The main slate for week 16 in NFL DFS is a pretty interesting one because I think at least there is a pretty clear build. We can spend down at running back, spend in the mid range there, and then pepper, the high salaried wide receivers, get to a lot of them and feel pretty good about doing so, potentially spend up a tight end, maybe up a lower solid receiver too. We'll break it all down, get you ready. For week 16, let you know why we are leading that way and get you set with all the knowledge you need for week 16's NFL DFS main slate. Welcome on into the heat check fantasy podcast. That's right here on the FanDual Podcast Network and FanDual Research. My name is Jim Sonnis. I am a managing editor of digital media for FanDual Research. Joined here as I am every Thursday by Branding and Dula. He is a senior managing editor for FanDual Research. Brandon, week 16 is coming in. Happy holidays to you. How are you doing today? Well, Jim, my voice isn't great. So we'll keep it a little bit shorter, a little bit sweeter today. I don't know. I was talking to my wife on morning. My voice sounded fine and then we log in. Did you look at the running back pool? Is that what led to the sickness? Yeah. Then it got me down with the sickness, yeah. Oh, down at the sickness. We're going at disturbed at 9-01 central time. That is a harsh wake-up call for sure. But hey, we're going to soldier on through because if all these NFL players can play her, then so can we. We're going to break down week 16 and main NFL DFS. Letting you know where we see value across this week. I actually think there are some pretty good spots at running back, potentially a wide receiver as well. We'll break down bookmaker stacks and much more to get you ready for week 16. But first, a reminder to make sure you are subscribed to the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast, wherever you get your podcasts. Thank you. As you covered four NBA DFS every weekday breaking down the slate with the Daily ISO. You can find that on the cover of the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast, here and also over on FandallTV plus Austin Slam talks the U.S. DFS when they have slates as well, all right here in the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast. No more recap shows for the NFL this year because we have Christmas coming up on Monday, New Year's Day, the following week. So no more recap shows. We'll have the preview shows through the Super Bowl. So you can find us right here Thursdays, 10 a.m. Eastern on the Fandall YouTube page and over on Fandall TV Plus. Also do not forget we have a free play going on each and every week over at Fandall Research. To get yourself entered for no entry fee, go to Fandall.com slash research on the homepage. You'll find a story that has a link to the free play in there, go to Fandall.com slash research to find that free play each and every week. Score early this NFL season with Fandall America's number one sports book right now, new customers get $150 in bonus bets with any winning $5 money line bets. That's 150 bucks if your team wins. If you've been thinking about joining Fandall, there is no better time to get in on the action. The app is so easy to use. There is a wide range of betting options including spreads, player props, totals, and more so visit Fandall, it kickoff the NFL season. Fandall official partner of the NFL must be 21 plus and president select states. Fandall is offering online sports, wagering in Kansas under an agreement with Kansas star casino LLC. First online real money wager, only $5 pre-game money line wager required, $10 first deposit required. Bonus issued as non-lunch robin bonus bets that expire seven days after receipt. See terms at sportsbook.fandall.com gambling problem call 1-800-Gambler or visit Fandall.com slash RG Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Kentucky, Tennessee and Virginia. Call 1-800-NEXT-STEP or text NEXT-STEP to 533-420, Arizona, 1-888-789-7777 or visit zcpg.org slash Jack, Connecticut, 1-800-9 within Indiana. 1-800-522-4700, visit KSGambler.com in Kansas. 1-877-770 stop in Louisiana. Visit mdgamblinghealth.org in Maryland. 1-800-gambler.net in West Virginia. 1-800-522-4700 in Wyoming. Hope is here. Visit gamblinghealthlinema.org. Or call<PHONE_NUMBER> for 247 Supporting Massachusetts or call 1-800-770, hope and why or text hope and why in New York. Let's dig in now to the slate overview for week number 16. And Brandon, to me, it begins with the fact that we actually do have some decent value at running back this week. A couple of guys you could consider below $7,000. And to me, that means I want to get to some high salaried wide receivers. What to you stands that when you break down this week's 16 main slate? An overall lack of quarterbacks as well. There's one guy who stands out. Maybe we can get a... Robert's asking if the Bucks hat means we're on Baker this week. So maybe we have an extra quarterback to consider here. Maybe. I always try not to wear hats of teams playing on the main slate, but I'm not a fan of any team. I'm a fan of teams that give Rashad White a lot of all. I was gonna say, I'm a fan of Rashad White this week, but other than that, I'm a fan of Justin Fields this week. And after that quarterback gets iffy, and I don't know how you build lineups or other people build lineups, but for me, every lineup starts with quarterback. And that just dictates where I go with the rest. I mean, there are values that I want to build around so I could just maybe say that I'm building around them. But as far as when the lineup actually gets... I guess the lineup technically starts with the best values and then it's what quarterback I'm playing, which game do I like? It's hard to find that this week. Yeah, it really is, to me at least, all about Fields. And he really is like the guy for this slate. I agree with that wholeheartedly. And it's hard for me to find another quarterback I like equally to him. Like in our love section, I couldn't really find a second guy that I was like super, super into. So, you know, we'll see how that goes as far as finding alternative quarterbacks for this week. But I think that I agree with you where that is where I began my lineups.  They were like, make sure to fill in your value plays first so you know how much salary you have left. And I was like, oh yeah, this is great advice. Thanks, Fantasy Feud. I think I still have like two bucks in my account there. I should probably find a way to retrieve that. But anyway, like they would tell you to put in the top values first, that was bad. I think it does revolve around gain stacks because for a tournament lineup in NFL DFS, that's gonna be the catalyst for whether or not you come down with the top prize. So to me, it does begin with quarterback. And for this week, it does begin with Fields. You didn't expect a Fantasy Feud shout out on the show here. I may need to rest my voice throughout the show, but I got to just say, I don't know what you're talking about. You don't remember Fantasy Feud? I'm pretty sure you wrote like Fantasy Feud helpers for the different like- No, no, no, it's not that. It just, I don't know how you got onto that so quickly. And in your mind, it makes sense, but- Yeah, I don't know. It's the attention deficit stuff. Sometimes it crops up in very weird ways. But you were talking about like, oh maybe you should get the value plays, blah, blah, blah. And like that was, you know, what got you. What I really meant was like, look, if we have a great value running back, you can maybe say you're starting your lineup there, but the rest of your lineup is built for me built around quarterbacking it. And so it's just in Fields. Yeah. I don't necessarily envision, look, I like DJ more plenty. I don't think I view him by himself as like a guy I want to build around compared to maybe some other receivers. So it was a tricky week. You know, we have a lot of overlap as well, but you know, we're going to kind of, and there's one play who kind of came up right before the show that we reversed course on, which would help a lot. Yeah, usually late week editions are not something we get onto, but I think that the oversight on my part to not be on this guy before was an error. We'll talk about him later on. Let's begin things though by talking about the injuries impacting the week 16 DFS. Like Tyree Kilmas practiced on Wednesday with his ankle injury. It seemed like he was close to playing week 15, but did ultimately wind up sitting. Now this makes it possibly sits again, but like, but how important this game is if they want to win the AFC East? I don't think he will. Devon HN missed practice with a toe injury. The toe injury he played through last week where he most arrested on Wednesday as he's been doing all year long. We'll talk with the Dolphins in the bookmakers section. Jonathan Taylor got into full practice Wednesday with his thumb injury. Zach Moss did not practice with his forearm injury. Michael Pippen is limited. Gives him a pretty good chance to clear concussion protocol by Sunday, which I didn't think would happen given the way that hit looked this past week. Falcons Rush defense has been really good this year, but Taylor's workload has also been good when he's been healthy. So any interest in Taylor, Brandon, as they spend up to be contrarian option for this week? I'm gonna say no, but with the caveat, it might be easy to sort of fall into the same default builds this week. It's hard to know, because we have such a similar process at this point that we align, I don't know if everyone else will align, but allocating a lot of salary to running back is gonna help you be quite different because there are some lower salary backs that optimizers seem to like, some confusingly so, but some justifiably so. I'm not gonna get there. I don't think there's enough wiggle room with the matchup and the salary. He's still great, his workload's great. He could hurt us for not using him. I just don't think that it's likely enough to wanna get there. Yeah, I think that I'm pretty much on the same page with you. I would say of the higher salary running backs, he's the one I'm most likely to wind up using at some point just because he can have yardage upside. He hasn't really shown it this year. He's only had one game with more than a hundred yards in scrimmage. So like he could burn you, but maybe the odds are lower, especially in a tougher matchup on the ground. So he's the most likely high salary back for me, but that still does not mean I'm super high on him regardless. CJ Strad looks to be trending toward another misgain this week due to a concussion. He's still experiencing symptoms, which really bones me out for him. Hope he gets okay here pretty soon, which means case Kenan will likely get the start again. Nico Collins did get in a limited practice on Wednesday after missing last week of the calf injury. We'll talk about Devin Singletary later on, but any interest for you in the past catchers for the Browns with Kenan, or for the Texans against the Browns with Kenan starting? I mean, we saw some life, but I don't really want to bank on case Kenan too much. I agree. So I'd probably lean toward no. I don't think I have to. If anything, I have receivers to pick from. Biggest question, and I don't know the salary, because again, I don't like to look at salaries and then talk myself into guys. I like to talk myself into plays and then see if the salary is reasonable, but where's Noah Brown? He's high, 69. He was one of the guys I looked at on the recap show on Monday, and I kind of thought I'd be on him, even though it's a tough matchup, but once he clocked into 69, I was pretty low on that, even with I thought Stroud had played at that time. And then you take away Stroud against his defense. That's not ideal. So I think that's a bit too high for me. I think that's probably where you'd settle in as well. Yeah, so no pass catchers, I don't think. No, I think that it's really just singletary. If we get there, it is a case Kenan revenge game. So there is that, but that's worth at least a 15% bump to the Texans projections in general, but outside of that. Trevor Lawrence, miss practice Wednesday, did you do his concussion? He still could clear in time. If he gets an unlimited practice on Thursday, but this does ding his odds of playing. Zay Jones probably not gonna go, has a hamstring injury. If Lawrence can't go, will you target any of the Jags pass catchers in a plus matchup? And if he does go, how high would you be on Calvin Ridley and Parker Washington and Evan Ingram? I love, I love Ridley with Lawrence. I really liked Evan Ingram more and more. His target shares have been really consistently high, which is something that I value a lot. I'd probably get to Washington as well, if there's Lawrence. If there's not, that's a big drop off in terms of expected efficiency. Yeah. I think I'd probably, I'd probably be out. Is that too dismissive?  