Technically, our job here on the show is to recap week 12, and we'll be doing that for today. We'll talk about Josh Jacobs going bananas. We'll talk about some key injuries and stuff like that. But honestly, I'm excited to use this as like a backdoor like second preview show for week 13, because week 13's main slate kind of rules. I was excited about week 12 going in. Week 13's already better, baby. So we're going to break down what we saw on week 12, what it means that awesome week 13 main slate, and talk about all the key takeaways from this past week in NFL DFS. Hopefully, get you set for that's some fun. Once again, next week, this is the heat check fantasy podcast powered by Number Fire. That's right here on the fan dual podcast network and numberfire.com. My name is Jim Sodus. I am a senior writer and analyst for numberfire.com. Joined here as always by Brandon Gadoula. He is the senior managing editor of numberfire.com. Brandon, week 12 was pretty fun. It was kind of gross for a very long time. The afternoon slate did pick up though. How are you doing today? I'm good. Yeah. Week 12 started with the Thanksgiving slate. That didn't happen. We're going to ignore that. Never happened. What are you talking about? It feels like two weeks ago by this point because we got a lot of games to cover. But yeah, I almost was like, oh yeah, that was the same week. Week 12. But yeah, week 12 main slate, fun. After a bit, I was really disengaged during the early slate. Spain was playing Germany. I was kind of had my in the World Cup. I kind of had my eyes on that a little bit. Don't worry. I took lots of notes and I watched all the Red Zone. I just was making a joke about how bad the games were. But the Raiders and Seahawks game, if you ever needed to be convinced to stack games, I'm not saying that everyone in that game was in the optimal lineup or anything. Cardinals, chargers, same thing. Yeah, so you start off and a lot of the games are just not particularly good. You have like a Garrett Wilson who has a good game. But if you can just, whenever a game does go over or has a lot of points like that and it's concentrated, it's not a cheat code. But boy, whenever that stuff hits, it's like, this is why we stack. Yeah, you just need to get fewer things right. If you nail a game that winds up either hitting a high total or going over a high total, it just increases the odds that you're right and decreases the number of one-off shots you're taking. That's always a beneficial thing. Justin Herbert didn't light things up.  He was still the perfect quarterback and the perfect lineup. Kyler Murray played well in that game. Keenan Allen was fine. It was a decent game. James Conner had a really good game. They're running back had a good game against the chargers. And they're facing Josh Jacobs next week. What could go wrong? But it was nice to have that back and forth. And I wish that I had leaned harder into that. Because I think once we got to Sunday morning, I was pretty torn at quarterback. I was like, okay, Tua's got this big spread. I still liked him, but it was a big spread. Lamar's playing in wind for the 16,000th time. You had wind in the Tampa Bay Cleveland game. Not that you're considering quarterbacks there, but Mahomes had the high spread too. So I probably should just go at the two games. And I did. I think my highest exposure guys were in those two games, but I wish I had gone further with it, I guess. And I want to take that next week. It's like recommitting to games next, especially on a slate next week, where we can actually do that and feel good about it. Yeah. And sometimes we get questions on Twitter. How big should your core be? Or what kind of contest should you play? And that's all dependent on you. But for me, over the past few years, I've really tried to narrow the player pool. I had a lot of Antonio Gibson, so that was not ideal last week. But I had a lot of Samajia Pirai and Rashad White. They didn't go nuts. But the salaries helped me get up to other guys. So I had balanced lineups that were okay, could have been better if the stacks hit a little bit more. But if you're playing tournaments and you're hoping to have huge weeks, you just want to maximize the odds that whenever you do get things right, that you're benefiting from that. And if you play 10 quarterbacks over 10 lineups, the odds that you're going to have a fantastic 0.1% lineup for the week, they just go down. Yeah. Adam Levitan of Establish the Run says, what do you win when you win? And that kind of goes into that. You want to be right when you're right. And I think that that's a key thing to keep in mind. And we'll talk about that process overall pretty often. But that kind of, I think, is a nice vindication for that. We're going to break down what happened in Week 12 and all that. And just one second. But first, a reminder to make sure you're subscribed to the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed, wherever you get your podcast, because twice weekly NFL shows continuing as we roll along here, we got NBA with the daily ISO and top Vecchio every weekday as well. A lot of good stuff all right here in the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed. Make sure you're subscribed in your podcast platform of choice by searching for the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed. And also the NFL shows live on the Fando YouTube page as well. So hit subscribe there, hit the like button for watching. We appreciate all of you. And check out those 10 a.m. Eastern on Monday and Thursday. Also talking about the Week 13 main slate. Well, the Sunday Million is now posted over on Fanduel. Just go to the Fanduel lobby and check out the NFL Sunday Million 1.25 million dollars in total prizes, $250,000 to first place. Just a $5 entry to get yourself a chance at the $250,000 and the $1.25 million in total prizes. It's going to be a really fun main slate. So go check that out by going to the Fanduel.com, the Fanduel lobby, or download the Fanduel app, eligibility restrictions apply. Let's start things off here by talking about Josh Jacobs. Now, typically we don't dive into production for the headliner, but when a guy goes for 303 yards in scrimmage, I'm okay bending the rules a bit. That's fine with me. Jacob's 303 yards in scrimmage. He has now had 150 or more yards in scrimmage five times this year. How sick is that? So I think the way I want to frame this is let's put every running back in a neutral situation, you know, at home, let's say three point favorites, just put them in a neutral situation. Is Josh Jacobs now the RB1 for DFS? Maybe. I'm trying to think of who else. So I think that like Saquon's up there. Yeah. McCaffrey is in consideration, but he's kind of banged up to his Eli Mitchell's outlook with health. JT could be in that discussion as well. Yeah. Austin Echler. Isn't that discussion? I was going to say Echler. Give him the passing game work, given the red zone he always had recently. You know, I think my pitch for Jacobs above Echler specifically is a yardage, because again, 150 or more yards from scrimmage for Jacobs five times this year, that's happened 30 times by any running back in the NFL this year. 30 times Josh Jacobs has whatever five divided by 30 is like 17%. I think. Yes. On the fly math and I got it right. Okay. 17% of all games with 150 plus yards of scrimmage have been done by Josh Jacobs so far this year. I feel like that's kind of hard to say. And like Echler has had that one time, one time. So like I think Jacobs above Echler. Yeah. I think Saquon, like he's not as like consistent because he's pretty dependent on big plays, which is fine. That's I like volatility. That's totally fine. But it you know, it does ding him a bit. JT, I would say probably a worse offense than Jacobs. Yeah, that's yeah. I mean, we don't love either offense. Yeah, specifically, but yeah, better offense. I think a hard time not putting him first. Yeah, he's probably first. The question is, you know, in the past, we've seen running backs who are, you know, the number one be salaried at 10,000. I don't know if he's quite a 10,000 back for me. So the obvious, you know, what we're going to do here is name that salary for Jacobs. I'm saying, are we saying specifically for this Chargers game because that well against the charger? Is it a first time around matchup? No, they played in week one. So it was a while ago. I think it was week one. I'm going to say 96. So he's 95. Okay. I think that's very appropriate, right? Like, I agree with you where I have I have some reservations putting him at 10k because he does still lose some passing game work to Amir Abdullah. And, you know, the 300 yards we can talk about what was it 86 of it came on the, which means he had 200 before the 86. That I'm not knocking. But, you know, we're going to look at the 300 and remember that. But, you know, I'm not knocking 200 yards from scrimmage. I'm sure it was over time too. You can add that in that copy out if you want. Yeah. That's what I was saying. Yeah, for sure. But still, you know, overall 33 carries seven targets. So he's losing some passing game work to Abdullah, but still seven targets, over 51% of the routes, I'd say 96. And it's a boy, we have not really built around many running backs this year in that, in that nine upper 9000 range or mid 9000 range, I guess. So we're going to find a lot about the salary scroll in terms of how playable Jacobs is. Correct. And even if it's hard to play him, I think we should make sure we get some. I fully wholeheartedly agree. He's played five games, I believe without Hunter Renfrow. I don't have the actual splits up right now, but I've been pretty sure I picked the right games. Five games that Hunter Renfrow, six, six, eight, four and seven targets, he has averaged 168.2 yards in scrimmage. He's had three of his five games of the 150 plus yards and scrimmage have come in those games. Red zone rule is fine. It's not like his, his strong spot is a red zone role, but like he can score multiple times as he has shown. So I feel like he's well worth 95, especially in that matchup and especially the game that, you know, there are three games that kind of stand out for stacking next week. That's one of them. So I'm, I'm okay paying that personally. He's just, he's really fun. I'm happy for him too, because like he's, it's his contract year. He's going to get paid and that's awesome. Yeah. The Chargers is more of a Thursday note, but the Chargers allowing 1.63 yards over expectation per carry. Next worst is a 1.13. So half a yard per carry that bad. Like how James Conner dropped 140 on them yards in scrimmage. Like, what are we doing? What do we do? Not no disrespect to James Conner, but like he hasn't had a great year in that department. Yeah. Okay. And let's turn the page and I'll talk about some injuries here. Aaron Rogers left Sunday night's game with a rib injury. He didn't return because