What is crackling, everybody? Welcome on into the Heat Check Fantasy Podcast, powered by NumberFire. That's right here on the FanDuel Podcast Network and NumberFire.com, where today we are getting you set for the Rocket Mortgage Classic coming up this weekend and breaking down our favorite plays for PGA DFS. My name is Jim Sotus. I am a senior writer and analyst for NumberFire.com, joined here as always by Brandon Cadulla. He is the managing editor for NumberFire.com. Brandon, we are heading to the Rocket Mortgage Classic. Good week for you last week with Nailing Dustin Johnson for your magazine picks. So how are you doing today? Yeah, hopefully some other people took that. I mean, I was on web the week before. I've actually hit some pretty. You've hit five since the season started. Yeah. And that's only officially. Because there were other ones where you were like, I should go this way and then didn't. So it's five official hits for you for the magazine picks, but you had a really good year overall. Yeah. I think it really just comes from trusting the data and not really overreacting to one week. I mean, once I had access to like more granular data, I was looking back at like, well, this guy lost strokes in one of his three rounds. Once I had like round data or even event data, that's not super predictive. Just trust longer samples. I mean, we know that DJ was struggling, but he showed signs of life. We know what DJ can do. I mean, he won it. He easily could have lost it last week, but I mean, I think it's just a good example of trust the data. You don't know everything and you don't know why someone struggled for 54 holes, whatever it is, whatever the sample you want to look at is. So yeah, it's been pretty good. And it was my best DFS week for a long time because of DJ. So despite having a lot of, they're like enough, I had higher exposure golfers miss the cut. My player pool didn't miss the cut very often, but the guys who did miss the cut were impactful. But because DJ did so well, it didn't matter all that much. And it kind of seemed like in tournaments you could go five out of six and still do really well last week. Yeah. I mean, because there's just worn a whole ton of six or six. I mean, Fino and Scotty Schaeffler really hurt. I think a lot of people had those issues. Hi, Schaeffler. Yeah, a lot of good golfers missed the cut, whether it was close or not. That's golf.  He's gonna miss the cut sometimes. It's gonna happen. But I think this week is actually a really fascinating deviation from what we've had because the field is still good. It's still a fine field because we know a lot of these golfers, we know that they're probably really underrated. But I mean, when your top two studs are not Rory and JT and it's instead Bryson and Webb, I don't know. I mean, I'm still looking forward to this one. It's just, it's not quite what we've had, the back three. This depth of the field is not the same. But I mean, having Bryson and Webb are awesome. So like, they're not slouches. It's kind of like that second tier, usually like where Webb would be part of that second tier, he is the first tier now. And he's one of only two guys in that first tier. And that's kind of a deviation from what we've had, which is what you were saying. And it's going to lead to an interesting discussion around roster construction, which we'll discuss throughout the podcast for today. So let's dive in to the Rocket Mortgage Classic. It is at the Detroit Golf Club, which is 7,334 yards. It is a part 72. And if you're looking for course data here, you're not gonna find a whole lot because this is only the second time they have played at this course. The cut line last year was five under par, which is my nightmare. So they're apparently growing the roughs longer this year to make things a bit more difficult, a bit more penal if you decide to miss a fairway. Hopefully that works because I am just always horrified when you have to be like six under to make par. It does not make me very happy. It's tough. So they're gonna grow things out a little bit more this year and try to make it more difficult. The top 65 plus ties make the cut after two rounds. And although it's not as deep of a field, the number of golfers in the field is the same. It's about 150 or more than 150. So you're gonna have to scrounge to find golfers who make the cut. So Brandon, when we look back at last year at Detroit Golf Club, what stats stood out as being important? So Nate Lashley ran away with this one, one by six strokes beating Doc Redman. I mean, putting really seemed to factor in more heavily than usual at this event, but that's kind of can happen with just one year of data. But even still, the three of the top four golfers by Strokes game T-degree finished top five, including Nate Lashley. So Strokes game T-degree still very important. This is not just a putting contest. If you, there's really never gonna be a situation where you look only a putting and disregard T-degree and play when you're playing DF faster or making some betting picks. Interestingly, if you look at the end tournament stats off the T-play, it wasn't very useful toward predicting the results last year. Distance specifically was a little less important than usual on the PGA tour at Detroit Golf Club. Again, Nate Lashley won at 25 under super low cut line in a weak field as well. We're gonna need golfers who break par. So birdie or better rate, if you have opportunities gained, if you're on fantasy national, we need golfers to score. So that's a big part of this week. So my stats this week are gonna be Strokes game approach, stone number one, always number one, good drives gained, green zone regulation, birdie or better rate, and then bent grass plus poa putting. Yeah, and I think that my list is similar, good drive rate approach, exact same thing, bent grass plus poa putting. The one thing that I did include, because last year golfers who did well at this course were good for the full year in scrambling, I didn't want to include scrambling itself because it's an indication of just saving par and that doesn't seem like it's super helpful. So I didn't want to include scrambling itself. So I decided to go with around the green or stroke strain around the green in order to encompass some part of what the scrambling popping may have been looking at. So I did include around the green play as well, even though it wasn't technically something that popped last year, I just wanted to account for the scrambling without necessarily looking at good scramblers, if that makes sense, maybe kind of backward, but I didn't want to look at scrambling by itself personally. Yeah, I mean, it makes sense to score well, you can't really have bogeys. So if you do get into trouble or if you're that type of golfer who can be a little bit creative, get up and down, potentially with scrambling and around the green play don't correlate one to one, obviously, and I'm not saying that you said that, but I think that you're gonna need to do everything pretty much to score. And I think one thing that's problematic with a week like this is the lower the scores, the easier it is to score, I think it can get a little bit difficult because the best golfers can only do so well if it's a very easy par three. I know that we can joke about Bryson being able to get there and eagle it, but if it's a birdie opportunity for everyone, I mean, you don't just automatically because you're better than the field, you know, get equal chances on par fours, it doesn't work that way. Yeah, and that's tough because we have to discuss how we're gonna handle Bryson and Webb Simpson who are super expensive relative to the field, Bryson 12-2, Webb 12-1, nobody else within $900 of Webb. So definitely gonna be an interesting discussion throughout today's podcast and we'll talk about that in a second and talk about golfers who have done well at Detroit Golf Club. But first, ever wonder what would have happened if the Cleveland Browns had actually trained it for Russell Wilson or if Andrew Luck came out of retirement? Well, now you get to find out with FanDuel's Football Multiverse, a new contest type consisting of madden simulations around what if scenarios? Each scenario will be streamed on YouTube and have an accompanying free to play fantasy game. This week on the FanDuel Football Multiverse, we see what the Dallas Cowboys would look like if they had let Ezekiel Elliott walk and what the Giants would look like had they taken Sam Darnold instead of Saquon Barkley. Zeke and the Cowboys are on Wednesday, Darnold and the Giants on Thursday, free to play contests are in the FanDuel lobby and you can watch both streams at 8 p.m. Eastern each night on the FanDuel YouTube page. We also post the PGA heat checks and the NASCAR heat checks up on the YouTube page too. So just in general, make sure you are subscribed to the FanDuel YouTube page. Let's take a look at last year here