It's just because like the salary is super low at 68 and he's gonna get a lot of volume. He had 12 targets in that game, I think on Monday. Yeah, 12 targets there, 13 week before obviously hideous efficiency in both those games, but they were also way tougher match versus what he gets here against the Buccaneers. So I think like a white Ridley mini game stack is in play. So even if it is CJ Bedford and I do not like CJ Bedford, I think he's pretty trash. Our guy, Nathan Work, got signed out their practice squad. He's with the Patriots now. Like that's so rude of them to take him away from us. At least start if you're gonna take him. And the Texans tried to claim them too.  But the Canadian destroyer. Yeah. I think I would still get to some Ridley. I think I would cross off Washington if it's Bedford, but I could still get to Ridley if it does want to be Bedford. Just not as heavily as I would if it were Lawrence. And I'd probably be right behind this game if it were Lawrence, but I'd be high on Ridley specifically if it were Lawrence too. Yeah. I mean, if your salary's still on the 6,000s and you're the true wide receiver one, even if your quarterback's not great, like. Yeah. I agree. One on the same page. All right. Kenneth Walker III didn't practice Wednesday due to a shoulder injury, which I didn't notice during the game on Monday night. So it's noteworthy. I would say the Seahawks tend to practice less than anybody else in football, I think. So like in terms of like, oh, this guy didn't practice the week. He's still going to play. You know, that's more prevalent with them than anyone else. If Walker does not go, I'm going to speak for you and say we'd be high on Zach Sharpenay if that happens. If Walker does go, we'll talk about how to handle them in the trend section. Geno Smith was also full, meaning he should be good to return this week. Marquis Brown didn't practice Wednesday with a heel injury. He's been dealing with that for a decade now, it seems like. So I bet he finally sits out this week. Greg Dorich, Ron Delmore, and Michael Wilson were the three receivers with Brown missing most in week 15. We'll talk about them in the bookmaker section. The Packers didn't have either Jaden Reed or Christian Watson at practice on Wednesday. Reed suffered a toe injury in week 15 and did not return. Watson has not practiced since his hamstring injury. AJ Dillon practiced, so could have just a one-game absence there. Let's assume that Reed and Watson sits. We could have value plays available in this game with Tucker Kraft at $5,300 a tight end. Dentame and Wix is 54. Are you willing to go with them? Maybe Romeo Dobbs or Aaron Jones in a game with a very low total. Yeah, Wix jumped out to me. He's been running more routes. Dobbs is the kind of player who has been playing. So we're always looking for players whose roles increase, but he's had a knack of scoring touchdowns, which I'll take, even though the results haven't been there, but we can stick with Wix here. Again, roll expansion recently. Got some yardage juice. You can notice the glaring lack of touchdowns there. For the salary of 54, I like that. Might be silly to go with him instead of Dobbs at 57. I'm kind of leading Wix though. I'm still fine with Kraft, but we have a lot of good tight ends this week. So I want to make sure my tight ends have some upside, which I think Kraft does. But Aaron Jones is the one who stands out to me, I think most, because running back's pretty iffy. We're just going to spoil this. We love Rashad White. We love Ty Chandler. After that, it's kind of gray. And I think Jones should at least be in that conversation. He might not, I don't think he'll end up my RB3, but there's like four or five guys who could be RB3 to whatever that math would be, RB7. I think that that consideration is Devon Singletary, Chuba Hubbard, he's the guy we talked about this morning and finally decided we should just be on him. Devon Singletary, 62, Chuba Hubbard, 64, Aaron Jones, 67. I think Bijan Robinson's in that discussion as, please, I'm sorry, I should have warned you all. If you vomited, I'm sorry, upon hearing his name, I'm sorry, that's my bad. But I think he's in play for the RB3 as well. I think they're all kind of in the same tier, honestly. I would probably put Jones at the lower end of that tier. I prefer Wicks as like a value play in this game, but like Jones not out of play, especially if he, you know, our old tag gets a full practice by Friday. And just because I think there's a better indicator of like him being fully, fully healthy versus like playing because he needs to. Yeah, I don't want to think about Bijan too much. I don't think anyone wants to think about Bijan. Yeah, that's part of why I like him is I don't think people will go there despite the fact he's now back indoors, which means a better game environment, facing a bad defense. I think there are things that do benefit him here. Are any Packers like close to core level plays for you? No, I don't think anybody in this game will be, Chuba would be the closest, but like it's just too low a total of me to have like a core play there. I think like Wicks is more so like, okay, I have one slot I'll use for a value receiver. I rotate through Wicks, Jameson Williams, guys like that. I think that that's kind of the round that he's in. Yeah, I don't see any way this game is super high scoring. I know Fandal Sportsbook has odds on. Yeah, take this would be the highest scoring game on Sunday. I wanted to see where it actually ranked. I should have had that pulled up already. I did take the over. So like... Yeah, the over is different than... Than it's scoring 175 points. Yeah, yeah. So this is the second, well tied for the second longest odds to be the highest scoring game on Sunday at plus 1700. Where do I have it ranked among Sunday games? Okay, so Miami Buffalo or Miami Buffalo, Miami Dallas, why'd I sell the injuries tag up? Miami Dallas, I have Minnesota up there and then it drops, ooh, wow. 17 to one might actually not be a bad number. You're already dependent on the Panthers scoring points which is always kind of scary, but like, you know, just saying started out there. I don't think either of us are saying that this game will be a back and forth affair, but I think that there's value plays here and Truba Hubbard many stacked with some Packers. Even like an Aaron Jones stack, I know there's a slight negative correlation longterm between running back stacks, but... It doesn't cancel out upside. Like especially for a guy like Aaron Jones who gets work in the passing game, Hubbard does to an extent too. So like, I... Yeah. And there's a difference. We're talking guys at lower salaries. We're not, we don't need Pete games from everyone. Exactly. Will Leviss didn't practice Wednesday due to a sprained ankle. They're facing the Seahawks who had strong outside corners, but Devin Witherspoon didn't practice Wednesday and then Rik, well, we got benched on Monday for a bit. So that's kind of weird. Any consideration to you, for you to go at Deandre Hopkins with Tannehill likely back in the saddle here? I really like what I see from Hopkins like longterm. I'm not, I'm definitely not out because I love DK Metcalf. So that's a very fun stack to have access to. Guys who just can have 50% in-game target shares coming off of a down game in terms of production, Hopkins is despite what nine targets. Yeah. He had 196 air yards. I mentioned a stat recently where when Elijah Moore got like 245 that there was only like 10 games of players getting to at least 200 as of a couple of weeks ago. It's one of the best like workloads there. He just needs to catch the ball, which is not, that's not in him, but I'd rather have that opportunity than like a lack of that opportunity. So I'm into Hopkins, but I also definitely don't mind the Seahawks defense at 35. Oh yeah, I agree with that. I would say the air yards will go down when it's not pure de-gaffer Will Leviss. I think the efficiency will be neutral, which is good and that helps Hopkins, but like Leviss just like chucks it like no other. Doesn't can't have. His a-dots like high, but it's not like. 9.2. Like Leviss just like bombs. That's high though. It's just bombs. Yeah, but 9.2 is pretty high. Yeah. Hopkins in games that Tannehill started 11 deep targets in six games, 11 deep targets in six games, and he averaged 3.8 in games with Leviss. So I think it'll go down, but like that's fine still just cause like his salary is pretty low as 71. So it's still okay with Hopkins despite the, and again, the efficiency is neutral between Tannehill and Leviss. Brian Robinson mispracticed Wednesday again due to his hamstring injury. The commanders also did not have the starting left tackler center. Seems bad. The backfield was a mess without Robinson last week. So are we good to avoid it against the Jets here? Yeah, nobody got a 50% snap rate on passing. Good. On the other side, Zach Wilson seems likely to sit on week fifth week 16 due to a concussion. That puts Trevor Simeon in line to start. Great matchup, but we can cross off all Jets, right? You're the Trevor guy. So you tell me. It's not his fault. It's the Jets fault. It's not Trevor's fault that he's struggling. We're going to go with that. How low would free? I would need there's hours to be free to get to Breez Hall or Garrett Wilson. Okay. Sometimes that, we always play the opposite game. Like what salary do you think someone's at? Like what salary would you need? Like how far off? Where's my breaking point? I have a total in this game at 33.7. So hard pass. I will not go there. Regardless of how good the matchup is. I don't 33.7 is actually the second highest total on the main slate. So at least there's that. I was going to say, it feels like we're living in the thirties for the past like month and a half. We certainly have been. We are not living in the thirties though with our first game in the bookmaker section. I was still on the Packers and the Panthers when I decided to screen share that is not in the bookmaker section before this week. Instead we're talking about the Cowboys and the Dolphins where the total has gone down a tick to 50 and a half. I agree with that movement personally. I think that it should go that direction. The Dolphins are one of that point favorites. No other total on the slate is higher than 46 and a half. The Cowboys last week Brandon flopped in Buffalo. Down games do happen. But how are you viewing this game for stacking? Is it bullet proof for you? Cause it's not for me. And I kind of want to get your vibe on it. It's not. And like when I look at the Sims are running stuff. A lot of these guys rate out like solid, but not as you would expect based on how high the total is relative to the rest of the slate. A lot of that has to do with salary. But I mean, if we take a step back and look at, we'll start with the Cowboys here.  