of x-rays were inconclusive. Jordan Love came in and looked good facing not a full prevent defense because that game was still like in play. But like, you know, he looked pretty good. Rogers has said that he wants to play if he's able to, and as long as a team has a mathematical chance at the playoffs. So Rogers might play, but like if they go with love, would that completely crush Aaron Jones and Christian Watson for you or no? It would for me. They're going to be, I mean, they've been run heavy. They're going to be run heavy without, I mean, we can sail there and Rogers thinks we won, but less efficiency whenever they do pass. I guess maybe the claim you say is like it'll open things up for Aaron Jones a little bit more, but I don't really see it that way. Honestly, if Green Bay and Philly were on the main slate, I don't think I would have got to Aaron Jones. It wouldn't have been the best decision, but I would have preferred the value backs to him. Watson, I just, I don't know if there's enough passing volume in this offense for me to like prioritize these guys. So I guess I could say as bringbacks in a stack of a game that I absolutely love, but this team plays so slowly. You know, I never watch an island game live. I always DVR it. The Packers are such a good team for that because it's two, it's two presses of the 15 second skip ahead. And I never miss a snap from the Packers because they only snap it with five seconds left on the play clock. That's pretty funny. I think that they were kind of on thin ice for DFS viability to begin with, in part because of like the play clock stuff, because like you watch Aaron Jones play and it looks easy. Yeah. Like he picks up chunks like with no effort. And then you look at the final box where it's like, Oh, you have like four targets? Like, yeah, what? How did that happen? Like it's always feels like he's doing better than he is because he's so efficient. He's so good, but the offense just like, so low volume overall. And I think that like it'd take a while for Sowers to come down. It's not like an anti Jordan love thing. It'd be fun if he's good. But it's like, it increases the range of outcomes, not in a good way. And, you know, A.G. Dillon is not necessarily the guy that we some people thought he might be this year. Right. But he can still get some work. And if it frankly, if they're playing without Aaron Rogers, I would assume A.G. Dillon gets more just more touches to sort of, you know, get some some bunny rushes or or targets. I mean, he also had four targets, same as Aaron Jones, which I like A.G. Dillon just fine. But those guys should never really have the same amount of targets. Aaron Jones have two deep targets, though, ran very different route numbers. But just I think I couldn't play. I couldn't play Jones. I want to see the Cowboys formation where they've been using Zeke as like a fullback at times. I want to see that with A.G. Dillon at fullback. Like imagine that be sick. They did combine for over 100% of snaps. So I'm sure they done that quite a bit this year. They're on the field together often, but not like an I formation. Like fullback situation. That's because Aaron Jones can play out wide. My question to you, though, is how low of a salary do you need for Aaron Jones against the Bears next week that you would consider him? If we assume that that Rogers is out, take take that how you how you will. I would probably need it to be like 72 without Rogers. Yeah. And what about lower 74. Okay. Aaron Jones 74. Okay. Well, that's not a priority to me, I think. Christian Watts in 65. That's fair, but not enough where I'm going to actively seek it out, given the concerns around the offense. And I will not be stacking that game. Why? I can't imagine. Are you disrespecting touch? Sorry, I can't call him that. Are you disrespecting Trevor Simeon? He got his nickname stripped yesterday because Trevor Lawrence went nuts. So Trevor Lawrence is now Toddy Trev for the record. Yeah. Well, I mean, I don't know. I don't know what the status of field is because it went from, I mean, he could have been day to day or missed the season. So I don't know. His left arm might be amputated within the next week. We don't know. Well, we'll keep tabs on that though. We'll see. The Packers, it's just, you know, they were on thin ice and that doesn't make it easier. Travis ETN, speaking of touchdown, Trevor Lawrence suffered a foot injury for the Jags never returned. He was on the sideline, which to me implies it's not, it's not broken, it seems, and it might not be serious, but the team, they were fine, right? It's a Michael Hasty, 79% snap rate in this game, five targets and 12 carries. It is worth noting they claimed Daryl Henderson off waivers last week. He wound up being inactive, but he could play. But Hasty had more burst, I think, than Henderson showed pre-release with the Rams. It does seem like ETN could have returned if needed, maybe. And I don't know. And we play him next week, assuming health. But if we get no ETN, would you use Hasty, knowing that Henderson is likely to be active? So they get the Lions for context. Yeah. I need a mea culpa on Antonio Gibson, which sort of parlays into this. Because there have been very few of any superstar running backs, we've played a lot more value running backs than in years past on this show. And I think sometimes, or I think that's led to my willingness to accept an imperfect role, such as assuming that Antonio Gibson was just going to be a featured back. Or at least the 1A, heavy 1A. Yeah. Yeah. And I don't know if this is just one of those spots where I could get out over my skis and say like, yeah, they didn't activate Daryl Henderson. Hasty looks good. He's going to be able to do it even without ETN. I don't know if that's the right play. Give me a salary for Hasty, assuming there's no ETN. And therefore, sort of assuming that Henderson plays. But also assuming they're full of them facing the Lions. That's in there too. So that'd probably bump Hasty up to like 66 for me. I was thinking around 65 without ETN. He's 65, exactly. Like, I think he's killed some bursts this year. He's looked good. They showed confidence in that game. Henderson, you know, he was released for a reason. It's just one of those, like, I gotta shake. Would he be, would I currently put him in the cashing consideration on Monday? No. I think that's how I feel about it. But yeah, it's one of those where like, we're going to have a lot of these throughout the end of the season with just more injuries where we got to assume one way or the other that this role is sticky or it's not. I'm not saying it's not sticky, but I don't want to assume that it is and say that he's a breakdown. It's sticky in the bad way, I think. It's like a little sticky situation over there. Elijah Mitchell exited in the third quarter with a knee injury for the 49ers. He didn't actually play a snap in the first quarter, but played a lot in the second quarter. McCaffrey, Christian McCaffrey had some knee discomfort. He did play late in that game when they were trying to ice things out. So discomfort, but it wasn't like a re-injury didn't seem like. Mitchell still had seven carries and 15 snaps. Jordan Mason, five carries and eight snaps to close out the game. Even without Mitchell, McCaffrey, with his knee discomfort, may not close out games. The snap rate should be higher than it has been if there's no Mitchell. So McCaffrey, not at full health right now, but may have one less legitimate threat to his workload. So what would a Mitchell injury do for your thoughts of McCaffrey in the short term? It bump him up. We saw him go play 81% of the snaps in his second game with the team without Mitchell. But since Mitchell's been back, he hasn't been above 65%. He's just been between 63% and 65%. I know that there was the discomfort this week that kept him off the field a bit more. But it's an imperfect role. And I know that he wasn't 100%. I know that they didn't really need him on the field. But to give Jordan Mason the ice the game carries is enough for me to balk at this situation. McCaffrey also just in a, not the best offense, not an offense that's going to score 40 points a game, 30 points a game with relative ease. I think he's probably going to end up being over salary week over week for me. There's going to be a little bit of fear of missing out. But I don't know if the true Christian McCaffrey like eruption spots are going to be there anymore because he actually has viable teammates.  And that's probably not going to ever reflect what his true salary is. Yeah. I wanted to see what the injury report winds up looking like this week. If he sits a couple of days with like a knee injury or something like that, that's kind of concerning regarding the offense. He said like, you know, they're not the most explosive offense. Part of that could be because Debo is also banged up. He went in with a hamstring injury. It seemed like he aggravated it during the game. He didn't come back in like right away, but he's not healthy right now. Yeah. He was limited all week. He was one of my loves for the show and then didn't get. He was questioned like he wasn't even off the injury report. So I think he's like legit dealing with stuff. He's not going full speed. It doesn't seem like. So like if McCaffrey practices in full all week, my concern will be decreased. But I still think I couldn't put a nine in front of a salary with a straight face. They are facing Miami next week. Pretty fun being there as well. McCaffrey. Whoa. It's Arizona 82. Yeah. That's about that's about where I had it. That's low enough where it makes you think about it at least, which I appreciate. Yeah, it definitely does. You know, I talked, I did some study on like pivots and guys in that range can often be overstated with how good their role is. I think that that's one of the spots where again, I think this one depends a lot on the practice report because we did see him play over 80% of snaps in a game. We've seen that scaled back since Mitchell's return. It's clear this team wants to get Elijah Mitchell involved. Which is fair. I look good. He is good. So I think we can really only wait until Thursday and get a little bit more information. Yeah. If he's full practice Wednesday, my confidence will go up about 30%, I would say. Darno Mooney left with an ankle injury for the Bears and didn't return. Sounds like there's a good chance he misses the rest of the year. Cole Comet led the team with six targets on 25 throws. Chase Claypool also went to the injury tent at one point, but he ran 20 routes to Comet at 25. We don't go to this passing offense often, ever. Would removing Mooney from it entice you on Comet or Claypool assuming we get Justin Fields back at some point? No. Mooney has averaged, I'll remove this game from it. He's averaged five and a half targets per game, which guy here is getting more than that. And who's getting bumped up to eight or nine targets? They're not enough to go around. And also Fields has been great, but his passing efficiency has not been, so the value of those targets isn't that high either. I don't really see this as someone stepping into a huge opportunity. I agree. Michael Carter suffered an ankle injury, was rolled down the second half. Sounds like it's a sprain, but they weren't sure of the severity. Zonovan Knight, who apparently has a nickname of BAM, BAM Knight, which is pretty fun. Wound up with that. He was hard to deal with. Because he was from Zonovan. Spreadsheet Ruiner, Zonovan Knight, 49% snap rate. He converted with 103 yards in scrimmage, so that's pretty fun.  