Risk and Reward-Thursday Night 9/28/17

Slide1

By John Bush

Risk and Reward-Thursday Night Edition

I wished to give my take on the GB vs CHI using Risk and Reward-Thursday Night

—————————————————————————————–

Risk and Reward-Thursday Night using my Risk and Reward Analysis will include:

  • Game Script
  • Defense against the Position (DAP) Data
  • Non-PPR and PPR Rankings (100 to 0) Green to Red
  • My Risk Assessments for each Player (High, Mid, and Low Risk)

I have constructed these data charts below to maximize your visual view of the entire game landscape. Use thoughtfully. My philosophy is less is more? I will hit the highlights but will not give you the same old tired pundit driven opinions.

 —————————————————————————————–

Game Script and DAPs

Figure 1 How to Read Game Scripts and Defense Against the Position (DAP) Figures.

Slide1

—————————————————————————————–

Figure 2 Short Discussion of Risk 

Use the Risk Discussion for a deeper understanding of player risk levels are shown below. See the Detail Game Risk and Ranking Data for each team.

Risk and Reward-Thursday NightSlide23

—————————————————————————————–

Figure 3 Thursday Night GB vs. CHI Games Scripts and DAP Analysis

The data shown in Figure 2 shows the following:

  • Predicted Total Game Points (near 46 points) GB 30 vs SFO 16
  • 2017 Seasonal DAPs for Each Team’s Offense to face. (Find the Positional Advantages)

——————————————————————————————

Risk and Reward-Thursday NightSlide1

——————————————————————————————-

Looking at the data, the total points for this game should be near 46 points of scoring or. I envision a skewed game where GB scores 30 and the CHI team are 16 point producers. The defenses will be easy (Figure 2) and the offensive capacity of CHI is its the downfall. CHI can not score enough rushing to win!

Figure 4. GB Team Players Rankings (PPR and Non_PPR) and Risk 

GB faces an easy defense via overall points given at a +1.4 DAP. However, the CHI defense has produced -2.8  QB DAP. Rodgers will not have a career game and will be scoring a little below his average. I still have Rodgers ranked at 100 and low risk! I will be playing him.

Montgomery faces a -1.2 DAP and should produce an average type of game. One score or two would not surprise! I have him at 91 low-risk player

The GB WRs face a -1.1 DAP and will produce on average. Nelson is at 96.7 and low ranked as well Adams at 83 and low ranked. These players should collect 3 TDs. The 4th TD is not as likely as Allison or Cobb ranked about 60 average are high-risk types. Gambles in your DFS games!

GB TEs should have an easier game of all positions at +1.3 DAP. I have Bennett at mid risk and ranked at 78 in PPR. I am still not expecting a big night though!

GB’s average night will crush CHI’s average production! We may be overestimating the game’s total points if GB gets the game in hand early! 

Risk and Reward-Thursday NightSlide2

——————————————————————————————

Risk and Reward-Thursday NightSlide1

——————————————————————————————

Figure 5. CHI Team Players Rankings (PPR and Non_PPR) and Risk

Does CHI have a chance to win? Seem unlikely playing on the road! The CHI QB Glennon faces a -4.2 DAP. A below average situation and Glennon will be struggling in the passing game. Howard/Cohen Double RB attack will be the main threat to GB! The RBs face a nice +2.7 and each should score a TD.  If they are to upset and win it will come from this group!

Howard/Cohen Double RB attack will be the main threat to GB! The RBs face a nice +2.7 and each should score a TD.  If they are to upset and win it will come from this group!

Zach Miller the TE faces a very tough -5.4 DAP and should not be a factor!

The WRs are all low ranked. Wright is ranked at 55 (eh) but is a high-risk player. Maybe he scores but facing a -2.8 away from home, I would not use him!

Risk and Reward-Thursday NightSlide3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>