Like overall, I don't ever truly fear his upside and he has upside. He has like, now his upside's more like in the 28 range than it is like 38, although, you know, he can get over 30. You know, he had a stretch recently where he was sort of living in that 24 to 30 range. And he has that 38 point game. But I don't necessarily fear it. You can't really fear Tony Pollard, although we kind of still maybe some foam of like, no, this is a good workload. I forgot when I was listening running backs. He should be in that discussion though. Yeah. Like what I'm trying to get as it comes down to CD lamb as like a priority.  But I think it comes down to like, does CD lamb become a priority at 94? Is he for you? Relative to the high salary receivers. So let me just pull out here and show all the higher salary receivers. We got Tarika 10,000, Justin Jefferson, 92. Mike Evans, 87. Amon Restain Brown, 86. I'll put DJ Moore in that discussion too at 82. And then Jillian Waddle, 81. I think that lamb is like potentially my favorite of that grouping. I'm hesitant though. But the thing is, he might be your favorite, but are you going to add your way to build lineups, like start lineups with CD lamb? No, because I'm more likely to use Justin Fields as my quarterback and therefore DJ Moore is more likely to be the guy turned to there. So it just makes it feel like by default, this game is not as stackable as other high total games have been in the past for us. I agree. And like even last week, like we liked that game, the Dallas and Buffalo game, but like I was, because I handled, I don't know if people know this, I handled my lineups. I was handling lineups in Sunday morning and I realized I had forgotten Dak. And like, I didn't really care that much that I had forgotten him. Like I went back and added some, but like I didn't get that high. I will say I'm higher on Dak this week than I was last week because the Dolphins defense has gotten a lot of praise recently for good reason, but they've also faced a ton of awful, awful offenses. They faced the Jets twice recently. Zach Wilson didn't play one game, got concussed pretty early in the second game. And then I think they faced the Titans. The Titans actually moved the ball against them with Levis and the Raiders were in there. The commanders were in there. A lot of really bad offenses and the Cowboys aren't that even when they go on the road, like they're still a good offense. Like they had that big game against Philadelphia, which was also on the road. Wind speeds here around 10 miles per hour. So that is a slight downgrade, but like I'm higher on the Cowboys passing offense this week than I was last week. So there's that, but like I agree with you where it's like, I'm having a hard time truly, truly prioritizing this game despite the high total. And then if you flip it around, I mean, we know Tariq Hill, not a hundred percent didn't practice Wednesday dealing with not the kind of injury you really want for someone who's, the reason he's so good is just how fast he is. Now he's still probably faster than anyone on the field anyway, but it's not ideal. There's no real wiggle room for a letdown at the salary of 10,000. We have value, we can get there if we want, especially if we don't play fields. I'm just not as like afraid of it as maybe I should be. Maybe I regret that, but none of these teams are overly stackable and I'm kind of, they're also hard to mini stack because there's no value for the Dolphins. No. There's really no value for the Cowboys either unless you consider Pollard and Ferguson, is it like, but they're like mid-range guys at there. Ferguson especially is at the high end of a value consideration. Robert on YouTube asked if Jaylen Ramsey will shadow CD-Lam. I'd expect him to. Last week he requested to shadow Garrett Wilson and did, Wilson ran 54% of his routes against Ramsey last week. So like, that's not gonna push me off CD-Lam. Honestly, it doesn't bother me at all because CD-Lam's very good. We'll get a lot of volume. It's a fair question to ask because Ramsey's playing very well. But again, different beast for Jaylen Ramsey in 2023 to face CD-Lam than a team quarterback by the two-headed monster Zach Wilson and Trevor Simeon. I do want to talk the backfields here. You talked about Pollard. I think that he is in the mix once again. Just the sour is low enough. It's a good enough team. So I will be on Pollard. But I also think that Devon Achan is worth considering depending on his practice reports for this week. Again, didn't practice Wednesday because of a toe injury. Last week he had zero full practices. He was limited Friday. Didn't think he was gonna go honestly. And then he was active. Had a pretty muted role. But I think the key thing for me is this passing game workload that Achan has seen since he came back from the most recent injury. That's a pretty good workload. It's a bad running back slate. His salary is down to $7,500. And we saw the Cowboys get shredded by a kind of similar back in James Cook last week where he most of it is still the top guy in this backfields based on his snap rates, based on his goal line usage and stuff like that. But like I do find Achan interesting. Is that wrong in your eyes? Achan's, so he's one of those guys where you want, like our process is adjusted opportunities largely within a good offense, with a good red zone role. He's got some of those boxes. But the thing with Achan is that he gets such a high opportunity per snap rate that it's a little bit different at least. He's gotten a carrier target on 52.6% of his snaps this year. That's basically as high as, you know, a full-time running back. Yeah, it's like Derek Henry's. I'm not feeling great, but what year do you think it is? He's Ligera Blunt. What do you mean? Two more different players. They look exactly the same. Like I see no differences between Ligera Blunt and Devon Achan. It's the same rate as Kenneth Walker. It's the same rate as Aaron Jones. Basically the only full-time back, if you consider Derek Henry full-time anymore. So there's always, so tricky because I'm gonna say the word floor. There's a low floor for Achan because he can escape a game with like seven, eight, nine carries, three to four targets, maybe doesn't break anything, but he's just very different within this offense. And if you think this game is high-scoring, I would assume Achan has something to do with it. Sure. If you're low on this game, you're probably like, well, you know, most of it might steal all the goal line work anyway. So there's nothing for Achan left. I think Achan's still in that conversation for the RB3, but he'd be toward the bottom of that tier due to the volatility. Yeah, I think that's fair. Raheem Mostert, like he gets the touchdowns, but the yardage has not been there. 64.7 yards per game since Achan returned, and he's $8,800. I think that that salary gives you an out to say, if it kills me, it kills me. Like I don't think I'll have a single Raheem Mostert share this week. So he's got the 20 touchdowns. How many do you think my model has him expected for? Which is largely based on yardage. How many? 13. He should have seven and a half. Based on long-term stuff that indicates what leads to touchdowns. And it's not like his red zone share is insane. He has a 47.1% red zone share since Achan came back. He has five touchdowns in that time. Like that makes no sense. I think he just scores at such a high rate on his red zone work that, yeah. But is that sustainable? And I think that's the question you're getting at. Well, whenever the team's defending the Dolphins or worried about everyone else and Mostert just gets to walk in, go in the opposite direction. Like, yeah, it might be sustainable for this year. Yeah, I think that Achan is really purely tournaments only and like a low exposure tournament play, but like good for like the low entry tournaments where like your competition with Achan is very small. I would also need a stack of this game to play Achan.  I agree with that too. Any final thoughts for you on this game? Tua, where are you with him? In the QV2 discussion, but like I pivoted off him in my loves for this week just cause like I went to back over him instead. Like it's so hard when you don't run, like you need really good efficiency and really good volume. And like he can have that, but like it's just been like so long. I don't know.  I know. Like- It's an all-ice sunny thing. Donkey brains? Yeah. I have a certificate. What? Deeming me that I don't have donkey brains, but you don't have any such certificate. I know what you were talking about. I know. Where are you on to? I was trying to move past it, but it was too good not to. Are you doing the same with me as Tua though? Yeah. So can I ask you quickly? You know, we saw some tweets or information about the Dallas defense. Where's Dallas' defense for you? Tweets about them? Yeah, like if you remove, like and I think the process makes sense, but like if you remove big plays, like Dallas' defense looks kind of iffy, but you said like, you view Dallas as like a good overall defense, right? Cause Number Fire has some fifths against the pass. Yeah. So- I think they're struggling against the run right now. Jonathan Haken's banged up. He didn't practice on Wednesday against. There's a good shot that he sits.   Maybe that's why I feel lower on Tua. I'm trying to, I'm trying to figure out honestly why I'm lower, but maybe that's it. So like if you view Dallas as a good pass defense and you don't think it's fluky due to like interceptions and touchdowns and stuff like that, like Tua's got four games against top 10 adjusted pass defenses based on Number Fire's metrics. Who's at 237.3 yards per game? This team gets like weird with their splits cause of blocks and stuff, but in terms of efficiency, 0.01 per drop back over expectation in terms of passing that expected point. So he's basically played like to the level of the defense when he's played tough defenses. He's really just torched like the bad defenses. Yeah. So the fear goes down for me. So again, I'm not going to fall or anyone for Tua.  