James Robinson was an active, but they said they wanted to see if Knight could give him a spark, and he kind of did, so that's for something. So let's say Carter misses next week. Would you have interest in BAM Knight, or would the likelihood of a committee scare you off? Yeah, one of the spots where there's enough of a committee, would you say a snap rate was like 49%? Yeah. Does that go up? I would put a cap at 60%. I was going to say, what's the 60% snap rate worth in this offense? Not a lot. They put in the Vikings next week, low total, 43.5%. I did bet the Jets moneyline already. I could see that. I don't necessarily know that it's going to be because of a big game from Knight. It's because of defense, yeah. So probably eight. I think the models will love them. Yeah. So I think about it this way. Like his competition for rushing attempts in this game was Michael Carter and Ty Johnson. Clearly the Jets think that Michael Carter is better than James Robinson. So I think the 60% snap rate, that's probably where I'd keep it, but maybe there's room for a forward expansion next. He did play well too. Just seven routes. Three targets and seven routes, yeah. So the three targets is probably high. Probably. I just, I feel like, what are the odds he literally, I mean, I guess, to burn? All I'm saying is he's worth thinking about. I don't think he'd be worth playing. My assumption right now is he would not be worth playing, but I think he's worth thinking about at least. I'm good with that. Maybe we find out that there's absolutely no value elsewhere. And that we need, like, I don't know, we haven't looked at the main slate fully, but receivers, tight ends, maybe they're all on the slate and we need to get there, but. Right. He's not worth crossing off, but probably not going to be a place I'll go to. Patriots have a couple injuries on Thursday. Jacoby Myers had a shoulder injury, did come back at one point, but Damian Harris had a thigh injury and was apparently on crutches. Myers left in the first half. Devontae Parker led the team in routes, but Nelson Aguilore had eight targets. Only Ramondra Stevenson with 10 had more because Ramondra is their wide receiver one. Harris's final snap came in the third quarter, but didn't actually log a second quarter snap. So Ramondra is running ahead of him even before he was officially ruled out. In the end, Stevenson, 82% snap rates led the team in targets. Just seven carries in a past heavy script, which was smart against that defense. Stevenson without Harris has had like a legit, legit, legit role despite his offense. So before we talk about the past catchers, they're playing Thursday, so we won't be able to check the salary, but name that salary on Stevenson without Harris given how much passing game work he's been getting recently. I would probably put him in like the 84 range, which I think captures the opportunity, but also caps it a bit based on how I view this offense. 100% agree. I would say 85. I think that's spot on. Very good back. Very good role. We want to actively seek out past catchers in the backfield. He gets us that. Not going to lose a lot of work. He gets high leverage work. He's also a good football player, which is worth something. So I'd agree with that for sure on Ramondra. There's no Damian. And I think they'll probably be able to run the bills Thursday. So that could be a good spot for Ramondra. What about the past catchers here? I mean, Meyer's probably going to play through it. It sounds like so you come back in, but like would even taking him out entice you for any of the past catchers? Because I don't think you would. I'd care too much. I wouldn't care much if it was a main slate. I know like Hunter Henry almost had, you know, two touchdowns, but just the five targets that they just like spread around bad targets. Yeah, you can do better on a main slate. I agree. Single game slate's different, but main slate. So thumbs up for Ramondra. Thumbs down for everybody else. Let's dive into the role changes and talk about some running backs who filled in for guys who were out this past week. Rashad White, legitimate featured back in Tampa Bay with no Lenny Fornette. 91% snap rate for Rashad White. 14 carries and nine targets. The route rate was 74%. Now Fornette did practice all week, was ruled out Saturday. I think that probably implies he's going to be back. They played Monday upcoming, but what's your view of Rashad White? If we assume Lenny is back, given that White looked okay in this game? Yeah, it'd probably be like sort of like an early season Fornette. I think maybe their roles just swap around. Sure. There was a quote from this team that was basically like, you know, we've been working on getting Rashad White up to the level where he can just like handle the load and he's there now. That's not something you come out and say. I mean, you could say that because they knew that Fornette wasn't going to be relevant this week. But I also don't think that you come out and say, you know, we want our backup running back to lead this team and then just give it back to Leonard Fornette. So I would say that it's probably, you know, we had Fornette in like the mid 7000 range. Once the dust settled and we realized that he wasn't going to be 90% snap rate Lenny all season. I'd probably go like 76 for White because I still think that Fornette would mix in about 35% of the snaps and maybe still some high leverage stuff there in there.  That's fair. And Tristan Werffs got carted off their right tackle, one of the few good offensive line they have left. I would lower it. It's not because of him. And not because of the way I expect the split to break down with Lenny. It's because of the offense. So I think we're on board with the expected role. I've just lower on this offense. So we had Aaron Jones in this range. Like would you rather play Aaron Jones or Rashad White? With Rogers or no. We'll say with Rogers. I'd rather play Aaron Jones because he'll be efficient on his touch as I know. Okay. With Love, I'd probably go Rashad White because Tom Brady is better than Jordan Love. I know we've, you know, Jordan Love played well, but I think I can say, I can say the decent amount of confidence that Tom Brady is probably better. So yeah, we're about the same age there. Samajia Peerine really nice role with no Joe Nixon, 80% snap rates. He had 17 of 19 running back carries and seven targets, which is a 19% share. Peerine had three out of four red zone opportunities. They were like three kneel down. So I count for that. If you're looking at those numbers, we're not roasting Peerine if Joe Nixon is back, but Nixon was ruled out earlier this week, didn't practice at all. I don't believe. So where are you at Peerine after this week if Nixon were to miss again? And in Nixon returns, are you going to lower your expectations for him, given that Peerine has played decently well this year? I think the big thing here is, look, no, no Nixon, we play Peerine. But if Nixon comes back for this chief scheme, I don't know if he's like true Joe Nixon, because Peerine has been able to do some stuff with his opportunity. He looks good when he gets the ball. I think this would probably hurt my interest in Nixon. I feel like it's kind of simple. Play Peerine if Nixon's out, lower myself on Nixon, even when he does come back. I don't think I'll lower him too much because Peerine's played well all year, and they still have been giving Joe Nixon a lot of work. Like he had that Jets, that Jets game. Peerine like closed it out and looked good. And then they still went back to Joe Nixon. I think it was a Thursday night game right after that. So I'd probably still be hiding Nixon. The one thing that gives me pause is actually the same game. Jujus misjuster came off a concussion this week, the cheese, and didn't play a full role. So like that's within the range of outcomes. Nixon's salary is 85. That's high, worth it, but high. Joe would lower me on him a bit, but I don't want to cross him off. Like I'd still get to Nixon game stacks. Yes, I'm saying we're basically the same thing. It's coming off the concussion. That's really what worries me. It's if Peerine was horrible and they didn't have a solution. I say, well, he's just going to get as much as he can handle, but I don't think this team is dumb enough to do that to Joe Nixon. And also like, I can't even use my crotch. I'm like, well, he's full in practice because Juju was full on Wednesday. Yes. So like everything is case by case, but like that was noteworthy to me. Peerine's salary is 71. So if we get no Joe Nixon, I would be close to lock buttoning so much if Peerine this week. In that game, yeah. I agree. Okay. Marquis Brown came back with a nice roll for the Cardinals, led them in targets and routes, run eight targets on 29 routes, just 46 yards. So not super productive. He had two out of three red zone targets. And despite the lack of yardage, did have an 11.1 yard eight out, which is pretty good. So even with the Andre Hopkins getting a 22% target share, Brown had a 30% share. Hopkins did lead with four deep targets compared to two for Brown. So Hopkins' roll still wasn't bad. But I think it's nowhere that Marquis Brown's roll was good. How would you value those two with Kyler Murray going forward? They are in a buy this week and Ron Delmore slash Greg George might be back, but I still feel like these guys will probably get a lot of targets. Yeah. I think I think Brown's going to be heavily targeted. I don't think that by any means he would have more targets than Hopkins. I don't think that's really, it's just that this wasn't like, you know, Hopkins weirdly had a 10%, 12% target share and like they just had to funnel things toward Brown. Hopkins still involved, but Brown even more involved. So the problem for me is A, this offense is so easy to trust and it probably shouldn't be, but that Hopkins will be the main target getter, you know, week after week. Like if you had to put odds on, you know, Hopkins to lead this team in targets, it's pretty heavy. But also Marquis Brown had a 7,000 salary already was, I think it was 7,000 for this week. I don't know how much that'll go down. I guess maybe a little bit because the yardage wasn't there, but I