We talked going into Thursday about how the week 13 main slate set up as being one where there were almost too many good plays in the sense that we had a hard time deciding whom we wanted to prioritize, where we wanted to go, whittling down our lists, and we were right because week 13 was a wild one, massive, massive scores across the board, huge performances and a lot to break down. So what we're going to do today is go through the implications of all those points, what it means from a DFS perspective, from a strategy perspective, and then go through injuries, roll changes, and a week at the, a look at the week 14 main slate. Welcome on into the heat check fantasy podcast powered by Numberfire. That's right here on the fan dual podcast network and numberfire.com. My name is Jim Sonnis. I am a senior writer and analyst for Numberfire.com. Join here as always by Brandon Gadoula. He is the managing editor of Numberfire.com. Brandon, points week 13. How you doing? I'm good. Could always be a little bit better. Had some 2v2 swaps that cost me a little bit, mostly centering on George Kittle versus Foster Moreau. But the name of the game this week really was upside. And it's the thing we talk about a lot more now than ever where in, you know, I don't know. It always feels a little bit strange to talk about it. You want guys with upside, like, yeah, we all know that. But really thinking things through and trying to figure out who has upside and why has been a big change to my process and I know yours as well. This week, I think we had a lot of, you know, scrolling through our player picks. I think a lot of stuff worked out for this week. You know, some of those picks were not necessarily like pivots or anything. They were pretty. Pretty bold to say Justin Jefferson might be good against the Lions. You know, it's bold. We're going on a limb there. But the thing that I can kind of hang my this one hat on is, is that we talked specifically about value or receiver and how sort of unlikely those guys are to have big games and it seemed a little bit more viable to go with those mid range running backs with great workloads. Because we don't always get mid range running backs with great workloads. We usually get mid range running backs with questionable workloads. So even though we didn't I didn't I myself didn't really get to Jonathan Taylor at all. Yeah. I had a pretty solid week because of looking at the slate from an upside standpoint. And so I answered your question doing pretty well. Yeah. And you said the Jonathan Taylor thing that led to your victory in our head to head, which means you've clinched the season because I've sucked in that department. I jammed in JT with Michelle and Gibson, whereas you went with Jefferson Cup and Keenan Allen. And I had Keenan Allen and Chris Godwin like they were both fine, but having Cup Jefferson versus Odell made things pretty easily in your favor there. I think that that was the right way to play things in retrospect. I think that you handle that well. So we'll talk about that. We'll talk about role changes and talk about scoring in just one second. But first, what better way to gear up for the weekend. And despite severe thirsty Thursday night football with Fanduel and Captain Morgan introducing Captain Morgan Thursday night pick them a completely free to play contest that gives you four chances to win a share of $10,000. Fanduel fans will have the chance to answer 10 questions centered around both Captain Morgan that Thursday's NFL matchup. Fans who answer the most questions correctly will be eligible to earn their share of that week's $10,000 cash prize Thursday night football will kick off in just a couple of days. So if you're listening on Monday, can't get that now, but on Tuesday, go to Fanduel.com slash Captain Morgan NFL must be 21 plus to participate for more details. The Fanduel.com or download the Fanduel fantasy app eligibility restrictions apply. And don't forget to make your or to spice up your game day with Captain Morgan. Okay, week three headlines here again, the points because there were a lot of them here. And I think that for me, Brandon, I think that this is true. This thought this talk this discussion is true both in weeks like this where cash lines were outrageous. And in weeks previously where the cash lines were a lot lower because let's say week 12, you get a 30 point game or 40 point game for Leonard Fournette. You can mess up everywhere else in your line of self a very good chance to cash. This week, you needed a 40 point game to hang essentially. And so I think the key thing for me is that no matter how the slate breaks down, whether it winds up being a lower scoring slate or a higher scoring slate, identifying players with that upside is important because you want the guys who can help you cash even when everything else goes poorly across the entire week, and you want guys who can hang on slates like this. So I think to me, it just kind of is justification of like the mindset we've had the past I would say two years or so, where we are selling out for upside above all else is that a correct way to phrase that do you think. Yeah, it and I think the thing that can get lost is like, yes, it sounds obvious you want guys with high ceilings, but I'm not sure that we all and myself included always understand who has a super high ceiling. Yeah, I used to think it was wide receivers with really high a dots, regardless of volume, telling myself that, you know, two or three downfield targets, maybe one other target get like five targets bunch of areas was enough to make a huge difference. That's not really the case, you need total air yards, of course you need to catch passes and score and convert, but you know total air yards which a lot of people, or at least some people don't like the total air yards are very important in terms of identifying true upside, because it factors in downfield work and volume. So I used to have that issue. And with quarterback specifically that's the other thing that kind of is has been a big change. In years past we've been able to replace big games at quarterback with lower salary quarterbacks. That is like just straight up. Not the case anymore. This year, and I did this at like 845 this morning so I just just bear with me but this year, quarterbacks who are projected for at least four Fandal points on according to number fires projections, they've gotten to at least 25 Fandal points at about a 15 and a half percent rate. It's like the baseline of all quarterbacks who are projected for work. If you look at quarterbacks with at least a salary of 8000 on the main slate, those guys have gotten there 32% of the time so more than double. And the non studs so anyone who didn't have an eight or nine in front of their salary quarterback got there at 11%. It's still possible to have big games from lower salary quarterbacks, but it's very evident that these run heavy and now like the Tom Brady's the Matthew Stafford's like, there are only a few players who really can go out and throw for 350 and three or four touchdowns. So it's about kind of looking at every position each week, figuring out where we can exploit things and then figuring out where the upside lies from there. I think that, you know, it may seem obvious to say that you need upside, but at the same time, you look at so you posted the draft rates for this week already up on number fire and looking through those right now. And there are some guys pretty high on the list who don't have upside relative to other guys available this week like, like if you use miles gas and that's okay like I want to make that very clear because like we're having this discussion for reason, but like miles gaskin to me is someone who when I had, you know, Antonio Gibson when I had Sony Michelle, I know that like, Jamal Williams didn't do great his role was bad. It wound up being bad but going in Jamal Williams had a better ceiling projection the miles gaskin and miles gas and even with all those options there, why not be on 15% of rosters. So like, and again, if you use miles gas and it's totally okay, like that's fine. I understand how you got there. But like, I think that we can say these things while still seeing some inefficiencies in the way people play things, because guys who I don't use that having upside still wind up carrying popularity like Rex Burkhead only 2.3%. But like, that's 2.3%. You could have gone elsewhere. I think that that to me is kind of what stands out is there are some people who there are still plays will make on guys who don't have upside you know, I mean, Garderman shoes defensible because his salary so low, and he was in a great match up but he was on 7% of rosters Kirk cousins 8%. Derek Carr on 6%. Even though he's losing some goal on work to Marcus Marriota. So in to a I think two is fine but like 4% on a week like this that's kind of still a lot, given the way they're playing offense right now. So I think we're still seeing players without ceilings wind up on a decent number of rosters. So although we're saying hey, you need to identify ceiling. People aren't doing that across the board and I think that for me if you talk about quarterbacks me at running back, the two pillars to ceilings are touchdowns and yards, like that's just it's that's the way you score points that's very obvious but people like Gaskin don't have a lot of yardage upside. That was the key differentiator for me between Jamal Williams and Antonio Gibson sony Michelle is that touchdowns are harder to come by for the line to like score like 29 this week or whatever that sounds harder to come by for them than they are for the Rams, for example. So I think that just thinking about okay. Does this player give me either big yardage upside or big touchdown upside. If you can't say yes to one of those. And definitively yes, preferably to both. It's it's going to be a situation where I think you want to deviate. I think that's the way I view it.  But like you got to think about the chance that you're going to regret not using certain players and Miles Gaskin similar salary to what he's had same role as what he's had. He has never made us regret not using him. I like Miles Gaskin. I think he's a fun player. I think that you know there's there are things to like about him, but nothing was so different here compared to Antonio Gibson and I know the draft percentages were wildly different. But there was a very clear shift for Antonio Gibson for even Jamal Williams. But then you go back to the what are the odds Jamal Williams in it with a bad offense really makes me regret using him. It was a little bit higher for me than for you. I know that I didn't actually get there because we got Sony Michelle. But Sony Michelle fantastic offense. Very clear role change potentially a talent upgrade on Daryl Henderson. So you have to ask yourself like am I going to regret not using this guy. Yeah. And again if you use Gaskin that's OK.    So like again if you used him it's only fine. It's more so we're talking about this is what we're looking for. And we hope that like that can be helpful in trying to identify things. So again at at quarterback you need gobs of passing upside or some rushing at running back yards and touchdowns at wide receiver yard. And I think that's kind of the way they'll get their tight ends a bit different because you can have weeks where like a guy who gets thirty nine yards and two touchdowns will be in the perfect lineup. But and you can also and you can also have weeks at tight end where the studs don't have a big game. And so the salary you allocate there is just wasted. But we also can see George Kittle put up thirty five Rob Gronkowski at the nineteen point eight Dallas Goddard who we didn't talk about. I wouldn't have played him regardless but Dallas Goddard's role is different than like punt play tight end roles. So I mean you know I I'm fine not playing Dallas Goddard. I just saw Kyle Pitts's name and I wanted to say like I don't know if Kyle Pitts has any upside anymore. But you know it's it's just something that you really need to think about unless you're unless all you do is play your head to heads and like double ups.   