But it's again, it's a goes back to like what I said earlier. I don't like to look at, I've moved past looking at salaries and talking myself into guys. I want to talk myself into the plays that I love and find ways to play them. I'm kind of just fearful of not playing Tua and that sounds wrong. Okay. I think that if I were something at this game, I would say if I have zero guys in this game in my head to head against you, I would not be shocked at all. I will stack it for tournaments at times. But like, I don't think there's anybody here like in maybe Pollard. Maybe, maybe for, I don't know. I don't know. Maybe Pollard, but probably not. All right. Can we just establish that we have Rashad White as the RB1? The entire Chander as the RB2? Yes. We're seeking who to play in our flex, basically. Correct. I don't know if one of those games is in the afternoon, but like point being, this game is in the afternoon as is Bear's Cardinals, and Rashad, the Bucks do play in the afternoon. Why do they play in the afternoon? I have no idea. I couldn't figure that out either. All right. So we probably flexed. They won a prime time baker. Yeah. 405. So we're still seeking that RB3. Pollard might be, no, it's Chuba Hubbard, I think, is where might be Bijan. Oh gosh. How many times can we make people vomit throughout the show between Pollard and Bijan? We're going to do it. Less vomit worthy is Lions at Vikings. Right now, the total is 46 and a half. The spread is three in favor of the Lions in this game. Vikings defense has broadly played well of late. The Bengals did get to them last week, but can the Vikings defense slow the Lions here and how do you view the Vikings offense? I really like Amon Ross, St. Brown still. I feel really good with the way that he gets his work. His red zone rolls phenomenal. I think St. Brown, if we look at receivers above 8,000, he might be my favorite. Other than that, I don't want to get to the running backs, honestly. Either of them? Like as a priority? Yeah. No, do you want to get to them as a priority? Oh, as a priority, no. But I'll filter through. I think Montgomery Sour is pretty interesting at 73, given that he just pees like... The way to handle some running backs this year has been go to the Lions running back who's coming off the down game because their roles have been the exact same. A bit of separation last week where Gids did get more yardage to Montgomery, but they've been the Spider-Man meme. They've been just magnets for each other ever since Montgomery came back as far as yards and scrimmage outside of last week. Sour is 73. People will probably be more higher on the passing game. Gids can be a big game. I can see Montgomery being a tournament play, but no, I don't think I'm prioritizing any Lions this week, honestly. So, okay, maybe this is where we differ. Okay. I like him on wrong. I agree with that part. Like, I think that he's got a great workload. He has a path to a ceiling. His RedZill role has been, I think, undersold by the touchdowns that he's had. If we look at them in the sixth game since Montgomery returned, Amon Ross Saint-Brown has a 45% RedZone chair, a RedZone target chair. Like, that's absurd for a wide receiver. So maybe I should just be higher on Amon Ross Saint-Brown. Maybe he's like the priority here. I think the reason that I didn't list him there is because I know I'll have a lot of fields. And again, I'm going DJ more with fields if I'm using fields. That's the one reason. But like, as like, not considering quarterback, like just like projection, game environment, quarterback skill, Amon Ross probably won there. Yeah. Yeah, that's how I feel. I just don't, I don't wanna play. I'm just on the low on the running backs, I guess. Yeah. I think gives the salaries too high at 84, you know. It's a reaction to a big game last week, which is fine, it happens, but I'm fine. Not getting there. I do wanna play the other running back though, Ty Chandler. It's a really tough matchup for him. Detroit's been awesome against the run this year. So matchup-wise, it's bad. We had a very good matchup last week with the Bengals. But the workload is also really good. Alexander Madison didn't practice again on Wednesday. And in that game, Chandler 23 carries four targets, 57% red zone share. He had four out of seven chances inside the red zone, 157 yards of scrimmage. That yardage will scale back with this matchup, but he's also at home. His role is objectively amazing relative to the rest of the slate. So even in a tough matchup, I wanna be heavy, heavy, heavy on Ty Chandler this week. I think you said he's your RB2. Definitively, why is he there for you? I think you listed all the reasons, but also 74% first half snap rate last week, ended at 81%. So they just started leaning on him more and reports are that that's the plan. So, can't really overthink this one. Even if Madison is back, I'm still gonna be on Chandler. Cause like Kevin O'Connell has said, like he used the word featured twice when talking about Chandler on Monday. This is when we didn't know if Madison would go. He said featured featured role. He didn't say the featured role. He said a featured role, which does change the quote quite a bit, I think. But like, I think we can feel good about Chandler regardless. Again, it's a very tough matchup and I respect the Lions rush defense, but he is still very firmly a priority. I do think in like a, in my non Chandler lineups, there's a lot of incentive to get to Justin Jefferson as like a pivot because we can assume that Chandler will be very popular. And a lot of people don't like using running back and receiver in the same lineup. I think you should be okay with it based on what the data says, as far as like how often non correlated players from the same team wound up in the same perfect lineup. But like Jefferson, really good workload last week, 10 overall targets, three deep targets. All the touchdowns went to Jordan Addison, but like they were prioritizing Jefferson and he's facing a pretty bad secondary CJ Gardner Johnson might play this week. He's back to practice on Wednesday, which is cool because I thought he was done for the year for the Lions.  Maybe it, if I didn't hate Nick Mullins, I would definitely go Jefferson above Amon Ross a Brown, but I do. So that's the one reason I prefer a Saint Brown. Where are you on Jefferson? Basically the same place as you. Okay. I think he's more of a differentiation off of Chandler. Less of a priority than Saint Brown though, trust the quarterback more. Although I think I'm higher on Mullins clearly than Jim is. This does sound like it's, is this game more stackable than Cowboys Dolphins? There's no quarterbacks I want to use in this game. Are there quarterbacks you want to use? I think that's my QV2 right now. So yeah. Okay. It's close. Because there are no good quarterbacks.  Absolutely not. Rather get hit by a bus. I think the odds that he gets bent for Jarron Hall are 50 percentage points higher than the odds I use him in DFS. AK, I think there's 50% chance he gets bent for Jarron Hall during this game. Nick Mullins. He was fine last week. No, he wasn't. And now we made some bad points. No, no, no. His efficiency numbers were fine. He was not fine. He is, if you take Josh Allen and strip away all the things that make Josh Allen cool, AKA like his athleticism. He is chaotic. He is unhinged. He is unpredictable. But then he also doesn't have like cyborg level arm strength and like the biggest bones you've ever seen on a human being. So like take away the things that make Josh Allen cool and just give him like Josh Allen's ADHD. Like that's, that's what you get for Nick Mullins. That's Nick Mullins. He threw a pick to a defensive tackle who was tackling him. Negative highlight bias is bad. And we should avoid that. However, I can't get that play out of my head. I'm not gonna talk you into him. I'm not gonna play him. People are gonna play him. Other people will. I can almost guarantee it. They should have got decent odds to lead Sunday in scoring. Good. Those are terrible odds. Oh, the Vikings, you mean? Or this game? Well, the Vikings. The Vikings to lead this late in scoring. They should not be that high. Well, they're Nick Mullins. They're 16 to one, which is like middle of a pass. But Detroit is second. This game could be back and forth. There could be a lot of, you know, he's got, he's got like viable assets surrounding him. You could do worse at quarterback than Nick Mullins. Barely. The counterpoint is Nick Mullins. Let's talk about the tight ends here. Cause they're the ones I'm having the hardest time with. Saint Laporta, 72, that's pretty high. I like his workload, but I don't like it that much. T.J. Hawkinson 68 has not had as good of a workload with Jefferson being healthy. So like both of these guys are good, but I would have a really hard time using them over Treyvick Bride. I like some of the guys, other guys in the 6,000 range too, like Ferguson and I think David and Joku is 66 too. So as much as I like these guys, not going to get their outside of game stacks and honestly, even with in game stacks, like I'll just be kind of middling on them. Am I too low on Laporta and Hawkinson? Laporta's salary is as high as it gets. Coming off a three touchdown game. This game to other people is probably going to sound more stackable than it does to Jim, clearly. So I think he's going to be a popular pick when we have especially optimizers liking a lot of low salaried running backs. I think he'll be pretty popular. I wouldn't talk anyone out of him. I think he's due for some negative touchdown regression. I prefer Treyvick Bride for a lot of reasons, but you could do way worse than a guy who has what three touchdowns last game, 140 yards, two games ago, he's good. As far as Hawkinson goes, I think the salary is too high. If I'm going to play a tight end here, it's just going to be Laporta. Yeah, here are those odds you were referring to with the highest scoring team for Sunday. Dolphins leading the way at seven to one. Lions are plus 750. If I'm looking for one that I like, I don't mind the bucks at 16 to one. I think, yeah, I just think the teams at the top are a bit overvalued. So like the Vikings are, the Vikings shouldn't be as far behind the Lions as they are. But like, I just, you know, I just, I'm not, like a lot of times we talk about, okay, like I like the high, the stacks this week and I'm just going to build around them. I don't feel that way this week personally. And I'm just lower on the top total games than I typically am. I understand it, but I like this game more than you do, I think. I think the one guy I feel good about outside of Chandler, like feel legitimately pretty good about is Jameson Williams. Last week, seven targets, which was a career high, I believe for him. And they weren't just like bomb and pray kind of targets. He was getting like some more creative targets. Need to check the Lions injury report because Josh Reynolds had a back injury. He's been kind of dealing with that for most of this year, I believe. Reynolds didn't, he was full in practice on Wednesday, not even listed on the injury report. So like he's good to go. But like, I like Williams at 52. I need to have a lid on his rostering because like there are so many paths to him busting, but like, you know, it's a guy who's getting some targets, gets downfield work, has yardage upside and a game that has a high total and tight spread indoors. There are enough checks there for me to get to him. Are you okay with Williams? Sure, he's game stacks only, but it sounds like you're not gonna stack him. They're stacked this game, so. Let me, I'll stack him with Chandler. And I'd stack him with Jefferson. I'm okay having him alongside of Monrasse Browns because like we're using them for different reasons. So, you know. Yeah, he's fine. All right, let's shift then to talk about our final bookmaker game of the week. That is the Arizona Cardinals at the Chicago Bears. Right now the total is 43. That has come down a point and a half since things opened and the Bears are four and a half point favorites. So it's definitely come down. It's lost something to appeal, but like, you know, it's still a decent implied total for the Bears. Their implied total at one point was behind just the Dolphins, Cowboys and Lions, but it's a plus matchup for Justin Fields and DJ Moore. So I'm still on them despite the fact this total is coming down. How are you viewing the Bears here and any bringbacks on the Cardinals side? Justin Fields is the only quarterback I like this week. I agree. And I guess we always run into this with Jim, but what I mean by that is he's the only quarterback I truly love. Other quarterbacks I can nitpick a lot more easily. So we still have very similar considerations at a quarterback, but I just kind of frame it like, if I don't love you, I don't really like, I'm not gonna say I like you to like play, you know. So Fields is the guy for me. I don't see really any scenarios where I move off of him in our head-to-head or my main lineup or building around. The hardest part is he's hard to stack because there's really one great option. I'm not the hugest Cole Comet guy. Yeah. And I feel like I'd be playing him out of obligation to stack with Fields. You can always do worse than stacking a tight end with your quarterback, but he's not a priority for me necessarily. Fields though is the guy, he's got the matchup, he's rushing, he's got a stack partner. And probably due for some positive, passing touchdown regression hasn't had a ton lately. So he's the guy for me. As far as bringbacks go, it's Trey McBride. I feel like Fields, more McBride is probably the best stack I can come up with this week. Yeah, I agree. I think that is a phenomenal game stack here. Matchup on both sides is good. The Bears defense is really outformed expectations, but not against tight ends. You've been sending me a lot of numbers on that. And I think that makes a lot of sense that they would struggle against tight ends. McBride's target share could be astronomical this week if Marquise Brown can't go. So it's a very logical stack that also does mean there'll be a pretty popular pairing. So that's why I'd want to give at least some consideration to Comet at 62 is like, okay, I can get exposure to the Bears passing game without taking the exact right everyone else is taking. So it would be Fields with Comet. I'd probably still put more in there personally just because I don't mind pairing them together. If we look at them in the games Fields has played, where am I? The target shares for the Bears are 29% for DJ Moore, 21% for Comet. That's pretty good for a tight end, even at $6,200. 