I typically say that the main slate is just around the corner, but this week it's kind of not, because we're talking here on Wednesday to account for the Thanksgiving holiday, because I don't wanna talk to you tomorrow, no offense, just don't wanna be here. So we're gonna do this on Wednesday, give you an overview of the week 12 main NFL DFS slate, talk through what we're keeping our eye on, which game stacks we like initially, and hopefully at least set the table for you to have a successful week. Welcome on into the Heat Check Fantasy podcast powered by Number Fire. That's right here on the FanDuel Podcast Network in NumberFire.com. My name is Jim Sonnis. I am a senior writer and analyst for NumberFire.com. Joined here as always by Brandon Gedula. He is the managing editor of NumberFire.com. Brandon, once again, a happy Thanksgiving to you. How are you doing on this glorious, glorious Wednesday? Good, I ran into this dilemma a few weeks ago. You said things, and I didn't know which of two ways to go, so I'm just gonna go through all the options again. Let's go, here we go. See if I can remember. You said that you typically say the main slate is right around the corner, which I think is, as everyone knows, your catchphrase is on your T-shirts that just the main slate is right around the corner. That's like your, I just, I've never heard you say that. Oh, thank goodness. I thought you were serious, and I was like, oh, do I actually say that? But you said you typically say that. Is that a thing you say that I don't know about? I don't know, I hope not.   It was like, what corner? What corner are we talking about, champ? The proverbial corner. Yeah, okay, sure. The royal corner, as they say. Sure. Is that a- The second thing was- Is that a bark-stale corner, or which one is that? Okay, anyway, number two. You said, and this is probably like a subliminal thing in your mind, is that something about setting the table for this week 12th. Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. And I was like, I feel like that's the one I should have went with, but- Well, when you're eating pizza on Thanksgiving, Brandon, do you need to set the table or do you just like free-ball it? We're not doing pizza this year. We're setting the table, but yeah, I mean- Sell out. Way to not stick to your morals. Look, I'm all for non-traditional Thanksgiving. Non-traditional Thanksgiving is the way to go. Yeah, that's fine. I'm not gonna push back. I've given up on like shaming people for doing what they like, especially post-pandemic. No, since the beginning of the pandemic, I was like, yeah, do whatever makes you happy.  Well, yeah, I mean, that's the strategy still is pizza whenever for me and the wife, so. That strategy is still there. I respect that. Very good. Okay, so if you are looking for a Thanksgiving DFS preview, we recorded that yesterday. It's up on the Fandal YouTube page right now. It's also up on the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed. If you're listening to this on Wednesday or early Thursday, go check that out, get your lineups in.  We can have fun with it anyway. We can still want some money. That's super inspiring, I'm sure. Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed for that. Also, if you're watching right now on the Fandal YouTube page, hit the like button there and hit subscribe because both those do help us out quite a bit. A lot of good stuff here on the Fandal YouTube page each and every weekday. And we also have a lot of good stuff, non-NFL stuff on the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed, NBA NHL via Tom Vecchio, UFC, usually the Austin Swain none this week. I believe I don't think there is a card this week. So taking that one off, which is good, good for Austin to get some family time there. And then back next week with that, PGA back after the new year as well. So hit subscribe on the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast. Feed me if you like what you hear. Leave us a rating and review. Did I snub something? No, you said you got to click the like button and then you said you got to hit it. And neither time did you say smash. And I don't think it registers on YouTube unless they smash that like button. I'm requesting you don't smash that like button because I value all of you as viewers slash listeners and don't want your computers slash phones to break. So don't smash it, please. Gently press, gently tap, gently tap, little nudge, little nudge in the like button can help us all out here without sending your computer into oblivion. Okay, the NFL season rolls on with week 12 this weekend and Fandal is partnering with EA Sports to bring you this week's NFL Sunday Million Daily Fantasy Contest. Enter the NFL Sunday Million Marquis Contest presented by EA Sports Madden NFL 22 this weekend to compete for a chance to win a share of $1.5 million in prizes. Simply build the best player roster while sitting under the salary cap and follow along as the games unfold with 10 games scheduled for Sunday afternoon. There is plenty of big names to choose from and plenty of opportunity for a big payday. Kickoff is right around the corner. There we go. Maybe I think that's why I say it. Anyway, head to Fandal.com today and get in on the action now for more details at Fandal.com or download the Fandal Fantasy app. Eligibility restrictions apply. Suddenly I have an urge to skip this podcast and play Madden. It's like the messaging works somehow. So kudos to you EA Sports. You got me at least. I'm not distracted and thinking about my Chad Pennington old dynasty rosters on the early Madden days. Anyway, let's take a look at the slate overview here for week number 12 of Brandon.  What stands out to you? Yes, quarterbacks bad, but also running back is very good. We have a lot of stud running backs to pick from. Not all of them are in flawless spots though.  So how does that kind of stack up? So that's I think really figuring out running back really to ranking these, these backs from a priority standpoint is what it's going to take for me to feel comfortable for Sunday. That is the one consolation of a bad quarterback slate is we do have six running backs for the salaries of $8,000 or higher and I can make a case for all of them. I think that they all are worthy of where they're at which does allow us to nitpick and I'm fond of that. I like nitpicking, I think it's kind of fun. It also gives us situations where we might be able to get some of these guys that reduce popularity because there are good options. And we saw that with John Taylor last week, maybe it's, I don't know, like Najee Harris this week, something like that. Like there could be guys who were in good spots who could be good tournament plays. Now the problem is we're recording this on Wednesday we're not going to have a great grass bond who will be popular, who will not. We'll talk through our view of things, give you an overview. The other thing that I want to stress here is that because we're recording Wednesday, things will change. We will know about more injuries as the week goes along. So keep an eye on the news and be reactive without being overreactive. And I think the way that I would do this is like set aside time, extra time Sunday morning before you fill out lineups if you are like me and do them all Sunday morning by hand, set aside extra time Sunday morning to think through the situation and think through, okay, if I had a player with this projected workload in this game, how would I handle them? Taking the name out of it and stuff like that. So it's a week where the content, the stuff around this site will be less efficient than usual. And I think that does give us a good chance to be more optimal than the field, which is a fun chance we don't always get, I guess is the way that I would phrase that. Yeah, I mean, people obviously have other stuff going on for the most part. And content will be a little bit more outdated, including this podcast, which I know how it sounds, but even when we record Thursday, it's like sometimes by Friday, a lot of the stuff we say is deemed not even entirely irrelevant, but very different. Like the place we love might not be as big of loves because something else opened up. But I will say one of the things that I love doing with this podcast is going over the trends because for the most part, the trends we discuss are not really injury dependent. They're not just saying, here's our favorite plays and if something changes, that part's irrelevant. But especially early on in the season when we talk about strategy, that stuff really applies. And so that's why I like what we do with this podcast. It's not like a pat on the back, but a lot of stuff that we do, I think everyone else can apply and it's learning how to look at relevant samples, looking more into splits that other people might not. And it doesn't really take a whole lot of extra work. And you can get, like you said, that leverage, especially if you're having these long-term views of offenses that you might not need to scramble as much on Sunday if you feel good with what you've seen from a longer sample. Yeah, and going back to the new stuff, like there's a lot of discussion always about the value of late-breaking news because there's less analysis around it. And in this week, everything will kind of be more heavily weighted towards late-breaking news because there'll be just less coverage around it. And fewer people will like consuming stuff like that. So I think those are all advantages for us as people who do pay attention, stuff like that. Obviously like spend time with your family, ignore the news for a while please. Sunday morning though, circle back around and then get back up to speed of what happened while you were out. You should have time Sunday morning to do all that and get the info you need. Okay, injury section for this week will be light because again, we don't have injury reports on Wednesday yet. But let's go through the ones we know about and are monitoring as of right now. The big one is Aaron Jones, not sure if he'll play at this week. It seems like it's most likely that he sits A.J. Dillon $6,900. Brandon, how would you handle Jones or Dillon if Jones misses a second straight game? Yeah, I think he'd be one of the best plays of the week again from a process standpoint. He played 74% of the snaps last week. 23 adjusted opportunities, which for us is carries plus double your targets because the reason we do that is an average running back carries worth twice as many Fandall points on average, or sorry, a target is worth twice as many points as a carry on average. He had six targets last week. That's a really good workload. And this is just one of the better offenses on a small, like the small main slate. It's about as small as we ever get for a main slate. So he really stands out to me as one of the best running back plays. And I mean, while we're talking about injuries and how things affect us, this is probably a good example too of like, let's say, hey, we're going into the weekend. I think you and I both love A.G. Dillon. We find out Aaron Jones plays. That takes A.G. Dillon off the board, but that still doesn't affect Jonathan Taylor, Christian McCaffrey, that kind of stuff that you don't have to throw everything out and start from scratch if you're really digging into these situations. Although if the place kicker for the Colts misses, then it blows up everything for the entire Colts box matchup in my mind at least.  