It's going to happen very very very extremely rare nine player parlay. Yeah. It's very difficult. But I think they're just like having that like checklist in your mind of does this play of a path to I mean like again not foam over like make me regret not using them. That's the checklist we had with Nick Chubb and Derek Henry in years past. I think that we need to like think about that. Especially when like there are other options because like again that's not like Harvard Miles Gaskin. I use Miles Gaskin last week because there weren't alternatives. It was different this week. So you know just having a read on the landscape and stuff like that. But hopefully that's helpful. If you have a question on it just like hit us up if we didn't clarify enough you know what is upside why does it matter etc etc. Okay. Speaking of upside let's talk about Justin Jefferson years of a transition to the injury section. Adam Thielen left with a high ankle sprain early on this game which is a bummer because you know it's pretty fun. But Jefferson nuts 14 targets 182 yards in a touchdown. Tyler Conklin the conk daddy had nine targets KJ Osborne at seven targets feelings probably going to miss time because they play Thursday. And with a high ankle sprain there's a good chance he misses beyond that too. So how does your view shift of Jefferson? How does your view shift of this entire Vikings offense going forward assuming Thielen misses time. Yeah so high ankle sprain I don't want to project but that might be more than just this week on a short week. So with that obviously we want Justin Jefferson. That's not a huge shock. He got two red zone targets five downfield targets two end zone targets this past week. That's a safe one. I think the biggest shift is it makes Tyler Conklin more viable and it also puts KJ Osborne back on the menu. His snap rate was around 50% for like six straight games but got bad. Yeah it had gotten like to the point where you know and there were weeks where we said hey KJ Osborne relative to the whole slate has upside. That went away but he played 93% of the snaps in week 13 and had seven targets for 47 yards which doesn't sound great but he did have three red zone targets and a downfield target. You want to look for that leverage we're talking upside if that's the theme targets matter but downfield targets are worth a lot more than a general target especially a short target if you separate them out in that regard. That's the same for red zone targets obviously so KJ Osborne actually had some good weight on those targets. I was worth about almost 10 targets worth despite having just seven. Yeah so I think that that makes Osborne a player I do think that increases the appeal of Conklin because he's been a good player and that matters. I think that this does hurt Kirk Cousins quite a bit because you look at his EPA per drop back targeting various players Justin Jefferson he's at 0.65 which is absurd. Like that's bananas that he's been so good at Jefferson but Thelan's at 0.26 and like that's still a good number. Like I know it's not Jefferson's number but it's still a good number and so you take that out of the offense and I mean KJ Osborne's at 0.27 but like part of that's because Jefferson and Thelan are garnered so much attention so like his Cousins EPA per drop back is going to fall across the board I think with Thelan being out. And so I think that what it does is kind of it hurts everyone from an efficiency perspective I think the volume will be enough where it increases Jefferson increases Conklin and Osborne but it really hurts Kirk Cousins. I think it negatively impacts Madison for Thursday negatively impacts I mean Dalvin you know if he comes back before Thelan comes back. So I think volume boost for those guys but overall it's fair to be very concerned about this offense going forward because Thelan is actually a real contributor to that offense from an efficiency perspective. He is but Justin Jefferson is a much more important piece. Correct. So I don't want to overreact in the thing that that really helps me not want to overreact too much is that Adam Thelan's vacating a very good red zone market share of 23% and just like an outlier actually amazing touchdown rate in the red zone. So if you give me a little bit more touchdown juice for Justin Jefferson Tyler Conklin Alexander Madison or Dalvin Cook depending on who's who's back there. I like that. Yeah I think that you know what oh Kirk yeah sorry I caught it eventually. I think that the good thing is we were never considering Kirk Cousins on a full slide to begin with really like it's funny. It's funny because we were talking upside and I knew that and I was like OK Kirk Cousins to me is the prototypical like he has potential for 300 plus yards and multiple touchdowns which he's done in five games this year he's gotten to over 300 yards and two to three touchdowns. And he's like sitting between 20 and 25 Vandal points and like that's his ceiling. And if he hits that ceiling and there's no like 30 plus point games from quarterbacks that can work so it's always slate dependent on how you're viewing upside but his like max ceiling really still is like 25 ish Vandal points if he has 300 plus and multiple touchdowns. Yeah there was a tweet this yesterday about how like I think her cousins tied Brett Farr for the most games with 300 yards to touchdowns and no picks with this Lions game. And it was like put Kirk in the Hall of Fame and I couldn't tell if they were joking because Vikings Twitter is weird. I love Vikings Twitter and I'm happy to indulge but I couldn't tell if they were serious or not. Daryl Henderson active this week but just in case of emergency Sonny Michelle played well I think that's a key thing to focus on here. He took advantage of his opportunity get 24 carries for targets he had 129 yards and scrimmage that is a new season high not just for him but for any Rams player. Michelle played 97% of the snaps he had 46% of the Red Zone chances and you know I think it was Jordan Rodriguez put out a tweet on Friday about how the Rams were underperforming relative to expectations in the ground game. And it was possible they would have made this change had Henderson not got her I'm just like we're trying to read into her tweet because like she's very plugged in. She's very plugged in and but like the vibe I got was that it's possible Michelle may have a legit role going for maybe not 97% but like a legit role going forward because they were displeased with the efficiency from Henderson.  I can't trust anything he says this next week we're going to Monday night Rams versus Cardinals. I don't want to trust anything he says so what is your baseline assumption of what the role will look like in this backfield next week. Probably not 97% snap rate for Sony Michelle. I think it probably scale back a little bit but I don't see why he wouldn't take over the Daryl Henderson role with with Henderson taking over kind of the not really roll but just snap rate in four games that the four games leading into this one. Daryl Henderson was averaging about a 69% snap rate with Sony Michelle at about 30%. I don't see why it still couldn't be about a 70-30 split in favor of Sony Michelle and that would be enough provided that the salary is reasonable. Of course they're Monday night so we won't have to deal with that on the main slate but I really I don't care if Daryl Henderson to full go starting practice this week I would not feel comfortable playing him. I would if the salary was right on like the Thursday through Monday slate consider Sony Michelle because that game has a really high total. Yes it'd be a very good game for on the main slate it's not. I'll be in Arizona this weekend for Fanduel Fanfest going to a Nelly concert on Saturday. I like that he's making a comeback. Yeah I'm excited for this. I need to start re-listening to Nelly to get ready. So if you're in Arizona on Saturday come say hi at Fanduel Fanfest got a Zachary Levi versus Kurt Warner throwing competition which I am endlessly excited for. And then the Fanduel WFBC on Sunday too. But anyway digress. Where are we talking about. Oh yeah so other thing about this is knowing which reporters to trust. I trust Jordan Rodriguez. That's why I put value in her tweet on Friday. I trust Adam Schafter. Adam Schafter tweeted at 4 16 a.m. on Sunday morning that the team was not optimistic that Henderson would play. I know there was like the Mack Jones with Thanksgiving last year but Sheffi don't miss. And so if Adam Schafter says they're not optimistic that Henderson plays I'm going to build lineups under the assumption that Michelle is the lead back. Henderson was active. Jay Glazer had said at 1250 that Henderson may be active but not sure what his role would be. So I trust Sheffi. I trust Jay Glazer. Both their things combined to me said I could trust Michelle which is why I had 60 something percent. And the field thing is like 17 percent Michelle. So knowing which people to trust knowing which ones to view skeptically. But I think that plugged in beat reporters. Great. Adam Schafter. Great. Jay Glazer. Great. He was on the Kyler thing too with his ankle. Some others if they're just kind of throwing stuff at a wall and seeing what six maybe be skeptical. I think that if people you trust decide who you trust. You know that's that's a long thing to sort through. But Sheffi don't miss. Like I think that that is an important thing as well. If he says they're not optimistic Henderson will be good to go. We can use Sunday Michelle with a good amount of confidence. There we go. Miles Sanders left early after aggravating his ankle injury. They've got a by coming up so he's likely good. But his role before the injury was great. He had 24 carries three targets 142 yards a 50 percent red zone share. It was his best usage of the year. But it came with Boston Scott dealing with an illness he did play but he was not didn't seem like he was a full health. Jordan Howard was out. So do you expect Sanders increased role to stick after their bye week. I mean I think it'll be fine. I don't know if it's going to be enough where I want to target it. We're talking upside here. Jordan Howard probably going to be back by the time that they play in week 15 I guess that is just. And we know that he has a very involved red zone role. Boston Scott was sick. He played like four snaps or something. So Miles Sanders has the talent to have upside. I don't know if he's going to have the role with those question marks. And again looking ahead to week 15 is not something we're doing but presumably we will have running backs with better paths to huge games than than Miles Sanders and somewhat of a committee. Would you say that it does increase your view of him though it does but I don't think it's going to be enough where you know even if he's in the 6400 range I don't think that that's going to be like. Yeah enough to tempt me. I think I might be a little bit higher in him than you are just because like this offense has been pretty good. I know then like we'll talk about the Minshew stuff later on but like they've had games like this with Hertz too so I think regardless of who starts like we could potentially see the offense playing well. Sanders had good work two weeks ago. He was getting decent work last week before his injury so you know I think a little bit higher and then you may be but there are still some flaws there especially with Howard potentially taking goal line work and hurts. That's a big thing. They're going to play