at Detroit Golf Club. Again, only one year of past history to look at, but we can't look at golfers who popped there who were in the field of this week as well to see if we should expect that success to continue. And as Brandon mentioned, Nate Lashley was the winner in last year's event, $8,500 for this weekend and a different field for sure. But you know, wins and wins Brandon. So what do you take out of Nate Lashley's win last year? Yeah, Monday qualifier $8,500. Monday qualifier last year to win, but he's $8,500 this year. I think he has to kick off that conversation for past history because where else would you start? Only champion in the field, one by six. But he's missed four straight cuts, including the Charles Schwab and the RBC Heritage since the hiatus. He did that by losing only 1.4 total strokes to the field over those four rounds. He's been pretty neutral over all across various aspects of the game, which basically just all the strokes gained stats hasn't been terrible, but four straight missed cuts should get us completely off of Nate Lashley. But he did finish third back at the waste management before the missed cuts by gaining 6.1 strokes T to green. I definitely understand the hesitancy in going hard at Nate Lashley because of the missed cuts. But he went super low last year, 63, 67, 63, 70. There were three rounds of 63 here and he had two of them at $8,500. I think he's stomachable, if that's a word. Despite having missed four straight cuts, he missed by two and then missed on the number. I've got two sub 70 rounds over the past four. It hasn't been that bad. I don't know if people will jump back on him. I would assume that they will. But what are your thoughts on Lashley? Yeah, I was going to check. I'm checking fan chair sports right now to see if he was popping and at least based on early tags, he isn't. I would guess that inflates as the week goes along because people naturally tend to talk about the past winter, which we're doing right now too. But so I think that you combine that with the, or potentially not being super popular with the fact that he's $8,500 and despite the missed cuts, the stats aren't all that bad for Nate Lashley. I can see the case for it. The one reason that I'm not, you know, super excited about it is that there are actually a decent number of golfers in the mid 8,000 range. I hate the high 8,000 range is terrible. It's like, that is my least favorite range of the entire field this week. But the mid 8,000 range is a lot better than usual. So although Nate Lashley is $8,500, that may lead you to believe that he's kind of like this one guy down there we can trust. I actually think there are a good amount of options in the mid to low 8,000. So if I get the sense that Lashley is going to be a popular player for people on Fandall, I am very okay pivoting elsewhere. And I actually don't think even before accounting for popularity, he's my favorite guy in that tier. So he's in consideration for me. I think it's a way to phrase it, but not a priority and not my favorite guy in that tier. How are you viewing him relative to that tier? So I'm gonna be in this tier a lot because I'll explain probably what my intention is this week as we get there, there's gonna be a very specific segment of the show where it makes sense to talk about what I think my go-to strategy is going to be. But so I will be in this section of the salary pool quite a bit. He's going to be someone I consider but not necessarily someone who jumps out to me. And I don't think I have to play him. I don't love the current form. Again, it's not been good. I'm not trying to say it's been good, but it hasn't been completely dreadful. He has one here, obviously. I have some shares of him, but I really don't think he'd be top three for me below 9,000. Yeah, I think I would agree with that too. Probably not top three for me. But because I think we might be on the same page, I'm gonna be down here a lot too, hopefully not for the same reason, but I'm gonna be down here plenty. So I think that we're on the same page there. Let's move to the middle tier though and talk about a guy who was in that same range last week because last week, Brandon, you've smartly talked up Doc Redman as being a good value at $8,100. And he came through, 11th place finish, that was awesome.  But he's also $10,000 now, so we have to decide if Doc Redman is actually worth that. Redman's finish last year was not a fluke. He gained 6.7 strokes to a green and 3.5 an approach. He did putt well, but the finish had more to it than just that. Redman's numbers have been awesome since the end of the COVID-19 layoff. He has gained at least 4.7 strokes in approach in all three events. He had 7.8 strokes in approach two weeks ago and that's awesome. He's also a younger golfer and we were talking coming out of the COVID break. We want to target younger golfers who may have improved in that time. Redman is 22 years old, so that's also valuable, but it's $10,000. So it's a weak field. Is that enough to justify paying $10,000 for Doc Redman or is now the time to jump off that train? I think you can jump off. I don't think it's that outrageous given this field. We target, I mean, the name of the game here for the HE Check is finding young ball strikers who can't put or have a short game. That's what Doc Redman is right now. And if, let's say, Joaquin Nieman, whenever he was younger, was $10,000 in this field, we'd still play him. I'm not saying that Doc Redman is Joaquin Nieman, but these approach numbers are pretty much unmatched. He can gain strokes off the tee, which again might not be super important this week, but I think you could do way worse than Redman at 10,000. I just am not going to go out of my way this week to play him. If I'm in that range, I won't write him off, but I don't think that he's going to be someone who I really try to focus on getting into my lineups because there are about three or four golfers, I think, below 10,000 I like. So I don't think I'll have to get to Redman, but again, I don't actually dislike him at the price. I just wouldn't prioritize him. I think that, I agree with you. The golfers right beneath 10,000, like immediately beneath it are really, really good this week and I like a lot of them. I would also mention that I was checking the fan share tags for Nate Lashley and in the process saw that Doc Redman is number one, which is justified because like again, really good current form, finished second year last year so I get it. But when we have, like again, the thought process for me when a golfer is going to be popular, and I don't think this is like weird or anything, is can I find alternatives to replace the expected production from that golfer for Doc Redman? The answer is yes, because the guys directly beneath him are really, really enticing. So I think that's why I won't go at Doc Redman. It's not because I'm not buying into his recent improvements. I am more so banking on the fact that the short game is not that good. He's probably gonna be very popular and he's not cheap. So I'm okay pivoting elsewhere and then buying back into Doc Redman at a more opportune time. I think that's the way I'd phrase it for this week. Let's move to your second guy who popped here last year. That's Patrick Reed. And I think in this field especially, Patrick Reed is very, very interesting because he is an objectively good golfer and it's hard to find a lot of those in this second tier.  They're the best. But when you can find someone who can have the weeks that Reed can have in this field, I think that's very interesting. He's 11-2 Brandon. What do you see of Patrick Reed? Specifically, what did you see out of him last year at this course? Yeah, so he doesn't, I mean, Reed never gets a ton of positive buzz and I get it. I understand why people might not view him very positively but he did play here last year, finished fifth. He ranked sixth in Strokeski and T-Degreen and third in approach, which is what you wanna see when you're looking at course history. If you do, strong bentgrass putter finished seventh at the Charles Schwab so he has a good high-end finish in a tough field recently, did miss the cut at the RBC Heritage on Bermuda and then last week at the Travelers was a little shaky but ended up finishing 24th. So in his past week starts, he's been seventh cut in 24th and objectively and subjectively, he's just the cut above most of this field. He is a significant savings from both Bryson DeChambeau and Webb Simpson. I think you can trust him at 11-2 pretty easily. I don't know how often I'll be in this range. So what's your thought on Patrick Reed here? I think in this range, I think he's in the top three for me in this range. It's tough though because like when I am here, I wanna make sure I get enough, we're gonna talk about him later but I wanna make sure I get enough Sung J.M. Buying him off of a couple of rough events. I am intrigued