The trickle down effect, the butterfly effect of DFS. So, you know, still bad. Eli Mitchell day-to-day with his finger injury, we'll talk about this game later on, but if you want to talk about Jeff Wilson, you're specifically, let's assume Mitchell sits again. What would you do with Wilson at $5,800? So the role wasn't quite what I had hoped for. I mean, the results are one thing, but the role, not really what I was expecting, 58% snap rate, two targets for him, 19 carries. Like it's really hard to look at 19 carries and two targets, especially at a sub-6,000 salary, and it pick it. And that's the thing that stands out to me is like the salary's still low, the workload's still good, and the results weren't there. But according to my model, he should have had about 15 expected Fandal points, had an end zone target that could have cashed in the next play, he came up short on a rush for not a touchdown, but a first down if memory serves. So it really was like a good enough role for the salary within a viable offense. So I definitely would say we can go back there. It's just a matter of then how you value him versus, you know, there's an opportunity cost if you're playing Jeff Wilson, that you're not getting a third stud running back. Yeah, I think his role was underwhelming is what I would say. I think which sounds like kind of where you were as well. But like there was still enough there if we assume that both Mitchell and Jamechael Hasty sit. If Jamechael Hasty plays, that's where I start to get a little bit sketched out in terms of how I view Wilson. Like I think I could still consider him because the matchups a lot better in terms of rushing this week than it was last week. So I think that that is a positive here, but like I still think that he's gonna be, I'll be lower on him this week than I was last week, despite the fact that it's a better matchup and a really good game just because, you know, there were some issues with his role for sure. Yeah, you don't really love to see fades to an offensive tackle with the goal line instead of carries. I also don't love to see them using a receiver as a running back as opposed to the actual running back. Yeah. But I think that this will come down to, if you really want to talk yourself into like a Christian McCaffrey, Jonathan Taylor start, or if you are really, really valuing, you know, a Cooper Cop or Devonte Adams, and you think that they're better plays than maybe their running back counterparts, which is its own conversation.  Right, and I think that that's why I would still use him. Like if we get with no Mitchell and no Hasty, I would still definitely go there. It would just be not the 80% or whatever I wound up with, wouldn't be there, but he would still be a good play at that point. Jordan Howard likely to miss this week due to a knee issue, which trims it to potentially a two-man backfield for Philadelphia, plus Miles Sanders' role could expand as he is another week removed from his injury. Does that do enough for you to get on Sanders here at $6,100? So you're talking about the pace in this game, right? Okay, so it's appealing. This one again comes back, like comes down to, there's an opportunity cost of, if you play Miles Sanders, you are not, and like let's say we get A.J. Dillon, I don't know if Miles Sanders plus A.J. Dillon is really required to get the lineups I want, unless I'm saying I'm playing Tom Brady, I want Cooper Cup and like one of his receivers. So I think it just comes down to like, how heavily you have the wide receivers above the running backs at the top, because that really dictates the need to talk yourself into Miles Sanders' role, getting better. Yeah, I think I'm higher on him now than I was Monday. We talked about Howard potentially being out then as well. I am growing more receptive to it because they've been really good as a rushing team, which means it's kind of like a 49er type situation where you expect the efficiency of the groundwork to be pretty good. So I would say at $6,100, that actually is pretty nice. Like that's a good salary relative to other guys in that range. And you know, in his role last week, 94 yards for him across those 18 adjusted opportunities. That's not too bad. With a downfield target? With a downfield target. I think that they like him. Like I think from like a, and like, you know, they probably should more so than Boston Scott. They had a chance to give Boston Scott more of a big role and they decided to give Jordan Howard work. So if you give me like a 60% snap share, I think it's realistic, 60% snap share, very heavy rush team, very efficient rush team against a pretty bad rush defense. I think that's enough for me to get there. I do want to kind of read the room a bit as we get closer to it. But I think for right now, I am currently in on Sanders, not like aggressively, not for cash games, but like I would like to get there. I just want to proceed with a little bit of caution as a result of the fact that I'd still expect Scott to get work. Yeah, so usually I'm at least building some preliminary lineups before the Thursday show. I didn't have quite as much time this week. In building things out, if I really want to play like Tom Brady plus on Mike Evans or Chris Godwin, plug in CMC, give me like a Dalvin Cook kind of back and a viable tight end. I think we will really have to be open to the idea of you're smirking at me. But you just listed five out of the six players in the lineup that I made last night. So if you're going to go that route with like Brady, who salaries not that high on a typical main slate, but is one of the higher salaries of this main slate, you want to stack him with, and really your options are the two receivers. Yeah. I think I got to be a little bit more open to the idea of my third running back being down here. And at this rate, I would put mile Sanders above Jeff Wilson. Sanders versus Dylan? No, I agree. Versus Dylan. I think I'd still go Dylan. I agree. Yeah. Looking more at mile Sanders, like you said it warming up to him. Even just now, I was like, I don't quite think I'll be there. But if you take Jordan Howard out, that should open up more red zone rushing work. I had Sanders with an expected Fandall point of about 12 last week. So it could have been even better. Yeah. So, yeah, and that game is going to be pretty decent. So I think mile Sanders actually is on the radar. Yeah. I think he's above Wilson. I agree with you there. I think he's below Dylan by a bit. So I agree with you there as well. And I will say, if you want to build a Brady lineup with McCaffrey, you probably need a value back in there. Then like, I have it with Dalvin. Like I made one with Dalvin, but I had to go down for the third back. So, you know, then it's, do I prefer Dalvin versus AG Dylan? So it does get a little bit sketchy, but I think that, you know, it's worth that discussion, I would say. And if I have to use Sanders to get that, to get upside elsewhere, I'm pretty okay with that personally. I think that he has 20 within his range of outcomes. Yeah, there's like, and we're not going to give out full lineups, anything like that. If you start like Brady, McCaffrey, Dalvin, Evans, and you want AG Dylan in there? You can make it work. You're probably skipping Michael Pittman at that point. You're skipping any bring back potential with Brady. And you're kind of locked into the few low end, like low salary value receivers. So you're going to have, I think this could actually be a pretty, I wouldn't even say fully duplicated lineup, but like very chalky. Yeah, I agree. The Jets have a lot of stuff going on. Michael Carter will miss this week due to an ankle injury, but Zach Wilson is back. He's going to start this week with Joe Flacco and Mike Whitebolt being out due to COVID. So we have Zach Wilson. We've got a Tevin Coleman at $5600, Ty Johnson at $52.  Is it a plus match up? The Texans taking care of business. Not against the Titans. Is the Titans offense, I'll stop. I was going to ask if the Titans offense is better than the Jets, and this is going to be a joke. And I'm not sure if it would come across that way, given my track record with Ryan Tannehill. Well, I was like, okay, I'm looking at defenses here, like for the end of the show. And I was like, oh, I'll just pick Houston because they're like, they're not a good defense, but they're 4,900. What? They're 4,900. I mean, yeah. How would the Bengals 33 and the Texans 49? Well, they got 16 and 15 Fando points the past two games. They've allowed 13 and 17 points the past two against Miami and Tennessee on the road, mind you. But yeah, I was more inclined to play the Texans defense than take this value. I think that this is a fine spot for like season long, if you really need a plug and play running back. I would go tie Johnson over Coleman. But we talked about this on the recap show. Their workloads are pretty similar. So you have to get past, you have to project what you think will happen. And that's pretty risky when it comes to daily fantasy, especially with a team that has virtually ran a committee until Michael Carter started to separate. All intentions, like all indications are that it'll be about a 50-50 share and you don't really want that in offense this week. So you have to project what you think will happen and they have to hit. Like that's two things there and that's tough. How does Zach Wilson starting impact Elijah Moore and Corey Davis for you? It's kind of a wash for me. Yeah, I think it's a lot of move. I think people view it as a downgrade, but I think it's a lateral move. Like, are we really gonna deem anyone a downgrade from Joe Flacco? Like, you know, I feel like it's a pretty lateral move, which means that I'm okay with more. I think that Corey Davis is a really, really good tournament pivot under the assumption more will be popular because we've seen Davis have good chemistry with Wilson this year and Corey Davis is still getting targets. So I think I love Elijah Moore and want him to succeed. But I do think that it's a fun time to pivot to Corey Davis at $6,100, stacking with Brandon Cooks as like a mini stack. Like if I've got a situation where I'm going Brady with Gronk and I've got, you know, some wide receiver slots open, that's the situation where I'd be okay, going this weird potentially suboptimal route.  That would be an overall value stack with Taylor Cooks and either Jess Receiver. You could do a lot from there with the like better game environments and like the higher salaried studs. You don't seem that into it, but it's more of a... It's definitely not like a priority thing. I see what you're saying. I just, I think Tarot is kind of like a light version of the issues we talked about with Cam Newton and Joan Hurts, but I don't throw enough to be a dual threat. And I think that's so, I don't know. It's not the worst idea. And I get why you're saying it. I just don't like to get there. I think within the context of quarterback, we have to ask where the odd someone gets to like 30 here. Hurts hasn't shown that because he's not throwing... He did get to it last week. But yeah. Three rushing touchdowns. I'm not projecting 19 points from, oh, I guess 18.3 for at least one rushing yard and all those, but Brady could do it. Cam doesn't really have the passing. Rogers maybe, depending on how you view that overall matchup. Stafford could. Stafford could. Herbert, you're going to talk about upside in that game. Like Kirk Cousins, he's got a very, very narrow path to do it. So like if we take the, and we talked about this on the Thanksgiving preview, like what you say, hey, what are the odds Josh Allen, Jack Prescott don't really have huge games. Then these lower salary quarterbacks are more viable because they can match the floors of the higher salary quarterbacks. So usually you got to talk yourself into five or six quarterbacks, like falling below 25. It's not that many this week. Brady, basically. And of course this will be the week where like, Herbert goes for five touchdowns himself, but it's probably not. Probably not. Probably not. Speaking of upside, let's talk Titan's Patriots. AJ Brown banged up. Status is unknown for this week. They're facing the Patriots here. Any interest in them at all? No, they got rid of AJ and Peterson. So that makes the backfield a little bit tighter, but I don't think there's enough there anyway. I think it'll just be a three man backfield with three different guys, with Deontay Foreman, Dantro Hilliard. And I guess this means Jeremy McNichols is expected to get cleared this week. Potentially. I don't think there's enough upside from the receivers. I will say AJ Brown, where he is projected, has a really high per dollar projection. So if he's cleared, I think he'll be really chalky.  