Washington and weak. They're at home against Washington week 15. That game might have an overall combined pass the run ratio or like a pass rate of like 30%. Yeah which is good for Sanders but yeah I think that they're going to be too many question marks with Scott two weeks recovered from an illness and how we're back in the mix. Fair enough. Corey Davis aggravated his groin injury was ruled out. Help lead to big usage for Elijah Moore 12 targets for those were deep and two were in the red zone. So bad offense is cap upside because you can't score touchdowns if your offense doesn't score and that's an issue but Elijah Moore for deep targets to red zone targets. Zach Wilson played decently well for the most part on Sunday as well. So it's still bad offense. What's your trust level with Elijah Moore right now. Trust not really there but 200 air yards. That helps me view him as someone with upside and I don't this is not a stat I look at but it really feels like his touchdown share not like red zone share like touchdown opportunity. It feels like he's scoring all their touchdowns. That's not the case I get that but like he scores pretty frequently. I have him with five downfield targets but either way four or five is great. Two red zone targets to end zone targets. I'm not going to nitpick that workload within this offense. He's always going to be kind of in play for a one off. If I really need to get there although I don't I try not to do that. They play the Saints next week. That might be a spot to avoid and then buy back in when things get better. I think so too. Their implied team total looks to be 18.75. Well yes I was going to say second worst on the main slate but no there are three other teams below 18. And then there's the Bears on Sunday night with 16.25 so great stuff. Yeah I think that in a matchup like that where he's facing a run heavy team that's going to drag down the pace of the entire game. Really tough matchup. Good defensive line that can take advantage of this Jets offensive line. It is a time on Gummery revenge game and a Sheldon Rankins if he's healthier revenge games. There's that but you know I think that that is a rough spot. We'll buy back in once things open up for Elijah Moore. Logan Thomas scored early. Then a bummer. It's something he tore his ACL cord Adam Schafter. Thomas had three out of the 14 deep targets. John Bates popped up here with four targets. He did have a full game earlier on this year with Thomas out and Ricky Seales Jones out. Didn't do a whole lot there. He ran a lot of routes but wasn't getting a lot of use of John those routes. So I'm hesitant on Bates personally. What about you with Thomas likely done for the year. I just don't have that much interest within this offense as far as past catchers go. If you can't get Terry McLaurin going game by game. I don't know what what the path to upside is for John Bates. I'm no disrespect to John Bates but I was actually going to when we were talking about upside and looking at draft percentages. Terry McLaurin was fairly popular and I understand it as like he he himself has the talent to have upside but his role right now within this offense. And just the way the offense is operating is not that much upside with him. I don't really think I'm going to be tempted by that at all. Yeah. Especially when like he was by Keenan. He was by I mean I like Lockett a decent amount. He was by like legitimate dudes that was I didn't get to anyone like even though it was a high total site spread and they want to be so run heavy which is good for Antonio Gibson but not good for anybody else. We're talking upside. That's the end of this of this show. John Bates forty six hundred. He's going to get you access to higher upside plays at other positions but for John Bates to have like is he going to get to 12 phandal points ever if he scores one of their few touchdowns maybe. But next week we have Travis Kelsie George Kittle Rob Gronkowski Mark Andrews potentially Darren Waller TG Hawkinson Dawson Knox Kyle Pitts. We need like all those guys to sort of be capped at 18 which can happen. We've seen weeks where that happens but that's a long list of great tight ends. I think it might be a week where we need to save some salary to get back up at tight end. Yep it is looking pretty fun next week at tight end. Likely nothing here did want to note that Austin Eckler left early with a it seemed like an ankle injury against the Bengals. I think he's fine. There was like a video of him like walking out of the complex and then he walked back in to get a better shot of him walking out. He's great. I think he's fine just noting it here that he did get banged up late in case he missed practice early on this week. Kenyon Drake left after seven snaps due to an ankle injury. Josh Jacobs played a career high 84% of the snaps 13 carries 52 yards nine targets for 38 yards. Jacobs now has at least three targets native is past nine gains. He has at least four targets and five straight. So no Kenyon Drake sounds like he broke his ankle and is done for the year. How are you viewing Jacobs with his receiving role being what it is right now. Yeah. So you set a career high with nine targets which broke his prior high of seven targets which he got two games ago two games ago. Yeah. So that's really promising. I know you take Kenyon Drake out of the mix. You take Henry Ruggs Darren. And Jelena Schard was out due to COVID but I think you got put on the list this morning which means he might not play next week either. So you take all that into account. Drake left early but Peyton Barber played nine percent of the snaps he played five total snaps. So it wasn't like well Drake's out and so Josh Jacobs still going to play his role and they'll find another way to get someone else involved. We didn't really see that. Josh Jacobs historically for us has been a player we've used as a low upside play. The receiving work really changes that. So I'm pretty high on Josh Jacobs. Who do they play next week. Yeah. So he was over salary this week. I thought I know he was fine but I thought that he was over salary. I had so much tunnel vision. I couldn't even tell you what Josh Jacobs salary was. I was so fixed. Seven thousand. So he's had 30 adjusted opportunities in two straight games. It's very good. Hasn't converted that into a ton of yardage but we know it seems like every time they score it's Josh Jacobs. I don't know if that's like it's kind of like everything with Elijah Moore. I don't know if that's true but like it seems like it. I think that I think he was over salary before but I'm bumping him up a pretty decent amount as a result of this. And what that comes out to is a salary of seventy two hundred dollars for Josh Jacobs. I think that's fair in this matchup. They're big underdogs eight and a half points on the road. But if the receiving works there and the snap rates there he's not going to be scripted out as easily. So I could see that. Yeah I'd say about seven thousand seventy two right in there. He is seventy one. So right between us they cut the middle. Thank you for that. I think it's fair. You know I still have concerns about yardage upside but like it's easier for him to have yardage upside if he's getting targets which he is. So I think that helps a lot. It also helps plan the Chiefs defense. They've been good man. I don't know. I mean I guess Givante just went silly but they've been better with Chris Jones being inside and stuff like that. But yeah that game's going to be weird. I'm already dreading having to figure out that game. I hate it. I hate it so much that I have to like think about like having the Chiefs on the main slate this year has been the biggest blessing on the planet for my bank role. Yeah it's what and I mostly meant like the Chiefs kind of just they're not as focused on stopping the run. Accurate. Accurate. Mike Lennon suffered a concussion late for the Giants. Daniel Jones has not been cleared for contact and may not be able to go. Other quarterback on the roster is Jake Fromm which means I have to go scrub some old Jake Fromm tweets from pre draft before they get resurfaced if he starts. They're on the main slate. Obviously the Giants to be a cross off if Fromm starts but how much would you worry about the Chargers on the other side if Jake Fromm is the starter here? So they are the Chargers are 10 and a half point favorites according to Fandle Sportsbook 45 and a half point over under. That might be too high. That still gives the Chargers a 28 point implied team total which is tied for second best on the slate. I still wouldn't put it past the Chargers to keep that game a little bit close like throughout to go full Charger. Of course I'm going to worry that the Giants have just not really been helpful for a lot of games but presume I mean honestly the Chargers are just like it's Justin Herbert Eckler Keenan and I'm not that high on Mike Williams at this point. So like I probably have a better quarter. What's that? He went for 100 yards this week. Justin Herbert's eight out went up. We're talking about that later. And he had a 20% target share finally on the nose. 20%. So honestly I think it would just bump me off of Herbert unless quarterback is really bleak which we'll find out as we do our salary scroll. But then it comes down to like is there enough for Eckler as the salary right and then Keenan and salary jump up too much. But with the Chargers like it's kind of easy to figure out so I don't have to overthink it too much. That's fair. Okay so let's move now to the role changes for this week. And the big one was Javante Williams indeed a feature back with Melville Gordon 23 carries nine targets a buck 78 in totally yardage. He had four out of six red zone chances. It was everything you hoped he had. We I guess we don't know what Melvin status will be for next week. If Melvin can't go name that salary for Javante Williams at home against Detroit. So Denver eight point favorite 43 and a half point over under so they're in five team totals a decent 25.75. I think that's good enough with what how good Williams is like he's just phenomenal. This is one of those where we could be way apart and I still think that they're both justified. So I'm going to kind of split split the difference here and go like 78 if Melvin sits. It's still a bad offense. I don't care. Yeah I know because you were going to play. Dieris Johnson at 9000 in this match up. I was didn't have to but his role in a competent offense like they're not terrible they're not especially in week 14 context. His role is worth eighty five hundred dollars against the Lions. Like that's that's the kind of role he had. I don't care what he did with it. That's his role. His his his skill is fun. But like from a role perspective against Detroit and Detroit's like I think they're better against the run than perception. That's why I'd say it. But like that's 85. Well you'll you'll be pleased Jim because he's 67. Oh my gosh. So I wasn't I wasn't a huge director of the camera Melvin. Rest up buddy. We'll see you week 15 or later on. I don't know. But like get some Z's in buddy and let's let's let Givante run run wild again. You know he played Sunday night so that's going to have a lot to do with it with the salary being what it is. So but that's like borderline lock button territory of Melvin. That's lock button territory. Yeah. Yeah baby let's go. Doesn't matter if it's 85 or 78 you know 67 is lower than both.  Sick player. Sweet match up. Rest up Melvin. First game with no Debo Samuel the 49ers featured George Kittle and Eli Mitchell Mitchell set a season high with an 85% snap rate. He had 22 carries and three targets. That was even with Michael hasty being active for this game. I had concerns about that. I should not have.  