feel like we're never going to get it. What's that? I played a lot in that 7,000. I felt pretty bad about it. I don't know. I don't know if that's going to go down. And if you put Brown at like 75 and Hopkins at like 85, I'm not saying they're bad plays, but they're going to be hard to prioritize whenever this offense is always a bit of a trap. I just had the depressing thought that it's like DK Metcalf and Tyler Locke with worst quarterback play. And it's like, ah, that feels good. I didn't want to say, I don't want to say that, but yeah. Yeah. I think that I might be a little bit higher on Marquis Brown. The yardage wasn't there, but like, yeah, I think these guys have a chance to both have 25% target here, which is a lot. Oh, yeah. Yeah. I like, I do think it's like a lock at Metcalf situation. Yeah. But I'm saying The value of the offense hurts it for you. Yeah, like 75 would be kind of high. I can define that. Yeah. And, you know, I could see it being the case. Hopkins isn't going to go really below 8,000. No, it shouldn't. Yeah. Right. So. Okay. Zeke Elliott snap rate went back up in week 12. He played on 52% of the Cowboys snaps against the Giants and Thanksgiving. Played just 30% in his first game back, though part of that was because of the blowout. Tony Pollard still had more carries than Zeke, 18 to 16, but he played only three more snaps. Elliott had two at eight red zone chances. Pollard didn't have any, or he had one, I should say. We're still unlikely to play Zeke by himself. I did on Thanksgiving and might only like be at lineup, but like, you know, this is not Thanksgiving typically. So how you view in Tony Pollard, seeing what's the role Zeke had on Thanksgiving. Yeah. We talked about Zeke on Thanksgiving and, you know, I said it, I would assume that this team wants to get him like a touchdown. And he got a little bit more than that in a pretty good rushing matchup. He looked good. Yeah, I did. And he looked good against the Vikings too, I thought. Yeah. Because guess what? He's actually pretty good. He was when he's not completely hurt. Tony Pollard's better, but Zeke Elliott is not terrible. Yeah. It feels really bad that like Twitter hate Zeke because they love Pollard. Yeah. And therefore, overlooking the fact that he's still good for like what he should be. Yeah, but yeah, I think this is just a spot where it would, I'm not going to play Elliott on a main slate, but I'm also probably not playing Pollard on a main slate because I don't know if his salary is ever going to dip back down to, so let me clarify there. I will play Pollard at the right salary in games that I want to stack, but Pollard is probably not going to be a one-off type of play for me. I'm keeping the Aaron Jones comp, and I've used Aaron Jones outside of games that I want to stack, so I'm good at that. How much did you like enjoy? I don't know. They're on a main slate anyway, so that helps. It's a bit of a cop out for me, so. Yeah. I mean, it depends on the salary always, but you know. Did we get the, I know it's Colson two out of three island games. Gosh. But that means we get chiefs bangles on the main slate. Don't complain. Don't let them hear you complaining. I've, I thought about this before and I was like, oh no. And I was like, oh, actually. Well, yeah, I guess plus when I DVR through that Sunday night game, I don't want to say really pay attention to the first half because it would be a lot. I think the Colts should also like be on every island slate to keep them off the main slate. So just keep the Colts on an island at all times. I'll use JT and single game, that'll be fine. The Colts should, should be like a Mac team or something and just play every Thursday night football. Wednesday, put on a Wednesday. Maction, but I'm on a Wednesday. I think that's a, I'm a favorite. I think the powered is in this role is like 78 or so. You know, I think that's probably around, it's probably lower than where he'll be. But yeah, I think that, I think that's where I'm coming from is his ceiling is better than that, but that's okay. Like not everything is ceiling despite my attempts to make everything. I know, I know. In the first full game without CEH, Isaiah Pacheco's role was pretty nice. You, you're calling him Lego Pacheco, which I think is, is good. Like Lego, my ego, right? Is that, that's right? No, no, it's, you know, like, instead of like gimme Pacheco, it should be like, like at least make it try to rhyme if you have like a bit of an option. No, I think, I thought it was a Lego, my ego. Well, I mean, there's that too, but I don't really, I'm going with Lego, my ego, Lego Pacheco. 22 carries in one target on a 50. He's like a Lego version of Isaiah Pacheco, which would also be cool. I'd take that. Yeah. I'd happily put that on my desk. I'd put any Lego on my desk. The Legos are sick. 54% snap rate for Pacheco, 48% of the red zone chances. I went the right there because he had like 12 red zone opportunities because they couldn't score in the red zone. My God. And they still covered the Rams are so bad. This is an ideal script for Pacheco where they were up the whole time, game never really in doubt. He did skid 86 yards. So these caveats are important. Ronald Jones was involved as well. So lots of caveats, lots of good, some bad. Did this game alter your view of Pacheco at all? I don't think so. I think he's still someone who snap rate is not going to tell the whole story for me because he's going to get carries whenever he's out there. That's what he's there to do. But is also very prone to being just taken. I know we had 12 red zone carries. But this team wants to use Jerick McKinnon in the red zone whenever they're trying to pass or just in general. I think that there's an inherent cap on Pacheco. And your best, like your best case scenario is you're going to yell at me for this maybe, but it feels almost like a Nick Chubb thing where unless he turns his 20 carries into like 150 yards and a touchdown or two. Now the salaries are very different. Are you saying you should be 96 like Nick Chubb is next week? And Nick Chubb is the best running back in football. But I just feel like there's only one way for Pacheco really to hurt us. That's not a bad comp, honestly. He's like a downgraded version of Nick Chubb. Like the downsides of Nick Chubb apply to Pacheco as well. That's what you're saying. Yeah, like value Nick Chubb basically. Yeah. So in the three games with CEH, either out or minimally involved, 82 yards in scrimmage, 107 and 86. That's not terrible. Like I said, the 12 red zone chances this week. So what's 15 divided by, sorry. Oh, no, what did I select? 15 divided by 40 is like 38%. 38%. So 38% red zone share in those three games. Is he in play for Game Stacks for Bengals Chiefs next week? I think he is. He's not like a priority target. I probably don't want to get there as like a standalone play, but like I think he's in play for Game Stacks at least. That's not a salary. He's 7,000. Why? That seems a bit high for someone. He's 63. Right. Like who do we have 7,000? 7,000 a lot. Who do I need to bribe? Push him down. Like I'm not saying he can't be great at 7,000, but he's got to score twice. Yeah. Which he can do. And then in that case, what? I mean, I do think it's within the range of outcomes for him to bust off a long run, in which case the yardage upside could get him there. He could go for 120 in a touchdown. And if he has a couple of catches, like that's getting to 20. He'd rather have more than 20 at 7,000. But like, that makes it more fringy for Game Stacks than definitive for Game Stacks for me. It's a little high. But Game Stacks are only not a consideration in anything without like a Game Stacks. Is that right? Yeah, I think so. Yeah. I wouldn't be tempted by him in an outside of Game Stacks. I agree. We alluded to this earlier, but Gigi Smith-Schuster's role was limited off his concussion. He ran his 19 routes, which was 13 fewer than Travis Kelsey, Justin Watson, and Marquez Valdes-Scanling, earned three targets on those 19 routes. Skymore, six targets on just 14 routes. So we want to go hard at that Bengals' Chiefs game next week. But Juju's role was... How will you view the non-Kelsi pieces of this passing game next week if we assume Kaderius Tony remains out? I need to know how good the other games are on this late. I mean, there are three really good games because we have Lions, Jags, and Chargers, Raiders. So this isn't the only game to stack, but... Give me a salary for Juju because he was 66 this week. If it goes down because he didn't do anything, I don't know if it's going to go down though. I would assume it kind of goes up just because he's back, but... Give me a salary. I thought it was a win-low at 66 this week when I used him. I would say bring it down a bit, but I'll bet for the game. So 65. Okay, so I was going to say like 68, just assuming that we know that Juju should be more than what he was this week. He's 69, which I think is fair. Depending on how... If the $6,000 range is as bad as it was this week, I'll probably get there, but by default and not by seeking it out. The other guys, I don't quite know if there's going to be enough for any of them, even at low salaries really to... Watson doesn't earn targets, and VS doesn't earn targets. Skymore does, but I don't know what his snap rate will be if Juju's more full. I mean, he's kind of like an Adrian Peterson-esque guy where the snap rate's not going to be good, but when he's out there, they're going to try to give him the ball. Isaiah Pacheco is Nick Chubb, and Skymore is Adrian Peterson. He wears a running back number, so it actually makes sense. I will say as someone heavily invested in Skymore, being relevant, it does seem like a few plays that might have been drawn up for him got blown dead, so maybe he had a little bit more work. I would not be surprised if he gets some rushing attempts or something as well. But it's really... Even if in the low $5,000 range, these are not guys that you build around heavily. Yeah. Unlike the 4pm only slate? Sure. Could you get this guy more in a game stack on the main slate or no? What's his salary? He is 50-53. Probably not. But it's not definitive not. Like how bad is value this week? That's something we'll find out with the salary scroll, but also it's important just to remember, what do you think the best yardage and touchdown upside is for Skymore? Seven targets, 80 yards in the touchdown, which is lower than my checklist of 85 or two tubs. Which is decent, especially at 5300. It's not even 6300, but the odds he goes for like 120 yards in a touchdown or two seems very minimal. And then yes, you're opening up salary for other positions, but you're also kind of accepting a sub 15-point output. And I don't want that to be a definitive, personally, if I can avoid it. So we'll talk more about them Thursday. I know. I can do that right now. We know which three games we're going to be talking about in the bullpattery section. Yeah, buddy. Keep the wins low, please. Latavius Murray had a really good role on a really bad team after the team cut Melvin Gordon. Latavius, 83% snap rate. What did that get you? 93% in the first half. He handled 13 and 15 running back carries. He had just one target, but didn't run 25 routes. So there's that 66% route rate. Mike Boone, eligible to return from Ninja Reserve next week. So possible there's more competition here, but when you consider this offense, but also consider a decent role, what's that worth to you? That's tough. It's your revenge game next week against the Ravens. So we've got to multiply that. I can't remember. Like he's played. How many plays he played for? My gosh, like five. Raiders, Vikings, Saints, Ravens, and he's on his 15th with the Broncos. Okay. It seems like it's higher. Yeah. I mean, that, oh, that totals 38 and a half and Denver's a seven and a half point underdog. So I mean, I don't even need to know. I just want Lamar in a freaking fun game for once.   