by Victor Hovland once again, shocker. That happens every week. But and I think there is a good case to me for Tiro Hatton who is 11-1. So it's not a bad tier but like you said, objectively Patrick Reed is a cut above a lot of these guys. So I feel like I should use Patrick Reed but there is a strong draw towards the others. So it's a question of do I actually follow where I think I should go or do I say, eh, I wanna have fun with Victor Hovland and Sung J.M. instead and it's not like they're bad process plays but like there is a strong draw towards them for me. So I'm having a tough time deciding on Patrick Reed. I think the way that I'm going to do it is I'm going to actually make sure I have exposure to Patrick Reed but I don't think he'll wind up being my most utilized golfer in this range. So I wanna make sure I use him because you are right but it's also, it's just Hovland and M like draw me towards them at the exact same time. Yeah, so I can't really blame you. I would say of the top seven golfers in salary. So Bryson, Webb, Reed, Hatton, Hedeky, Victor Hovland and Sung J.M. Everyone aside from Hedeky, I'm good with and Hedeky's number one for me and like my stats model just what we saw with him when he returned was not Hedeky. And again, I shouldn't put too much talk into that but we know that Hedeky can't putt anyway. So I feel okay being off there. So I'm good with six of the top seven. As for Reed, I do prefer to Hatton to Reed this week for $100 cheaper but I think Patrick Reed is someone that we're gonna have to watch the popularity of. He's eighth right now in fan share tags. If he's popular, I understand it. I don't think I have to chase it but he can make birdies. I think he leads the field in birdie or better rates over the past 50 rounds according to Fantasy National. So that's what we want this week. So I have no issues with Reed. And if putting is gonna be more important that's not a huge concern to Patrick Reed whereas it is for Hovland at least. Sungjae's okay on Ben Grass and Poa but Hovland it would be a concern. So I think if you're playing that angle that would bump up Reed as well. Let's move all the way down Brandon. I talked about how much I like the mid 8,000 range. Let's skip that entirely and jump down to the 7,000 range and talk about Cameron Tringale because Tringale is someone we targeted quite a bit over the winter. He is only a $7,900 for this weekend and he's going to a course where he had success last year. Tringale tied for third in the field with eight strokes gained tee to green. He used that to finish fifth at the tournaments. That's his best finish on the PGA Tour since 2015. Now before the COVID-19 break, Tringale was hot. He gained 5.7 and 4.7 strokes in approach respectively in the final two events but then the only event we've seen him since the end of the layoff was last week and he lost 3.7 strokes in approach and lost 2.7 off the tee. That's not good. But Tringale is $7,900 this week. He still ranked 16th in approach to past 50 rounds and he was awesome here last year. So Brandon, is that enough for you to risk it on Cameron Tringale in tournaments? Now it should be because I said that I need to trust the larger samples. That's what I talked about at the top of the show. I don't think I would argue with anyone who wants to play Tringale but I think that there are potentially better plays at the low 8,000 range. I haven't dug too far into the 7,000 range because it's usually just not a good process to be down there too often. I think you have to get a little overconfident but Andrew Putnam's 8,000. Danny Willett has not been great but we know what his high-end upside is. He's been pretty solid tee to green even with the struggles recently. Again, I'm not gonna talk you out of Cameron Tringale but I don't think I even need to get there this week. Yeah, I think that's a good argument is that you don't need to go down that far but I'm actually okay doing so regardless just because I am gonna be down in this range decently often and I want that salary flexibility because I would love to get extra exposure to that high 9,000 range we were just discussing. Let me live there a bit more versus other ranges. I think the drop really starts to come in in the low 9,000 range and I think that this is one of the weeks where from about 9,400 and below the gap is not as big as it typically is so I'm fine with someone who's 80 or let's say 8,300 compared to 9,300. I think that gap is much more narrow than it typically is and so I think that we can spend down pretty easily this week. Yeah, it's very much like a, I forget what it's called, a speed graph? I actually don't know what it's called. I don't know what my graphs are, Jim. I can't remember, not even algebra. Whoa, gosh, okay. I have no idea what I'm talking about. Is it calculus? Calculus, yes. My calculus teacher in high school called it a speed graph because it looked like the movie Speed where they're driving on a bus and it has to go 55 miles per hour higher and they're turning and weird stuff. Anyway, it looks like that. We're like, it's super high at the top and then it's a super flat distribution once you get the salaries lower. I know that if you're not watching and usually we can't see my hand moving. It's worth it to click over to YouTube and see this. It's really not, there's really nothing added because I have no idea what I'm saying but the gap between the $12,000 golfers and the $11,000 golfers is a lot bigger than the gap between the $9,000 and the $8,000 golfers which is exactly what you were saying. I just had a lot more trouble saying it. Yeah, but I mean, we got to talk indirectly about Keanu Reeves, so. Is he in that movie? I've never seen it. I saw it about 10 times because I was very, very ill as a kid. It kept running on HBO for like a three week stretch where I was out of school. So I just kept watching it. I don't think I'd ever seen a Keanu Reeves movie until like a couple years ago. We watched The Matrix and then I saw Always Being My Maybe and he has like a cameo in that and we watched the first John Wick movie and I finally have seen the light and realized that Keanu Reeves is freaking awesome. It just took me 28 years to arrive at that conclusion. There's a whole subreddit dedicated to Keanu being awesome so you can check that out. As there should be. Let's move into the current forms. I don't know what we got to Keanu Reeves from, of course. You brought up speed. I don't know, man. Not the drug. Anyway, current form. Kevin Nott, 10-4. Talk to me about him, Brad. Yeah, he'd been rounding into form before the hiatus with the 14th missed cut, 9th and 36th and then two post-laff starts. He missed the cut and finished fifth last week at the travelers. Now, if you look at that, it's a cut and a fifth doesn't seem super consistent but this is a perfect example if you go back and look at the stats of what putting does to a player. His strokes gain numbers were pretty consistent in each. He gained in all three T-degree stats at about the same rate but lost an average of 0.93 strokes putting in his missed cut over his two rounds and gained an average of 1.4 when he finished fifth. So again, it's not one-to-one but his off-the-T approach and around-the-green numbers were very, very similar and one led to a missed cut and one led to a fifth. So if you're new to golf, that's a perfect example of why you should probably just trust the T-degree numbers more than the putting which is very, very volatile. So keep that in mind. Na is fourth in combined bentgrass and poa putting over the past 100 rounds. He's 34th in birdie or better rate which is not as high as I would want it to be for the price but he does what you need to do. We've seen two good T-degree performances. We've seen the fifth place finish that kind of upside in a tougher field so any interest in Kevin Na at 10,400? I think he's just kind of in a dead zone where I'd rather spend up for the guys who are slightly more expensive than him or spend down for the guys who are a bit cheaper than him. It's not an objection to Na himself. I just don't think he adds anything more than really again a loaded high 9,000 range. So I think I'm probably gonna wind up with no Na despite, you know, I think I agree with what you said about how the T-degree plays been solid and that backs up the fifth place finish but I just, I think that I'd rather just deviate a bit elsewhere spending down or spending up depending on where I'm at. What about for you? Yeah, I think I'm in the same range and I don't have, this is not data backed but I always feel like Kevin Na is a little more popular than I would expect for one reason or another. He's fifth right now in fan share tags. So, I mean, we've seen really flat percentages, draft percentages on Fandall in these very deep fields. I think we'll probably see it return to what it was before the break where Bryson, Webb are on like 35 to 40% of lineups specifically Bryson. Whereas the past few weeks it's been kind of everyone's captured around 25%. So, I think ownership's gonna be more important this week than it has been. And Kevin Na is someone who I'm fine kind of avoiding if he is popular. I'm fine avoiding even if he's not but yeah, I get what you're saying too. Like I just think I have other options basically. Yeah, we do, we do. So, let's talk about one of the other options. Part of the reason that I was really okay with not obsessing over Patrick Reed was because there were other golfers in that range where I liked quite a bit. One of them is Sung Jae-im. Sung Jae-im is $10,800 in a weaker field a few weeks after he was 10-9 against a tougher crowd and that's interesting to me. With the struggles in the two events since then it's possible it's justified but I wanna talk through those here right now. Sung Jae has lost to combined 2.6 strokes and approached the past two events.  