Kittle had 12 targets. He had twice as many as anybody else. Two of those ready targets Brandon IU had six targets with one deep. They get Cincinnati on the road next week. That is a fun game. I think. Where's the total in that game? Oh 47 and a half. One point spread. Joe Burrow is a one point dog. They get those offensive linemen back. Sorry. Anyway name that salary Eli Mitchell and George Kittle for next week. Well if I apply the gym tax to a great snap rate. I gotta say 9700 for Eli Mitchell. No I'd still probably put him. It's a good game. 82. So I think that he is in the Josh Jacobs discussion where he was over salary this week. Because I wasn't sure the passing game role. But then the passing game role was better than I thought it might be. So I'm going to put him at 78. Because it's still not a big dummy. It's still not a big passing game dummy. What do you mean? Just messing with you. I think 78 is fair. And he is 74. Sweet. That's fine. I'll take that. That's totally fine. Good player. A lot of volume. I know he didn't win but like decent offense too. I think San Francisco puts a lot of thought into how they travel. So I'm less worried about traveling to the East Coast. It's also a good afternoon game which may help too. So I think that that's a pretty sweet situation. I think that... Do you just call Cincinnati the East Coast? Close enough. There are people who put Ohio in the Midwest which is like... It's not egregious but it's not optimal. Do you call Ohio the Midwest?  People call you Midwest by the way. That's the thing. I'm very defensive of the Midwest and I don't want Skyline and Chile in the Midwest. That's the big differentiator for me. Central Pennsylvania is not Northeast. It's more Midwest than Northeast. New Hampshire is Midwest. It's Wisconsin. I don't think that should dictate. By that rationale, New Hampshire should be in the Midwest. Anyway, this is my... New Hampshire is actually Wisconsin take for today. I think Mitchell's great at that salary. What about Kittle? Yeah, phenomenal. We know that he has that upside. That buzzword we're talking about. But none of this is surprising. He's one of the best yards after catch players in football. You know, I want to say... If not for some incredible footwork, it would have been such a huge game. But he's capable of that. And I'm sorry but like John Bates isn't. Breaking news! And like anyone who is listening is saying, well the salaries make it difficult to compare the two. Yes, that's why you always have to look at everything slate dependent. And really the goal is to find the lowest salary plays you can find who still have slate altering upside. If that doesn't exist at tight end, it doesn't exist at tight end. That's how you have to view it. And then you have to figure out whether the studs are going to have a big game or not. Yeah. It goes back to like the Thanksgiving slate. It was like if Josh Allen or Dak don't have big games, the lower salary quarterbacks are viable. But if they do, then Josh Allen did, you just can't really make that up. Yeah, and like when there are so many guys, who could go off? It's tight end. It's not Kittle, it's Kelsey. It's Gronk in a really fun game. Mark Andrews with absurd usage recently. The odds, one of those guys goes off is pretty high. So I think that your read that we want to allocate salary to tight end is very, is correct. Kittle for next week checks and it's 71. I could see that being higher, honestly. Yeah. Yeah. So yeah, I think that that's where I'd be with that. So quickly. I mean, I thought that 7,000 was a tiny bit high for a run centric offense. I think he's still worth like 67 because like it wasn't a huge deviation from what I expected, I guess. I would have said about 66, 65 and he's 64. So within that game, I think I'll have some interest there because he's, so he's going to be a player that I probably target because it's like I'm going down as low as I can go. We're still kind of telling myself there's some upside and he should have upside. Yeah. I think that he does. So I'm sad there's no Debo, but this offense is pretty fun when the usage is concentrated. Yeah. We got our first glimpse at the 2021 Saints of Taston Hill note. Hill hurt his finger. So this could all be moved, but he had a good fantasy outing, 264 passing yards and two touchdowns, 11 carries for 101 rushing yards. He was awful as a passer and probably not going to get better with like a jacked up finger. He was at negative 0.29 passing that expected points for drop back. Part of that was because of the picks and those were a negative script. So that is what it is. But Hill last year 0.06 passing that expected points for drop back across his starts. So not looking at the full season across his starts rushing volume in the yardage. He did throw downfield eight times. Eight out was 5.6 yards. Deontae Harris led the team with eight targets. Trayquan Smith and time on Gumray at seven each. Smith was the only saint to have multiple outfield targets. Didn't catch either of them. And weirdly, the team actually had a 60% early down first half pass rate. It was 51% of Trevor Simeon and 50% of James. They were actually more past heavy, which is weird. So there's a lot going on here. Just give me your view of the Saints with Taston Hill with a banged up finger. I would play Taston Hill if I hear that the finger is fine. It's not. And if it's not, then I won't play anyone and I'll continue as usual with the Saints. I think it comes down to, I think that's as easy as it is. Like the Deontae Harris target share can be fine. It's, that's not really what I'm looking for. I need a little bit more than that kind of role within this offense. So I think that he is a good example of what we talked about previously where you want, like you can have just rushing because he had 101 rushing yards and 264 and two touchdowns and still at 24.66 fan dual points. You don't see a lot of guys go for 101 on the ground and still have just 25. Now, if he had had a rushing touchdown, which he very well could, he's at 30. So he has a path to upside, especially against the Jets. But I think that path becomes muddier when his finger is banged up. And it's tough to project there to be a lot of passing efficiency. I can see this being a situation where they take a Derek Henry approach with Taston Hill and just kind of say, go to your broke, you know, because they're in win now. They need to win given their playoff positioning. So I think that that 125 yards and two touchdowns on the ground is very possible. But the odds he reaches that, the odds he reaches like a good passing game, go down with the finger injury. Yeah. So what salary is low enough to tempt you on Taston Hill? I already saw it. It's $7,700. So I cheated. Sorry. No, that's fair. That's too high for me. I haven't looked at other quarterbacks, but with the context I've gleaned so far from the rest of the teams on the main slate, it's going to be too high for me. I still think he would be viable if he were somehow in like the low 7,000s. If that was the difference because the rushing is virtually guaranteed.  So nobody against the Jets next week. I think that it is a bit different given the Jets. So that does help. But I'm also curious where he'll wind up from a roster rate perspective next week because people will talk about the rushing all week. It's already started. That's going to be the key thing all week is Givante. And then what the Chiefs did against the Raiders a couple weeks ago, that'll be a key talking point. And then Taston Hill's rushing will be the key talking points this week. I don't know where I'm at there. So we'll see. But I think he's a consideration, not a cross-off at that salary because the rushing is so good. But it's hard for me to get as jazz when I can't expect the passing to be fun. Okay. I know. I know this all too well, but Lamar Jackson's had for him, three straight down games. Yeah. His salary is 7,900 next week against the Browns. I cannot really perceive a situation in my life that I talk myself into Taston Hill over Lamar Jackson at very similar salaries. Well, league MVP versus 32-year-old Swiss Army knife. I don't know. I know Lamar has not played like the MVP this year, but still, I agree. Okay. We got a two-game sample now in the Rams with Odell Beckham at full snaps. And in those games, Cooper Cup has a 26% target share. Then Jefferson's second at 22%. Odell's at 20%, but leads in deep target share at 33%. Van is at 28% there, whereas Cup's at 22%. So two-game sample is still very small. I think the encouraging thing is that both Odell and Van are getting downfield work and good overall work. Cup, like his shares are lower, but I don't care. I think he's still like, I'm not going to nitpick that one. I think all three great out well for me based on the uses they've got in these first two games. What about you? Yeah. It's going to be one of those offenses that we can virtually always turn to. Matthew's never got a little dinged up, but I think he's fine overall. And then it's just going to come down to whether we can get up and justify to Cooper Cup in our lineups. And then if not, which of the two... I'll call them both secondary receivers that we prioritize. For me, do you think it's going to be Van Jefferson? Just because the yardage juice seems to be a little bit more there than with Odell, who really built himself out with the touchdown yesterday. But I have really no issues. I'm sorry, Jim. I cannot get to Tower Higby really myself. Oh no, I had his numbers on the sheet and did not say them because he's the new fake player. So someone's been fake each week. I unfaked T Higgins in time to ease him this week, which is good. So I bailed myself out there. I could have made a very grave mistake and did not. Who is the fake person this week? There was someone who was fake. Can you convince me that X person is real? I can't remember who it was. I think it's Tyler Higby. Convince me, Tyler Higby exists. You can't. You can't convince me. I've never tried to, but... That's accurate. I'm talking to previous Jim. Convince me, and he can't either. He's sitting there looking at his bankroll with Tyler Higby. And it ain't great. So yeah, I think that to me it's cup in a tier of his own gap. Gap. Van 2A, Odell 2B. I'm interested in the fact that Van actually was on more rosters than Odell this week. I was shocked because I had two lineups, you know, differentiating across single entry, duplicated them, except put Van and one and Odell and another. Under the assumption that Odell would be more popular, the Odell one is in a smaller field, the Van one in a larger field. That was the only difference I made. And I was kind of surprised to see Van. It's probably because Odell was quote-unquote questionable, but still surprised me, I would say. Yeah, I think I can come down to, and we've had these situations in the past, like with other teams where it's like, you just play the guy who has lower buzz around him entering the week. The Michael Crabtree and Mari Cooper equation. Michael Crabtree always had less buzz. He did. Oh, it's pretty much tomorrow. One-eyed Jack is saying that I already faked Tyler Higbee. So Tyler Higbee has been already, so I don't even know why I had his name here, because he's not a real player. He's already faked. I'll find a new one for next week. We'll figure this out. It's not to Higgins though. Is it Miles Gaskin? Yeah, maybe. Although I've benefited from Gaskin, like two different slates this year, so maybe I shouldn't do that. That seems kind of mean to him. The nice to me.  Antonio Gibson said a career high in snap rate in his first game with no JD McKissack played 82% of the snaps, 23 carries and six targets. We look at the four games since the buy, three of which were with JD McKissack. Gibson is at 24 carries, four targets, and 31.3 carries plus 2x targets per game. He's at 108 yards per game. So if McKissack misses more time, name that salary for Antonio Gibson in week 14 against Dallas. There's another 80% plus snap rate with... Who had the same exact workload? We just Jacobs. Josh Jacobs. Well, no, Eli Mitchell. 