Like he's probably not going to get lose. Nick Westbrook Akine. So I'm out on this entire offense and I don't really feel guilty about that.  Gonna avoid it. Jamal Agnew was officially placed on IR by the Jags this week. It's a fun story that he did this. I'm kind of bummed, honestly, that he's on IR. We talked a bit about Marvin Jones on Monday. Is the Agnew injury enough for you to go at Jones at $5,900? It's enough for me to consider him, especially because we need value at receiver. He's not going to be my favorite value receiver, but I would put him, I think like value for us at receiver is at least 6,000 and below, if not 5,900 and below. Yeah. There might be like a list of like four, five, you say four. So he's on that list, right? Yeah. So it's me, Marv. I forgot the other. Cadarius Tony. Marquez Valdez, Scantling and Van Jefferson.  So he's on that list. He would be fourth for me. Yes. So that might answer the question, but I'm probably going to be down there plenty. Agreed. Especially because what I do is I build lineups, I duplicate them, and then I make just a few tweaks so that my core stays really tight. Those guys will be the ones I'm rotating through a lot. Yeah, because they all have very clear paths to failure. So I agree. And I think that all four of those are honestly better than the 5,000 receivers we've had for a while. So that does increase my enthusiasm slash optimism I can get to, McCaffrey, JT, Dalvin, et cetera, et cetera. Any thoughts on James Robinson? No, he's oversalary. Okay. Yeah, just asking, because he's someone we haven't talked about in quite some time. Yeah. His role's been bad since he came back, honestly. So am I wrong to write him off? Do you disagree or? It's mostly the matchup that I think we don't want to just cast everything aside, but 64% snap rate last week, Carlos Hyde's still kind of there. Yeah. Wait, Carlos Hyde played 30% of the snaps and got one target and no carries. Is that wrong? Let me look. I could pull it up here. Okay, Carlos Hyde. That's right. No carries, one target on a 30% snap rate. That's 13 snaps. So it's not. Well, he did, that was 13 snaps. It was a decrease from the previous week that we had two carries and two targets on a 29% snap rate. Is there like, so like Rich Rebar coined the like doing cardio thing for Chris Hogan, where he'd like run routes and never get targeted. Is there a Carlos Hyde equivalent for a running back? I don't think, I don't like running backs don't work that way. They do now, I guess. I thought that was a mistake with my spreadsheet, but huh, Carlos Hyde, the Chris Hogan of running backs. Final injury here, Eric Ebron, probably gonna miss this week for the Steelers, which should put Pat Friarmuth back into a full-time role. I know we talked about this Monday and I was like, hey, I'm downgrading Friarmuth. I've given up on that now with Eric Ebron being out. What's your outlook for him at $5,300? I like him.  I was like, you're saying surprisingly you were right. I was like, I have more confidence.  Even if you don't believe in you. Well, thank you. This comes down to how you view his true ceiling compared to the upper salaried tight ends, which tight ends pretty decent this week at the top with Kittle, Kyle Pitts in a good matchup, Rupka and Kalski's back. Mike Gasicki can get a lot of work, very low total. No, a fan always has some potential. So it's like, do you want to pass those guys up and play value at receiver? Or do you want to play Friar Muth and like a Michael Pittman? So I guess an equivalent might be like a Van Jefferson, George Kittle versus Michael Pittman, Pat Friar Muth might be the same salaries there. I think in a situation where I'll need both, honestly. I think both is the answer, yeah. So Friar Muth's in that conversation as a result. But tight end I think is actually kind of decent. It is, I agree. I think that of the lower salary tight ends, I've got Friar Muth above redacted, above the he who shall not be named, AKA Tyler Higbee. Oh, I thought this was a Dan Arnold bit. Oh, no, I don't view this being a real player. He's T Higgins, he's fake. So like, he's not even in the consideration for me. Whereas Tyler Higbee is still. It's Friar Muth above Higbee for me. And then other guy who you mentioned who I'm not going to talk about is just, I don't know. Well, he's a player love for me. I have Friar Muth above him. I know we've been OK taking the same guys, but we had a lot of overlaps. I figured I'd at least differentiate a little bit. You have time to change it, don't worry. I think people will go away from Dan Arnold in a really good matchup because he had no targets. He ran a lot of routes last week. He was the Carlos Hyde of tight ends last week. Let's go to Bookmaker Info for this week. The one standout total on this later is for the Bucks and the Colts. That one is at 51 and a half with the Bucks. Three point favorites. We don't know yet the status of Vita Vea or Antonio Brown. Definitely have viable guys on each side. I'd expect Vita Vea to play. I would expect Antonio Brown to sit. So what's your view of this game from a stacking perspective? You and I talked before the show that there's a chance we play only Tom Brady this week.  Just kind of a basic strategy thing. I'm not going to use the same lineup, but I'm probably going to use the same quarterback and it might just be Tom Brady across the board. Yeah, the path for Tom Brady to bust here seems extremely low, or I guess extremely narrow for him to bust. But the path for him to flourish is wide open. We need to make a meme of the two paths diverging in the wood. One of them is just tiny. One's real tiny. And one of them is a giant passing lane in the Colts defense. Yeah, I like that. But yeah, and that's not even to be just jokey. I think Brady has, by far, the best case to be made for a quarterback this week. We know who we want to stack them with. It's Mike Evans and Chris Godwin. I think we'll have a little bit of a debate there, but I would say we both like Mike Evans more that much I can say with confidence. I think Godwin, despite not having as good a role as Mike Evans, is still very viable. We can bring it back with Michael Pittman. That's about it, but I think that's like the go-to stack. Of course, we can bring it back with John Taylor, but I'm talking pass catchers. So that's going to be, I would almost guarantee, in a bobble hat against you. Absolutely, I think so too. With regards to the stacking guys, I actually do think, so I've been off of stacking tight ends with, or quarterbacks with just their tight ends. If I want to get the tight end in there, I'll typically lop in receiver two. I think I could consider going with Brady and just Gronk as a pass catcher because Gronk actually has yardage upside, which is wild, but he does. I think my preference would be if I'm going to have Gronk, I want Evans or Godwin in there too, but I think I'm okay considering Brady with just Gronk as far as like stacking for this game. We're getting Gronk $6,500, not a low salary, but I think his role is pretty good. Yeah, so I think I need to bump him up from where I was. I really do love George Kato and Kyle Pitts. I think Pitts might be a little bit forgotten. It's a really good matchup for him. He's facing a non-Ali defense coordinator the first time in a bit. That's good. So Gronk really gets bumped up and put in that tier solely because I love his quarterback so much this week. Process wise, outside of that, I still would have him at least third among those three tight ends, but I'll probably say it's gonna be a spot where I have more Rob Gronkowski than my process as I should, just because I don't really think I'll have access to a lot of other quarterbacks. Yeah. I don't know if that makes sense. Yeah. So Gronk in his full games is 8, 5, 8 and 8 targets. That's pretty good. He's had 70 plus yards twice in those four games. He's had a really good role and he looked pretty good on Monday too.  And I think Gronk is playing like that kind of guy. So that also with Brady. I think that he works. If I had to rank them in terms of like stacking, like if we're talking just with Brady, I would go Evans, Godwin, Gronk. If we're talking as standalone plays, if we ignore Brady, then it becomes Evans, Gronk, Godwin, just because Godwin's target sharers in the games with Gronk have been, it's a small sample, but like they've been a little tiny baby but underwhelming. Yard of the plant hasn't been quite as big, so I think I'd still like Godwin, but I put him third in terms of standalone play behind those two. Yeah, it's just really nitpicky to rank them that way, but they're all three are in play and that's why I think that gives extra, extra viability to Tom Brady for this slate with, and I always hate when there are two, like too many stacking options, but it's three and it's three really good ones. And they're three with massive upside. And they're three with massive upside within their positions. How would you change things if Antonio Brown were to play? Cause we don't know. Yeah, I'd upgrade Brady. Yeah. Like it's probably not worth considering, but like I guess while we're here at least. No, yeah, I think it's, I would still like be fine with all those guys. I would just make sure that I get some brown lineups in there too, basically. Cause like we saw earlier this year that they can go off with Brown being active. So it's not ideal, but I'd still be fine with it. It would lower me on them at standalone plays. That probably answered your question better. Yeah. But, you know, I just get some brown lineups in there with my Brady stacks. We mentioned Michael Pittman. I think he is the preferred bringback here.  He understands that this is a tough rushing matchup and may get Taylor more involved as a pass catcher as a result. I mean, he's had a pretty good pass catching role honestly recently in the six games of the snaps being up 3.7 targets per game, but they're kind of like fun targets. So I think that that works. I prefer Christian McCaffrey over JT and I prefer Pittman as a bringback, but I still want to get some JT in there. Where are you out on Taylor and Pittman as bringback options here? I love Pittman as a standalone play, especially that salary where we'd never really have a lot of options in that salary tier at receiver. He stands out to me from just again, it's like a one-off. Even if I'm not playing Tom Brady and I don't actually have any buccaneers, I like his role enough to want to play him. So ingest that into a stack and it's just a very obvious one. My biggest fear is that I will be too heavy on Michael Pittman because like, I'm cool if I go straight up lock button on Tom Brady. Yeah. But if every one of those lineups is, or like a lot of those lineups are just tied to Michael Pittman because he's the only pass catcher who makes sense to bring it back with and Pittman puts up like eight points, that's rough. Yeah. So I got to watch that and that ups the viability of just stacking with Jonathan Taylor because there's a path to this game just being, let me say path a lot, I know, but that's kind of how we think. Yeah. So the path to Jonathan Taylor running the, like running the ball efficiently enough, getting something on the ground, being involved as a pass catcher and then just running in the touchdowns with his insane red zone workload. And then Tom Brady just slinging it and that's how that game goes. Yeah. So I don't typically stack running backs against my quarterbacks, but I think in this case it works. So that's really the only way I can kind of get away from Pittman is if I do stack Jonathan Taylor there. I do that a lot honestly, but I would say to me right now, it's 70, 30 in favor of Pittman over Taylor. If I had like 10 Brady lineups, I wouldn't have said seven and three. Although if I had 10 Brady lines, I'd probably do six Pittman, three Taylor, one blank, like one with no breakback. Yeah, but yeah. To account for what you were saying. Yeah, absolutely. Okay. A matchup of NFC heavyweights this week is in Green Bay, high total coming down a bit, tight spread actually went back up to 48. So totals of 48 for Packers hosting the Rams. It is a one point spreading Green Bay's favor.  