Successful players across DFS have divided opinions on ownership, what it means and how to take it into consideration. In a vacuum, everyone can acknowledge that given you like a player on a slate it is always better to get them at lower ownership, thus increasing your ROI in the event they hit their ceiling. One of the things I haven’t seen discussed and that matters immensely is how efficient the market is at identifying value. When we decide to take a stance against a player, are they likely to outperform their salary based expectations? In an earlier piece, I took a look at how DailyRoto’s projections did at identifying value, and in this week I will take a look at how the market as a whole does.
To start off the first step is always data aggregation, so leveraging the ownership data from The Fantasy Fanatics, and the historical game logs for performance and pricing from our own tools at DailyRoto I was able to aggregate a file for every player-game on the season and set out to test a few different hypothesis:
- Is the market efficient? In other words, do highly owned players perform better in raw fantasy production?
- How does the performance in different ownership buckets vary by position?
- Layering in salary parameters, how do the answers from the above as it relates to providing return on value as it relates to the salary cap?