I don't, I don't need to calculate what Denver's implied team total is because I know it's 14 points and that and I would bet the under.  That role within this offense, not worth a whole lot. I'd say like, I think he was what 62 this week. And I didn't use any of them. I'd maybe, I mean like, no, Mike Boone's gonna, might come back. Well, let's assume Mike Boone's not bad just for funsies. Okay. 83% snap rate. I'd bump him up to 63. Sure. Cause he's locked into that. I mean, he did have a long carry. So at least something. I don't really think it's his fault. He kind of seems. No, it's not his plan well, but. I like Latavius. He seems like a cool guy. He's from like near Syracuse. I've been Syracuse for a while. So like, you know, I'm pro, he played for the Vikings. I'm pro Latavius. I just, I can't root for this offense.  Like I've, I've been trying to practice self, like, you know, self love and not bet the Broncos. So and not put money on the line. So try to avoid that. He's 64. Okay. Just me in that game. I think I can just cross him off. Yeah. In a pretty neutral game script, Brian Robinson led the commander's backfield after Antonio Gibson was the guy in a positive script last week. Because sure, why not? Robinson 18 carries for 105 yards, three targets, which was like, probably like 16 times more than he had his career up to that point on six routes. Gibson three, or nine carries, three targets and 14 routes. In total, Robinson played half the snaps. Gibson 40%. So someone might lead this backfield. If we don't know who, can't really predict what script they'll be used in. Can we just cross them off? Yeah. So the 2022 running back situation across the entire position led me to think that I could trust Antonio Gibson a bit more than I should have. This is the exact kind of thing in the years past where we'd be like, there's too much to get wrong and not enough to get right here. They did not do enough against Atlanta. So I'm out. I mean, I guess it's a decent match up against the Giants, but... We care. So Gibson 61, big hat, Robinson 66. Yeah, where are our hats? I guess I've got like, if I like just hold this up to like the camera, we can just look big, you know? Well, finally, we had like big hats to promote after the game. If I just like sit it on top of my head, it looks kind of big. Oh, it kind of shows off how big my forehead is and I'm uncomfortable with that. So we'll just, we'll work it. You look fan to look expense, like a hat, 75 bucks, apparently. Would they expense a $75 hat for us for the stream or no? I don't, I don't want it. I'll take it. I don't care if you want it. I'm not asking you. You can have both then. I can't get a commander's hat, but I can't justify wearing that. Like, but if it's something else, I'll wear it. So... Yeah, cross moth. Okay, cool. Isaiah McKenzie popped up for a nice role in Thanksgiving. Good thing I missed that. McKenzie 10 targets and two carries while running 80% routes. Stefan Diggs was still the top guy with 15 targets. Gabe Davis had five targets. The six red zone targets split evenly between Diggs and McKenzie. So 10 targets for McKenzie, three in the red zone, two carries, which is noteworthy. So how confident are you in using McKenzie now? And does this lower your view of Gabe the Babe? I think it does lower me on Gabe. I kind of tracked him a bit and saw that the raw targets were up, which is always kind of, I know the market share, I know the potential on those targets is great. Now that it's maybe back down and for a good reason with McKenzie, because McKenzie is actually good at football, I would be lower on him if they were on the main slate. Thankfully, we'll get another week on Thursday night to see how they utilize these guys, but it would lower me on Gabe. I think I would be very open to McKenzie, assuming he's in like the low 6,000 range within a game that I want to stack because the bills are hard to stack to begin with just because we want to play Allen, but then Diggs's salary is always crazy high. So I would be McKenzie in the high 5,000 range for me. Isn't he always like lingering in like 61 to begin with? No, he was like 53 on Thanksgiving. Well, Thanksgiving's a different slate. No, but he would, I think he's been down there anyway, because like his snap rate's been like 47%. His role has been really bad. I haven't been a Dynasty League and like I've been tracking McKenzie a lot and he's been like unusable for the most part. So I need him to be in the high 5s personally, because like there's still a risk that he loses some snaps at some point. Okay, so he got up to 61 and 6,000 in weeks 4 and 6, and then he's been lower than that. Yeah, I think I was still, because I don't ever look at him. I think I just probably thought he was up around there. So he'd probably be up or 5, sure, I'd plan. I think it lowers Gabe as a standalone play, but I'd still love Gabe for Game Stacks, because you know he has, that ceiling is still well within his range of outcomes, and I'm okay chasing that. Like it might burn me a lot of times, but like when it pays off, it pays off. Yeah. Like he can win a slate by himself. So I'm okay chasing that personally. So it does lower me as a standalone play. I had a lot of Gabe on Thanksgiving. If, you know, if I had known this would happen, I wouldn't have been as heavy, but if I had known, what a, you know, the forever caveat. Um, it doesn't really been on Gabe, but I still like it for Game Stacks. I think we're on the same page here. Okay. In the first game with Keenan Allen and Gerald Everett, but without Mike Williams, Austin Neckler led the Chargers and Targets, because sure, why not? You got to freak his own quarterback. Let's dump it off. 15 Targets for Austin Neckler, 10 for Deandre Carter, Keenan and Josh Palmer both had seven. I like Keenan a lot. This game does not alter that from me, but this offense refuses to throw it downfield and it drives me absolutely insane. Where are you on this passing offense for the Chargers? Still like Keenan. I think I need to bump up Eckler a good amount. He had six Targets in the first half. So obviously the nine and the second half, but I was looking at seven in the fourth quarter. So a bit misleading. He had a lot of those dump offs in the fourth quarter. But yeah, I'm good with Keenan. I think that, you know, in the past, whenever Keenan Allen's healthy, he's kind of underrated with how good he is for fantasy. I think people maybe view him more as like a better real life performer, just because he's not like a high adot, like making, you know, downfield catches kind of guy, but... It's a technician. Yeah. So I still like Keenan. I feel good with Herbert. I think he's getting healthier, rolling out of the pocket, making some plays on his own. And as much as I don't love it for the adot for Herbert, dumping it off to Eckler, who can, you know, get some yards after the catch underneath. Yeah. They're the worst dump off options. Yeah. Yeah. So really no change. I think that there's probably a temptation to bump up Eckler after 15 targets, but I don't think that's really indicative of, you know, how they're hoping to use him long term, like to give him, if it was, you'd have got more targets in the first half. Like it's totally flipped when it was earlier this year, because his red zone rule is sick. He had, he had a stretch of like he, so last year, Aaron Jones led the league with 17 red zone targets among running backs. Eckler has 19 this year already, after yesterday. So his red zone rule is awesome, but the yard is upside sucks for a guy in the 9000 range. He's had 71, 63, 180, his pass four games. He has topped 130 once this year. He has topped 100 exceeded 100 only three times. So like his workload is good, but he's not doing a lot with it. Now he could always do that. He could always get the yard. We saw the mix in past lack of yardage is not indicative of future lack of yardage. He did have 199 in one game. So like that's, and he could have get three touchdowns on top of 199 yards, but it's frustrating. Yeah. Name is sour for Keenan quick. 76. Yeah, probably around there. 77, that's fine. Again, the Raiders. Also, yeah. And also I'd say Arizona second and eight odd allowed. So that plays into it a little bit. They get the Raiders next week though. They're still fifth, which is unfortunate. The fifth lowest. Fifth lowest eight odd allowed. But they get torched anyway. Yes, but it's not simply due to the deep ball. So it's actually a perfect mesh for the chargers. They stink and don't have a deep balls. That's where the chargers live, baby. Line of scrimmage, no deeper, you know. Any interest in Deandre Carter? Because I can't get there. Probably not. 62. He has not had more than 73 yards this year. The 73 was on the 10 targets this week. I will pass. Palmer's salary was 68. It's down to 66. I'd rather use him. Than Carter by a wide margin. Coronary Patterson's role expanded a bit more this week. 58% snap rate, his highest since his injury. He had 11 carriers and five targets, which is 21 adjusted opportunities, which is carriers plus 2x targets. That's his most there since week one. His 73 yards, but his most since week three. He had four out of seven red zone chances. So we know this is a good running team. Patterson's role potentially expanding. But Tyler Algiers is good at football and will not go away. Nor should he. He should keep any work. He's good. Are you willing to give Patterson a swipe given the slight expansion? So I was going to say no, but then I did see a salary. Oh, no. So give me a salary for Patterson. What would it be? This will tell us a lot. They play Pittsburgh, which would be. That's actually not bad. So I'll say a 60 slight expansion. 