I would mention that right now, there is a wind projection of 15 miles per hour, 35 degree temperatures. I'm just saying that. I don't think it's like worth freaking out of right now. Noting that though, what's your level of confidence in the Rams offense specifically this week and then thoughts on this game? Confidence, not really a word. I'd say I have with them at this point, but interest is still there. Although the interest has gone from Darrell Henderson and obviously Robert Woods more toward Van Jefferson at a great salary of 5,400. Of course, I love Cooper Cup, but that salary of 9,500 is really hard to get to with the stud running backs we have. And this goes back to like, hey, if you think Cooper Cup's a better play than Christian McCaffrey in a game with a low total, Jonathan Taylor in a really tough matchup, you can set yourself on a mile standards a lot more easily. I don't quite know if I'm there with Cooper Cup, but if you look at his game logs, there's upside that hasn't ever been there with Cooper Cup. He's got 17.7 and 15 Fandle points the past two games without a touchdown. That's stupid. 13 targets in each of those. Like I usually block it receivers up past 9,000 on Fandle, but like the way that he's doing it is kind of sustainable because it's so volume driven. Yeah, and it's good volume. Like he's getting the ball in ways that like is conducive to both floor and upside. So I've not typically been the biggest Cooper Cup guy. I'm very okay changing my tune. I would say like, look at his shares, like their Devonta Adams shares and the Devonta Adams were 95, we wouldn't only blink twice. Like, go ahead, that's fair. So I think to me it's a very justifiable number. If we get Jeff Wilson and Miles Sanders without their backfield, or if we get Jeff Wilson and AJ Dillon without their backfield mates, you can very easily fill out a lineup with a Brady stack and Cooper Cup as a one-off. And so I think that I like that a lot.  So that's one thing I would know as well. Yeah, and because the salaries are so prohibitive, a Cooper Cup Devonta Adams stack is probably, like both of those guys should have popularity, but the combination of the two probably not that common just because it's so hard to do. Of course, you'll really be strapped for your salary at running back. But again, if we get news or you're willing to take a chance on Miles Sanders or you sell yourself on the Jets backfield, which I can't quite do myself, like that's such an obvious, like high upside pivot to me. I like that combination a lot personally. And you can make it work pretty easily. So honestly, like if we can get these value backs, I think you have two different builds this week where you blow it all on running backs or blow it all at receivers. I want a kind of stars and scrubs-y type build for this week. I think that's where I wanna go. And it does depend on where the running backs break this week for sure. What's your level of confidence in this game? Because to me, I am a lot less confident this game shoots out than the Bucks Colts game. It's outdoors, that's part of it, but also like, I don't know.   Does that worry you? It does. This game, I have some like rudimentary game scores that I do. I factor in over under implied team totals, pace and pass rate. This one's fifth on the main slate. It's really Tampa Bay and Indianapolis like way out in front. And this one is just kind of in the second tier. It doesn't really differentiate. It doesn't really separate from anything else. Despite that though, I think it'll carry some popularity because we got bigger names in it with the two superstar receivers with Van Jefferson who will probably be one of the more popular plays just due to the salary savings he offers us. But honestly, it doesn't do a whole lot to separate for me. A big reason for that is the pace. And like you said, that's primarily from the Packers. Like if you watch them, they are cold just like snapping the ball with two seconds on the play clock and that just grinds things down. Of course, it's an explosive enough offense on both sides where we could still see points, but I think I'll probably just be lower on this game in general. And if I do get there, I think it'll just be whenever I really try to take some value running back and double stack those receivers. The pace concerns are part of why I feel like I'm just gonna wind up with a lot of Brady is because in theory, Rogers and Stafford could both be solid, but like that's the concern that I have there, some potential weather concerns. Again, it's Wednesday, you know, who cares. In terms of offensive efficiency, I have no concerns because right now if I look at my numbers for projected offensive efficiency, Green Bay ranks fifth on the Slates, the Rams rank fourth. Actually, sorry, that's a third and fourth on the main slate because Dallas is up there too. So third and fourth in the main slate behind Tampa Bay and Minnesota. This is the game with the highest projected offensive efficiency between both sides. It's up there because Indianapolis doesn't grade out as well in my stuff. So that's why it's up there. The pace concerns do matter though. So I would say I think Rogers and Stafford are both considerations. This is a two quarterback game stack. I just don't know how high I can get on either due to the concerns around. They're both considerations to me is what I'd phrase it. Yeah, but it's different. So like it's almost like they're each a half quarterback. So it's like a one quarterback game in total because this is not what we would typically call a two quarterback game, which there aren't any because there's only one quarterback that we won anyway on the whole slate. So quick pause on that. Did we, should we talk about Carson Wentz or no? We can talk about him. Would you consider him? I don't think so. Okay, would you? I don't want to. But like I feel like I should ask you for takes on him. Yeah, no, I'm okay, not going there. I should also ask you for takes on Daryl Henderson because I don't trust myself there. I do trust myself, but I know I'm, I know where I sit on this or you can use Daryl Henderson this week. I don't think so. I really have problems with the way that he accrues fantasy points. It's a big, it's a big kind of question mark for me. He did play 74% of the snaps before thereby. Like I'm not, I'm not writing him off saying it's a bad situation, but if he doesn't score multiple touchdowns, he doesn't really have a whole lot to give to us. So I'm probably not going to get there. Even though this game has the potential to be the best game of the week, I think that potential is lower than most people will think. And I think that that will also make Henderson a little bit more popular than I think he deserves to be. Yeah, so among all backs in their most relevant samples with salaries of $6,900 or higher, he ranks last in 83, with 83 yards per game and a 27% red zone share, even in a good game. Like that's, those are the two routes to upside and he's not the best in either. So if he burns me, it burns me. I've been okay being lower on him so far this year and you know, we'll see, that could change and it could hurt me, but it hasn't yet. So I don't know, whatever. I'm gonna add something to a pivot table. So I'll get back on my circle back here depending on what I'm talking about. I think it's gonna hurt me metric. And basically, okay, call it that please. Other 48 and a half point total on the board. Actually, I think this one's gone down. Anyway, it's San Francisco for the 49ers and the Vikings. 49ers favorite by three. Eli Mitchell, the one guy we're waiting on here in terms of injury news, but everything else is pretty steady for this game. So Brandon, we talked about the 49ers backfield. What's your view of the rest of this game? Yeah, deep in a pivot table here. We're talking 49ers versus Vikings. Yeah, actually, I did know this matchup. I've been a little, because of the Thanksgiving prep, there's been a few matchups that I've not actually remembered off the top of my head who's playing who. Progress, Prati. I have this game ranked a little bit higher than the game we just talked about. I think that there are definitely plays that we can consider. I like Brandon Ayuk. I liked him last week. Led the team in targets with seven. His role has gotten a lot better recently. And if Debo Siamio has relegated more to the backfield, that just makes it an easier situation for Ayuk to generate targets. And whatever, I don't know what would have happened where he was not playing early on, but it's not really a production thing, because he's been pretty good once he's been getting targeted. So you say 85 yards or two touchdowns for receivers? Yeah, I think he's had 85 yards twice in the past three games, right? Yeah, he had 85 in a touchdown, then a down game against the Rams, but then 89 in a touchdown the week before. So that's basically like that's enough at 6,300, where he's definitely close to the list of like, and I'll say this, if I cannot get back up to Michael Pittman, and I got to settle for Brandon Ayuk. I'm cool with that this week. Yeah. We talked, Jeff Wilson already, I think our thoughts are clear there. I'm probably not gonna end up with any Debo, which is a little bit scary, but if I'm allocating high salary to a receiver, I'd probably just go with Justin Jefferson in this game, because yes, there's guaranteed touches if Debo's getting carries, but if that comes at the expense of targets, that's a big concern for me. Could have just been GameScript related last week against the Jags, but I would probably put Jefferson above Debo, and I'd also probably put Jamar Chase above Debo this week. So I think that if I'm stacking the game, very preferred Debo, because he has a lot of upside, and if the game blows up, it's probably because he's doing some fun stuff. True. So I think that's the one thing that keeps me from crossing him off, but I think that he is one of the players where I need to care the most about roster rates and popularity, because if he's popular, I want no piece of it because he's over-salaried.  