Gross Bombs: NFL Props for Week 16
Josh Gross
The WGC-Dell Technologies Match Play is one of my favorite events year in and year out, as it requires more creative thought and DFS strategy than any other PGA Tour stop. Consequently, this week I’m going to focus on the strategy and roster construction side of things more than specific plays. Regardless of the event, PGA DFS is all about weighing the risks and rewards of players in relation to their ownership projections. Often, you have to feel like you’re on an island when it comes to your viewpoint of a play in order to be in the highest EV position. Enter: Hot takes.
Not all hot takes are meant to be overly spicy (though some will be). Instead, what we’re looking to do here is point out the largest ownership inefficiencies possible. Lastly, don’t feel like you have to play all of the plays I advocate in a lineup. Instead, perhaps pick one or two favorites for single-entry and ask for a minimum of double the field’s exposure to each in our state-of-the-art FTN Optimizer.
As always, check out my Course Fit article for a sense of what we’re looking at this week, and take a glance at all of the Course Fit projections.
1. You don’t need to be obsessed with leaving open the possibility of all six players making the Elite Eight and having all four players in the Final Four.
Apologies in advance, but we’re going to get mathy for this take. Let’s start simple: Here are the probabilities of getting all six of your players through the opening group stage, assuming average win percentages of 33%, 30% and 25%. Historically, the top seeds have advanced just over 30% of the time, so 33% and 30% are very generous:
The remaining probabilities look like so:
At best, we have just a 3.2% chance of getting four golfers into the Sweet 16 and a 21.6% chance of getting three golfers through.
At the very best, we have a 0.1% chance of getting all six through. As unlikely as that is, let’s proceed under the assumption that we do, and calculate the probabilities of getting each of them into the Elite Eight:
Only about 0.05% (five in 10,000) of lineups will, on average, have at least four players into the Elite Eight. Six out of one hundred thousand will have all six. You don’t need to chase this outcome.
Another argument for “proper construction” is that if you have less than six through, you want to make sure each and every one of them can get to the Elite Eight. So, let’s assume you have four players into the Sweet Sixteen. How disadvantageous is it to have two of your guys play each other right away? Your chances of having at least X many players advance from that point, assuming a 60%, 55% and 50% win probability for each, are as follows:
Lots of numbers, I know, so allow me to summarize:
What you lose in ceiling (no chance for all four to advance, you largely gain in floor (at least one is guaranteed to advance). Your chances of getting at least two through actually go up if the Sweet Sixteen matchups are toss-ups (50% instead of 55% or 60%.
Do not use players from the same group, obviously, but it’s OK if you have one or two potential Sweet 16 matchups, especially in smaller contests like single-entry GPPs
2. Every fade is a good fade
Most weeks, for a fade to truly pay off, you want a missed cut. The problem is, the best plays typically have well over a 50% chance to make the cut. This week, even the players with the best chances to advance have less than a 50% chance to win their group. Consequently, every single fade is more likely to help you than hurt you. This is a bit simplified of course, since it also matters who you play in place of them, but the point remains — even the scariest fades are more likely to be eliminated than to move on and hurt your lineups.
3. Bryson DeChambeau is the ultimate correlated leverage play
For those who are unfamiliar with the term, correlated leverage exists when the chalk you’re pivoting off of and the contrarian option you’re pivoting to are inversely correlated with one another. With Talor Gooch projecting as one of the most popular plays of the week, particularly in high-dollar single-entry contests, pivoting off of him to the extremely contrarian Bryson DeChambeau makes a ton of sense. In this case, the inverse correlation is perfectly inverse. In other words, if Bryson wins the group, Gooch is guaranteed to be eliminated.
Why is this such a hot take? Well…
Clearly, Bryson doesn’t feel quite ready to compete to the best of his ability, though I do believe he’s merely trying to eliminate some of the pressure to win with these comments, like the pressure he crumbled under in his match against Brooks Koepka.
All in all, if this event is all about game theory, like I believe it is, then I will happily back the most contrarian one seed in the field in what is probably the weakest group of all (hence Gooch’s popularity).
4. Cameron Young wins us a ton of money
Everything about Young screams match-play superstar. He makes birdies and eagles at a great rate, he drives it extremely well, and he makes putts. Course fit would have been a slight concern due to his short game, but he’s gained over a stroke per round with his short game in his last six rounds. His issue at Sawgrass, his first disappointing result in ages, was an inability to avoid the big number (really bad holes). In match play, that doesn’t matter — a lost hole is just one lost hole.
The fact that DK scoring rewards holes won more than it penalizes holes lost is just icing on the cake for Young. Hopefully the marathon event ends with Young hoisting the trophy and FTN celebrating the big bucks.