And this is in addition to the putting surface being a negative as he is better on Bermuda than either Poa or Bencras. This is not his best putting surface. But at the same time, Sung Jae is still 25th in approach to the past 50 rounds. He is 15th and good drives gained. He gained 5.6 strokes T-degree three weeks ago at the Charles Schwab. He gained 7.1 at this course last year. So, I kind of think that Sung Jae-im fits a somewhat similar mold to Webb Simpson a couple weeks ago when he won where he was coming off a rough event where the data wasn't really that good but it was a very small sample. Whereas the larger sample on this guy says he is a good golfer, I am at least very interested in Sung Jae-im at 10 eighth this week, even if it's not in a cash game roster because I think I'd rather go with some increased safety there in case there actually are some legitimate struggles but for tournaments, I think Sung Jae is someone I want to buy back into this week at 10 eighth. Where do you sit on him and how concerning for you are the past two weeks? I think they have to be concerning a little bit because it is two weeks and six rounds because he made the cut and missed the cut and nothing looks super great there. But he did still gain, technically strokes gained T-degree in each of those. The putting has been terrible, which I don't put a whole lot of stock in over a six round sample. But we know that he has upside. I mean, he won the Honda, was third at the Arnold Palmer, 10th at the Charles Schwab. His win odds, based on just how good he is, T to green are pretty strong. I have him sixth in my simulations to win at 3.6%, which is pretty big for a golfer. So I think Sung Jae is very much in play. I like him as a bounce back, but I don't particularly think I will be rostering a ton of him because of how I want to build my lineups. Do you think that Sung Jae's a better win bet than a DFS play? I think he's, that's actually tough. I kind of wavered in like a millisecond because I do think he can win, obviously, but he can score a lot of fantasy points without winning. Yeah. And he is priced pretty well. I think that he's, I'd say win bet because he's 25 to one on Fando Sportsbook. I know that this is kind of a top heavy field with Bryce in a web, taking up a lot of the win equity, but as far as like actual betting value goes, I don't really want to have too much exposure to golfers priced below that. So I think Sung Jae's a really good win pick. Okay, cool. He is 10-8. I think that when I'm in this range, he's probably my favorite golfer, a little bit overholland in Reed. And I agree with you where I may not be here all that often, but when I am here, it's probably going to be Sung Jae most often. Let's move into your second current form golfer, which is Christian Bezadenhote. And Bezadenhote, $9,600. What are you seeing with him recently that made you want to bring him up here? Well, he's not going to be popular, I would imagine, because he's Christian Bezadenhote and he's not a name that a lot of people know. His PGA Tour of Samples, only 20 rounds. But in that sample, he's 17th in this field in Stroke's Game Approach. He's got 10 combined rounds on Bent Grass and Poa. He's been fine in them as a putter. I don't think that that's something that we should give him. It shouldn't be a positive, but it's definitely not a negative for me. And according to DataGolf, Bezadenhote ranks sixth in field-adjusted Stroke's Game Approach among golfers with at least 10 events in 2020. He's fifth in this field among golfers with any number of events. And basically he's like behind just Hideki, I think, of guys who actually have like significant rounds played this year. So I think that he's got the case for some of the best irons approach play in the field. Doesn't typically pick up strokes off the tee, but that's not super important this week. So I think that that's something that's in his favor. I finished 29th at the WGC Mexico, small field, but tough field, 18th at the Arnold Palmer, cut at the Schwab and 28th at the RBC Heritage. So for $9,600, I think we'll probably get someone who's very low-owned, someone who can make up plenty of ground with his approach play. I think that that's a pretty good recipe because you can be very chalky and play someone like Bezadenhote at low ownership and differentiate your lineup a lot. Yeah, I think that Bezadenhote is interesting and I like the aspects that you mentioned within him. So he's a consideration for me. The question that I have is where will he rank for you in that high 9,000-rated? Because we've alluded to this a couple of times. There are a lot of good golfers there. Doc Rebman is 10,000, we alluded to him. Rory Sabatini is $9,900. Lucas Glover, a personal favorite, is $9,800. Brendan Todd blew up for most of the event last week. He is 98. Adam Hadman is 98. Hecheck favorite, Brian Harman is 97. Eric Van Royne is 96. There are a lot of really good names in that range and I don't think Bezadenhote is going to be near the top of that list for me at no fault of his own. So I am monitoring him and okay with him but I think when it comes down to it, I'm gonna find myself gravitating more towards Glover, Hadwin, guys like that versus Bezadenhote. Are you finding yourself in a similar dilemma there? Yeah, from a process standpoint, I think that just about everyone there has a better argument to be made for them but that's pretty much why I brought him up because how many people are going to play Christian Bezadenhote over all those names you just mentioned or Rafa Cabrera-Bello seems to be a bit of a DFS favorite. Kevin Kisner, Brandon Grace, who's not- We don't mention Kisner on this podcast anymore. He's part of the reason why I had a, not as good of a week as I could have had last week. He's banned for one week. Yeah, Harold Varner is 92. So yeah, we love, we're a very pro Harold Varner podcast. Kisner, one week hiatus though. But yeah, so there's a better process for a lot of these guys but I don't think it's significantly better than Bezadenhote to the point where you don't touch Bezadenhote. So again, I think he's a very easy pivot away from this range and I think that's very, very intriguing because I'll need to find those spots this week. And you mentioned you can use one golfer and make your lineup unique. So if you want to use someone like Bryson who we know will be popular this week, Bezadenhote could be an easy route for doing so while making your lineup at least a little bit different. Let's move on to Tyler Duncan. Tyler Duncan is 30, so not necessarily someone you expect to make big, sudden, sustainable changes. With that said, he has posted some decent numbers since the end of the COVID-19 left. So I think he's at least worth discussing. In all three events, Duncan has gained at least two strokes in approach. His big one was last week at the Travelers, gained 7.5 to 80 green, but lost 3.2 putting. So he finished 32nd. Duncan ranks 22nd in the field in good drive rate over the past 50 rounds. He has 21st in approach. The short game is pretty bad, but the ball striking is encouraging. So Brandon, have you seen enough from Tyler Duncan to buy in at $8,700? I haven't seen enough not to buy in. I don't think he's my favorite play in this range, but he's gonna be someone who I'm okay with. I just think that there are easier cases to be made for Sebastian Munoz, Lonto Griffin, Tom Hogi, more specifically, right around that price range. So it's kind of like a buzz-aid note where if Tyler Duncan's not going to be popular, I'm fine rotating him in, because one of these value plays, maybe two of them, will probably get talked up to the point where it's like, okay, I don't need to play Sebastian Munoz, no matter how much I love him, because everyone else loves him, and I'm sorry, Sebastian, if you miss the cut, it's good for my lineups in that case. So that's just an example. But yeah, I mean, Duncan's T-degree plays been good, and I'm fine