25% red zone share for both guys in that time and Moore has a 41% deep target share. I also will say the weather in Chicago is fine, which is weird for December, like Christmas Eve, it's gonna be 52 degrees. I'm kind of bummed out by that, honestly. I love a white Christmas. We're definitely not getting it this year. Hey, we are.  Oh, white Christmas. Yes, I'm in. Okay, I like that. But the problem I have with the Fields Moore Comet build is I really don't want to use a receiver on the Cardinals. I thought about Greg Dorch when we were talking on the recap show on Monday, but he hasn't gotten yardage on the targets he has earned. Like, yeah, he does earn targets at a pretty high rate when he's on the field, but it doesn't translate into yardage. What? He said he earns targets. He's got three targets his past two games. Well, but his target per route run rate is 17, which is fine for a guy of $4,700, but it's still 1.0 yards per route run. Like, that's not ideal. And Michael Wilson's really just kind of a field stretcher. Doesn't a lot of targets. He gets more yardage upside, which is, I guess, beneficial. He ran a lot of routes last week. I just don't know if I want to bank on him at 51. Like, I think you could consider him in that mixture with Jamieson Williams and Duntavian Wicks as a low salary guy. You include his like a rotational piece, but like, I think if I were to go with Comet, I would just go with no bring back as opposed to forcing it with one of the wide receivers. Yeah, definitely. For me, no double tight ends this week, even though running back is a little uncertain. I gave it, like, I thought about it for like 30 seconds earlier this week. I don't think you need to. I'd rather, if I'm going to flex a non-running back, it's going to be a receiver. Basically you're saying in that scenario that combat outscores Devin Singletary, Chuba Hubbard guys in that range. And I just don't think that's super, super realistic. Yeah, we have some options. We also have a couple receivers in like the 6,000 range you could talk yourself into depending on Michael Pittman's status. Yeah, a couple. What do you mean a couple? You're only one. You can only be one, Alec Pierce. Well, Josh Downs bad. Are you higher on Wilson than I am? Yes, but I don't think. So, I don't really want to bog down a whole lineup based on Michael Wilson. I know he gets me access to ceiling, but if he gets me like 2.1 fandal points, that lineup's not doing much of anything unless you hit on the 100th percentile outcome of everyone else. And I think that's too realistic, too likely to happen for me to want to build around.  Okay, sure, they were okay, but yeah, they weren't great. Yeah, cause yeah. So will you include Wilson in your fields lineups? Like if you have 10 fields lineups, how many are you bringing back with Wilson? Probably do like eight with McBride and maybe one with Wilson. And then one with none. And then one just none, yeah. I probably do seven McBride, one Wilson, two none. I think that's the distribution that I'd most likely have. I could basically be two Comet lineups with the rest having DJ Moore. So, running backs, I'm not going to anybody in this game. Are you? In this game? Yeah. No, perfect. Anything else or we can move on to trends? Then we can move on. Okay, let's do so then and begin our trends discussion by talking about the Seattle Seahawks because they get Geno Smith back this week after good vibes drew a lot. And honestly, like Seahawks offense has shown a bit more upside. Recently had that Dallas game overlapping with them. They got the left tackle, Lucas backs.  So what do you see with the Seattle Seahawks recently? What does it mean for our lineups this week? You got some interesting splits for Seattle. Facing Tennessee, who's 27th against the pass according to number fires metric, seventh against the rush, a bit of that funnel vibe. Seattle won last week. They're lively. They need to do some stuff. They need to win, keep the foot on the pedal. And, you know, one thing that I like to look at a lot is post-buy splits. It's maybe not, maybe not always super relevant. Maybe there's not always a change, but sometimes if there isn't a change is telling, but if there is, you know, it would be logical that teams would take the break, figure it, figure things out and come out with a bit of a different approach. But especially whenever there's a high profile rookie involved and there is here Jackson Smith and Gigba's role with the team since the buy has been a bit different. 65% route rate, 15% target share before the buy, but since up to 77% of the routes, 18% target share. And we have a four game sample with Gino, Kenneth Walker and DK Metcalf healthy since the buy. And what this does is puts me on DK Metcalf this week a ton. He has a 29% target share for 10 targets per game. Catch rate over expectation is minus 14% for just 4.3 catches per game and quote unquote, just 71 yards despite like a really bad catch rate. 138 area yards per game, eight dots almost 14 yards, 5.8 downfield targets per game, which for me are 10 plus yards downfield. Really good red zone share, 50% of the targets. I think he might erupt this week in this matchup against the team that just allows downfield passing and allows big plays on those downfield passes. Tyler Lockett though still very good, you know, relative to salary, 25% target share, 75 yards per game, 25% red zone share. And then you go back to like Jackson Smith and Gigba in these games in particular, so not all of his post-buy games, 15% of the targets really low eight-odd under four yards. Minimal downfield work, still 50 yards per game, but if you take a look like at the whole process here Lockett's salary still looks better than Metcalf's but Metcalf has a lot of upside in his profile. JSN 5900 is the salary as you're pulling him up now for anyone watching. I don't know if he's got the juice to take advantage of a team that allows a high eight-odd. He might, did we get a bark? She was like smacking her lips and I didn't know what she was doing. I didn't know she was like chewing on something. She's just very sleepy. I was worried. I had to like take my earbutt out because I didn't know what she was doing. Well, last week we got a bark on Aaron Jones. It's a dog by the way.   So I think that we're all, I think we're gonna agree, love Metcalf, probably gonna be a little low on Lockett for whatever reason. I feel like you're warming up to JSN a lot. I don't quite see it this week. I don't wanna put words in your mouth, but no. He should be in the conversation for a value receiver this week. I just don't love him. And then as far as the running backs go, a bit too much of like a 60-40 split. I don't necessarily love that. So, unless we get a situation where Walker sits, in which case Charbonnet is good. What's his salary? I didn't look. 57. Yeah, heavily. The Titans, Jeffrey Simmons, didn't practice on Wednesday again. They got shredded by our guy, single digits. Sorry, single Terry. He helped get me into the Dynasty semifinals. So I gotta lighten up a bit on him. I agreed to unlock it though. 67 is just kind of like, it is whatever. I think that also same thing with Smith and Jigba. It's like, eh, it's whatever. Really more about that cap. I looked at a different sample than you. Slightly different, like basically the same thing. But like, if we look at the games, DK has played since the buy, 25% overall target share, which is fine for 76, but 42% deep target share and 48% red zone share. So in line with what you said, where it's like the high leverage targets are sick and he's facing a terrible defense. So I think DK might be my favorite one-off receiver the week at 76. Is that fair? Very fair. Tennessee just bad across the board against receivers. I wanna get to DK and my main lineup. I do too. And I can get there in a field's lineup with DJ Moore and Trey McBride. It does require some maneuvering, I would say. But like, it can work. Question for you is, Gino, $6,600. If quarterback sucks, should we not just spend down? I'm not saying that this is like something I think we should do, I'm asking you. Do you think that Gino Smith doesn't play at 66? I feel like if you're not going with fields, there's a good case to saving salary. Gino's in that conversation. I think if I built 10 lineups, I'd probably have like six with fields, two with Kyler and maybe I just go Gino and DK or like Gino and JSN and just hope for like a four touchdown game from Gino. Yeah. I think it's viable. I think Gino's at least a consideration for my quarterback to this week. A lot of guys are because there's no one who really stands out. But like, I think he's at least in consideration at $6,600. So I'm bored with that for sure. And I'd put in Hopkins as a bringback there. If I'm stacking, if I'm using the Seahawks passing offense. Let's go to my first trend and talk about the Jags defense. That game is kind of fun for this week. The Bucks and the Jags, it gets a little bit less fun to Trevor Lawrence can't go, but we can select the Bucks side of things. They're at a pretty good spot here against the Jags defense. Across the full season, the Jags ranked 26 against the run according to number fires metrics, which gives us the full green light for Rashad White, which we would take if there were a worse matchup. He has 99 plus yards from scrimmage and eight of the past nine games. And only one of those was against a bottom 10 rush defense. That's the Jags are. So at $7,600, Rashad White is one of the, I would say like free plays of this week. He's apparently the highest salary running back on a different site this week. And I don't think that's totally out of play. He's 77 just to clarify. Now I'm out. $900 that ruins it for me. Done. He's 76. He's about to shout it out. Yeah, no, I'm out. The Jags pass defense has been slipping recently too though. It's not just the rush defense. The Jags have underperformed expectations on early downs against the pass in six of their past seven games. And they were a full 10th of a point worse than expected into five of those. They've been like really bad in five of their past seven games. Their quarterback Tyson Campbell has been in out of the lineup in that stretch, potentially helping explain the troubles, didn't play back on a Sunday night. And I think that makes the bucks passing game pieces viable as well. The salaries are not low on them. Mike Evans $8,700, Chris Godwin 69. I think Godwin now that he's actually showing some more juices more in play, apparently his wife got mad at the offensive coordinator on Instagram. So squeaky wheel narrative for Chris Godwin, helping pump up that yardage. I'm finally in on him. You broke me. You were right. So I like white and I will have him in the grand majority of lads this week. I don't mind having Evans or Godwin in there as well. I would say relative to the high salary receivers, I do still like a Monrocy Brown more than Mike Evans at 87. I like Jefferson more too, but like there's enough there where I at least consider Mike Evans. So where are you on the bucks? I assume we're in lockstep on Rashad White. Do you consider Baker at all? How are we viewing the bucks here? Yeah, White's the RB one. He might be in every lineup for me almost, just as someone who builds like, not a hundred lineups I'll say. You focus on a core of lineups instead. Yeah. Mike Evans, it's like the inverse. I've been higher on God, not higher on Godwin than Evans, but I've been higher on Godwin than you, lower on Evans than you. He's just scoring at a really high rate. He has, I don't think he's ever had a normal year with touchdowns. He either has like 1500 yards and three touchdowns or like way too many touchdowns, but you can't really knock what's going on here. So it's more of a stackability situation. So I'm much more inclined to play Mike Evans. If Trevor Lawrence plays, then again Tampa Bay like needs to win. Yeah. And like play good football.  