So I do wanna get the read on the way things are going this week. And if people are like, Debo's over-salaried, he's running back now, I would like to get there because if you look at his week last week, ran a route on 22 of 24 drop backs, only two of those routes came from the backfield. So what he was in the backfield was mostly for running plays. So that doesn't really change like his route tree. He also had the low and deep target last week. I don't think his rule actually changed that much in terms of the passing game. They just didn't throw the ball at him as much because they've had whatever 20 drop backs because that's what they wanna do. So if I'm game stacking and I prefer Debo, standalone play, it's IUK by a country mile, like by a wide margin because the salary is great. The role is very good. All I prefer Kittle over IUK for a standalone play. What about you for that? Kittle over IUK for a standalone play, yes. For like a cash game, I'm much more likely to have IUK than Debo straight up. I probably should revise my stance with Debo. If I'm stacking this game, I get what you're saying there. Where I would really, if that game blows up it's because Debo's doing something. But this also is not really a game that I feel like I'm targeting too much. Okay. Where does this game rank for you on the full slate? Second? It's second because it might be a zero quarterback second. I think her cousins is a consideration for me. I'd rather not, but I might have to because the quarterback is so bad. But I think because I know where the ball is going, it is a projected high efficiency game. That's kind of tough for me to turn down. And like, again, I know how I want to stack this game. I want to go down and cook on the Viking side again. And Justin Jefferson cook preference for me because he's a running back, just kind of the way it goes. His role is absurd relative to his tier. Like he should be, if you flipped his inaugural salary, I wouldn't blink at it. Like he's 81, not just 88. Like I think Dalvin should be 88, honestly. So I think Dalvin cook is a massive, massive core play for me. It's very easy for me to run it back with Kittle or IUke or if it's like a full game stack, run it back with Debo. So that's why it's there.  Like he blew up because he gets good usage and he's a very good football player basing a bad secondary this week. So no objections there. But I think that's where I'm at is that's why I like is I know how to stack it. Yeah, that's true. I know we're gonna talk Denver and almost call them the Clippers because I got NBA brain down on. I don't even like, I don't care about the NBA and it trips me up to see LAC every time. Yeah, it was the LAC specifically that got me. That game does rate out higher than this one but there are plenty of concerns. This game still feels like it could be gross because the pass rate's so low. I think maybe that's what's bogging me down is I think the odds of this one erupting are a little bit lower just because these teams would want ideally to keep it on the ground and keep the clock moving. That's very fair. I can see that. Okay, we're gonna go into the trends discussion here in just one second. But first, FanDuel and Simple Mobile have partnered to add an extra layer of excitement to one of the biggest free to play contests on the market. Introducing the FanDuel free to play gridiron pick'em contest presented by Simple Mobile a completely free to play contest that gives you a chance to win big on Sundays. Here's how it works. Simply answer 10 pick'em questions for this week's slate of NFL games and compete for a chance to win your share of $10,000 in cash prizes. If you're one of the highest scoring users on the day you will be eligible to win some cold hard cash. Kick off will be here before you know it. So head to fanDuel.com slash free slash contest slash gridiron pick'em and make your picks today and skip the contracts with high speed data, talk and text on a powerful nationwide network. I just screwed that up every time. Nationwide network with Simple Mobile. For more details as a FanDuel.com or download the FanDuel fantasy app eligibility restrictions apply. Let's dive into our trends here for week number 12. Your first one is in one of the other games. So we have to talk like the other games too and try to decide which of these stink less. You're talking about Steelers versus Bengals specifically the Steelers with no juju. What are you seeing there? Yeah, so we got 20 teams on the main slate and we went over virtually six of the best ones if not the six best ones already in the bookmaker section. So the pickings leftover were not ideal for the most part but this Steelers team is one that I've mostly overlooked all season aside from Najee Harris. And I at least figured this was a good opportunity to dig in and see what exists and what could be one of the more appealing games over the week, although it is a divisional matchup against the Bengals. This is just like I said, it's been an afterthought offense for me and it's not really burned me very often because there's not an abundance of big fantasy outputs within this offense. I actually wanted to make sure I wasn't just making that up. So I looked things up and their non-quarterbacks have maxed out at 21.7 Fando points this year. That's the fourth lowest output by a single team's top non-quarterback score but this is like a somewhat viable offense. So I wanted to make sure that I'm not just gonna cross them off in what could be a good situation. And just because the ceilings haven't quite been there doesn't mean that they won't be. That's not how ceilings work. If you scored 25 points once it doesn't really mean that your ceiling every week is 25 points. It doesn't quite work that way. And according to next-gen stats, Ben-Rothus Berger's 2021 splits have actually been slightly worse with Juju Smith-Schuster on the field than without him. I mean, I love Juju but he's really not the like needle-moving talent or at least he doesn't have a needle-moving role. He's not used that way. Yeah. So I'm not downgrading this offense and that's something that you and I talk about a lot. And in this split without Juju Ben-Rothus Berger has been perfectly league average with 0.12 passing net expected points per dropback. The NFL average is a 0.11 and if you adjust all those games against the opponent expectation he's been a little bit above expectation by 0.02 points per play. That's fine. It's viable. And that's on this slate could be enough if we like this game overall. Now it's led to only 243 yards per game, 1.8 touchdowns. Not a ton of yardage in this offense and that really sucks because Deontay Johnson is getting a lot of work. And again, in these games without Juju Smith-Huster but with Ben-Rothus Berger, Deontay Johnson has a 31% target share and a 43% yard share. He's averaged 81 and a half yards per game on those 108 yards per game in that sample as well. He's returned 13.9 fan goal points despite an expectation of 17.1. That is awesome usage. 2.3 downfield targets, two red zone targets in that sample, salary 7,100. Issue is I don't know if I can really put him above other receivers in that tier but if it's enough to like this game then I'm kind of interested. Chase Claipel has an 18% target share in these four relevant games. Still getting some downfield work still involved in the red zone. We already talked Pat Fryermuth I think we both will say that we like him at 5,300. And then we get to Najee Harris at 8,800 with a lot of elite running backs to go through. And again, the ceiling has been the issue for Najee and a lot of the reason that we like to pay up for Christian McCaffrey for Jonathan Taylor is because they can bust open a slate. It's been different with Harris. It's been like a high floor output. He has a per game average of 30 and a half adjusted opportunities in this sample. Still giving us 17.7 fan goal points with an expectation of 18.4. Has been underperforming as a rusher the success rates low, the expected yards per carry to outperform his actual yards per carry. But he's definitely not off the radar by any means. The reason I wanted to look into this offense was to see if there's enough to be viable. I think Ben Rathausberger is doing enough to keep them viable. I would not normally have considered Deontay Johnson but I think he's probably a pretty good head to head play. I think Chase Claipel is at least interesting if you like this game to turn into a shootout, which it could, but I don't think Najee Harris is enough for me to want to go to him over, even like an Austin Eckler, or especially a Daven Cook this week. So probably not there with Najee outside of game stacks, but any thoughts for you on the Steelers offense, which is just honestly one that we kind of gloss over all the time. Yeah, I think the typical issue with Deontay is that it's the Terry McLaurin effect where like his workload, I just don't like the game. And like, this game's fine. So I don't mind him at 71 and at from over Claypool relative to salary. This is a second time around divisional matchup, which is usually iffy. I would say that I prefer Friar of Youth over both, Deontay and Claypool. I would too, given the context of this position. But like, you know, the guys around Deontay, if I assume I can't get back up to Mike Evans. Right. You know, it's Adam Thielen, who cares. Six touchdowns on Sunday coming. Keenan Allen, low upside matchup. AJ Brown in a bad game. Jalen Waddle's fine, but like, you know, he doesn't have the biggest upside either. So like the guys around him are the same concerns he has, which I think is good for him because he has a better targeture than they do. So I think that's a positive for Deontay. Not going to prioritize him just because the offense is what it is. But like, I'm not going to be totally out on him either. One question I have for you is, relative to salary, Najee versus Joe Mixon. I had a feeling that might be coming because I like Joe Mixon a lot. Yeah. I think I'm leaning Joe Mixon here. I played him last week. It worked out well. I like, dare I say, he has like a higher ceiling. Yeah, you're right.  Do you know that Joe Mixon has been in four perfect lineups? Like partly because running back has been pretty bad, but like he's got upside. He's had 123, 110. He had a two games with 150 yards in scrimmage. Like he gets some good red zone work. He's 8,000, whereas Najee's 88. I prefer Najee, I want to say that. But like, I don't think it's outrageous to put Mixon above him. I like Najee more because against the Bengals, you funnel targets to the running back. We saw that was the Michael Carter, Ty Johnson game was against the Bengals. Like their linebackers are there. Biggest weakness was part of why I like Fryermuth a lot too. So that's why I think in terms of the Steelers side, I prefer Fryermuth one, Najee two, Deontay three, Claypool four, but both Najee and Fryermuth great out well. Problem is Najee's below McAfrey. I put him below Taylor despite the tough match for Taylor. He's definitely below Dalvin. So he's probably fourth among the six top guys for me. So I don't know. I'll still use though, I won't say that. Yeah, it's strange. That's kind of what this led me to is like, there are four viable plays from this team. Of course, Claypool's very much quaternary in that conversation. But I think that he fits within a game stack. And I think that this game is one of the more stackable because there's, I think, at least for me, there's Tampa Bay, Andy, tier one. Everything else is just clearly tier two. This game for me is part of it, despite its concerns. Again, second time around, divisional matchup, some pace concerns, some pass rate concerns to some degree.  So I'll be higher on this game than I think a lot of people. Okay. Well, one game I'll be higher on than others, I think, is Giants versus Eagles. Reasoning being here is pace. After the top three games, we're looking for these games we wanna stack this week. And I think that Eagles, Giants is pretty good. Largs we do to pace. Your pace numbers up on Number Fire have this projected as the fastest game on the main slate. Am I correct in saying that? I think that's the case. On the main slate, yes, I believe. Okay. So they rank 10th and 11th in pace by your numbers in neutral situation. If you let me have all my tabs open, I'd have been able to check, but you yell at me to close all my tabs. Yeah, it slows your computer down.  