85% snap versus 82, 23, and six versus 22 and three. So we're getting to the point where, look, guys are banged up, and yes, true like incredible upside exists at the superstar level of running back, which I don't actually think we have a whole lot of on the main slate. So we could get numerous new feature backs, which is kind of weird to call it Josh Jacobs, Antonio Gibson, like new feature backs, but they really weren't. They are now, I don't know, throw them up there in like the 77 range. I still don't love the offense, but... That's where I was. Yeah. 77 is I think the exact number I would have said. And Gibson against Dallas is at 74. So they did jack him up more, but it's fair. You know, I think that 74 is fair. It's not a massive bargain like we have with Givante. But like that's on the good end, where I think between Gibson, Jacobs, Mitchell, we've got, and potentially Givante, we've got rock solid mid-range plays again and running back this week. Yeah. So the thing that I'll probably talk about plenty on Thursday is like, yeah, give me George Kittle because I have like Josh Jacobs with an 80% snap rate. Right. Which I haven't really had a lot this season. The mid-range like roughly 6,000 to 7,000 range, which isn't quite the mid-range, but like at running back has been pretty bad. So a lot of traps this year. A lot of guys who you have to convince yourself are going to have bigger roles in a game, which can't really do, because it's not how it works generally. Yeah. We might have that this week, even up in the 7,000 range. So I'm pretty excited for the week 14 main slate already. And there's no Jonathan Taylor on next week's slate, which means, I mean like I'm bum because I love Jonathan Taylor, but also no Moskaskans, so one less guy there. The Lions were committee-ish at running back without Deandre Swift. Jamal Williams played less than half the snaps. He still had 17 carries, but just one target. So to me, if we're not going to get 80% snap rate here, I can ignore this backfield. Do you agree? Yeah. This is what we've been dealing with. We don't want to deal with these types of backfields. We want to deal with like the Josh Jacobs and Tony Gibson's. And I thought that the snap rate would be better. I liked Williams plenty. Again, I did pivot off of him for the most part by Sunday because we for sure had Sony and Michelle. And the reason I got off of Williams instead of Gibson was just simply due to the implied team total, the offensive expectations being really low for the Lions relative to the other value backs. We also have a new fake player via One-Eyed Jack on YouTube, Leviska Chanel. I need no convincing. You're right. Yes. Yes. Accepted. There was a bit of a non-change in the Cowboys backfield despite the buzz about Zeke maybe being limited or sitting. Zeke had a 66% snap rate. Tony Pollard played 39% of the snaps. Elliott led with 13 carries with Pollard. 7, Pollard had four targets to Zeke's 3. The team threw all four plays. They were in the red zone. Pollard and Zeke each had a red zone target. So there was no change. They're facing Washington next week. Pretty good game. How are you viewing this backfield right now? I'm probably on a main slate going to avoid it. I agree. I don't think that there's enough from Zeke health-wise. And it's weird that I'm sticking up for Zeke because I'm usually anti-big contracts. Establishment. Yeah. But he's still been league average while being very clearly not 100% or close to it. Tony Pollard I love, but you can't will Tony Pollard into a 70% snap rate. It doesn't work. If we could have, it would have happened a long time ago. Sure would have. You need the long touchdown. It's always unfair to do this, but according to the next gen stats, his expected rushing yards this past week, 21.6. He ended up with 71 because of that long run. Yes, you want guys to overperform that number, but again, take that away. And we're looking at someone who had seven carries, four targets, 39% snap rate. Yeah. That's not a DFS target. Right. So that's what we can't use Pollard. The reason I can't use Zeke is that the yard upside has not been there since in the injury. He has not topped 76 since week six. So can't get to Pollard right now. Can't get to Zeke right now. And that's okay. I can be okay ignoring it back. The one less team to consider. I can go to the receivers instead. That's totally fine. Russell Gage finally showed some upside. My bad. I made a bet with our colleague Austin Swain that Amara Cooper would outscore Russell Gage this week because Cooper was like on the COVID list. That was before it was reported. He was like sitting out of warmups, but like I was still wrong because Russell Gage had 130 yards on Sunday. What the F? It's almost double his previous high for the season. Did it on 12 targets. We got a six game sample without Calvin Ridley. In those games, Kyle Pitts and Russell Gage are tied for the team leading targets at 21%. Pitts does lead with a 41% deep target share. Whereas Gage is at 18%. I would also note that Gage had a zero target game in that sample, which means could be even better or it could mean he has a zero target game in his range of outcomes. So is this enough for you to consider Russell Gage and DFS? It's still going to take the right situation. It's going to take the right salary. It's going to take a really promising matchup. It's going to go back to what we talked about. My first trend last week for upside from value receivers, I really need it to be indoors, which of course it's the Falcons, so we'll get some of those down the stretch. Good, like really weak past defenses. You got to get a little bit nitpicky when it comes to projecting out these value receivers, but he's really the 1B here or like the 1A. I poured a sample specifically from passes from Matt Ryan since Week 8 without Calvin Ridley. Basically the same thing. It's like a one target difference between these behind pits. The main issue is I think touchdown equity, not even yardage potentially, but like this is just a pretty bad offense and everything sort of points that Kyle Pitts having some touchdown regression too. So that maybe it's overthinking it, but I'm really going to need like the perfect check, the perfect checklist to get to Russell Gage. I'm guessing their salaries will be pretty similar. I would just use pits. I know like he still has better upside, I think. I think that's, I don't know, maybe I'm just being like stubborn, which shocker. So when have I ever been stubborn? Yeah, never. Gage is actually higher salary. What in the world? Okay. Yeah, okay. So they're at Carolina and Carolina is coming off of a buy. So that's not great. Is this the second time they've played this year? You can't remember a first time. No, I don't think so. I think it's their first time, but still, I mean. That's like bad game. What about, just because we're talking about this offense, did you see enough from Cordero? Like, because his snap rate remains kind of low. It was like 50-50 with him, Mike Davis, but he just gets good work. He does more with it too. Yes. But we just don't like the offense. So he had 96 yards this week, 135 last week, 136 in his previous healthy game. The yard upside has still been there despite kind of weird usage, 21, 22, and 23 carries plus two X targets. So it's fine, but it's not, I think he's over salaried if that answers your question. Yeah. Also the Falcons did play the Panthers on Halloween. Matt Ryan went 20 of 27 for a buck, that was the game where Ridley was ruled out before this, that like 11-30. That was that game. So second time around matchup. Nope. Yeah. Nope. That game doesn't exist. It's a fake game. The Dolphins got Devontae Parker back this week for the second game since week four. Parker tied of Mike Gasicki for the second most routes on the team at 31, but just five targets. If we look at the three games with Tua Tunga-Valoa and Devontae Parker healthy, Jalen Waddle has a 28% target share. My gosh. He has 33% of the deep targets and 46% of the red zone targets.  They're not in the red zone a ton, but units were not worthy. Devontae is at a 22% target share with 27% deep. Gasicki is at 16% overall, 27% deep. I am jacking out Jalen Waddle in my mind. I had worried about upside previously, but he's been getting more of that recently. The problem is that from a salary perspective, this is not like a thing to say, hey, Jalen Waddle's doing stuff. Everyone knows that. Devontae Parker likely pretty low in that department. They're on a buy this week. So it'll be real. I think they get the jets after the buy though. So where are you at on Devontae Parker and Jalen Waddle right now? Yeah, I like Jalen Waddle plenty. I won't be alone in that. I was trying to get my spreadsheet sorted to those games we're talking about. So in those games, because it's a small sample of just three games, if I look at target per route rate, Jalen Waddle is at 29%, which is phenomenal. I think Cooper cups at like 30% for the full season. Parker is at 23%. Gasicki down at 20%. Of course, the hierarchy is going to be Waddle and then debate between Gasicki and Parker, depending on how tight end and in value or see your look. But I think I could go back in on Parker assuming that and with the five targets, not a whole lot there.  And I think that he'll be absolutely on the radar. I've seen enough from that Waddle. What's going to depend on how high the salary gets? Because if you put him up in the low 7,000, then he's with all the bona fide, like tier two slate altering potential guys. I'm not saying he doesn't have that, but it's a little bit less inclined to go there over some other options. I agree with every word you just said. Thank you. To a T. I think we're on the same page. Okay, Devonte Freeman played 68% of the snaps to the Ravens this week. Highest mark for Ravens running back all season. He had 14 of 17 running back carries, eight out of 10 running back targets, and a 14 carry eight target workload with a 68% snap rate, if you ignore the name, is very good. So is this enough where you would actually consider using Devonte Freeman in daily fantasy? A question I didn't think I'd ask this year. Yeah, I picked up Freeman and dropped him like seven times this year. Seven's a bit of an exaggeration, but I was like, there's never going to be enough. And this could be enough. Within this Ravens offense, you always have to put a hard cap of 70% for any running back just based on how they work. It's been the case for years now. They played a Browns on the road next week. Nice old 42 and a half point over under just a two point spread pricey. But it's a two point spread in favor of Cleveland, which is wild considering that Baltimore was a four and a half point favor against Pittsburgh this week. And honestly, this may sound outrageous, but what's the difference between Pittsburgh and Cleveland right now? So I could see it if the salary is in like the 62 range. And there's nothing else valuable at running back. But if it's any higher than that, I think I'd have to worry. I wouldn't quite project eight targets for him again. Yeah. I think he's like. Gaskin. Gaskin ish. Yeah. He's Gaskin ish. So if there are no alternatives, I can get there. But if I have really good alternatives, like if I have Givante Williams, no, like I'm not going there. I'm not going to do it. So quit asking. So he had this great snap rate, great overall workload, scored on the ground, ended up with 18.2 Fando points. Is that his ceiling? That is his highest output all season. Is that his best case scenario? It's probably close to it. Yeah. About 100 total yards in a touchdown. He is $63. So if we have no alternatives, sure. Fine. But I'm not actively seeking him out yet, despite that. Okay. Let's go to situations to monitor what other stuff stood out to you this week with that we have not yet discussed. So this one's specifically for Jim, because we saw Chris Godwin have a fantastic workload.  