But Godwin, I'm struggling because I've liked what I've seen from him just from like production or not a production standpoint, but an opportunity standpoint, not from a production standpoint, still do for a big touchdown regression though. He is the, if you look at all, main slate relevant wide receivers. So I think that's like how many here just to give some context. It's like almost 60 guys in my spreadsheet. He is the biggest touchdown regression candidate with Mike Evans being the biggest negative touchdown regression candidate. So like maybe something flips eventually. Problem is the $6,900 salary. Don't love that. But I should probably just prefer him to Calvin Ridley if Lawrence sits. Sure. Would you go that far? Where are you with Godwin this week? Much higher than I have been. He's finally getting downfield work and like having double digit targets and back to back games. Like it's hard for me to be annoyed with that. If you look at the games that Evans has played the full game, Godwin 23% overall target share, 24% inside the red zone, despite that one touchdown. Like good red zone roles hasn't converted that into touchdowns, which he should eventually. Godwin, I think this is post Instagram yelling has a couple of deep targets in both games or he had four in one game and then two last week. So higher than I have been. I think you're probably right though to go Godwin over Ridley if we assume Lawrence does not go. That's probably fair. Baker, I don't think it's a cross-off. I prefer Gino. Like that's that's the question I'd ask you is Baker or Gino, Baker 73 Gino 66. It's tough cause Baker is coming off of a great performance. It feels like whenever you look at someone's like game log say, oh, well he can get to 20, he can get to 29. It's cause he hit the high end of his variants with the touchdowns. Yeah. Now 381 yards. Yeah. Love that. 28 attempts. Now, yeah. What are the Packers doing, man? I let me let me let me scroll back scale out at all quarterback. So I got fields. I don't know. Can you really justify Baker at 73 over like Kyler at 76? Yes, I can. Given I think the Bears defense is decent and I think Kyler is really struggled. So yeah, hasn't been great. Baker will be more efficient. Kyler has a rushing, but like I can definitely justify Baker above Kyler. Multiple stacking candidates. Yeah. So where's Baker then? We know fields are QB1. Where's Baker? Below Gino. OK. So which means he's below Dack and Tua. OK. QB5? That might be. I don't I don't even I wouldn't wouldn't argue it really. I'm probably not going to get there. I guess it's I don't want to use so yeah, that's the thing. Multiple stack candidates though. Yeah, I think the biggest case against Baker is I'm going to play Rashad White and while White has a great receiving role. I'll I'll use them together. I don't care. That's fine. Then you're banking on the Bucks to be the highest scoring team, which. Maybe 16 to 1. Maybe. All right, let's go to your second track and talk about the Atlanta Falcons back to Taylor Heinecke. And the money line shifted in favor of the Falcons when they benched Desmond Ritter. So seems bad for him. This total is weirdly high. I kind of love the under, but it's still high. So we can't totally dismiss it. It's 44 and a half. So talk to me about the Falcons with Heinecke and let's see if we can identify anything that is noteworthy within those splits. Yeah, should be. It's this is the fastest game on the board and pretty much any any cold scheme is the fastest game when you average things out based on my numbers. But fastest game could have some juice. Depends on a couple injuries. Depends on what we see with Heinecke here. But, you know, he replaced Desmond Ritter at halftime a week eight against the Titans when Ritter had five sacks on 17 drop backs. Heinecke started week nine and 10 injured his hamstring a week 10. So he's got like two partial games and a full game from him. And then the team went back to Ritter after the buy. So like we have a sample here, but it's not the best sample because only two of those games were with Heinecke starting and he didn't finish one of them. So a little bit tricky and it is worth noting that Drake London missed week nine. So this is just a really problematic sample to sort of dig into. But on a per drop back basis, Heinecke is at point one zero passing that expected points per drop back. League average is about point seven this year. Ritter's been a minus point one. You know, Ritter's had a. Polarizing sort of season in a sense. He hasn't been as bad, I think, as some people would imply, but he's also been subpar overall. Now, the biggest thing that stands out to me, if you adjust for opponents faced Heinecke's at a plus point zero five, so he's played above expectation in terms of passing that expected points with Ritter. At a minus point, oh, eight, so really underperformed once you actually account for opponents a little bit better. Now it is a 79 drop back sample for Heinecke. So I don't want to factor that in. And they have about the same eight out of eight point three yards. So I do think it's a like a boost to efficiency, but I can't sit here and say that Heinecke is definitively a substantial upgrade. What I think jumps out more is sort of team tendencies a little bit and even that's been kind of up and down. So, you know, in that week nine game, that full game, Heinecke through 38 times for 268 and a touchdown point and 08 passing the expected points per dropback against the mid level Vikings. The, you know, it was fine. But with Ritter under center this season, the team's pass rate over expectation has been minus 11.4%. If you look specifically at the plays like the games with with Heinecke under center, they had a plus 1.4 pass rate over expectation in the second half, whenever he replaced Ritter. That's kind of interesting that he came in to replace the quarterback and they didn't just stay run heavy. It kind of went a little bit more past heavy, at least for them.  But it was a minus 6.5 in his full game. And then through three quarters of week 10, it was minus 16.7%. So it was really all up and down. And I don't want to sit here and say like this team is going to throw the ball a ton. But they lean on B's Ron Robinson in that game. He had 22 carries, 95 yards in a score. So I'll just shout that out for you. I don't really know what to make of this. What I think overall is that it's definitely not a downgrade in efficiency. They could be more past heavy. But this game should be like up tempo. I kind of like the Colts to a certain point, especially if they get Michael Pittman. The salaries are low like London 62 pits. His salary is 55 and B's John's is 70 100. I just don't know like what to do with this change. I want to buy into some certain things, but I don't quite see it. I know you love B's John more than I do typically.  What are you thinking the expectations are from this team with Heineke back under center? The same. I think there's no difference. I think they're the exact same, which is why London is intriguing. Because like, if you gave me London with Raider at 62, I feel like people are probably pretty intrigued by that given that he had a buck seventy two two weeks ago. It was against the box and like they're terrible against pass. But the Colts aren't like great, like they're fine, but they're not great. Indoor game on a slate that has a lot of low totals. It has a high total. If I disagree with it, it's a pace up spot for Atlanta. So like I don't like the low six thousand range at receiver. I think I prefer to dip down in the low five thousand range. But like, if I wind up having, you know, sixty five or so on the table, I feel like I'm going Drake London over Curtis Samuel, Drake London over Brandon Cooks over Josh Downs. I think that relative to his tier, London's kind of a standout. Do you agree to that? A standout relative to his tier. Like, I prefer to skip over this tier, but like, let's say I had 62. You know, I'm pretty firm, pretty OK, putting me in there. So I'm not counting Lockett at 67. That's too high. I might prefer more of a locket. I'd prefer locket. I still think there's a lot to like about Tyler Lockett. Sure. He's easy to gloss over, though. He falls down too much. That's my that's my critique of Tyler Lockett. He does kind of fall down a lot. You know, yeah, that's really. Yeah, I'd probably go London over. I like Josh Downs fine if there's no Michael Pittman, but it makes more sense probably to go with with London. What is this? Well, what is this? When is the last time Josh Downs had a good game? All right, you remove a thirty one seventy three. We remove a thirty one percent target share for my team, and that's going to stay the same, I'm sure. So yeah, I mean, but like also he didn't play most of that game against the Steelers and he had three targets for nineteen yards. Yeah, his yeah. The Steelers are yeah. All right. Yeah, I mean, there's like JSN who I don't love. Dobbs, I don't love. Oh, my sorry. I want Alphas who have yardage upside. So I'd rather go Alec Pierce than Josh Downs. Sorry, sorry for liking yardage in a in a contest where yardage matters.  