Does stacking work in daily fantasy basketball?
Follow theScore's fantasy feed on Twitter (@theScoreFantasy) for the latest news, features and more.
The strategy of "stacking" comes from the world of DFS football. In football, stacking refers to pairing a quarterback and a receiver from the same team in hopes that the two combine on a scoring play, thus providing fantasy owners with a brevity of points in one fell swoop.
In NBA DFS, stacking isn't as popular. This is because the correlation between two players simultaneously having big games is much harder to predict and doesn't necessarily correlate like a QB and WR do. The success of a shooting guard won't for instance lead to a dominant performance from a center. If anything, one player's success on the hardcourt usually results in opportunities being taken away from his teammates.
But that isn't to say that stacking should be entirely avoided. The strategy does have some merit in certain situations and with certain player combinations. Here are a few tips to keep in mind when considering a stacking strategy in NBA DFS.
Three's a crowd
As is the case in NFL DFS, stacking is usually reserved for a combination of two players. These two players should see their production intertwined in a way that allows both players to benefit on a single play, whether it be a touchdown pass or a 3-point shot coming off an assist.
But there's a significant disadvantage to rostering more than two players in any stack. A three player stack, whether it's in basketball or football, is simply a poor strategy because scoring plays can only benefit two players. In basketball, there is only one assist (if that) and one basket per scoring play.
On any scoring play in basketball, three of the five players on the floor are left out of the play and see no benefit. In actuality, these players see a reduction in value when left out of a scoring play. First, they miss out on one of the game's limited scoring opportunities. Second, there is now less time left on the game clock, which consequently reduces the available time for these players to earn DFS points of their own.
It's relatively obvious, but DFS players should be clear on this point before further looking into stacking. But with this established, let's delve into some more in-depth successful stacking strategies.
Start with a passing point guard
The main benefit of starting with a point guard is that they contribute to the production of other players. With distribution being a key part of any point guard's role, a strong performance from a PG can turn into a strong performance from any other position. Similar to a QB, a PG has a role that can be both productive for themselves and for their teammates.
Specifically, NBA DFSers will want to identify top level passing point guards. The success of an NBA stack will primarily rely on an assist leading to a basket of some sort, so DFSers need to maximize their exposure to these type of plays. Names like John Wall, Chris Paul, Rajon Rondo, and Ricky Rubio are a few of the elite names that an NBA stack should start with.
Because point guards earn DFS points not only from their passing but also their scoring and 3-Point ability, they should be the starting point for any NBA stack. A point guard simply represents the best chance of finding a player that participates at either end of a scoring play, whether it be finishing off a play with a basket or creating one via an assist.
Add a scorer or a big man
The most likely candidates to feed off a strong point guard performance are high-level scorers or big men that benefit from easy baskets. Look for these type of players as the secondary choice in any DFS stack. They will be the ones converting your point guard's pass into points and an assist.
Using the example of Rondo and DeMarcus Cousins, we can see a correlation between the success of both players last year. In 19 games when Rondo had 15 or more assists, Cousins tacked on at least 25 points in 10 of those games. And in the 49 instances when Rondo had at least 10 assists, Cousins had 25 or more points in 23 of those 49 games.
Another pairing that demonstrates this correlation is the Clipper duo of Paul and Blake Griffin. In the 30 games that Griffin played up to December 25 last year, the dynamic forward had at least 25 points in four of the 11 occasions when Paul had 10 or more assists -- a correlation rate of 36.3 percent.
However, the best correlation for success between point guard and a scorer may be between Paul and SG J.J. Redick. Last season, Redick had 23 games of at least 20 points. In 17 of those 23 games, Paul also had at least 10 assists -- a correlation rate of 73.9 percent. With this example, DFS players should look for matchups conducive to Redick and attempt to double up on DFS points by drafting Paul.
Stacking in cash games
Similar to NFL DFS, stacking in NBA DFS is often limited to GPP play. With the overall goal in cash games being to establish a high floor, stacking can be dangerous in cash games because of how a poor game could derail both your players or the tendency for one player to take scoring opportunities from another.
But stacking teammates in a cash game isn't out of the question. In contrast to the basic stacking strategy that predicates finding players who simultaneously benefit from one another's productivity, NBA cash game stacking should be approached from the opposing viewpoint.
Take for example the frontcourt of the Memphis Grizzlies, dominated by PF Zach Randolph and C Marc Gasol. Last year, Randolph and Gasol combined to average 14.8 rebounds per game, 7.8 from Randolph and 7.0 from Gasol. Overall, the two combined to grab 26.5 percent of the total rebounds available when either was on the floor.
In a theoretical cash game lineup that rostered Randolph and Gasol, DFS players would establish a more projectable rebounding total by selecting the two rather than guessing on two players from separate teams. By rostering Gasol and Randolph, DFSers reduce the risk in a specific aspect of your lineup, and therefore reduce the volatility of your roster as a whole -- a primary goal in cash games.