You can't. But I think you're projecting or something. I said, this is a question for Jim. And you're getting all defensive. Chris Godwin had 17 targets. Mike Evans had 10. Rob Gronkowski Leonard for not had eight each in four games with Gronkowski and no Antonio Brown. Mike Evans leads with a 20% target share with nine targets per game. Godwin's close behind at 19% Gronk at 18% for not at 14%. Is there anyone you view as the top priority here? And the real reason I wanted to ask this is, do you see a roll shift for Chris Godwin? No, but I didn't need a roll shift to use him because I used him this past week. Let me read you verbatim from my piece on Friday. Godwin has put up yardage totals of 74, 65 and 24 in the three game sample with Gronk and Mike Evans and no Antonio Brown. That's underwhelming and you understand why given the lack of down feel volume. That does not mean Godwin is incapable of big games. It's just not his most likely outcome. That keeps Godwin from being a key standalone play. But if this game features a bunch of points, Godwin likely contributes a healthy chunk of the time. So I think that his floor is the same. I think his ceiling is exactly what it was. Not a roll change. I'm finding them in games that I want to stack. They get Buffalo next week. I want to stack that game. Somebody use Chris Godwin. I don't want to roll change because I think that he is what I thought he was. Gold star. Let's talk about Mike Williams and potential roll change. Mike Williams got back up to a 20% target share, 20.0 on the nose. That's not great for a single game. Yardage upside returned this week. I do not want to overreact. I think he's now, I want to say eight out of nine games. I guess now it's nine out of whatever. He's got two games with at least a 20% target share since week four. Do you think that this is a return closer to the early season stuff, or do you think he's going to be back around 15, 16% next week? I want to talk about the charges and philosophical changes because that will correlate with the Mike Williams stuff. Let's return to that later. Don't call him Mike Evans. Sorry, you're right. I thought that you were messing up Mike Evans when he said Mike Williams because they're both mics. They're both really big. We both go to football and I was very confused, but I was like, oh, you're actually changing subjects. I caught on eventually, a little slow. Just a small one that I keep checking on, but since week five with T. Higgins back, he actually leads the Bengals in target share at 25.2%. Chase is at 24.1%. Tyler Boyd, 15.8%. It's not a knock on Jamar Chase. It's just reassurance that T. Higgins is not a distant number two. It's not fake. Yeah, he's not fake. He's not a distant number two within this offense. And then Alexander Madison did have the role that a lot of people thought he would. 86% snap rate, 22 carries, three targets, which I think literally might be Elijah or Eli Mitchell's exact numbers there. Right. He did lose Sunday in Wangu and Wangu was dealing with an illness, but not enough for I think you worry like he's fine. But, you know, he is what he thought. We thought he was. For me, Clyde Edwards, E-Lair's role coming out of the buy was underwhelming, I thought. He had 14 carries and three targets. He played 50% of the snaps. I thought they might get him more involved. They did not. He still actually ran fewer routes than Dara Williams. It's tough for C. H. to have a big role in that current setup. So I was hoping for more. Didn't get it here. Dave Montgomery finally got some work in the passing game. He had nine targets in Sunday. His previous high was four. He had 39 adjusted opportunities. 141 yards, both of which were also seasoned highs. I don't know if it's the new norm, especially adjusting fields likely back next week, and they're not the main slate, but just quickly, does this change how you're viewing Montgomery at all? I don't think drastically, no. I think it increases his ceiling, but doesn't change anything else, which is fine. I'll take that. I'll take an increased ceiling, but does it increase the odds he gets that ceiling? Maybe not. I thought it was good, and I'm encouraged by it, but I don't want to overreact, given I'm not going to project him for nine targets going forward. Yeah. Okay. Finally, a sad one. You can omit Rashad Bateman from lineups. You probably should have given the yardage stuff previously, but now officially ran a route on just 41% of drop backs this week. He was at 56% last week.  So hopefully we'll see you in 2022, Rashad Bateman. Let's move now to philosophical changes and talk about that charges offense, because the chargers let Justin Herbert cook. His eight-out was 10.2. His season-long mark entering somehow was 7.0. What? He went deep on 26% of his attempts. That's up from 14%. Led to big days from Mike Williams, Jalen Geithen, Keenan Allen scored twice. So I think that's the shift here, is that they let him rip it deep more. I'm not sure if that is sustainable. I think that Brandon Staley is a very smart coach. I'm not sure if that can overcome Joe Lombardi's baseline as an offense, which is some not going deep as often as you would like. So I think to me, I'm going to up them a bit. But I'm not going to drastically change the way I view this offense, which means still going to think Keenan Allen is going to get a massive target share. I'm still going to think that Mike Williams has a wide, wide, wide, wide range of outcomes, which does include a high end, but doesn't include a super high probability of getting there. So to me, I boost upside up a bit, but don't change things too much. What about you? We saw the big shift in pass rate from them in non-garbage time situations, but it just like it comes down to who all are you really considering from this offense? I don't need to consider more than like four guys. Herbert, Allen, Mike Williams, Eckler, sick, log out. Yes. Yes. This goes back to Mike. No, you got me doing it. Mike Williams. Are you considering him like heavily? Would you say that you? Yeah. So I had a lot of Herbert this week and a lot of, I had enough burrow and a lot of sacks that game. I had 44% Keenan, 17% Mike Williams. That's not that high. Did this week increase you then on Mike Williams? Because for me, it really didn't. I mean, it increased a little bit because I think that the odds he gets a ceiling or higher, they're going to let it rip. But it's not like, if I had redone my exposures, I would say go from 17% to 25%, maybe somewhere in there. Okay. So a slight shift up, but not a huge one. So it's, I agree to shift with offensive philosophy. I don't really think that it changes who I'm considering though. Yeah, I agree. And I don't think it changes the hierarchy of how I rank them. One considering them either. Exactly. Yep. Okay. We're on the same page. Nice. I would assume that Jalen Hertz is back after the Eagles bye week, but it doesn't case Gardner-Minshew starts again, whether that week or later on this year. It's worth noting they were still pretty run heavy. The team's early down first half pass with Minshew was 45%. So even with Minshew, they're going to pound the rock. I had some Devontae Smith this week under the hope that they would increase their pass rates. And it led to Dallas Goddard going nuts. Devontae did nothing. Does this change your view of Goddard and Devontae at all? Or are we just kind of hanging out? Still low on them. I know Goddard converted this week, but they've had by far the lowest and garbage time pass rate over there. Five games entering this week and it did not change with the court direction. I think he's fine. And it's like I used him on the one PM only slakes. There was no Kittle. There was no, I mean, Gronk was there. There's no Kittle, no Moro. No, I had Gerald Everett. I shouldn't admit that publicly given the way he played, but yeah, I did. I think he was fine there. I think he's fine. But if there's legit competition, tougher. So he's fine. He is what he is. And Devontae, very good player. Not the kind of offense I want to target a receiver in typically, not the kind of games I want to target a receiver in typically either. So that's where I'm out there. Let's go to the salary scroll taking a look at the main slate for week number 14 over on FanDuel.com. Great place. Okay. Starting off a quarterback. Shout out what you see. A lot of studs. I see Tom Brady at $8,200. And I think I'm going to go back for the third straight week. I could see that. Josh Allen on the same game as 88. I think both of those are great numbers. And I feel like that's going to be what I build around this week is those two. It does feel as though Dak Prescott could go a little bit forgotten at 81. I'm always a little bit hesitant with them outdoors. Not super, not as much as I used to be because I think they're just a better offense now, but a little bit, tiny baby bit hesitant. Lamar at 79 I think is going to really make us pause and think. I think he and Josh Allen will be like the quote unquote optimizer plays the week, but that's fair. I'm not going to play Taysom Hill then. With Lamar being there? Yeah. With Lamar being there. I'm not going to play Russell Wilson. Why is Drew Lax $7,200? Because I guess it's an injury against the line. It's Detroit. That's why. Okay. Derek Carr is 72. High game, high total game. You know, a game will probably stack. However, with Marcus Mariota justifiably taking some goal line work because he's a better quarterback. I'm not going there. Joe Burrow, 71. That I could do. I could very much do, especially to get their offensive lineman back this week. I could very, very easily see myself doing Joe Burrow at 71. And if his hands are right. Yeah. He looked really gross. He looked to be in pain. Yeah. I mean that like his pinky was like the size of mine and I'm a little bigger than Joe Burrow. So it probably shouldn't be the same size. But yeah. 71 for him. Like Joe Burrow. We talked about upside. I think although he has not necessarily shown it at times this year. A lot of that's because of touchdowns being all Joe Mixon. If those touchdowns break his way. I think 30 is within his range of outcomes. Right? Or no? Um, that's like 95th percentile for him. Yeah. Okay. But here's the thing. At 71, 25, 26, 27 Vandal points can do it. At. Yeah. I think the salary being what it is. It's not like it's a Kirk Cousins like 75 or something, which I know is kind of splitting hairs, but 400 is pretty sizable when it comes to quarterback. So I would say to me standouts are Josh Allen. Brady Lamar Burrow. And then Mahomes and Dak kind of hanging out and lurking. I guess. Right. I mean, I could talk myself into already Helen Mahomes, Herbert Brady, Dak Lamar and Burrow. I can't do Herbert with the way the Giants set up. I can play. I can play Justin Herbert against the Giants. I think I'll, I'll be all right. Go ahead. I'm saying I could make the case for it. I'm not saying he's going to be a. That's fair. Okay. Moving to running back, speaking to Justin Herbert, his running back Austin Eckler is the highest salary guy in this late at $9,200. And we have three backs above 78. That's it. So we are going to be able to get the tight end. We might not need this. So again, going back to upside, does Joe Burrow have 30 point upside? Yeah. If things fall his way, do we need to go to Joe Burrow forgo the guys who definitely have 30 point upside in good games whenever we don't have that much salary we need to allocate to running back? Probably not. Very fair. I would say don't write off Joe Nixon salary back down to 85. Again, I want to keep an eye on the offensive linemen. They're center and right guard, right tackle route this week. So if they're back, I can see that being a pretty good situation for them keeping an eye on Nixon. I would not write him off after this week. Is there, do you have a read cause you're, you know, way more about injuries than I do. Do you have a read on Alvin Kamara?  