So is Drake London, then like. A cash game consideration. If I had like, I would not reconfigure my line to get away from him if I had 62. That's what I was like, we might be in that range. Sure. I think he's he's not a cross off. So yeah, I think, yeah, I think he's consideration at least. OK, I like Bijan too, but I'm not going to. What about you with that? What about pits? Not totally often, I prefer to get to the 6,000 range of tight end personally. I got real close to putting pits in my my loves this week. But I think I like Tucker Kraft a bit more, too, at 53. Under the assumption, Reed does not go. Just that's a lot of targets available on that team. And they've got a better quarterback than the Falcons do. But like, I think that pits is a consideration as well. I'm not opposed to that. I think all three Falcons, the legitimate Falcons are like in play this week, the legitimate Falcons. I mean, he's still can get some downfield work from Piney Key and stuff. So you can you do worse. I agree. So yeah, I'm probably going to have Falcons. And I feel OK about that personally. You know, none of them are like, definitely, definitely, guys. I want to go to you, but like, I'll have some for sure. Let's finish up here with my second trend, talking about the Browns defense. Typically, when we talk home road splits, we're talking offenses like the Cowboys and stuff like that. But here, I think it's pertinent with the Browns defense as they face the Texans. They get Case Keenum here instead of CJ Stroud, which means I'm not touching the pass catchers. But I think there's enough here to consider Devin Singletary at a salary of six to two hundred dollars at home this year. The Browns defense led up negative point two six passing that expected points per drop back. They're a negative point of seven against the run. Those are ungodly numbers, like unreal, how good the Browns are at home. But on the road, they're pretty mortal. In fact, they're actually letting up a worse and average number in both categories. They're a point one three against the pass and point one against the run. Part of that is scheduled because they face the Ravens and Rams on the road, but they also have twenty nine points to the Broncos, twenty four to the Seahawks, thirty eight to the Colts. And there are some special team stuff in there. But then also twenty six to the Steelers on the road. I think there was a defense touch on there, too. So I think they're very good. They're a very good defense, but the Browns are less daunting when they're on the road than when they're at home, which opens the door for Devin Doubletuddies. He has twenty five twenty six carries and five targets on a seventy five percent snap rate last week. Damian Pierce effectively got squeezed out of the lineup in that game. If Singletary were a higher salary, I'd worry more about quarterback play. But for sixty two hundred dollars in this role, I'm still inclined to give him a whirl. Where are you on Singletary and are you going to go to him here? Or does the combo of a matchup with the Browns and Case Kenham push you off? Willing to go there, yes, due to the salary. It's a little more. That's a lot about the salary, which is the type of stuff I've been trying to talk about, not liking to do. But it's also the roles good. I think he's been playing his best football. He's. Right before the show, he was my RB three. I think I like Chuba Hubbard more. It's a you make a good point for like the defense being not as good. You know, here is what we might typically expect, but. Very much a better match up for sure. For Chuba Hubbard. So Singletary, I think, is getting bumped out of my core play. About territory in favor of Hubbard. But I'm not going to talk to anyone out of him. I'm sure he's going to rate out well for optimizers, but but maybe not. I don't. Yeah, I guess he was. He's rating up better than Chuba when it comes to like optimizers, which means he'll have a higher roster rate. I think the Chuba is a bit too low in those right now, based on the role that he's had recently. I think they're in the same tier. I'm not fully on the Chuba over Hubbard yet. But I'm like, what? Wait, you said Chuba over. Oh, sorry, Chuba over Double Tuddies. OK. But like I see the case or and I wouldn't be shocked if I wound up there by Sunday. I think it's a consideration to maybe have both in like, like if you really need to save salary, you know, as opposed to getting to Rashad White, which bumped me out. But like, you really need to save salary. You could go with Ty Chandler, Double Tuddies and Hubbard. I think that's like at least in play if you really want to save salary. Like if you want to go DAC, CDLAM, Tirey Kill, that might not get you enough to get there either. But like, you know, if you if you're desperate at receiver, I think that is in play. And let me just ask this, if we don't get. Why are the CIA?  And they're the opposing team only. The Seox are the worst. Yeah. If there's no Kenneth Walker, I don't I don't know if that's like even feasible or plausible at this point. If there wouldn't be where Charbonne probably won. I assume in Jeffrey Simmons, that's again for the Titans, but I think he will probably one overall or one among the value guys, one overall, I think. Yeah. Just like he's too good. He'd be the clear RB three then, right? Like on the sorry, like he would be one of the top three. Oh, yeah, yeah, for sure. Yeah, I think so. Yeah, rest up, Kenny. Yeah, I don't I think he's in a play. But like, yeah, no, hypothetically thrown it out there for sure. Just to be safe. Weather for this week, only two games have wind speeds above 11 miles or above 10 miles per hour. That's Jags and Bucks, which is at exactly 11 and dolphins, cowboys at 11, slight downgrades, but nothing too crazy. Both those games so very much OK to check back on the weather on Sunday. Let's go position by position out in outline. Our favorite place week number 16, Brandon, so let's begin things at quarterback. Who are you turning to there? Justin Fields, my number one guy this week at eight three hundred. I think he's the only standout play of the week. He gets a matchup with a bottom three adjusted past the offense, according to number fires metrics. He's faced five bottom eight past the offenses. He's averaged 220 yards, 1.6 touchdowns as a passer. 10.8 carries 56 yards and point four touchdowns as a rusher. Second QB love doesn't really exist. I could go a lot of different ways. I don't know who you have at this point. I have. I'm going to switch to Gino, though. So. I was going to say, I might move to Gino more likely, but I think Kyler at least deserves some some attention. If I like this game enough, very obvious that candidate with Trey McBride. I know you like the Bears defense a bit, but they're fine. You know, Kyler hasn't had a lot of great matchups. So it's been it's been like, it's kind of hard to anticipate what I'll get. But 235 yards and a touchdown against like somewhat similar past the offenses, not as much rushing as you, as you would typically see, but not the same salary for Kyler either, as you typically see. So I think using the conversation, but it just really depends on your stacks. I think Gino, Kyler, Dak, maybe Baker in that, that conversation for QB too. Yeah, I think there are a lot of guys in consideration. The one thing that's not a consideration for me is putting anybody other than Fields as my quarterback one for this week. Similar to you there, the Cardinals ranked 31st against the past based on a number of fires, schedule, adjusted metrics and just in Fields. Since he returned from that thumb injury is averaging 12.3 carries for 63 yards per game on the ground. He's had only two rushing touchdowns all year. I had Fields as an entire touchdown score against Cleave or no against Detroit two weeks ago because of expected rushing touchdown regression and that hit there. And I think we'll still see more given how much he is running right now. He has an obvious stack candidate in DJ Moore. He has a good bring back candidate in Trey McBride as well. So yes, it'll be very popular game stacked at Fields with more McBride. But sometimes the chalk is chalk for a reason. I think that's the case here. So I think I will use Fields against you in our head to head. And he will be in my main tournament lineup for this week as well. Number two, I am going to go. Geno Smith, I think I am just going to settle on that. Because again, if we dislike so many quarterbacks, we might as well use a quarterback in a game where he's facing a terrible secondary and has a little salary at 66. I think the Titans can do enough to like keep the Seahawks pushing. That's what you need out of a Pete Carroll lead teams. You need pushback on the opposing side. I think the Titans can give us that with Tannehill this week. Geno has an obvious stack candidate again with DK Metcalf at 76. We can run it back with Yandere Hawkins at 71. I think it makes a lot of sense. So I'm OK, saving some salary this week with Geno Smith.  But like they've been a lot better as an offense since Abe Lucas came back at left tackle. That Cowboys game was his first game back since week one. So I think with that in mind, I'm OK going Geno Smith and just saving salary a quarterback at $6,600. Running back, what's you turning to there this week? Rashad White, 7700 with the salary there. Very reasonable, good match up on the ground. Jags are 26 and adjusted rush defense, according to the number of fire. White's been at 81 percent of the snaps, at least in five straight game. 80 percent, I should clarify, in five straight games in that stretch. Just shy of 110 scrimmage yards. 36 percent overall red zone share. And I know it's not fair to do because running back roles change and stuff. But just for context, if you look at the main state running backs this year, White's played 80.1 percent of the team snaps. Just two other guys are even above 70 percent. That's Travis E.T. Ann and Tony Pollard. He's like got the best role on the slate. I don't want to overthink it at all. Going to play him a ton. Second love is Ty Chandler at a salary of $6,900. I know it's a tough sort of rush matchup, but great role last week. 80.6 percent snap rate, 23 carries for targets has had the yardage over 150 there in terms of scrimmage yards. 57 percent total red zone share. Not going to overthink that one either, even if the role scales back a little bit, probably under salad for a game that might be one. It's still one of the more stackable games, even if we don't necessarily love the quarterbacks in it. Third love I have warmed up to Chuba Hubbard at the salary of $6,400. Just not the like not a great rush defense that he's facing. And his snap rates in the past four games have been 64 percent, 64 percent, 77 and 75 percent. And if you look at that sample, 25 and a half adjusted opportunities per game, so carries plus double your targets. Just shy of 100 scrimmage yards over a 55 percent red zone share. I think it's been sort of a breakout for him quietly. Salaries there, matchups there. I wouldn't fault anyone for going single Terry. I might still go single Terry, but I think Chuba is very clearly like a top four or five play at running back as of Thursday morning. Yeah, they've been really run heavy since they fired Frank Reich. I think they just kind of want the season to be done and like Chuba's benefiting. So I think that makes sense. My first love is also Rashad White's $7,700, not 76. He hasn't had many plus matches this year, but he does get one this week against the Jags. And White has always had a good median expectation, like he's always been solid from a median expectation perspective. But he's now adding the building blocks for upside. He's had 130 plus yards and scrimmage in two straight games. His max output this year is 25.9. Fandal points. And he's going to top that in the pretty near future. So Rashad White, with the role he's got right now, with this matchup, with how well this offense is playing, I think that he is a core play for sure. I thought Chandler is my second love, but you talked about him pretty in depth. I still think he's a very good play for this week. I do want to talk briefly on Bijan Robinson, though, just kind of outline why I find him intriguing. He's facing the Colts.  