65% snap rate because Algiers is good. 55% snap rates, 20 adjusted opportunities, good red zone role, good rushing offense. I would probably put him around 62. Okay. He's 64. Okay. That's fair. So I mean, he's not living in the range that he has been in the past. We put Patterson above the zone of a night, correct? Yeah. Yeah. 64 is fine. It's not great, but it's fine. It's not a write down. I won't stack that game. So maybe I won't even get there. But I would play Patterson in a one-off just because he has multiple touchdown upside just based on how good his high leverage work can be. If we're star for value, I can see that. So he's in the consideration set is what I would say. That's good enough to be worth thinking about for sure. They kind of squeezed out Caleb Huntley this week. He had a nice little run, but not a lot of work there. So that's not to be interesting at least. Gus Edwards returned from his hamstring injury and had a very typical Ravens running back game. 52% snap rates, 52 yards. He had six of 18 red zone chances, just one target and nine routes. So with this team, we know the passing game work will be limited for a running back. So any interest in Gus Edwards for the Ravens? No, not really, especially not in that game next week. Definitely will be stacking that one. There's always a capped upside for Ravens running backs. I'd say like 65, but I'm probably not going to get there myself. 67. So that's fine. I think we can just kind of say like, yeah, he could get us 100 yards maybe by touchdown, but he's not going to get passing game work. So it's like a max of 16 points. I need a bit more than that for 67 personally. We put Pacheco above Gus, right? Yeah. Okay, cool. The Giants spread the ball around in their first game without Wondale Robinson or first re-game without Wondale Robinson. I don't know, whatever. Richie James, Darius Slayton, Saquon Barclay each had six targets. Isaiah Hodgins had four. Nobody else had more than two. James Ledin routes run despite even the injury coming in. So that's noteworthy, I would say. So James probably the biggest beneficiary alongside Slayton. Is Richie James on your radar or is it just Slayton because he gets a deep work? I want to say it's just Slayton. That was a leading question on my head, by the way. Just Slayton. They play Washington next week. Bad game. Give me a salary on Slayton. So he was 64. That was kind of high. He was using that obligation because that slates. Yeah. His workload is now Mooney-esque. I'd say it's 6,000. He's 62. Like I like him as a player. I just don't like the passing volume. Curtis Samuel is 6,000. I might just prefer Curtis Samuel in this. Well, maybe not. He got blanked in targets. Is that right? Well, yeah, I'd probably go with Slayton. Yeah, I'd go Slayton. Never mind. Despite my adoration. Richie James is 56. I don't think I'd get there. Probably not. Despite my adoration of Reds and Rushing attempts, I don't think I'd get to Samuel at 6,000. Yeah. That offence is... All right. So Law student up there for a second, but we are now back. We'll try to get Brandon back in here in two seconds. And there you are. So my internet went out. My power's been browning out for the past day or so. So we got around that. We're back and cooking. I was asking myself about Daryl Henderson and the Rams. Maybe this was like nature's way of saying, don't talk about the Rams. I said you could skip ahead 15 seconds. Nature's like, cool, we'll do. Thanks. Anyway, so Jared Williams, 70% snap against the Chiefs, 11 carries, 3 targets, 60 yards. The team scored 10 points because they stink. I feel like we should probably game plan around this team not having Matthew Stafford, because it sounds like he's still losing like feeling in his legs. So any interest in Kyren or no? I mean, you could make a case that next week's matchup against the Seahawks is somewhat similar, where like they should play from behind and get him some like receiving work, but had that this week and had seven and a half handle points. So I don't really think that I'm going to get there, even if I'm trying to stack up Seattle. I agree with that. Okay, let's go into situations to monitor. What else do you know from this week? Miles Sanders ran all over the Packers, 143 yards to touchdowns on 21 carries. So it might seem like a roll increase, but I don't think the roll really changed. That game is actually close throughout, despite like 13 nothing in lead within like eight seconds, it's wild. Snap rates though just 54%. So it wasn't just positive script. And the game getting out of hand, anything like that. We actually saw a similar game from him back against the Jaguars. We had 27 carries, 134 yards and two touchdowns, and that didn't lead to a huge roll increase. So I'm not really changing how I view Sanders. I think it was just a great outcome on his workload. He's really good. He looks good when he has the ball, but I'm not really revamping my view on Miles Sanders. Alvin Camara, not someone I want to roster at all ever. 66% snap rate with Mark Ingram back. He played 30%. Last week, they gave David Johnson 18% of the snaps. I don't know what the situation is, but it's clear for one reason or another that they don't want to give Camara a huge workload that we've seen from him early in the season. When he was at 75%. And if it was a tight game against the 49ers, if you're not leading on Camara, then how do you talk yourself into playing Alvin Camara? Am I too low on Camara? Nope. Alvin stinks. Alvin's bad. Do you understand Swift? Roll bad. Alvin's good here for Swift. Of course. He's not there for me yet. 33% snap rate again. 30% in the first half. Eight targets, which we could maybe hang our hats on, are comically oversized hats. But six were in the second half. Just under 30% red zone opportunity share. Just too limited, so don't chase the targets and think that he's working his way back. I think we need to see more. Also Justin Jackson is good. Let's stop the Justin Jackson disrespect.  He's awesome. Go, cats. A bit hidden by the overall game flow for this one, but Jeff Wilson, 77% first half snap rate. Hope the salary comes down. They play the 49ers next week. Revenge game. In season revenge game too. How does that change things? It changes a lot. It goes from being 68% of my process to 74%. Yeah. Give me a salary for Wilson, because I would assume it comes down based on the fact that... Very tough matchup. Also a revenge game for Raheem Moser, if he's back. Wow. It's a really tough matchup. I would say probably like 73, given the matchup and stuff. 68. Okay. I like that. I'll be two. Again, good roll before that game got completely out of hand. He got a little banged up at 1.2, but he came back in, so he's probably okay. But 68 is low enough to be on my radar for sure. So write down it in terms of like dig into it for me. Yeah. Zajon's 14 targets, 145 yards. We find that when I like get off Zajon, he's like, hey, come back. And I'm like, all right, fine. So we're going to like that game next week against the Lions. Is he back? Out of obligation, yeah. Okay. Give me a... If he can do that.  I'm going to want to stack that game. Probably a pretty low salary. And I'm 64. What? What's Christian Kirk? 25. I'm not right there. No, I did. Okay. So Zay in the games he's played has a 23% target share. Kirk is a 24%. That's actually not a huge gap. I don't think Zay gets a lot of deep works. I think a lot of that goes to the other Jones. Is that disrespectful to the Marv? A little bit. Zay, you get some red zone work, I don't know. 64 is not low, but I wouldn't be totally off him in there. Yeah, for the game stacks. And then David and Joku's roll got better this week. Seven targets on 31 routes, 76% route rate. So I think that he's probably back on the radar for whenever we need tight ends. And they play the Texans next week. We may need to consider the Genuflect stack next week. Because Christian McCaffrey is 82. Christian Kirk is 75. And Christian Watson is 65. Potentially the Genuflect stack. I didn't know where you were going with that. There are no Jesuses in the player pool. So we'll work on it. We'll find a way to make this work for that. We don't talk about production often, but James Conner finally did something with his volume. He led, he had 140 yards against Chargers. Previous maximum was 86, 97% snap rate. His second time above 95% in three games with Benjamin out of the equation. So let's see if the Conner can still turn the volume into a ceiling in the right spots. I wouldn't bank on it unless it's an outlier matchup like the Chargers are. But it's worth noting. Michael Gallop said a new season high with eight targets Thursday. Three of those were deep. Turned it into 63 yards. He's not back to his old self yet, but I think he's getting closer. And it's possible he can have a ceiling in the right spots. He seems like he's trending up. So it was good to see because I like Michael Gallop a lot. Traylon Burks did get bailed out by a fumble recovery touchdown. I was very nervous. That wouldn't count until you sent me a screenshot of the rules. So thank you. The rule is very solid. So it was masked to bit the scoring, but it was still a good roll. 70 yards on six targets. Two of those targets were deep. We ran 29 routes on 35 drop backs, which was time for the team high. I'm still really into Burks' value play. They get the Eagles next week. Not the best DFS game, but a pretty good real life game. So name me a salary on Traylon Burks. Well, Asia Brown revenge game. Oh, ooh, good. And will he fumble against them too? He might. Burks, I just like, I can't get the comp out of my head of like early career, Asia Brown where like, it doesn't surprise me that he got 70 yards on only six targets. Like, of course he recovered a fumble in the end zone. That's just, that's what he does. Yeah. Because I fade Asia Brown, he runs down and, you know, just falls on a fumble and then zone. Exactly. Gets three targets, but 127 yards and a touchdown on them. And four touchdowns. Yeah. Because of the fumble recovery. Salary. I'd have a hard time going much above like 61 just because the volume is so limited. But I'll play him in stacks because I want that game. Spot on 61. I think that's fine. I'm a born. In their first game with no Kyle Pitts, Alameda Zaccheus led the Falcons in targets with eight. He had 91 yards and a deep target. Drake London at 29 yards on four targets. If London's not going to dominate targets without Kyle Pitts, I'm not doing it. I had an Alameda Zaccheus NFL all day card at one point. I guess it'll look like $3. So what, uh, what is dominating targets here? Is it eight? It's like, Well, I'm thinking like a, he needs like a 30% target share. So like three, three or four targets. Yeah. So you got there. Yeah. Four targets. Rashid Shahid seems to have earned a bigger role with the Saints. He ran 20 routes on 31 drop backs. He hadn't even played 20 snaps in the game until last week, much less 20 routes. Shahid had just three targets and this offense stinks, but I would say I'm at about two ETNs on him. Given the burst he has shown, he's got some speeds. So I'm at two ETNs on Rashid Shahid, uh, monitoring at least. Sure. Let's go to philosophical changes and talk about bad offenses changing quarterbacks. Maybe the jets don't belong in the bad offense bucket anymore. Mike White looked good. The jets still pretty run heavy though. They had a 48% early down first half pass rates. That was at 49% of the games with Zach Wilson. I'm guessing the rain played a pretty big role in this because White played well overall. Really good efficiency. That could allow them to be more pass heavy going forward. And the productivity matters. Garrett Wilson, 95 yards and eight targets, Elijah Moore at a long touchdown, but the snaps were still low. He had just two targets. So I'm in on Wilson here, even with a continued run heavy approach. I'm not in on more at all, not even Corey Davis. It's kind of just more for me. Where are you in this passing offense with Mike White at the helm? Kind of just Wilson, you mean? What did I say? Just more. Oh yeah, just Wilson, sorry. Yeah, I'm the same. Just flashbacks to one relevant pass catcher on a team that's not great. I'm sure I've given Garrett Wilson the Brandon Cokes comp in the past, not 2022 Brandon Cokes, but literally almost every other year for him. So he's probably going to be like 65, 66. 