He was limited this whole past week. Now it's 10 days. So he'll play. So Kamara at 9,000 against the Jets. I feel like if he plays, he's ready to play. Yeah. But like it's with Taysum means he'll lose some goal on work and like that's a pretty big concern to have for a guy at 9,000. Yeah. He's actually been one of the worst running backs relative to expected yards on the ground. So hopefully he comes back and is a little bit more, a little bit healthier. Yeah. I think it depends. And if Ram check an arm center back to, because if, if you get that offensive line against, you know, Sheldon Rankin's Mrs. Passwick against the Jets defense, I mean, Quinn Williams is still very good. But like that can be, I just think that 9,000 is a lot for a guy who has any red flags. Yeah. So I think the question at running back is going to be does Austin Eckler, Alvin Camara or Joe Mixon have so much potential over all of the 7,000 backs that you need to prioritize them? Yeah. Or can you save 2,000 ish from Eckler to like an Eli Mitchell or Antonio Gibson and then reallocate that back into other positions? Right. I think that's the right question to ask. As far as a mid-range goes, Lenny is 76 tough matchup with Buffalo, but you know, I don't think I have to do that. Not when Eli Mitchell is 74, Antonio Gibson 74 in games that we'll like, I think a lot. Yeah. Josh Jacobs 71 a game we'll like. Potentially Juventa. ZQ69. That's not low enough for me to get there, given the lack of yards upside, but like that's where he should be, right? That feels about right. Yeah. That's the one I would have put him at 7,000, show him a little respect, but. Juventa at 67 is the highlight here, obviously. So like, can we get Juventa, Jacobs, Gibson and Mitchell? Mid-range is sick. Build around that, go from there. Yeah. So I don't think we need Juventa Freeman at 63. Jamal Williams at 62. I think that's probably a little bit. That's probably fair. No. Not if he's going to split sentence. Right. I'm saying it's just salary. Not that I have interest in him. Do you want to say Forman 59 has a great red zone role for a terrible offense? I think they're like Hilliard and I think they're mechanically back this week. Or not. Sorry. Now, Mick Nichols got my Mick passing game backs mixed up. So that's the kind of play that I'm highlighting as you really don't need that. Yeah. There's one name. Uh-oh. Uh-oh. What is it? Don't do it. Ah. Do you know who it is? No. Well, let me guess. Let me guess. How low are we talking? Low salaried, for sure. How low salaried? Uh, lower than Sonya Michelle this week. Lower than 53. Yeah. Like I'm not going to do it. Oh, Amir Abdullah? Yeah. Okay. Against the Falcons? He's outstabbed. Not going to do it either. He's outstabbed Chuba Hubbard in four straight games. He tweeted that. Well, I don't, I don't go on Twitter. Nor should you. I'll especially not, don't read my tweets, but. A majority of the snaps without, with McCaffrey leaving early in week 12, bi-week to prep. I feel like they know. I feel like they know what they have from Chuba Hubbard. If anyone's going to get, if anyone's going to get heavy receiving work, it's going to be Abdullah. I don't think I have to do it. I don't think it gets me access to enough, but I'm a little bit tempted at least. Yeah. I don't think I'll do it either, but like, it's a good flag. Good to mention it. Okay. Moving to wide receiver. What stands out to you there? I see one thing that stands out to me. Well, I want to see if you flag the same thing. Uh, is it like a low, is it someone under salaried? No. Well, not necessarily over salaried, but like a priority for me. Um, it's pretty high salary guy. Diggs? Diggs weak, baby. He's back. $8,200 against the Bucks. I don't think that's egregiously low. I don't think it's egregiously low, but I think it's appropriate, and I think I'm going to use a lot of them. Yeah. I mean, I'm cool with that. His role has gotten a lot better. Diggs. Side line. Touchdown. Whenever I hear his name, the Joe Buck call comes into my head for some reason. Anyway, uh, what else stands out to you at receiver? Um, Keenan Allen at 76, I think is creeping up a little bit high. It's still a cash gameplay, but like, you know, that does, that's enough. So the thing that really jumps out to me is that there's a pretty big teardrop at receiver in terms of salary. We have Tyreek, 87, Diggs 82, Lam 78, Godwin 77, Allen 76, and then nobody else is above 73. And usually again, like upside is tied to salary. So if we just trust that, then we really got to think things through in terms of salary allocation. Jamar Chase at 72. A Chase burrow stack is going to be very affordable. I mean, Higgins is 68. That's pretty affordable too. I don't think I have to get to burrow, but I do think that Chase and Higgins will be really good plays in a tight script. Yep. Amari is 67. Has 10 weeks to get over his, 10 weeks, 10 weeks. Sorry, 10 days to get over, get his conditioning back up from COVID. Um, the mid 6000 range looks like it's a lot of dudes who are on IR. Um, so I feel like it's a good week to go back to Amari at 67. Potentially. Good week. Good week to at least monitor him. Potentially, yeah. The 6000 range is pretty barren until we get to IUC at 64. I wanted to ask you, speaking of Amari Cooper, Terry McClaren still 71. Can you see yourself? If you play Dak, if you play Amari, is there enough for you with McClaren at 71 or is it just a no? Well, I think it's a good example of like a guy I used in bringbacks only. Cordero Patterson this past week. I used only in bringbacks and they didn't have a bringback in every lineup with Tom Brady. I think that would be the McClaren formula where I have him at times in lineups with Dak and Amari, but I have or not Dak and Amari, they're like with Dak. But I also have some where I just don't bring it back I'm yeah, I'm with you. I would still consider him but really not feel like I have to bring it back if I play Dak. Yeah. Gallop 61. I was going to say that. Yeah. I can get behind that. Feels like a drop. I know you'll say no outright and I don't blame you, but Amon Ross St. Brown has had a bit of a change in his role. I wanted to bring it up but it wasn't enough. He's been playing like basically 90 rounds the past three games. Team high target share but a very low a dot. So I'm not there but like it's important at least to flag because rookie specifically but other players too will see changes in roles down the stretch especially for teams that are not playing for anything. No. I think Josh Reynolds 53 might be better on that team. But I don't want to go to them anyway so it doesn't matter. I think James and Crowder could get some buzz at 55. I've seen him all over waiver wire articles for this week. Why? I don't know. What has he done? I had six targets. Oh boy. Fun fun fun. Six targets and Zach Wilson anytime you can get that can't turn that down. If Daniel Jones were to be cleared and Tony were to play. 5300 is is viable there would not feel great about it but like you know I could get behind that. So I think this is going to be a very similar week to week 13 where we have value running back we don't necessarily have to allocate a ton of salary to running back although we don't have that option as much this week and the 5000 range at receiver is quite bleak. There is the Jags number one wide receiver Laquan Treadwell 51. I'm joking please do not use Laquan Treadwell just want to make that very very clear. I keep when I see him on red zone which is rare he's wearing 18 I get flashbacks the Chris Conley but it's not him. He stole his number they didn't retire it. Not yet. It's like seeing C.H. and 25 on the cheese it's like this is weird I'm unsettled. Okay tight end. A lot of good dudes. I think that Mark Andrews on the bottom end of this range is going to go overlooked because Kelsey's in a great game Cattle's coming off a huge game Gronk's in a great game coming off a huge game Andrews the usage I think he has 10 targets in like three of his past five games. So starting this past week 9 10 10 8 10 7 6 13 8 7 5 5 so he had basically five targets a game to start the season but it's really been different for him lately. I want to track sentiment on him this week because he could be a really good pivot for a tournament this week. Where we had a Dawson Knox at 6000 Dawson I'm the one who knocks where are we I mean he's over salary maybe I mean like he's over salary could you include him in game stacks I'm sure yeah but that's that's too high of a salary he needs multiple well he needs at least one touchdown potentially two touchdowns he's got over he scored last week and in week four sorry I'll sure go ahead Jim pencil him in for two touchdowns just like Mike and sticky was for 150 yards right yeah but no he's gotten over 50 yards twice like yeah he he can get 17 Fandall points it's not really the baseline like he's not on par with those other guys above him and I don't want to be fooled into thinking that he's in that conversation would you use foster maro at 52 when stacking that chief's Raiders game his role wasn't as voluminous as I had hoped that was a bit of a bummer they actually had a pretty high non-garbage time pass rate this week but it didn't really flow to maro yeah which is weird because we had a week without Darren Waller so this wasn't just a sheer projection it was like we saw this happen he was involved the week before too with waller leaving early and then it was kind of forgotten about yeah I think that if so what does he get you really I mean probably would he got you that one week we're at 16 to touchdown but that's it where you kind of need the other guys to not do what they can do basically yeah and so you're kind of making like a you are shorting you're doing a short parlet you're shorting all four of these guys into parlay if Kelsey, Kittle, Gronk and Andrews I don't think parlay would hit that but also you're saying okay maro might get me like a Tyreek mini-stack and I also want to play Josh Allen with Stefan Diggs in that lineup other than that like there's not a whole lot of salary to to allocate so it's kind of a narrow reason to play someone down at that salary yeah I agree okay that's my first view of this anything else for you at tight end no it's the top guys and I don't want to get sucked into Evan Ingram just defense is 3,000 throwing it out there I don't think I'll you know just I'm just I'm just saying I'm just asking questions Brandon I'm just asking questions they are going to be the optimizer pick of the week boo bad they're going to be like they're going to be like third best where it's enough that every time I see it I'm like man I should just play them Falcons are 35 cheese are 37 I feel like we'll have low salary defense we can use this week Browns are 41 okay note to future me I think we've kind of gone through this already where it's similar to last week where pepper that mid-range at running back take advantage of some guys with roles that are better than their salaries would indicates and use that salary mostly a tight end is that kind of where you're at right now yeah this week then we have like early on this season we've had no viable under salaryed running backs I think we have them this week so that changes the need to spend top dollar for your running backs and then instead we can allocate that to tight end and quarterback as well that's where I'm at too so I think that digging into the roles of those mid-range guys deciding how many of them we can lean on and feel good about and then going from there will be the key for us this week that is all that we have here for today on the heat check but a lot of stuff coming up this week of course Tom Vecchio has you covered with NBA and NHL via the Daily ISO and the Daily Deak right here on the number fire daily fantasy podcast heat Austin Swain is back with USC as well PGA coming back after the new year so make sure you are subscribed to the number fire daily fantasy podcast feed we of course are live on YouTube for these heat checks as well Monday at 9 a.m. Thursday at 10 a.m. hit subscribe there on the Fando YouTube page get notifications as we go live each and every day Brandon if people have questions for you on your favorite media Twitter where can they find you there I'm at Goodwill 13 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 Fando podcast network at Fando podcast big thank you to everyone for tuning in for today good luck to you on your Monday night single game slates we'll talk to you once again on Thursday to get you said for week number 14 this has been the heat check fantasy podcast powered by number fire