buying into a three-start sample for sure, because really, the past 50 rounds have been pretty solid for Duncan as well. Looking at fan share tags, it looks like nobody in this range is getting a ton of buzz yet, which is reassuring. Maybe we can kind of just pick your favorite one there. But I agree, he's not my favorite in this tier, but I think that Duncan is a consideration. You mentioned Munoz, he's definitely on my list as well, so definitely options here. I think that Duncan is a consideration if I need to change things up, because you don't want to get overly confident in any value play specifically, so I think if I'm rotating through and need to deviate off of a Munoz lineup or someone else, Duncan would be a consideration there. Let's move on to the bookmaker odds for the Rocket Mortgage Classic. Starting off at the top, Bryson DeChambeau, the heavy favorite this week, he is plus six 50 at Fandal Sportsbook. Webb Simpson is on an island by himself at 13 to one, one of those two in a second. Hideki Matsuyama and Patrick Reed are 16 to one with Thiero Hatton, right behind them at 17 to one. Victor Hollen is 20 to one, then Sung Jae M is 25 to one. Ricky Fowler is 30 to one with Scottie Scheffler, 32 to one, and Tony Finau, rounding in at the top group at 32 or 33 to one. Brandon Bryson and Webb have easily the shortest odds and there is a big gap between them and the field on Fandal. So A, which of those two do you rank higher and B, how are you handling the two of them specifically for tournaments? Okay, so I rank Webb higher just because of expected popularity. That's really it. Going through their win odds, their stats, actually a lot closer than you might think if you don't really realize how good Webb Simpson is. He's just been phenomenal for quite a while now. So yes, Bryson is more likely to dominate this thing and run away with it. But again, off the tee play was kind of mitigated last year, of course Bryson's super accurate despite adding all that distance, which is very, very scary. But Bryson's still, the short game's not quite there and Webb is just really good at just about everything. So I do have Webb above Bryson as for tournaments. I don't think you have to fade either of them because it's very hard to make the case that both of these guys implode or really either of them. I think it's a very hard case to make because Webb's super consistent, he's very good. Bryson gained so much distance, he's gonna gain so much distance off the tee compared to the field and hit fairways that the odds that Bryson misses the cut or Webb misses the cut just not really there. They're both about 84, 85% likely to make the cut in my simulations. I don't think you get a whole lot of leverage by fading them. So I think you can play both of them in tournaments. I think you can play both of them together in tournaments and I think that you can probably justify playing both of them together in a cash game lineup if you want. But if you're gonna play just Bryson or either of these guys, make sure you kind of differentiate elsewhere but I don't think that this is one we have to overcomplicate. I think they're both in play. And I think that what you will see at the end there is the thing I wanted to focus on. I think you can play both in the same lineup because it's in part because I think they are such a big tier above the rest of the field but also because there are really good options in the mid to low 8,000 range. If you plug in both Bryson and Web Simpson on Fandall, you have an average of $8,925 left per golfer, usually that is prohibitive. I will not be able to go there more often than not. But this week when there are so many golfers who are in the mid 8,000s, I can make that happen without using golfers who do not have a realistic path to a ceiling. I think there are guys in the mid 8,000 range who can get you a top 10 finish. So I am willing to do that. And I think that that is going to be something I do decently often in tournaments because let's say Bryson by himself, worst case scenario winds up being on 40% of rosters. That's 40% there. What percentage of those will also have Web Simpson? Probably not gonna be a huge number. I mean, there will be lineups. Like this is not some off the wall strategy here but I don't think you're basically whittling the roster way down a pretty good amount. So I want to start with both in a good number of tournament lineups, build around that mid 8,000 tier, see what happens. But I also agree with you where I'm okay having some lineups where I have neither. Yeah, I think neither's in play. I don't know how often I'll do that. But I think the key difference and we've alluded to it but we don't, look, we're here to give out our analysis and you probably always want to hear more value plays who are these guys are, this is a cheap make the cut guy. Those don't really exist with high probability. They just don't, that's how golf works. But the difference this week in this field is the difference between the golfers in like the mid to low 9,000 range, aside from Harold Warner, who I like plenty. I don't see that a huge difference between guys like Maverick McNeely, Keegan Bradley, Patrick Rogers, Will Gordon, and like your Sebastian Munoz or Lonto Griffin or Andrew Putnam. Usually that's like Scotty Schaeffler at like 96. Those types of players down to like Keegan Bradley in the upper 8,000s, that's a huge difference. The difference this week to me is not that significant. So I think you play Bryson Webb in a good number of lineups. And if you don't, you can still play those cheap guys. So you're going to get three of, you know, someone like Reed Hatton, Hovland or M or however you want to do that. You have a lot of flexibility this week because the field is what it is. Exactly. And it's a different, so basically what we're saying is usually at least Brandon Wells, because I, I'm a fish. Brandon will stress having, what's the word I'm looking, balanced rosters? Woof, that was a tough one. Brandon will stress having balanced rosters and that will be the go-to way. This week, because the gap is so small, it's not as important to go balanced. At least that's the way I'm reading it personally. And that pushes me towards Bryson and Webb. If I had to pick one, I'd go Bryson, but honestly, the answer to me is Borke no Los Dos. Let's do both. Let's see what happens. Let's look at that second tier. Basically everybody behind Web Simpson, who do you think grades out best from a DFS perspective in that second tier? I think, I think it's Tiro Hatton, which is scary. I'll talk about him more in detail, but he was fueled by putting in his last start, which you never loved to see. But before that, we know how good Hatton was. It was almost like scary to fade Tiro Hatton entering the players, like, because I mean he won the Arnold Palmer. Like, whenever you have someone who I feel that strongly about and he's in a field that's a whole heck of a lot easier than what some of these fields have been, I feel like I'm gonna regret not playing him. That's not a good process, but the stats are also there. The long-term form is there for Hatton. Very good iron play. He can make a lot of putts. So I think that Hatton might be the first place that I look, which sounds like you're not on that board. I'll go with that. I wanted to ask you something, because you have a model that adjusts for field strength, right? What do you mean? Don't you have a model that looks at their total in each round adjusts for field strength? And where does Tiro Hatton grade on that? Because I feel like he's probably stupid, good, because he's always in generally tougher fields. So I don't have that pulled up, but I can vamp for a bit. I'll vamp. The ball striking, as Brandon mentioned, is obviously very good for Hatton. He ranks seventh in good drives gained, 10th in approach to the past 50 rounds. That legitimizes him as being an upper tier golfer. I think that the reason that I am more hesitant to put Hatton at the top of my list is because I think people are gonna be wary of Sung Jae-im and I want to get back in on Sung Jae-im, who is someone who had the golf world attention coming out of the COVID-19 layoff. I wanna get there while people are looking elsewhere. So I think it's mostly because I'm drawn towards Sung Jae versus I'm drawn away from Hatton. Yeah, so I actually did have that pulled up in a different fact. I do so much research and I do too many things that I forgot I had this on this spreadsheet anyway, but so since the 2019 Masters, it goes Webb, Hideki, Reed, Bryson, Hatton. And it's gonna be low on Bryson, obviously, but in terms of numbers, it's 1.97 for Webb in terms of adjusted stroke average. Hideki's at 1.71, Reed's at 1.69, which is actually why he always rates out well and my more traditional model. Bryson 1.59 and then Hatton at 1.43. So I think that he's very much in play and we know that the more recent form has