Few will read this, so good for us.  JC, here is your slate; thinking of testing this

Positional Usage Index (PUI)

Built from the Weeks 1–4 team scales (0–100 for RB, WR, TE).

Three components:

• Balance Score = standard deviation of the three position scales. Lower = more balanced. Higher = more extreme (one position dominates the personnel mix).

• Max Scale = the highest of the three position scales. Flags the extreme lean.

• Average Scale = mean of the three scales. Overall volume of skill-position bodies on the field.

Most extreme teams (highest Balance Score)

LV (54), PHI (52), TEN (51), TB (48), DAL (43), LAC (42), NO (42), WAS (41)

Most balanced teams (lowest Balance Score)

SEA (15), KC (22), DEN (24), ARI (25), CIN (26), NE (26), NYJ (27), GB (29)

Extreme teams are almost always one-sided: high WR + low TE (PHI, TEN, TB, DAL, NO) or high TE + low WR (LV). Balanced teams sit near the middle on all three.

Historical results of extreme vs balanced teams

Personnel extremes and balance have been studied mainly through 11 vs 12/13 personnel rates.

• Extreme high-WR teams (heavy 11 personnel) concentrate targets on fewer receivers. This raises the floor and ceiling for the top 1–2 WRs but compresses the WR3 and reduces TE volume. Historically, the highest 11-personnel teams (Eagles, Titans, Bucs, Cowboys, Saints in recent years) produce the most fantasy-viable top receivers and the fewest usable third options.

• Extreme high-TE teams (heavy 12/13 personnel) do the opposite. League 12-personnel usage has risen from ~20% to ~24–33% over recent seasons. These teams suppress WR3 volume and create more TE opportunity, but they also tend to be more run-heavy, which can limit overall passing volume. The Raiders (highest TE scale this year) and recent Rams/Bears heavy-personnel groups fit this pattern.

• Balanced teams spread snaps more evenly. They produce fewer extreme individual volume spikes but more usable mid-tier options at multiple positions. Research on personnel efficiency shows that success depends more on execution within the chosen grouping than on the grouping itself. Extreme teams are not systematically better or worse in EPA; they simply concentrate or dilute opportunity differently.

Fantasy implication after four weeks

Extreme teams (high Balance Score) produce clearer “buy the top option, fade the third” signals. Balanced teams produce more committee or shared-volume situations. The early-season PUI is moderately sticky because coaching staffs rarely abandon their base personnel lean in the next four weeks unless injuries force it. The biggest year-to-year shifts have come from intentional scheme changes (more 12 personnel league-wide) rather than random fluctuation.

In short: extreme teams create concentrated fantasy upside at the dominant position and compressed upside elsewhere. Balanced teams create more shared, lower-ceiling opportunity. Both can win games; they just distribute fantasy volume differently.

Using the Positional Usage Index for player props

The Positional Usage Index (Balance Score + Max Scale) is most useful for props after Week 2, once the early-season personnel lean has been confirmed. Extreme teams create clearer volume edges; balanced teams create more noise.

Why the index has prop value

• Extreme high-WR teams (PHI, TEN, TB, DAL, NO) put ~2.65–2.73 WRs on the field and suppress TE usage. This concentrates targets and air yards on the top 1–2 receivers. Reception and receiving-yard overs on those primary WRs become more attractive because the alternative targets are structurally limited. The opposite holds for TE props on those teams.

• Extreme high-TE teams (LV and, to a lesser extent, BUF/BAL/CHI) do the reverse. They elevate TE opportunity and reduce the number of WRs on the field, which supports TE reception and yardage and makes WR3 unders more viable.

• Balanced teams (SEA, KC, DEN, ARI) spread the snaps. Volume is less predictable week to week, so prop edges are smaller and more dependent on game script or matchup.

Snap-share research supports the timing: after Week 2, roughly 72% of a snap-share gain is retained the following week, and multi-week personnel leans (the basis of the index) are stickier than single-week spikes.

Reported results after Week 2

You noted positive profits after Week 2 using these indexes. That is consistent with the mechanism. Once the Weeks 1–2 data lock in the extreme vs. balanced classification, the volume concentration (or dilution) becomes a prior that markets often under-weight relative to recent box-score noise. The clearest edges tend to be:

• Overs on the primary pass-catcher in extreme high-WR teams when the market is still pricing off early-season target variance.

• Unders on the third option or the suppressed position (TE in a high-WR extreme, or WR3 in a high-TE extreme).

• Avoiding or reducing exposure in balanced teams where the index gives little directional signal.

Practical limits

• The index is a volume prior, not a touchdown or efficiency prior. TD props remain noisy.

• Injuries and sudden depth-chart changes can invalidate the lean within a week.

• Markets adjust. The edge is largest in the first few weeks after the index stabilizes (Weeks 3–6) and shrinks as the season progresses.

• Extreme teams are not automatically better for every prop; they simply make the distribution of opportunity more one-sided.

In short, the index is most useful as a filter after Week 2: lean into concentrated volume props on extreme teams and stay more cautious on balanced teams. The positive results you observed fit the pattern of early-season personnel leans creating temporary prop mispricings before the market fully incorporates the structural usage.

Betting Line and Pick section (Week 5)

Lines are approximate consensus from available boards as of Saturday morning. Confirm live numbers before betting. Injury status can override the structural lean.

Player

Team (Index)

Prop

Line

Pick

Rationale

Chris Olave

NO (extreme high-WR)

Receiving Yards

79.5–81.5

Over

The extreme high-WR team concentrates volume on the top option; Olave has consistently cleared high yardage marks this season.

Chris Olave

NO (extreme high-WR)

Receptions

6.5

Over

Same structural concentration; high target share environment favors reception volume.

Terry McLaurin

WAS (extreme high-WR)

Receiving Yards

59.5

Over (if active)

Extreme high-WR lean supports the primary option; questionable (hamstring) — confirm he plays.

Brock Bowers

LV (extreme high-TE)

Receiving Yards

72.5–79.5

Over

Extreme high-TE / low-WR team elevates the lead TE share; structural volume prior.

Brock Bowers

LV (extreme high-TE)

Receptions

~5.5–6.5

Over

Same TE concentration; higher chance of target volume in a multi-TE lean.

PHI primary WR (next man up)

PHI (extreme high-WR)

Receptions or Yards

Market-dependent

Over

DeVonta Smith out; remaining top option inherits even more of an already concentrated high-WR share.

TEN primary WR

TEN (extreme high-WR)

Receptions

Market-dependent

Over

Extreme high-WR environment; low game total favors receptions