They're OK. Bijan has kind of been. I don't want to say like predictable. I think I don't know. He's kind of gone as expectations for the offense have gone. And I've got higher expectations for the offense when they're at home against the middling defense than I did. Playing in that slop fest last week or playing against the Jets and stuff like that. So I've not been on the basket weeks when he's flopped. And his salaries come down big time. You talk a lot about how when guys score, the salaries increase and they become worse plays, Bijan's gone the opposite way, where the salaries come down quite a bit. In the games that that Bijan has played this year, where he's been fully healthy, he is at 86.2 yards in scrimmage per game. He has 13.5 carries and 4.9 targets. That assumes there was no bump for him where he got that bump in the middle part of the year, like maybe it scales back a bit, but I still think that Robinson is a good play. So prefer Chandler as far as like cash games go. But Bijan, definitely a consideration for me in tournaments, $7,100. I do think Singletary still in play at 62. I want to get to the high sour receivers. Singletary makes it a lot easier. It's just a really good spike in his role last week with Kenan starting. The Browns defense has been beatable when they've been on the road. If we look at the game, Singletary has been lead back, including a couple of true duds. He's at 93.1 yards from scrimmage per game in that sample. That's tied for seconds on the main slate in each player's most relevant sample trailing only Ty Chandler, which is a one game sample. So for 62, I think Singletary makes a lot of sense. I understand the favor, the argument, favor of Chuba Hubbard. And like you said, I might get there too by Sunday, betting both those guys very similar and very worthy of low sourced slots in our lineups. Wide receiver, what you go into there? I'm I'm debating. I love all Monterey and Brown. I'm just going to stick with I'm going to stick with what I got for now. Air SB, I can get there with with the value. I can play two value running backs this week if I need to. St. Brown makes a ton of sense to me. Twenty percent target share since the buy, 85 yards per game, two point seven downfield targets per game, two point two in the red zone. Forty five percent red zone target share. Twenty seven percent of the end zone targets. Vikings have faced a higher rate of targets per route to receivers as well. Twenty fourth by yards per route run. I think it's a good matchup overall going to be good conditions. I think I'm higher on this game than you are. I know that, but if I'm picking one receiver above eight thousand, it's going to be St. Brown. Second love, I'm sticking with DK Metcalf might. He's kind of shaping up to be like one of my favorite plays of the whole slate. I agree. I already talked about, you know, his profile in detail, but just to reiterate just everything points to an eruption potential spot here. One hundred and thirty eight areas per game. In like a relevant sample with Gino and Kenneth Walker since the buy, forty eight percent of the team's air yards and the Titans are twenty eight and yards per route run. Thirtyth and catch rate over expectation allowed to receivers. And just they're also funneling a lot of production to receivers in terms of target per route rate. They're thirtieth there. Third love was are you going to pivot your loves at all? Third love. OK. It was going to be done to me in Wicks. I think he still makes sense as a value play. I am warming up, though, to Drake London a ton. And that if I can play like Hubbard or Singletary in London, I'm not really like forcing any plays I don't like. And I would be doing that with like Wicks. Sure. But London twenty four percent target per route rate, which is, you know, strong. It's like a Marquis Brown, DK, Matt Kaft, DG and more level. But he's been a lot better than I realized in terms of yards per outrun. Two point one one. Yeah. Receiver averages like one point five four. He's got a path to double digit targets if this team's a little more pass heavy. So I should probably aim to cut off my receivers at sixty two hundred pretty often, if I can. Yeah, I don't know if I'll be able to just because I really want to get to DK a lot. DK probably is my second highest hour receiver at seventy six depends on what you do at tight end. Yeah, but I'm going to use Trey McBride. So that's part of why. So but like if I use Jake Ferguson and I get to Drake London. Yeah, that's pretty sick. I think London's actually going to play this week. So I agree there. My first love is DJ Moore. Eighty two hundred dollars is not low, but like more is worth it. He has a hundred plus yards in Ford of Justin Fields, nine full games this year. The weather in Chicago is actually not bad. Like I'm confused why this game isn't getting talked up more from a DFS perspective. I bet the under. So like, you know, maybe that's why. But like, yeah, people are not like that is that's why people heard. Yeah, you bet the under more on. It was weird phrasing. It's not like the totals declining stuff like that. But like it's also guys we like we're facing the freaking Cardinals. Like why are we not higher as a collective community on this game? Cardinals 31st against the pass. I have a lot of fields. Only natural that more should be my top love. I think these guys are great. My second love is DK Metcalf. Similar to you. Great matchup against a bad secondary in the Titans. As you laid out great target shares recently. I mentioned the high levered stuff before absolute eruption potential for DK Metcalf and you're getting that for 76. Like I like the high salary guys, but like, you know, DK's DK's best case scenario is on par with those guys. That's not a very kill with with Nick Mullen starting for Jefferson. I think that like, it's the same for there. So I think DK can do that, too. My third love is Jameson Williams. He earned seven targets last week. Didn't do a lot with it. But that also means people probably shouldn't be on him super much. It's a great game environment with a very efficient quarterback, best quarterback in football, my darling boy. The Vikings defense is aggressive, which could lead to big plays. I think he's worth the risk at 52. I do think that Duntavian Wicks is is worth it. If reading Watson said to at 54, so I like him. He gets deep targets as well, pretty talented guy. So I do like Duntavian Wicks. If there were to be no pitmen, I think he'll play. But if there's no pitmen, I would consider out Pierce, too. But like, I think, I think Williams is is my top guy, my top boy there. Tight end. What you going to there? A Trey McBride. We're talking eruption potential for DK Metcalf. McBride has it. The volume just went there without Marquis Brown last week. 11th try to lock for your head to head lineup. I'm getting tempted of moving away from him in order to get like to Drake London. But I don't think that's the right place. So he's going back into lock potential like lock territory. Caught 10 of those 11 targets for 102 yards. The Bears very good. Tight end matchup 29th and catch rate over expectation allowed. 25th and target per route rate to tight ends in Murray starts. McBride's got single game target shares of 29, 24, 21, 39 and 29 percent. Also the biggest touchdown regression candidate among tight ends on the main slate in my model. I'm just going to go there and I can do it also like Jake Ferguson, though. And again, reasonable salary to get exposure to that potentially great matchup, maybe a little we were a little bit lower on it than other people, but I still think it's a good, good, good game overall. Three straight games with a target share of at least 20 percent. Miami 23rd and catch rate over expectation allowed to tight ends this year. Dallas needs a bounce back and Ferguson's been involved. I'd rather play him than like Brandon Cooks. So I agree. I have the same two as you and I'm going to stick with them. I think that that's the way to go with tight end this week. Trey McBride, Jake Ferguson, McBride, if we can get a wide receiver with his target shares for $7000 in a good matchup, we'd flock to that, right? Like any fills tight ends and they're not hollow targets, targets either. It's 85 plus yards and three out of five gains with Kyler Murray starting. This is a great bring back for fields lineups. I would say for my head to head, I might be more likely to use McBride than DJ Moore, despite the fact I will be using Justin Fields.  I think he's a slightly bigger priority for me than DJ Moore is. So that's where I'm at there. Like what are the what are the routes to make Bride having like a 12 percent target share this week? None. It doesn't exist. Yeah, I'll keep Ferguson here. I'll mention some guys I like after that. But like 18 percent target share for Jake Ferguson since the bye week, 26 percent of the Red Zone targets. He said eight targets and three consecutive games and 70 yards and two of those. And like in this game, you know, it's not the best environment, but it's still very good environment. So I like Ferguson a lot. I think David and Joku is worth getting to at times. Sixty six, like his target, his volume has been great. Given how passive they've been, good matchup against Houston. They're just a bad past defense in general. So I like in Joku. If Trevor Lawrence goes Evan Engram is very interesting. Also in command and field stacks, like honestly, like the 6,000 range is just really good. Maybe some craft, maybe some pits. So tight end is weirdly OK this week. Like it's better than running back. That's the hardest part about McBride. But McBride stands out so much from a target share standpoint. So, yeah, defense, what you got there? I got the Seahawks. They they need to do stuff. They're going to be relevant, played the Eagles well. Ryan Tannehill wasn't particularly good this year when he was playing 11 percent sack rate. I still like the Andre Hopkins well enough, not in the same lineups, but Seattle at 3500, definitely a defense will have a lot of. Yeah, I like them too, just because the salary is low. I like the Panthers, though, they're facing the Packers, which means it has to be my non Wicks and non Tucker craft lineups. But like and the Packers should win this game. So like there's that. But also the Panthers defense is just been like good recently. Salary is thirty two hundred dollars. So like if I really want to save salary, like and I do, I'm willing to go there using last week, too. I like them less this week than I did last week because I think Jordan loves better than Desmond Ritter. But like I'm OK going there at times, especially if both Reid and Watson are out, because that does ding the Packers offense quite a bit. Don't want to see Hawks you mentioned. I think the Bucks at thirty seven are interesting if it's C.J. Bedford, as opposed to Trevor Lawrence. So some good options for spending down at defense for this week. Any final thoughts for you this week, Brandon, before we close up shop for week sixteen. A lot of ways to get different, probably some games that Jim and I glossed over that you might like. Maybe games were higher on the. Load up. Well, you know, roll them out. But also thanks everyone for sticking with me while my voice was. It got better as a show in a long. It did. Yeah. Yeah, it sounded good. Sierra brought me some tea. I drank tea for this. I can't stand tea. I have some coffee. So I've been chugging. If anyone's really observant, I've been drinking out of three different mugs, but shout out, Sierra. Nobody knew until I drew attention to it. So yeah, I didn't notice. She's very sneaky, compliment her on her sneakiness skills. Thank you, Sierra. For your contributions to the program, Brandon, people have questions for you on Twitter. Where can they find you there? I'm on Twitter at goodwill 13 G D U L A one three. Happy holidays to you, Brandon. Happy holidays to Sierra and the cats as well. Happy holidays to all the listeners, too. I'm on Twitter at Jim Sonnis. You can find me on threads at Jim dot Sonnis. You can find Fandal Research on Twitter at Fandal Research. Want to thank you all for tuning in for today. Happy holidays to all of you. Be safe, be happy, have some fun. Good luck with your DFS lineups. Ignore them, have time with your family instead. But you know, set them and then forget them for a bit and circle back once the slates have closed. Have a fantastic weekend. We'll talk to you all once again next week. This has been the Heat Check Fantasy podcast right here on the Fandal Podcast Network.