A New DFS Value Metric To Remedy the Flaws of Points Per Dollar
On the surface, basing DFS decisions off points per dollar makes sense. After all, your aim is to score more points per dollar than your opponents. But as sturdy as the concept of points per dollar is in theory on a macro level, it can often break down in practice on a micro level.
Here are the two main issues with using points per dollar to determine/compare player value:
The higher a player’s salary, the fewer points per dollar he needs to be valuable, and vice-versa. If two players are projected for the same amount of points per dollar but have different salaries, they are not equally valuable.
Every position averages a different amount of points per dollar. If two players are projected for the same amount of points per dollar but play different positions, they are not equally valuable.
That's why I've devised a Value metric for comparing player values in DFS that 4for4 will be shifting to this year.
The metric, which we will refer to simply as "Value," uses multi-year historical data to determine a player's scoring expectation based on two things: (1) salary and (2) position. That scoring expectation is then subtracted from a player's projected points to arrive at his Value, or his projected points above/below expectation.
Let's go through two examples—one comparing players at the same position with different salaries, and one comparing players at different positions—and show how using the new Value metric is superior to points per dollar and how it will give you an edge.