Matt’s Musings | PGA Data Study, April 2

It’s very difficult to predict golf. I’m not breaking any news here. You all are likely familiar with trying to predict the PGA Tour if you’re reading this. It is a sport filled with randomness and with a lot of moving parts that lead to an ever-increasing amount of variance.

I think the most important thing in life is understanding the game you’re trying to play. It seems silly, but understanding how games (or markets) work is vital for success in most areas, and PGA DFS is no exception. When you’re deciding how to attack a DFS sport, it’s important to understand how the market works (salaries) and how people value different assets in that market (rostership). 

Are we any good at picking mid-range golfers?

For our purposes, we’ll define mid-range as golfers between $8,000 and $9,900. That sounds like a big range, but it makes up the meat of our decision-making process when building lineups. Also, we have a wide range of potential ownership in this price range. We’ve seen golfers at 2% all the way up to 40% or higher in this range. That means that there are huge implications for whether to roster a given golfer. If all things are equal in terms of range of outcome, you obviously want to play the guy who is on fewer lineups in a given contest. 

The 2%-5% group is a bit dicey given the sample size. There are a few outlier performances in that group that seems to be skewing the point average a little bit, but the Top 10 rate is pretty close to our next highest rostered group. All the way at the top, the golfers who reach mega-chalk status typically pay off with a whopping 39% top-10 rate. Again, small sample, but a really solid hit rate if golfers hit that chalk status.

In the middle, throw a dart. I mean, look, I know we’re supposed to act like we know things and feel confident in our data-based approach here but it’s just not the way things shake out. If you can layer your supposed edge and find golfers who are lower-rostered and you feel like they’re better options in this range, then go for it. 

Key Takeaways

In previous iterations of this study, I’ve come to similar conclusions. The absolute max-rostered guys are actually solid plays but we’re not great at differentiating everyone else.

• Avoid the golfers that are on less than 5% of rosters.
• Take some chances with pairing the uber-chalk and one or two high single-digit rostered golfer to get unique in this range.