Like I'm doing this for you. Like you should think about that. Anyway, it's first in pace by your numbers. And that's true even with the Eagles going full on establishment mode. Because in their four games as a hyper run centric team, the Eagles are still average 66 plays per game on offense. And their opponents are at 63 per game. That's really good. It's led to an average total of 53.3 points per game across two sides. I thought it'd be bad that they were going to run heavy, but it's kind of not. And it's fun. That's gonna be enough to put me on Dallas Goddard here. $5,900. He is the most desirable piece in this Eagles offense right now. He's a 6.5 targets per game in his full games with no Earths. Devante Smith, slightly tougher sell. I love the talent, but he's at six targets per game in that stretch. That's a pretty low number for a receiver who's $6,400. The pace also at least like makes me more interested in Jalen Hurts at $8,400 when I was on Monday. Not sure I will necessarily get there, but I'm less out on him than I was on Monday. The Giants just fired Jason Garrett. So that could lead to change, but we did see some predictable volume on Monday. Cadarius, Tony had 12 targets, even if they were pretty shallow. That's how you want to play things against the Eagles is shallow targets. We saw Tyreek Hill do well with that against them. Tony, $5,600. Saquon Barkley is 75. He played 59% of the snaps on Monday with six carries and six targets. Eagles are a much softer matchup for running back. So interested there with Saquon Barkley. So I think some mini stacks here are very in play, specifically centered around Goddard's with either Barkley or Tony. Devonte Smith, Miles Sanders also get a boost up here despite imperfect roles thanks to the pace here. So where are you at on this game and those guys? Yeah, so this is I think a perfect example of how I'm viewing this state and it's starting to make more sense. Cause again, we're doing this Wednesday so it's already less research than normal and we spent a lot of time digging into the Thanksgiving slate. But if I'm looking at the slate as one clear game and a big second tier, I want to go to where other people aren't. And that's very possibly this game and like Steelers, Bengals, as opposed to bigger value games like Rams Packers, things like that. So you make a lot of good points with this game. You make good points too with the fact that running the ball for the Eagles has not been bad because look, we're analytics people. We don't like when teams try to establish the run. Historically that's not led to winning. It's been passing more efficiently. However, the big caveat in all this is if you run the ball efficiently, that is viable and over the past four games since they've become really run heavy, the Eagles have put up 36.1 rushing net expected points. The Colts in that spanner at 30.6 makes sense. Next up is Baltimore at 15.6. Now this doesn't adjust for total games or per carry. I'm just talking like sheer points added. They're able to move the ball efficiently. That's good. Like that's good stuff. They're better. They have a higher expected point number on their rushing plates and their passing plays for the full season once we adjust for schedule. And in the sample point two, rushing net expected points per carry, point one eight passing net expected points per dropback. Like that's really, really good offense. So that's the difference. If this were a team that just ran the ball into the back of the line and punted, that's bad. So I think I'm with you. The pass rate is gonna look really bad but that doesn't mean the offense is not performing. So yeah, it's a weird caveat to have to make but I like it and I like this game. Pretty easy places to go. Love Kaderious Tony. They've at times made him like, they're like, Hey, Kaderious Tony got hurt a few weeks back and like we didn't know what to do because he's our offense. It's like, if you come out and say that very clearly like that means something and you don't get that very often with a receiver in the 5,000 range. So just the sheer potential of that workload being what it is. I mean, I have some more stats on him because spoiler alert, he's one of my loves for this week but boy, it's another one of those games where like if it goes off, we know who's gonna be producing. I think that maybe I was just dismissive of Juante Smith because like if I have a Saquon or a Tony lineup and I wanna like assume that it goes off he's probably gonna do some things. Stand alone, play no, but if he's paired with Saquon or Tony, I'm okay with it. Where are you at in Saquon at $7,500? I think he's more fine than like a target. I agree. I don't think I would get there in one offs. I think it would require a game stack for me. I wanna get there though. Sure. I want him in my player pool. I do not want him to be a core play in my pool. Correct. That's where I'm at. Okay, so we're on the same page there. Yeah. Okay, speaking of quarterback here. No. No, no, no. Sorry, it took me a second to realize what you're doing. No. 7,000. No. Like the game. No. Eagles below average against the pass. No. No. I mean. No. But tell me why. Because no. No. Could you tell me why? Because he's bad. We're talking about Daniel Jones, by the way, not Jalen Hurst. I should make that call. He's had a tough schedule. I don't care yet last year too. No. No. No. We're moving on. Panthers, Cam Newton. There's a quarterback I can consider. You're talking about what the Panthers have looked like with Cam. What do you see in there? I probably won't get to Daniel Jones, but... No. I'm cutting off my mic. You do what you want to. You talk about whatever you're talking about. So the Panthers with Cam Newton, I think it's relevant here because we are talking about how quarterbacks are very difficult for this week. So we got to at least consider or look at Cam Newton, plus this offense holds one of the best running backs of football, if not the best Christian McCaffrey. Potentially DJ Moore. We're looking at wanting some receivers in the 6,000 range. I think that that's a little bit of a better role than it has been. So I want to dig into this offense. Through his two total games, Cam Newton has recorded an NFL average, basically 0.12, passing that expected points per dropback. 12 carries for 60 yards and two touchdowns. It's just in line with expectation. And his 8-odd is 4.2 yards. It's not really going to do a whole lot. Of course, if you're throwing to Christian McCaffrey, that's going to lower your 8-odd.  That's nice. We know the potential is there. And last week with Newton in that full game, Christian McCaffrey led the team with eight targets, which was 30%. DJ Moore had seven, which was 26%. Robbie Anderson had six, which was 22%. And nobody else had more than two targets. That's really concentrated work. That'll work even with a low 8-odd, which again is drawn down toward the line of scrimmage with Christian McCaffrey getting so many targets. I'm not sure this game overall has the juice for stacking with such a low total, but I will have a lot of interest in McCaffrey. I think Cam Newton, DJ Moore stacks are kind of sneaky. I don't know what the read will be on Cam Newton's popularity numbers, but it's kind of classic Cam Newton, where he's going to run the ball maybe eight to 12 times with some efficiency on those, throw the ball a little bit, but he's definitely not like a Kyler Murray or anything where he's running and throwing for a full game's worth of passing production, but 6,700 with potentially, let's call it a 25 plus percent target share, if that's the way that this offense is going to work. That's pretty viable for DJ Moore if you're interested in this offense. I think the bigger question is with Christian McCaffrey in games with low totals, we've talked like with McCaffrey back this year and with low offensive expectations that, oh yeah, Christian McCaffrey's played in a lot of games with low totals because his offense have been bad. So I went back and looked, I'm in games where McCaffrey in his career has played at least 60% of the snaps. He's averaged 20.8 Fandal points per game, which is sick, like that's so sick. In games with totals of 45 or lower, he's averaged 17.3 Fandal points that includes seven of 21 games with more than 20 Fandal points, but also seven of 21 with 10.5 or fewer points. Of his eight career games with at least 30 Fandal points, just two came with totals under 46. Of his 27 games with at least 20 Fandal points, the average over under was 47 points and only five of these, which is 18%, came in games with totals of 44 or lower. So I kind of thought he had a lot more bigger games in these low totals. He hasn't really had nearly as many games with low totals as my memory kind of said that he did, but just nine of his 50 games with at least 60% of the snaps had totals of 42.5 or lower. So it hasn't really quite been what I thought. He's still averaged 19.3 Fandal points in these games, but that did feature outputs of 44.7, 36.1, and 25.5. Two of these games came with three touchdowns despite the low totals. So the path to upside, even in bad games for him, is there, but he also had 11.3 Fandal points per game and the other six with a lot of dud outputs, which is concerning. So what all this boils down to is like, in games with low totals, Christian McCaffrey still has that juice. He's got that win juice, but also the odds of a dud from Christian McCaffrey, like the bad games from him come in games like this. And that's concerning to me.  The touchdown equity might not be there, even though we've seen a eruption game. So I'm having like a hard time trying not to overthink this, but also not just going blindly and saying Christian McCaffrey's totally fine, even though this overrunner is terrible. So what do you think about McCaffrey this week and any thoughts on KM Newton plus D.J. Moore? Yeah, I think that the analysis of McCaffrey makes a lot of sense and it's fair to view things that way. I also kinda just don't care, in part because like total matters most with regards to touchdown upside and play volume because it does reflect both those things. Pacing this game is not bad between the two teams. So I think that that's a positive. I think this game goes over because I think that two was better than public perception. I think that KM might be better than public perception right now, which is great. So I think this game goes over 42. I think that's a positive for McCaffrey. Other thing is his like non-touchdown total this year specifically have been like, oh my gosh. So this was, I ran this before last week, but through week 10, there were four instances where I running back scored 20 fandal points and no touchdowns. Two of those were by Christian McCaffrey in his three full games to that point in the year.  