Rodgers-Nelson-Cobb stack. It is a high floor strategy that usually hits
value, but definitely lowers your ceiling slightly for all but the biggest
games. While it may be able to find a player to outscore James Jones at his
salary, I play it with the total three scores in mind. That’s a long-winded way
of calling it a hedge with upside. I really can't remember it ever
bombing my lineups other than an ill-advised attempt with
Stafford-Johnson-Tate.
I like throwing in a
pass-catching back that gets some burn in the red zone. Danny Woodhead and
Darren Sproles come to mind. Dion Lewis this year, or Pierre Thomas over the
last couple years too.
Justin Howe: All told, I guess I agree with Dan here:
if you’re trying to just place solidly in a smaller GPP, it might reduce your
floor too much to be reliable. If you’re wanting to stab at a few high-stakes
tournaments and know you’ll need well over 200 points to succeed, it’s a
dynamic and even sensible strategy. It’s the only strategy, really, as any
high-scoring QB you’d roster will already have you halfway to nailing it.
Yes, I read this one. I really apricate your well written article. Thanks for sharing this article. Keep it up. Now it's time to avail 1 litre water bottle for more information.
ReplyDelete