
I’m going to start this article with some Captain Obvious statements:
- When a chalk defense (I almost always fade the chalk defenses) scores a quick fumble-6 on a BS incomplete pass, that’s bad for me.
- When I am highly leveraged to a wide receiver and his quarterback only throws for 95 yards, that’s bad for me.
- When the mega chalk running back is mediocre all game but manages to get to value in the last quarter, that’s bad for me.
Oftentimes, the key to looking at a play and a trend is to decide on its realistic likelihood of sustainability. Is it really sustainable for a quarterback to keep throwing for less than 100 yards, or for a quarterback to keep throwing 50 or more passes a game? Is it sustainable to expect a player to continue to get multiple touchdowns a game, or for a star player to never get any touchdowns at all?
Will the chalk defense always get that quick fumble-6?
We’re at the point in the season where the public will start to blindly follow some trends, even if they clearly aren’t sustainable. The best contrarian, GPP-winning positions are often spotting these situations and taking a different approach.
This doesn’t mean all of my core plays or favorite picks are contrarian/trend-regression plays. But I tend to stick by a few of them, even if it’s starting to get silly.