He's at 153, I think yards per game in his full games, 151, 47% red zone share. I think he'll still get red zone working with Can being there. So I think the workload is so good in this specific context. And I think the game goes over to the point where I think that he's still the number one back on this slate. And I want to get there for cash games if I can and really, really will like to get there for cash games. I would need some good value backs to pass him up. I also prefer him over Dalvin and I liked Dalvin a lot if we're talking about like in terms of prioritization for cash games. So I think that that's a big thing for me. Yeah. Despite all the concerns I laid out despite the past to busting, he's still my number one overall. I'm with you, I don't think it's as safe as it would be with the end of game with a higher total for sure, which is not groundbreaking, but it wouldn't surprise me if he doesn't score a touchdown this week, if the total does kind of hit or goes below. But even with that, it's really hard to pass him up. Where are you at on the Cam and then the Dolphins? Just quickly. Cam I think is viable for game stacks. I don't think I would play him as a one-off if I'm gonna play him, I'd at least take a chance on DJ Moore. Cam or Jalen Hurts? I think Cam for me. Okay. I might prefer Hurts just because the pace in that game is better. That might be the one difference between me. Yeah, I'm gonna change that. I'm gonna go Hurts. Okay. The Dolphins just bring backs if I'm playing Cam Newton basically. Does that include the gas boy? Because he's popping in some stuff and I really don't wanna go there. He's been popping in my simulations for weeks now, but watching him is the least inspired I've ever felt watching a running back that I'm rooting for. It's like, worry, if you use them, just don't watch. Like, you gotta avoid at all costs. I don't wanna go there because he's at 66 yards per game in the five games with no Malcolm Brown. And I think the Panthers defensive line is going to embarrass the Dolphins offensive line. I think the same thing could happen to the other side too, honestly, because the Panthers offensive line is so bad. That's why I'm not like banging the table about the over on this game, but I do think that the gas boy doesn't quite do enough for me. So it'd be more waddle and gasicky. So where would you rank him among value backs? Like is he? Behind Sanders definitively. Yeah. Behind Jeff Wilson, if there's no Eli Mitchell. Behind AJ Dillon. I think that's enough where I just wouldn't get to him. I wouldn't quite consider Dillon in the same tier, but. Yeah, fair. If I really had to, I'd play him, but I think I would rather just go like chock, like heavy, heavy exposure to Miles Sanders instead. Yeah, I'd agree to that. Okay, let's finish up with our third or final trend to hear talking about that. Chargers Broncos game you alluded to, because it's a decently high total of 47 and a half, tight spread, fun players on both sides, but both defenses also come from the Vic Fangio tree. And the like thesis of that defense is to prevent big plays. And for the most part, both sides have done that. On the season, the Broncos have led up more than 270 passing yards to just two quarterbacks. None of the quarterbacks they faced have scored more than 21.5 fan to a points. That's gross. Other positions have been a bit better, but still underwhelming. No player at any position has scored more than 23.8 fan to a points against the Broncos. Only Chase Claypool and Sterling Shepard have had a hundred yards receiving against them. Diernis Johnson, who's the best running back on the plan, of course. And Najee Harris are the only backs with a hundred yards and both those guys needed 22 plus carries to get there. So we don't get many upside games against the Broncos. Same thing is mostly true for the Chargers. No players top 25 fan to a points against them. Of the eight players top 20 fan to a points, four of them came from the same game, that Brown's Charger shootout. It was Baker, Baker did it too in that game somehow. Wild times that happened this year. The main appealing options on the Broncos are wide receivers, but Devante Smith is the lone receiver to get 20 fan to a points against the Chargers. He has a higher targeture than anybody on this team. So I think I'm out on all Denver players except for Noah Fance. Austin Eckler could work on the Charger side. He's $84, which is pretty reasonable. I just don't know if I'll like him more than Dalvin Cook, which is a pretty big downside for me. So this game was good on paper and it might feature points, but the style of defense that both sides play is not conducive to big fantasy games. So do you have a different view of this game than I do? Am I overthinking it? What are your thoughts? I like Eckler still regardless, just because everything should sort of funnel toward him. I struggle with Denver on even smaller slates because their market shares can be very dispersed. So I want to like this game. I almost wrote up Justin Herbert as a quarterback love. I couldn't quite get there because I feel like the path to that huge game is capped. I don't want to play guys with capped ceilings. Mike Williams has too many target share concerns. I think this one could have some mini stacks. If I play Eckler, if I can't quite get to McCaffrey, I already played Dalvin. I'm like, I'm going to go Dalvin, Eckler in a lineup. I would consider like a Jerry Judy, just as like a mini stack, but that's I think my cap. Judy is really talented player. So like I'm not going to talk you out of that. I'd probably go Eckler Fant though personally, just because Fant fills tight ends, has some yardage upside. So that's our map there. I have a quick note on McCaffrey in games with no touchdowns, but 20 plus Fandall points. Yes, do it. Since 2017, which he entered the league, if I did this quickly, if my numbers are right, there have been 24 instances of a running back, getting to 20 plus Fandall points with no touchdowns. He has eight of those. He has a third by himself. What a guy. What a guy. He's great. We're going to go to our position plays. No weather for this week's recording Wednesday. So, you know, check back on the number, fire, games and lineups page on Sunday morning to see what the weather says then. But for right now, Brandon at quarterback, what do you have for the week 12 main slate? Well, if anyone's been listening at all, they know it's Tom Brady, number one. This is the best game of the week by good margin for me, Brady has that clear path that we talked about the wide open green pasture to big production with multiple touchdowns in this game. He has stacking options that are, you know, gives us multiple access points to a big game from Brady, but also kind of reasonable salaries for the most part. Indianapolis is 27th against the pass according to number fires adjusted past defense metrics. Brady and games against bottom 20 past defenses, 26.1 Fandall points per game, 308 yards per game, 3.2 passing touchdowns per game, 0.34 passing that expected points per dropback, which is over three times the NFL average. Gotta love that. My second love comes from a game that I did discuss with the other side here, but if I'm not playing Brady, I might as well try to save some salary. So I'll really be open to Joe Burrow at 7,100. Just extra, extra savings there. It helps me get back up to another stud running back. Burrow's offensive line matchup isn't that bad based on the current health against the Steelers who are 27th in pressure rate by next-gen stats in pro football focuses chart. Doesn't have this one. Their offensive line defensive line matchups, which accounts for health. Doesn't really say it's a red flag matchup here. Pittsburgh 17th and adjusted past defense according to number fire. I know, I know it's a second time around defensive matchup with some bad overall peripherals, but if I play Burrow, I can play Jomar Chase. I can play Joe mixing with Joe Burrow as well.  So I think for a value quarterback, there's a lot to like here. Yeah, there's enough where I consider him too. My two loves are Tom Brady and Aaron Rodgers going with the olds here for this week. For Brady, it's the fifth rank passing offense versus the 27th rank passing defense. The Bucks have a 65% pass rate in the red zone, which is the second highest mark in the league. And like, you know, that helps $8,200 clear stacking candidates. I think he's number one by a mile. Rodgers two out of like necessity, I guess, just cause like there aren't a lot of other good options. There could be wind in this game, which would lower me on Matthew Stafford, but like Rodgers, I believe Chris Allen has these numbers, but I'm pretty sure thinking back to Chris Allen's previous work, Rodgers wind splits are not that bad because he's played it a lot and like just is not fazed by it. So I do think that Rodgers would be number two for me at $7,900. I would consider Stafford, would consider Kirk Cousins, considering Hertz and Newton. Right now, I think I'm at Brady Rodgers Hertz based on the pace discussion we had previously about the Eagles versus Giants game. So no thoughts on going down at quarterback at all? I think it's the right thought process. I just can't quite get there. It's the right thought process though, so I can't knock it personally. Okay, I gotcha. All right, what you got at running back? I think McCaffrey would really be my number one, but if I'm being realistic and trying to build the best top to bottom lineups I can, that might not allow me to get to McCaffrey extremely often. So I'm cool going with Austin Eckler at $8,400. Again, it is a week where I want to allocate salary, but Eckler really sets up well and I'm not chasing the touchdowns. It's just a good roll. 70% snap rate, 25 adjusted opportunities, stemming from seven targets. Denver, not a good rush defense matchup anyway. 26th in rushing net expected points for Kerry allowed to running backs. 17th in adjusted Fando points per target as well allowed to running backs. So just a base level matchup out of the backfield. Second level is going to be Dalvin Cook at $8,100. I think the salary is too low. He is third in my early floor ceiling ratio on numbers across my slate simulations. The 49ers are a top 10 rush defense in rushing net expected points per Kerry and success rate allowed to running backs, but the game environments there, even though it's not necessarily flawless for me, 69 plus percent snap rate in five straight games with an average of 76% as well. And my third love, and this really shouldn't change unless we get Aaron Jones back, but it's going to be AJ Dillon at $6,900. The results weren't quite there last week, but the roll was confirmed. I think it had a pretty solid roll. 74% snap rate, 23 adjusted opportunities, ran 17 routes with six targets. If you give me that rushing share, which was 73% of the running back carries, 15% target share within this offense, I don't care whose name it is. If it's at 6,900, I'm going to take that. And if it's a guy who looks like AJ Dillon, I'll take it every time. That's true. So that helps as well. He's my third love too, and I had Dalvin Cook as my number two love. So overlapping there, I think that like relative to salary, those two guys are the ones that stand out most as being miss salaried. My top love is Christian McCaffrey. It's a tough match for Jonathan Taylor. That does not make me off of Jonathan Taylor. I want to make that very clear. Indy's personnel is very good, but it's Christian McCaffrey. And I think that we have a really good option here. He didn't just go for five touchdowns. So the Caffrey to me makes a lot of sense. Again, 151 yards per game in his four full games, 33.5 carries plus two X targets per game, 47% red zone share. He is under salary. It should be probably like 10. I would actually, I think we said 10 for Taylor, nine eight for McCaffrey on Monday. That's probably fair. But I think that either way, very willing to get there at a game. I think goes over the total for this week. So McCaffrey Cook and Dylan, my three loves. I would say though, I am higher on Miles Sanders now than I was when we started, slowly, slowly inching that thing up, becoming more interested there. Let's go to wide receiver. Who are you turning to there? I'm going to go with Chris Godwin at 7,600. I will say I prefer Mike Evans, but I think Chris Godwin will be a little bit less popular. His role hasn't been quite as good as Evans's in games without Antonio Brown and with Ronk. But that first game in that sample was against the Rams in Godwin. So a pretty good number of routes against Jalen Ramsey, who's been awesome in the slot this year. And if you look at the past four games without Antonio Brown, Godwin has a team best 23% target share, 22% weighted target share, which is just the metric that I use that looks at your target share, your red zone target share and your downfield target share. 