been better than that. Obviously, I know that this underrates Bryson because I look at a larger sample, but that's actually the most predictive sample. So looking at a bigger sample is not always a bad thing. That's right. And I do make some adjustments because we know that Bryson is not Bryson. We know that that's a very, very- He's Bryson Trout now, Bryson to Trout. Yeah, he's a very rare example of we can point to like this is different for sure, we know that. But yeah, Hatton, very, very good. And if he is not significantly popular, which I don't think anybody's going to be prohibitively popular other than Bryson, potentially Webb, and then like maybe a value play that everyone is on. Yeah, I think that's probably the right Reed, but I think that I do have Sung Jae number one over Hatton. But honestly, you could tell me Hatton, Reed, Havlin, or Sung Jae would finish first in this year and I wouldn't bat an eye. That's kind of, it's a very close tier to me. We saw a lot of movement in the odds between yesterday and today over at Fandall Sportsbook. So I'm going to ask you which golfer's odds have shifted, but if you just want to run through the highlights, the bigger ones, which golfer's odds have moved in a significant way to you? Yeah, some of the bigger or just more noteworthy ones, Teal Hatton from 14 to 17 to one on Fandall Sportsbook, Victor Havlin 16 to 20, Sung Jae M 20 to 25, Ricky Fowler 27 to 30, Tony Fienal 29 to 33, Kevin Na 31 to 38. So that goes along with what you said of just not really into Kevin Na. Bubba Watson 34 to 40, Doc Redmond and Rory Sabatini 40 to 50, Lucas Glover 50 to 65, Brendan Todd 50 to 70, and then Adam Hadwin, Brian Harmon, Eric Van Royne, Kevin Kisner and Brandon Grace all 60 to 70. And really the only shortening I've seen is actually on Scottie Schaeffler from 34 to 32. Now this does account for the fact that Odd Schaeffler once Harris English, who I think was 42 with Drew. But even with that, everyone's odds lengthened. So to me, that means there's probably not a real consensus this week outside of probably Bryson and Webb. So I think it's a wide open week. Yeah, Schaeffler, being the only guy shortening is interesting. He is 10-5 and I think that he kind of gets in the same issue that Kevin Na has where he's like, I'd rather spend up for some Jay or spend down for the other guys. Is Schaeffler someone interest to you at 10-5? Yeah, it's a little bit problematic because I'm talking about, I want Bryson and Webb and I'm fine with the values and not the balance lineup this week, but you can make a really strong balance lineup and get a lot of realistic winners in your lineup. So I think Schaeffler, I'm fine with him from an all-around process standpoint. I don't think I'll be in that price range with my default and go-to lineups. That being said, I think that if everyone tries to pay it for Bryson and Webb together, and that's a very popular, which it could be, if everyone loves the values, a balanced lineup actually does work this week. Yeah, and I think that if you're multi-entering for tournaments, that situation where you actively try to deviate your roster construction from one lineup to the next, play different ways, like don't just do Bryson and Webb. Bryson, a Bryson lineup at the top and a Webb lineup at the top, like find different ways to actively change your roster construction because if you are in ranges, other people are not in, that's going to give you, that's one route for being different and having a leg up over the field. Final question here, which lower salary golfers have the standout to you? Not a ton. Kyle Stanley, Chris Kirk are both 90 to one at 9,000 on Fando. Cebu Kim is 90 to one at 8,900. Michael Thompson is 90 to one at 8,800. Matthew Wolfe, 95 to one at 8,900. Brian Stewards, 100 to one, Mark Hubbard, 120, Lonto Griffin 120, and Tyler Duncan 130. Not a whole lot to go off of if you're really trying to maximize your win equity just in terms of the sports book odds. So it's, we're aware of the, we're not rostering Lonto Griffin necessarily to win. We're rostering him to make the cut and push for a top 25 so that we can play Bryson and Webb. That's a very big opportunity this week that doesn't always exist in other fields. And I think that it's worth noting that this week I am more willing to use guys with super long win odds than usual, just because like you said, I don't even to win. So like there will be guys in my lineups who are 130 to one to win, 150 to one is one of my player picks. But I think that it's just worth noting that things will be a bit different this week just because I don't think there's a huge gap. So I am willing to go with those guys for sure. Whether for this week, the only win advantage will be a slight edge to golfers teeing off early in the day on Friday. Even then, the wind never gets above eight miles per hour. So unless you're playing single round slates, I wouldn't really worry about wind this week all over. Pretty good weekend. So I think we can move on to our player picks here for the Rocket Mortgage Classic. Brandon, who are you targeting in the upper range on FanDuel for this week? It's gonna be Webb. I'm gonna stick with him as my 1A over Bryson. Still technically coming off a win. Neither he nor Bryson actually played here last year for whatever that's worth to you. I don't think it'll matter a ton. They're the top two plays, just no matter how you slice it. It's a pretty lukewarm field overall. So I mean, I really don't have a strong take between Webb and Bryson. I just would assume Bryson will carry a higher roster percentage compared to Webb whose third in approach over the past 50 rounds, ninth in combined stroke scheme putting on Poa and Bentgrass over a 100 round sample. Again, I'm looking to see whoever is less popular that's gonna, I can almost guarantee it's going to be Webb. And for how close I have it as a coin flip, I will pick Webb. Webb Simpson is my 1A. And I will go with Bryson D'Shambeau as my 1A because to me, I don't think the gap in salary between Bryson and Webb is enough for me to justify fading him because I think that he is like half a tier above Webb maybe. I don't know if that's outrageous to say, but I think he's like half a tier above Webb right now because even before the COVID-19 layoff, D'Shambeau has six straight finishes of eighth or better. He has gained at least 2.8 strokes off the tee in all those, at least 2.3 in approach in five of those six. And again, that's before the layoff too. The putter's been good, but Bryson ranks ninth in putting on Poa and Bentgrass over the past 100 rounds. So although the putting has been good, that's something we can expect to persist going forward. For cash gains, I'm starting with D'Shambeau building from there. I think that he is a bigger lock for me than Webb. I'm also comfortable going overweight on him in tournaments even though I know he'll probably be at least sniffing 40%. So I know it's gonna happen. I'm still gonna be heavier than that, Bryson. Any final thoughts for you on Webb and Bryson before we move on? Nope, you can play these guys this week. You can differentiate in plenty of other ways. So I'm not that concerned about it. All right. So who else are you targeting here in this upper tier? It's gonna be Tiro Hatton. I know he's not super cheap at 11-1, but I like a lot of what he gives. He's played just once since the hiatus ended, finishing third at the RBC Heritage. Again, did a lot out with putting, but before that, he was really good. One, the Arnold Palmer was just surging from pretty much every angle you could look at. Again, gained 9.3 strokes with his putter at the Heritage to finish third, but we know that Hatton has elite iron play, approach play overall, was really stellar before the break. Long-term form is good for Hatton and this is kind of an arbitrary thing that I've started doing, but looking at value of like top 10 percentages compared to the Vandal salary, I have him third for the price and for how expensive he is, I think that's very intriguing. So Hatton is someone who has upsides, should have a floor and can get hot with the putter and the irons, which is exactly what you need to win a PGA Tour event. We talked about a lot of guys in this tier, but I do wanna talk about Victor Havland here quickly because I feel like I've kind of glossed over him, but he's someone I'm gonna use and I don't wanna use someone who we didn't discuss a whole lot because that seems not, I don't know, it seems weird. Anyway, we know the short game is bad for Havland, but it has been bad this whole time and he's still rattled off really good performances. Havland has gained at least 3.5 strokes in approach in each event since the end of the COVID-19 layoff. He has also gained at least 1.5 off the tee and when you do that, you at least give yourselves some leeway to struggle with the short stuff. Havland, six in the field and good drives