Okay, hi guys Anthony here. We've just got initial jobless claims coming out shortly, so Definitely, I'm interested As much as you are to see how this comes out and this does come after what we saw last time which was this of course Which was US posting record Laos. This was the graphic from last week You remember a record figure and it dates back to going to the you know the 1960s Basically since the data set began and you can see the quite incredible Jump that we've had here Interestingly, you know in terms of layoffs obviously the unemployment rate Skyrocketed in the global financial crisis. We had a deep recession However, it was much more graduated in terms of the the feed-through effect in more nationwide job losses across America as compared to say a new immediate existential threat given it's a Pandemic health crisis meaning an immediate amount of jobs just halted or people laid off meaning there's an incredible jump Unprecedented in this sense the question mark for me now is about how does today's number come out? Expectations for three and a half million. We've got a range about one at the low Up to around five and a quarter at the high as I've said in the briefing this morning I've heard some people talk as as fantasy for those 10 million. I think that would be I'd like to say that's crazy talk, but who knows? I mean definitely from a market impact point of view the closer it gets up and towards that type of figure kind of North of six going towards seven eight million. Certainly the more violent and aggressive that initial knee-jerk reaction will be for sure But yeah couple of different things then to have a quick talk about for one Let's just talk about from a trading perspective Couple of the charts and one is I just want to refresh your memory about how exactly the S&P 500 Reactive the last time we had the jobless numbers now This is the S&P over the course of a kind of a week's activity and you can look at here on the far Left-hand side. This was the last US jobless claims number. So I've just shown you the graphic and obviously you'll remember Quite vividly. It was a really is a bad number in reality obviously mass layoffs leading to a massive spike in people Applying for for benefits in America However markets skyrocketed after that because it wasn't as bad as people have feared now what what kind of more concern with now is about Where do we go? To from here, and it's about the consistency on these elevated levels of which this jobless rate might last and that leads Me on to this and we just jump here now a lot of people talk about You know the v-shape or u-shape recovery I just really wanted to touch upon that briefly because beyond just this initial reaction We're going to see the reason why it is quite important Not fun payrolls is a little bit. I guess it's going to reflect some of this this initial jobless situation We've had over the last two weeks, but only a very small portion So yes, the job decline in America in payrolls tomorrow be almost a consensus estimate of nearly negative 300,000 but that number is probably going to get way more significant in the following month's report given how the reference period is set for when they conduct The data set so here then Understanding all how consistently and to how high the jobless rate is and things like non-farm payrolls Consequently the unemployment rate, which we'll see tomorrow is going to determine then what type of shaped recovery Do we see because this was a great? Kind of sentence or two that I saw that really hits the nail on the head and explains this the key determinant is This the the shocks ability So let's say the coronavirus to damage an economy supply side and more specifically capital formation when credit Intermediation is disrupted and the capital stock doesn't grow the recovery is slow workers exit the workforce skills are lost Proactivity goes down the shock becomes structural Yeah, so this is where we're reacting to these data points because we're thinking about What is the shape here of this recovery and the and the depths of the phase? We're in now which is the immediate aftermath will then define the type of recovery We're likely to see in how structural it is so here that this case study is looking at Examples of the global financial crisis now Canada are actually averted a recession They managed to perform a v-shaped recovery in this instance. So that's that classical Kind of immediate hit but immediate recovery. You then start looking at the u-shaped recovery Which is kind of an immediate withdrawal or immediate decline in interest rates and QE as we had 2008 2009 2010 and so on but then a powerful but more graduated recovery And then you've got someone like Greece in the European debt crisis In the fallout in the early 2010s era where they've had kind of an L-shaped recovery They've just never really got back to where they were as you can see here Pre-crisis growth trend is a million miles away from where the actual growth trend is as of now 2019 2020 And so the question mark will be however Consistently and how bad these numbers are will we see more? I think a v-shaped recovery now is Probably lesser believed from a consensus viewpoint They u-shaped possibly let's not forget. We've had an unprecedented large Fiscal stimulus injection by nearly every government in the world particularly in the developed world America that two trillion dollar package from Trump. He's talking about a four stimulus package to UK's done it as well Germany now altering their fiscal kind of management of their economy and providing stimulus so The one thing I'd say is I don't think we'll get an L-shape it will we get a u-shape? I actually think we might get a a Nike swoosh kind of shape If I could add another one, which isn't quite as powerful as a you but not quite as bad as an L So again context is what I'm trying to provide here for these numbers. All right We've got about two minutes. So let's just have a quick look at the charts. So This is the S&P. Yeah, a bad number bad. What does that look like? Well, the range top end is 5.25 million so you've got to get above that for this to really break I would say this near-term range And that's going to be the kind of the daily low really since UK and Europe is coming to the market any move low below there and been looking to target the the initial late Asia session European entrance point at 2466 and then the bigger test of course would be this Sunday Sunday reopening low and also the low that was seen Late yesterday in the Wall Street session. So this is talking about a negative Development in that sense as well. I'd also be looking for gold to pop higher It's already been rallying going into the numbers and it's up 30 bucks But a bad number I definitely think we get up to that range kind of low up at 1631 here in the knee jerk reaction And then oil will probably fit in tandem with the with the number in a fairly correlated move WTI already up two bucks up around its highs. It's either going to be Low number it adds to positivity a bad number. Let's say jobless at six seven million This needs to come back down again. All right. We've got about 30 seconds. I'll put the squawk on So they'll call out the numbers now shortly Gonna leave my audio running So that you guys can hear everything Six spots six four eight billion six spots six four eight million That's above the top end of the range of six million for the initial jobless claims number Continuing claims. That's three spots zero two nine million three spots zero two nine million for the expected four spots eight eight two Four week average. That's at two spots six one two million two spots six one two million US international trade That's negative 39 spot nine billion cad trade balance. That's negative zero spot nine eight billion Just to recap my US initial jobless claims to be getting that Prince at six spots six four eight million That's what about the expected three spot five and outside of the top end of the indexive range of six million Yes, I just turned the squawk off for a second You can see equities now starting to look a little heavier You can see the Dax here on the left bit of a downtick the NASDAQ just blurs pivot and the support point that was holding through much of the European session Making the S&P chart here a little bit bigger so you can see that was that lower bound level That was same with the NASDAQ holding up some of the price action at 81 50 So they're with a downtick not massive at this point So the number again six point six four eight million says much worse than expected. It's not though Fantastic in terms of how bad it is and you know, there was talk on the streets few people talking about 10 million Definitely is nowhere near that but certainly It's almost double of what we had last week. So look it is it is a negative So gold session highs now you can see that gold just pushing up a little bit more up 31 now on the day Will this be enough? I mean the determinant factor here is I'd want to see equities and a correlated move start to get a little bit more traction But gold, you know fundamentally this is a supportive piece of information. So another push-up now 25 Coming up 25 26 now on the print. So yeah gold getting a little bid on the back of that Let's have a look at WTI crude. Yeah, not too much of a reaction there I mean, we're talking about indirect kind of correlated moves here I mean, it's more about that idea of a bigger broader impact on the economy by a higher jobless rate equating to a higher unemployment rate So what's just keeping an eye on does that provide a bit of a cap given the rally that we've already had? I mean in oil here Depends how brave you're feeling. I mean, you've got that R2 that daily high Might this be the cap that's needed now to see a bit of a pullback and reversal in price for the rest of the day Yeah, I mean a pretty decent risk reward I'd say you could look for an entry point around these levels with your stop-loss just above the previous high at 60 and look to Play the market back down And again, you're looking for more follow-through at the moment. It's a little bit There's a little bit a lack of appetite. It looks like to really drive it forward Given that, you know, everyone's obviously more bearish in there They're tilt to how they think the job situation is going to play out But yeah, you can see that the initial reaction makes a little bit of sense. Perhaps a little bit uncommitted When we get to the open on Wall Street, perhaps then things start to show their hand a little bit more definitively But as I said Hopefully that's a bit of a snapshot of just what's going on. I'll let you guys Continue with your day Hopefully that was useful