66, I think that's fine. For his role, playing indoors next week, against a not threatening secondary, but I think that's totally fine. Like I wish I had a couple on us with White Wilson this week, but it's only because he was in a weird salary range and I was like, okay, I guess I'll take him here. I didn't seek him out. I'll be more receptive to him this week than I was this past week. Yeah, same here. The Panthers with Sam Darnold, very run heavy. Early down first half pass rate was only 30% against a very good Broncos defense. Panthers ended the game with 19 passes and 48 rushes, leaned on both Deontay Forman and Chuba Hubbard. Forman 24 carries Hubbard 17. They play Seattle next week. So do you think they stick with this plan and ruin that game? What's your read on them? Yeah, Seattle's not right. That's my fault. Who do they play? Oh, they're on a buy. They're on buy. I think they play Seattle after the buy. Yeah, that's not bad. What's your read on them with Darnold overall? Yeah, that's tough. I have them as the sixth. If you look at all individual games and you just for like game context, I have this as the sixth slowest pace of any game all season for any team. Pass rate over expectation on pass and run plays minus 19.8% doesn't get a whole lot lower than that. So I think it's a spot where even if they're not moving the ball efficiently on the ground, they're just going to try to like burn clock, which I guess in a way, if you're really, really inefficient. Yeah, you should muck it up. Well, like if you're really inefficient, then those are more like three and outs that that could help the opposing team. But yeah, I mean, Foreman, Harvard. Darnold's probably the best quarterback play they've gotten all year though. So that's encouraging at least. Maybe they open it up a bit, but I doubt it. I do want to go back to the Jets briefly because William brought up a good point over on YouTube. He's going to give Conklin a look this week at 5K. I don't want to go there for volume, but revenge game. Tyler Conklin against the Vikings. Williams like YouTube avatar is purple. So Tyler Conklin revenge game against the Vikings. William, I think it's destiny. Tyler Conklin all in at 5,000 for next week. The Texans with Kyle Allen really pass heavy when accounted for context. 74% first half pass rate in part because they were down 30 like right away. Targets are spread out. Nico Collins had nine targets. Damian Pierce had six. It's still got like 17 yards total for the game. Brandy Cooks and Jordan Acons had five. In total, 10 Texans had a target. Nobody had more than 61 yards. If Houston were to go super pass heavy, would you consider anybody here as a bring back option for stacks or no? No. Cool. The Rams with Bryce Perkins, very run heavy as expected. Early on a first half pass rate was 28%. They ran 18 plays and lay down to the first half, which is low. Five passes, 13 rushes. Perkins negative 0.41 passing that expected points for a drop back. His 26 drop backs resulted in 100 passing yards. This offense is a full crossoff. I think their games are pretty close to being full crossoffs. There's bad. Yeah. Pass rate of expectation minus 15 points. That's what we're going to get game after game with them. Agreed. So let's now go to our salary scroll for week number 13. Open up the week 13 and main slate over on Fandil and going position and by position Brandon. Ooh. Something caught my attention immediately and I want to know if the same thing stood out to you. How immediate? Immediately. Then no. Joe Burrow is only 83. Okay. That was my best guess. An astronomical total that I think could go over.  Correct. Okay. That's pretty sick. Yeah. I mean we're going to have a ton of high upside quarterback options. We have Mahomes, Hertz. I don't know if Justin Fields is a huge upside guy at this point because I don't know if he's going to run the ball if he did. Yeah. Burrow and a potential shootout. I don't think Lamar super upside in that game against Denver. He's still Lamar but yeah. Herbert against the Raiders. Tua. Not the best matchup but a good salary. Trevor Lawrence touched on Trevor is 75. I think about that. That's interesting. Yeah. Punting a quarterback means you're betting against a lot of guys. I don't know if it's punting though against the Lions. No, no, no, no. Below. Oh. Shredder Lawrence. Maybe we'll call him that. Shredder Lawrence actually shredded the Ravens lane in that game. That could be fun. Herbert 81 is also enticing to me despite my frustrations with the offense. With the matchup being what it is. I think Burrow stands out in a pretty major way at 83 in that game. I can see that. Yeah. Okay. Running back. What stands out to you there? Oh boy. Nick Chubb against Houston. That's the first game with Sean Watson back as well which boosts Chubb unfortunately. And a revenge game. Well, I don't know if it's a revenge. That game's just gross. I feel like sick thinking about that game. Josh Jacobs 95 or Eckler 92. Who do you prefer? Jacobs by a significant margin. Yeah, me too. Okay. I like both. A Jacob to Eckler stack is. Spende. I don't know if you can do it but could be multiple touchdowns each in that game. Indeed. Oh man. We already mentioned McCaffrey at 82. But scrolling beneath that, Dalvin Cook is in a really, really, really tough matchup with the Jets.  But a salary of 76.  This is cherry picking. But pass four games. Six, six, five and five targets for Dalvin Cook in those games. I would consider him despite a really tough matchup there. I don't really want to use guys against the Jets ever, but that's a low enough salary to give it some thought. Yeah. The 7000 range is a lot of borderline guys. Like Aaron Jones. I'm not saying Naji Harris, but if he has a huge workload against the Falcons, I could see the case potentially. Miles Sanders, we know the upsides there. Not the best matchup, but not the worst matchup. Piran Pacheco. Piran would be, I think, a lock button if there's no mixing. Yeah. I think Jeff Wilson would very much in the conversation too. So I think we're really going to have to figure out if any of those guys has is going to hit their high end of outcomes. One person who is, I think, worth discussing is Damian Pierce, his salary is $6500, facing the Browns. I have not used him in a while. It's been a minute, and that's been a very good thing that I've not used him. Do we think that he still has a ceiling in a very good matchup, or is that offense just too bad for him to be good? I mean, at a certain point, you've got to factor in some narrative stuff. I think they'll be as locked in as they can be in Houston. Very good on the ground matchup. I think that there's a case for it, especially if I'm playing in Joku or something at tight end. DPJ's salary is low. I don't know if there's a single write down running back yet, though. Unless we get no mix in. Yeah. But that's an injury contingency. Wilson is close. Jeff Wilson at 68 is close to consideration there. And I think that Pierce could be, it really depends on how starved we are for value, I think, and Cordero at 64 is worth considering. I don't feel great about anybody yet, though. Yeah, no one really, really jumping out. And I don't see anything as far as the value backs go either, like below them. Like the best case is on a midnight. Yeah, exactly. Okay, so let's go to wide receiver then. What do you see in there? Sorry, I was still hoping to notice something down here, but receiver, not as many high salary guys. I mean, there are, but not like multiple $9,000 salaries up here. Jamar Chase, still 89 coming off the return. Amon Ross St. Brown finally found the end zone this past week. His, he's 8,000. I'd like to get there. I just don't, you know, it's hard to know if he'll be able to at this time. Also, Jalen Waddle, 79 is interesting. I think that's pretty low for him given his, even that offense. Yeah. Just above that, there was T Higgins, still 83 with Chase 89. That's going to make it hard to stack that game. Hard to stack it, but Higgins is still worth it in stacks. Like realistically, I don't get to a lot of 8,000 receivers and non-game stacks, but yeah, as you were saying. Yeah. Road game for Amari Cooper. Well, we see the road game narrative for Amari Cooper, but indoors Amari Cooper, which means he won't be cold. Usually it's when he's cold that he turtles. So he's indoors at least. I guess that's worth, he's 78, his salary is. He's giving me Keenan Allen all day. Yeah, 77. Yeah, Keenan's pretty sick. For DK, 76. I'd rather use Keenan than Amari. Christian Kirk, 75 I'd rather use. Ooh, I'd rather go Amari than Kirk personally. I think the upside equation is better. Kirk said 100 yards twice this year. He had 96 and another, so that's kind of. That's true. I'm also a little drawn in toward the, the lines match up forgetting that Cooper's playing the Texans. Yeah. Juju at 69. It's uncomfy, but I feel like, oh, actually Devontae Smith is 68. Devontae Smith, 68. He's had eight, nine and nine targets the past three games with Dallas Goddard either out or limited. No touched or one touchdown in those three games. So the scoring hasn't been there, but it's a pretty good workload for 68. If we get like full practices from Debo at 68. I don't think we will. Honestly. I don't think we will either. Yeah. Again, Garrett Wilson Sowery comes in at $6,600. Same as Josh Palmer. So that can make Palmer a good pivot if Wilson winds up getting super, super popular. What? Deontae Johnson 65 and just like. That's upsetting. Unreal. So I'm guessing get priced up to like safeguard against like a Monday night bump, but how are you going to get Deontae Johnson a Monday night bump? Like 70 yards and be a new career high. So the low $6,000 is not bad. You got Donovan Peoples Jones $6,100. You got Traylon Barks 61 as well. I think both those are pretty good. Yeah. Both those guys have actual yardage upside and decent roles. Yeah. I mean, we'll take a look at like Mack Hollins, but. I used him in the four PM only so yesterday, but I didn't like seek him out. Yeah. And his salary went up $500. So. Because he scored. Yeah. I don't see a whole lot in the 5000 range personally. Maybe maybe I will have to like consider Richie James if there's literally no. Oh no, we got it. We got it. We got it. We got it. We got it. We got it. Oh my goodness. Oh, oh, oh, let me check something quick. Ah, we found the skeleton key for the Slates. Can I interest you? In a man set to face his former team, his former team, or his former coach who's not there anymore. Humiliated him on in like somewhat public situations. This player came back in an injury to a pretty full snap rate this past week. Five targets, not great, but three of those were deep. This player had a red zone target as well. He has one of the league's most efficient quarterbacks, one of the league's best quarterbacks, in a game we want to stack on Sunday.  