gained. He has second in approach to the past 50 rounds, finished 13th year last year, so he does have exposure to the course, though the ball striking was not as good in that one. He's a year older now, a year progression. In a weakened field, I am good continuing to buy high on Havland at 10-9. Brandon, you've not discussed Havland yet, so any thoughts on him and what is a kind of good range? Yeah, it is a good range and it's a little bit problematic because the ball striking we know is about as good as we'll see in this field. Just from what he should, if everything works out, he should be in the top five or so strokes gained. Ball striking, I won't say tee to green because that'll factor this around the green performance, which is, he knows he's been on record that says he sucks at chipping, he's aware of it, but you need to chip and you need to make putts to score a lot of birdies. He gets into birdie chance range a lot, but still doesn't seem super confident with the putter. I don't really factor in the eye test to that degree, but if I'm deciding between Havland and potentially some J.M. to your hat and Patrick Reed, as much as I love Victor Havland, he might be fourth for me in that range and he's going to be very popular this week. That's unfortunate. All right, well, if he's going to be popular then I have no problem jumping off because it's such a good tier. So I would play this thing based on projected popularity. If you see a golfer who you think is going to be popular, pivot elsewhere because there are four rock solid options we've talked a lot about in this show. Let's move down to the middle tier unless you have something else to add. Like we said that it doesn't matter for Bryson on web with the ownership, but they're a tier above someone like Victor Havland who still has a huge glaring hole in his game. So I think that that's the, I just wanted to make that distinction in case I was confused. Again, replaceable production. You have that replaceable production for Victor Havland whereas you probably don't as much for Bryson on web. Middle tier, we like this tier a lot. There are good golfers in the upper 9,000 so who is standing out most to you, Brandon? I have Adam Hadwin at 9,800. A pretty elevated price in this weaker field but he's 14th in approach and 12th in Greens and Regulation gained over the past 50 rounds. 13th in stroke skiing, putting over a 100 round sample on bent grass and poa combined. So should be able to get some greens, should be able to convert those birdie chances by actually being a plus putter. Being a plus putter is always something that I don't rate in a ton but I am this week because I need those birdie conversions. It actually has decent win equity for me in a field like this in my simulation. So I like him as a cut maker with a little bit of upside for 9,800 dollars. Yeah, Hadwin was the other guy considered from my first slot here. I wound up going Lucas Glover. We talked about Glover's play coming off of the COVID-19 layoff entering last week and kept up the hot irons last week at the Travellers because he gained 7.3 strokes in approach, Lucas Glover did. That is the most for him in a tournament since 2017 which says regression will happen but it means he was also really good. He struggled elsewhere on that one but he is 32nd in good drives gained over the past 50 rounds. He is at least a better putter on Poa and Bencras and he is on Bermuda, less negative there. He's 9,800 dollars and there are several other golfers in this tier. Are you laughing at his bad putting? Yeah, less negative which it's not wrong but it's not that much.  So I wound up going Glover. I think that Hadwin was also a consideration. I'm gonna let you talk through your second mid-tier guide and we can talk around our favorite golfers in this range. I'll let you do that first. All right, so Eric Van Royne, 9,600 dollars. He's 10th of my stats only model. He has the best top 10 odds in my simulations among golfers below 10,000. He has 11th in stroke scinti to green, top 18 in both of the ball striking stats. So off the tee and approach which is basically always number one for me even though I'm down playing off the tee play a little bit this week. Short game still problematic but he's a great scorer, fifth and birdie rate, 28th in opportunities gained. I'm not making this comparison but you beat ball striker, trouble with short game. We just talked about Victor Hovland. I'm not, again, I'm not saying that they're the same, they're the same archetype. They're not the same level. They're not the same because, because Van Royne is less of a disaster around the green. Yeah, I mean, there's not a whole lot of putting data for him on Benton Poa. He's plus on Poa, negative on Benton Grass for whatever that's worth. But Van Royne is a very, very good tee, green player who is very affordable this week. And we have, I mean, we love Scotty Shelf on this podcast, great ball striker, problematic short game. I'd rather just play Eric Van Royne and save about $1,000 from those guys. I agree. All right, so let's talk about the upper 9,000 range before we move on to my lower salaried guy. I think for me, it's Glover, Hadwin. And then it's either Sabatini or Van Royne, but Sabatini right now looks like he will be popular based on the fan share tag. So I'm okay going to Van Royne over that. What about for you? Who is your favorite guy in this tier? I think it was going to be Hadwin. I think it might now be Eviar. Okay. Hadwin, Eviar, Harman I think are my top three. Oh man, a Brian Harman reference on this podcast that did not come from me. This is the first, I love it. All right, the reason that we want to discuss that there is because my second mid tier guy is a little bit cheaper and he's the only guy between $9,500 and like $8,600 who I care to even consider. That's Harold Barnard the third. HV3 is another guy who has been crazy about his approach to past three events. In two of those events, Varner has gained at least 5.7 strokes in approach, which is awesome. He did miss the cut in the other one, still gained 0.8 strokes in approach in the two rounds that he played there. And those outings push him up to sixth in this field in approach over the past 50 rounds. He is also 16th in good drives gained. So like Glover, Varner is better on Poa and Bentgrass, less of a disaster than he is on Bermuda. So he might at least be competent there this weekend. And if he can be competent and continues to do what he's done, he will pay off pretty easily at $9,300. Brandon to me, HV3 is the only guy in this range I want to consider, but I am very okay with him in all formats. What about for you? Yeah, I think HV3 is a kind of a core play because there just isn't a whole lot else that I feel confident in. It's not that I won't play anyone else in that range, but in terms of confidence level, it's really Varner and then just down until I get to maybe Tom Hoagy at $8,700. And I don't feel super confident with Tom Hoagy. I made nine of 16 cuts, but I think Varner is gonna, I would imagine that whole command a lot of ownership on Fandal just because there's not a whole lot else. So HV3 popular for a very good reason. Like the only other guy I'm like kind of drawn towards here is he who must not be named Kevin Kisner. I thought it was gonna be Keegan. No, no, no. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. It would be Kisner at $9,500. Outside of that, it's just, I guess Rafa Cabrera Bayo is not terrible. Yeah, I don't mind RCB. Yeah, it's really HV3. Kyle Stanley's interesting. Considered him for the player picks, couldn't talk myself into it. I tried, I really did. I don't ever look at these numbers at six or 15 cuts is rough. Yep, it's not great, Bob. So let's move down to the golfers we actually do like in the value range. Brandon, once you get a little bit lower than those upper nine guys, there are some golfers who do stand out a bit. Who stands out most to you down here? Lonto Griffin, I think is one of them, $8,600. Bit of an all-around player, and he's not amazing, but he's not terrible in any of the three T-degree stats. 65th, they're better in all three, the worst being his approach at 65th over the past 50 rounds. Again, that being said, I don't love the other data in his profile, but we have seen him bounce back to a 24th last week. Very good poa putter, won a weak field event at the Houston Open back in October, not calling a win here. I think you were calling a win. Like he got a stick to it. Yeah, Lonto again. I think you gotta do it. We'll see, but I think that there's not a whole lot of difference for me between Lonto Griffin and what else you're getting it in the low 9,000s. Yeah, I think that's correct. And I would say the same thing about Sebastian Munoz, who's my first value play. Munoz has missed two or three cuts since the end of the COVID-19 layoff. So things not necessarily going swimmingly there, but looks like he is the components necessary for a good event here. Namely, Munoz's approach is still a plus. Even in the two events, he missed the cut. He was a plus there. And he's up to 23rd in the field and approached the past 50 rounds. The short game is not the strong suit, but he's not as bad as he has been recently, if you look at the larger sample. 