93 yards per game as well. And obviously stacks with Tom Brady, second loves Michael Pittman Jr. I just can't really pass him up. I can't rank anyone above him in the 6,000 range with his really good target market share in a game where his team should probably throw a little bit more than normal. And I like them anyway. So just kind of injecting him into a good matchup. In his games with T.Y. Hilton, Pittman Jr. has an 88% snap rate, 95% route rate, seven targets per game. It's just 24%. 3.8 high-levered targets per game. I mean, I'm just gonna, I'm gonna take that, even though Tampa Bay has been pretty good. One's adjusting for opponents' face against wide receivers. And my third love is Kaderius Tony down at 5,600. This game, as you mentioned, pretty sneakily fun for this week. Tony had a 33% target share, 40% air yard share with two downfield, two red zone targets last week. Was targeted on 48% of his routes in that game. We have seen and heard the Giants try to make him a focal point. And he has been targeted on virtually the same rate of his routes as Tyree Kill, Debo Samuel, and AJ Brown. Seems good, seems good. Good company to keep. My top-loving receiver is Mike Evans, $7,500. We look at the games with Gronk and without Antonio Brown. So it's a two-game sample, but hey, you know, whatever. 21% target share, 38% of the deep targets for Evans and those two games, double-digit targets in both. The Colts' corners are not the strength of that team. So I just want a lot of exposure to him, exposure to that game. I do like Odwin too. I know I was kind of yelling you on Slack about that last night, but it was mostly joking. I think he's fine, no objections. I have Michael Pittman as my second love too for a lot of the same reasons. I looked at the target shares in games with Hilton. 40% deep target share, 33% in the red zone, $6,600. They don't throw a lot in the red zone, so that's kind of a fluky stat. But like still, I do think that he is at 66 a priority for this week. My value play that I like most is Van Jefferson. Odell should get more work, but when Robert Woods is getting a 20% target share, Van was still getting like a 17% share. The past four games with three of those were the Woods, one with Odell slash Ben Scaranic who combined for eight targets. Van had a 17% target share. He had 42% of the deep targets and a 20% red zone share. He's $5,400. I think Van Jefferson is a star value play for this week. And a guy I want to build around. Tony would be my number two, I think, followed by MVS, followed by Marv, right? Yep. Boom, go to tight end. What you got there? I have Kyle Pitts here at 6,600. It's $100 lower than George Kittle, who I do like plenty, but Pitts is, I think, an easy pivot. Has had four straight down games, but now faces the Jaguars who were 29th in player level, adjusted Fando points per target, allowed to tight ends. The Vikings who Kittle is facing are second. That's a little bit worrisome. But Pitts has a 22% target share in five games without Calvin Ridley, 21% red zone target share as well. You know, the upside is there with the yardage, if Matt Ryan looks at all decent. And my second love would be Dan Arnold within the same game, 5,100. I think people will just write him off entirely like Jim is doing, just literally, just writing him off. I wrote his name down just to cross it off. No targets last week, but 22 routes, which was second best on the team. And the Falcons are 27th in those player level, adjusted fantasy points per target, allowed to tight ends. If you go back to week five, since his role improved with the Jaguars, even with a no target game factored in, Arnold ranks 12th among all tight ends in target share. So don't bail on him yet if you really need to save salary. Yeah, you mentioned Pitts. I do like Pitts a decent amount, but I will go with Kittle as my top one because it's my favorite access to the San Francisco side of this pretty fun game. $6,700. He has 6.3 targets per game since the return, but like that's on low volume. If they'd throw more, which they couldn't, you know, against a good passing offense, his target share is 24%. I think that Kittle is good access to a great game, those tight end, which isn't too bad this week, honestly, but like I, you know, I still don't mind filling it. So $6,700, very fair for me. My second love is Pat Fryermuth with Eric Ebron likely out. That's a big thing for Fryermuth, given the route rates he has with and without Ebron. He had a 21% target share in two games that Ebron missed. It was down to 17% in two games since Ebron returned. He gets a lot of work in the red zone and at this salary, you need like 40 yards and a touchdown and you're like paying off a tight end. So he can do that. He can get two touchdowns too. So Fryermuth to me, really good, low salary tight end. From over Arnold, I don't think that you're wrong to consider Arnold. I just think I prefer Fryermuth. Defense, where are we going here? I'm gonna go with the Chargers at $3,600. There's a high enough total. They're favored and that's kind of the recipe you want for fantasy points. You want sacks and turnovers. Teddy Bridgewater has an 8% sack rate. It's ninth among qualified quarterbacks. Garrett Bowles likely out. Is that a thing that I do good? I think they confirmed that yesterday. I was really... That's relevant? Yeah, yeah. Okay, cool. CDLan's practicing today too. Sorry, didn't mean to interrupt. Let's go. I mean, the Chargers are third in pressure rate. Yeah. I think that works. $3,600 is low for a team with that defensive talent. I know Teddy doesn't make a lot of mistakes, but the sacks matter. But I still think that's a pretty good play. I like the Bengals because I don't know why they're $3,300. I will use Fryermuth in the same lineup as the Bengals defense. I don't care. They're just aggressively under salary. They're four and a half point home favorites against Ben Rothesberger who can't move. They are the ninth ranked defense versus the 24th ranked offense. So although I like Fryermuth, I'm okay with Najee. I still think that the Bengals defense is very good. I would not use the Bengals defense with Najee, would use them with Fryermuth for this week. I also do think the Dolphins work as a pivot at $3,400 because that defensive line is so bad. The Dolphins, very aggressive defense, which is good for a defensive scoring. So I think that they would work too. So the Bengals, Dolphins are both the main ones I would turn to in the bottom range. And then the Chargers would be up there too as far as lower salary defenses. Okay, Brandon, we went long. So any final thoughts for you on this slate? Just do your best to stay tuned to the news. Tune out for now, tune back in Sunday.  But yeah, make sure you're properly valuing the news. Think about it, think about situations and how you would handle those things for sure. That is all that we have here for today. Again, if you've not checked out the Thanksgiving podcast and you've listened to this before then, go back to the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast or the FanDuel YouTube page, check it out there and get yourself a mentor for what should be a slate. That is for sure. Brandon, people have questions for you on Twitter. Where can they find you there? I'm at Godula13, G-D-U-L-A-1-3. And I'm at Jim Sonnis, J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S. You can also follow the FanDuel podcast network at FanDuel Podcast. Big thank you to everyone for tuning in for today. Good luck with your DFS linus, both for the main slate and the Thanksgiving slate. Happy Thanksgiving. Have a safe and happy holiday. We'll talk to you once again on Monday to wrap it all up. This has been the heat check fantasy podcast powered by Number Fire.


Free reasons why you should never blog a narcissist Free reasons why you should never blog the narcissist on social media in many of my videos. I Do recommend blogging the narcissist. I recommend going no contact as That's the only way that you can deal with them, but I think it's also interesting to Look at the other side of the coin To look at the reasons why you shouldn't block them because when you block the narcissist There are certain things that may happen as a result of this action There are certain things that they might do So this video is designed to make you aware of the dangers of blogging a narcissist on social media one Narcissistic supply When you block the narcissist You may think that it's going to hurt them You may think that it's going to get under their skin and in some situations You may be right But in other situations It may give them a narcissistic supply It may tell them that they have got to you The narcissist will read your reactions to their behavior To determine how you are feeling So if you block them They may know why you're doing that They may know that it's because you're hurt and It will give them supply it will make them feel powerful and important as Though there's something significant to you because if you weren't affected by them You wouldn't have blocked them So this could be a reason why you should never block a narcissist Because it may just feed their ego to They may get very angry when you block the narcissist It's likely to cause a narcissistic injury Which will be followed by narcissistic rage and when that happens They can become very unpredictable They can do things that you haven't seen before They will make threats against you. They will smear your name.  So now they have to bring you down So they can feel better about themselves They may even stoke and harass you They may show up at your work When you were with them it may have seemed like they wanted nothing to do with you But when you block them That's when you will see just how crazy and obsessive they really are 3 They may find someone else When you block the narcissist, they may be left without supply without anyone to attend to them But narcissists cannot be alone So if you block the narcissist It's very likely that they will find someone else Which may be something that you don't want them to do Maybe you don't want that to happen So this could be another reason why you should never block them Because if you're not giving them attention They're going to get it somewhere else Because they cannot be alone They cannot be left to their own thoughts and feelings They need someone there to make them feel better To make them feel like they're not at fault So if you block the narcissist There is a chance that they will find someone else And this may be very painful for you If you are still emotionally attached to them So these are free reasons Why you should never block a narcissist I'm not saying that this is something you should do But I thought it would be interesting to explore the other side of the coin My advice in most situations Is to block the narcissist and go no contact But I believe it's important To be aware of the dangers of doing this Narcissists are very dangerous people They can be unpredictable So you never know how they might react Thank you for watching I hope this video resonates with you Please like, comment, share and subscribe If you would like to donate My PayPal link is in the video description Coaching inquiries You can email me at coaching.narcsurvivor.uk Thank you for watching and I'll talk to you soon