Can I interest you in, as I stall? His name is DJ. Oh, Daryl. Daryl Chark Jr. I finally figured out it was going to be DJ Chark. Can I interest you in Daryl Chark Jr. at $5,300? Only if we go double revenge game, value receiver stack with Marvin Jones on the opposite side. I'm not doing that part, but I'll do the the Chark side. I might pee myself about how much I like DJ Chark. Because I love DJ Chark. Well, sure, but like, dude, listen to these hardest totals. 52, 0, 46, 0 and 16. How do you turn that down? How do you say no to that? What's wrong with you?   I was born in the dumpster. Yeah, I was born in the trash. I mean, like, sure. I think he's playable, but I don't think he's like a lock button. I think he's a lock button. DJ Chark in every lineup.  You guaranteed two touchdowns for a mom around St. Brown two weeks ago. I'm guaranteeing two for DJ Chark. That's what I was going to say. I thought you were going to say I'm guaranteeing 35 yards for DJ Chark. No, I'm guaranteeing. Well, he might get two touchdowns and not get 35 yards, but. I mean, we're going to want to stack that game, so he's going to be in the player pool, but he's not like. I'm going to have way too much DJ Chark. So I always send my exposures to you and JJ Zacharias on Sunday mornings. When I slack you those on Sunday morning, if I have a 40 next to DJ Chark's name, slap me, slap me. Hit me hard. Hit me hard. I deserve it at that point. Like, oh my goodness.  Like, what do you think a salary should be if you're this excited over him at 53? Can I not send exposures this week? Did I send them the wrong channel? Oh, I'm trying to find what happened this week. Maybe if I just search for Berks. This is a great podcast. Are you frozen again? Oh, I think Jim's frozen again. All right. I thought he was, all right. That's what he gets for having a slack open. So I think he's messaging me. Lost power. All right. So Jim lost power again. I'm going to go through a salary scroll of the tight ends because I can only assume that Jim thinks that DJ Chark's salary should be like 65, which is a bit ridiculous. But next week, we're going to have Travis Kelsey at 8,400 in a game against the Bengals that we're going to want to stack. We know that both Jamar, Chase, and Tia can come in at high salaries. So that's going to be a bit difficult. We're going to have to get a little bit creative in terms of how we stack that game. I don't even know necessarily if just many stacks. So stacks of Chase or Higgins with Kelsey and no Mahomes is going to be the answer because we're only going to be able to save so much salary from Mahomes. Probably the lowest we can get being Trevor Lawrence at 75 for next week that I'm realistically going to consider. But we also have Mark Andrews back on the main slate. So we have Kelsey and Andrews on the main slate. Andrews' salary down to 7,100 after a 7-target 50-yard game. Lost a fumble. Also dropped a very catchable touchdown pass. So we could have seen him with... No, so basically about 15, 16 fandal points if he converted that. Realistically, the salary or the results, the ceiling has been a bit more capped for Andrews than we would have liked to have seen based on what his potential is.  Okay, then we have T.J. Hawkinson. His roll got a little bit worse this week. His first half snap rate, if I'm not mistaken, came down a decent amount. I'll look that up here. But for him overall, on Thanksgiving, six targets did score, but just 43 yards. Hasn't cleared 80 yards since his 179-yard game back against the Seahawks whenever Detroit at the time was just super depleted. But Hawkinson had a great roll since his arrival in Minnesota in Week 9. But 84%, 100%, 100% first half snap rate. And then last week, down to 76%, that's a bit concerning. George Kittle, just another weird spot where we see the multiple touchdown potential from him against Arizona. But did that on just six targets, had four targets, 26 yards. This past week against the Saints, we're going to be open to stacking that game against Miami, at least with mini stacks. I don't know if Tua is going to become a true priority, but Kittle at 62, Pat Fryermuth 59, David and Joku 58 in a pretty good matchup against, at least team-wide matchup, against the Texans. So we do have some options with potential paths to upside. Jim, are you back? Did it not boot you this time? No, it did not. Where are you? I was talking, I went through in decent detail, Kelsey Andrews, they're sort of upside and maybe lack thereof for Andrews recently. But down through in Joku at tight end. I think that those are like the six options with potential upside. Did you capitulate and say the DJ Chark is the best play of all time yet or no? Well, no, I was going to go back to that. But I just wanted to clarify that Kelsey and Andrews still have much, much higher upside than Hawkinson and Kittle. Upside is a bit capped with their usage in Hawkinson, not getting a lot of yardage right now. This role has to kind of scale back a tad in the first half. But I would probably, I'd rather play Fryermuth and in Joku, I think than Kittle and Hawkinson. I think I agree on both counts. I will say Foster Morrow's role this most recent week was decent. Still didn't show the yardage upside, but it seemed like he was being used like somewhat often. Gerald Everett, I'd rather get hit by a bus. I used him a little bit too much this most recent week, but he's 54. There's that. I'm so upset with Russell Wilson for killing Greg Dulcich. No one cares about my season long teams, but the expectation was this would be a fun offense. Get Portland Sutton a good quarterback. I have a lot of Portland Sutton across season long, but I think I'm now more incensed at the fact that Greg Dulcich is. I think he had a touchdown called back on a penalty this week, but he did. And I think that like a couple of plays later, Russ threw a touchdown to some random dude. Brandon Johnson or something. That's not a person. Eleven yards for Dulcich in the past and two of the past three games. Lawrence Cage is a tight end this week, just in case you're curious. We're saved.  That's actually not bad, honestly. Shout out, William. You're basically banking against a huge game from Kelsey, which at 84, there's really no room for error there. And Andrews, if the win, like, not the best game. So maybe he doesn't quite get there, but. I did look up Noah Gray's salary. I will admit this. This is like the first step to acceptance is admitting. Is that a thought of the same works? They put a lot of heavy personnel recently. He's only had three and two targets and not a lot of yards, except he's a good football player. He's at like, I think 1.2 yards per route run this year. So we're going to get us to like, let's say 60 yards. We don't need to run like, you know, 50 plays to the cheese. It's doable, right? Noah Gray, I have his yards per route run at 1.20. Yeah. So only 50 routes and we'll get there. Travis Kelsey, 2.51. He's so good. He is. I do want him to retire, though, to clear the paint for my Noah Gray dynasty shares, but. So I think that really no value honestly at this point. Yeah. Aside from DJ Chark, I still need to know what his salary should be. If you're that excited about him, it's 3,300. It should be 53, but that's okay. You should have just stayed offline. You can't defeat me that easily. I'll never die. I'll come back to defend my guy DJ Chark and look up Noah Gray's salary until the day I'm gone. Okay. We've seen the salaries. We've seen the slate. We've broken it all down. No to future me. I don't know what I got this week. What's your notes future you? I think my notes future me is just stack those games and don't worry about it. Stack the games, find a way to do it, dig into the value there, but stack those games, get back to your old process. I think stack those games, but also that means accepting imperfect opportunities such as a DJ Chark, Marvin Jones, an imperfect like Zay Jones situation where you're maybe. Imperfect salary too. With the imperfect salary just because it's better often to do that and hopes that those games scored 60 total points, then trying to pick the right like Curtis Samuel one off or Darius Slayton one off in a game that might be a lot worse. Trust the total, baby. Trust the total. Stack the high total games we actually have this week. So we can revert back to our old process. And I think feel pretty good about that. We'll dig in on Thursday to see if any value pops up. Hopefully it does, but we'll see at that time. That's all we got here for today. I'm going to go see if I can get my energy to stop browning out. We'll see to be determined. Maybe I can't. Maybe I can. We'll see. Anyway, make sure you are subscribed to the Number Fire Daily Fantasy podcast feed wherever you get your podcasts. We have course on Apple podcast, Spotify, Stitcher, etc., etc. And also on the Fando YouTube page live 10 a.m. Eastern on Thursday to break down the week 13 main slate. Brandon, if people have questions for you on Twitter, where can they find you there? On Twitter, Acadol13, G-D-U-L-A-1-3. And I am on Twitter at Jim Sonnis, J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S. You can also follow the FanDuel Podcast Network at FanDuel Podcast. Big thank you. Why are you smiling? Because I did it backwards. Oh, I didn't notice. I don't look at you. Like, I don't listen to you. Why do you think I look at you? Come on. Come on. Come on. I am on Twitter. I already said that. I almost said I'm on Twitter. I can do it 13. What's that? This thing. We'll talk to you all Thursday. Have a great week. This has been the Heat Check Fantasy Podcast. Powered by Number Fire.