83rd in the field in strokes game around the green and 47th in putting on bentgrass and poa over the past 50 rounds. Munoz is $8,600. Did miss the cut here last year, but it means he has seen the course before. I am reaching for positives, but I don't think you need to reach too far to talk yourself into Sebastian Munoz. So I'm very good on him. Brandon, what are your thoughts on Sebastian Munoz who is $8,600? He's actually my number one in this range, but you signed up for him first. So it is what it is. Viable putter on bent and poa, I think overall. One of the better ball strikers in the field and for that price, it's very easy to like Sebastian Munoz. So he's my number one below 9,000. So your second value pick is another guy considered running up because the ball striking got me interested. That's Tom Hoguey, $8,700. What pushed you towards him? Hoguey is fifth in approach, ninth in birdie chances over the past 50 rounds. So it's definitely like the recipe for a value play, trying to hit the high end of his upside. Subpar putter over a full 100 round sample on bent and poa. I'm really trying to limit those options this week because I think that the scores are gonna be so low that you have to convert on puttering. And that's very volatile, yes, but you don't actively wanna target bad putters if you really need putting. I'd still rather chance it on a ball striker locking into some made putts than a putter who locks into great ball striking and a lot of silver greens regulation and birdie chances. So Hoguey for $8,700 I think is a high upside play but a big risk as well. Yeah, I think that's where I'm at too where I think that he's below Munoz to me and that's okay because I'll still wind up going there. I think I'd also put Hoguey above Griffin. Would you prefer Griffin over Hoguey? Lonto over Hoguey for me. Okay, I think I'd reverse that but I'm okay with either of them. My second low salary guy is Chesson Hadley, a name we have not discussed yet. I alluded to a golfer with super long win odds. Chesson Hadley, he's now 170 to one on Fando Sportsbook, so this pick could suck. But there are some reasons to be interested here. The big one is the ball striking for Hadley, ranks 12th in good drives gained. He is 15th and approached the past 50 rounds and that does include his two events in June. He has gained a combined 6.7 on approach and 3.6 off the tee in those two outings. He just lost almost all of it around the green like he gained there but lost all of it around the green which could happen again this weekend but he's $8,300, weak feel, aren't many solid ball strikers down here so I'm willing to roll the dice on Chesson Hadley and see if he can accidentally play well around the green and see what happens. Brandon, you have not mentioned Chesson Hadley this podcast, I assume that was intentional. What are your thoughts on him at $8,300? I mean, yeah, so he's gained strokes tee to green despite losing 1.9 around the green and 3.6 around the green. So you'd have to have good ball striking to lose that many strokes around the green and still gain tee to green. I mean, he's in play for like a top 20, top 30. I don't think it's significantly higher than that because he just very rarely shows positive putting and especially not a positive around the green play. So I don't dislike it but I don't really think I'll end up getting there because there are enough value plays I like. All I heard was I don't dislike it. That's all I heard. We're good. This is, this is grand. Brandon is all aboard the Chesson Hadley Express so we're good. Let's ride. Let's finish up with our win picks for this weekend. I'm gonna cut out Bryson and Webb. Is that okay? Sure. Okay, cutting out Bryson and Webb and then any golfer outside of them who is let's say 50 to one or longer to win, I won the bobble hat finally, I think. I didn't check again actually. I just checked on that. I had Dustin, you did not and I still lost. I got lucky with, I got lucky with guys making the cut and by that I mean I had four out of six. So it wasn't even a good week. Yeah, so I'm gonna pick first and because I don't really care who I get in the top end I wanna focus on the guy 50 to one or longer. I know we were talking about how Doc Redmond was necessarily worth the DFS salary but he's 50 to one and with the ball striking being as good I'm actually okay taking him as my win pick. So I'm gonna go Doc Redmond at 50 to one as my win pick for the longer guys. All right, so you got Doc. All right, I know how I'm gonna take for my long shot but is anyone other than Bryson or Webb? Yeah. I should probably trust my instincts here. I don't know if I'll bet Tealhattan but in terms of actually just getting the best win odds for our contest, I'll go with Hatton. I think I'll probably start my betting card a little bit longer than that though. Okay, who is your longer person? Eric VanRoyne. Okay, so you have EVR and Tealhattan and I will go SungJM and Doc Redmond. SungJ, again, I think that I just wanna get back on that train while people are potentially going elsewhere get back in on a golfer who is objectively just better than what he's been playing like recently. So I think it's a pretty fun event, Brandon. I think that the key for this week is think long and hard about how to handle Bryson and Webb but also if you're multi-entering for tournaments actively differentiate your roster construction from one lineup to the next. Anything else you wanna add here before we close up? No, it's a pretty wide open week. You can kind of make the case for a lot of golfers. So whereas I think the past few weeks have been a little bit more restrictive where you really had to have some balance and try to get guys who make the cut. You still need guys to make the cut but I feel like it's a larger subset of golfers who actually have decent shot of making the cut and very few of them who are kind of locks to make the cut. So trust yourself, I guess, I don't know. Yeah, TTP. That is all that we have for today. Big thank you to Calvin Theobald, our video producer for running the video side of things here today. Thank you, Cal, as always. We'll be back with you tomorrow to go through NASCAR for the Brickyard coming up this weekend. Usually it's on Friday. We'll be doing that Wednesday this week because of the July 4th holiday. So make sure you are subscribed to the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed wherever you get your podcasts. Brandon, people have questions for you on Twitter. Where can they find you there? I'm at Godulla13, G-D-U-L-A-1-3. And I am at Jim Sonnis, J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S. You can also follow the FanDuel podcast network at FanDuel Podcast. That is all that we have for today. Good luck with your DFS lineups. You fill them out and hopefully you have fun with both your betting card and DFS for the Rocket Mortgage Classic. We'll talk to you again next week. This has been the Heat Check Fantasy podcast powered by Number Fire.


It is important to have CLSB taught to soldiers because not all the time there's going to be a medic present for whenever an injury occurs on the battlefield. So it's very important having non-medical personnel have advanced medical training so that way they can help save a life. They also are really great helping hands for medics whenever they are dealing with a mass casualty situation. I really enjoy this opportunity. I think it's very great to have some better understanding of what to do in case of a medical emergency. I enjoy just having the chance to do something different outside of our normal day. My favorite part of the CLS class would be the hands-on training and as well as working with other soldiers from other units getting to brighten our spectrum of, you know, just seeing the same face every day.


Dumpsters burned in the middle of a French road on March 23 as protesters entered the ninth day of strikes against a deeply unpopular bill to raise the pension age. Video posted to social media showed the burning makeshift roadblock in Toulouse emitting a large plume of smoke while cars queued up behind it. French President Emmanuel Macron on March 22 said the legislation, which his government pushed through Parliament without a vote last week, would come into force by year-end despite escalating anger across the country. Dumpsters against the policy changes, which lift the retirement age by 2 years to 64 and accelerate an increase in the number of years one must work to draw a full pension, have drawn huge crowds in rallies organized by unions since January.