Differentials
FPL GW5: Hold Fernandes and Mbeumo or use the money elsewhere?
Fulham away and Spurs at home give United midfield owners a reason to hold. A Fernandes sale needs a clear plan for the money and the next captain.
Bruno Fernandes and Bryan Mbeumo owners can hold through Fulham away in GW5 and Spurs at home in GW6. Both have played 360 minutes across four starts, and both have produced enough early attacking threat to justify patience. Selling Fernandes makes more sense if you can use his £12.0m budget to improve another position or your captaincy choice.
Start with the two line-ups you could own after your proposed transfers. Keep United’s next two matches in that comparison. You need a stronger reason to sell than frustration with one return.
Two matches worth keeping in your plan
United visit Fulham before hosting Spurs. Existing owners can use that window to reassess Fernandes and Mbeumo while spending transfers on more urgent problems.
Neither fixture guarantees a haul. The holding case combines those opponents with both players’ opening minutes and attacking involvement. You can give them another match without committing to keeping them for the season.
That distinction matters if you own Fernandes. You may prefer a cheaper midfielder on a fresh squad draft, yet still get more from your next free transfer by keeping him and fixing a weak starter elsewhere. A new buyer has a different choice: they must justify spending £12.0m from today’s available budget.
Similar early involvement, different prices
Fernandes costs £12.0m and Mbeumo £7.9m. Across the first four Gameweeks, each has played 360 minutes. Fernandes has recorded 0.85 expected goal involvements per 90 minutes, compared with Mbeumo’s 0.84.
Expected goal involvements, or xGI, combines expected goals and expected assists. These season-to-date rates describe the chances they have taken and created; they are not predictions of future FPL points.
The split adds context. Fernandes has 0.57 xG/90 and 0.28 xA/90. Mbeumo has 0.70 xG/90 and 0.14 xA/90, with more of his early involvement coming from goal chances. Four matches give us a small sample, so avoid treating the near-identical xGI totals as proof that they will score the same points.
For existing Mbeumo owners, the lower cost makes a hold easier to accommodate. Fernandes owners have more money committed to the position and should examine the upgrade they could fund by selling. The £4.1m difference between their current purchase prices is substantial, though your actual selling values determine the budget you can use.
Sell Fernandes with a destination for the money
A Fernandes sale deserves consideration if you can use the released funds for a major improvement elsewhere, especially a captain you intend to back across your planning window. Compare the outgoing pair with the incoming pair and include any transfer hit in the cost.
Write down the actual players before making the first move. A cheaper midfielder plus money left in the bank may offer less immediate benefit than keeping Fernandes for Fulham and Spurs. A cheaper midfielder who lets you replace a weak starter with a strong captaincy option presents a different decision.
You can map the next few Gameweeks in We Play FPL to compare future line-ups and assign captains before changing your live team. Check that the funded upgrade starts in the matches you need it for, and that you can still field the side you want after GW6.
Avoid committing to a sale on the assumption that you will find a use for the savings later. Decide where the money goes and how long you expect to keep the replacements.
The GW5 call
Hold Fernandes or Mbeumo if your starting XI works and you have no clear funded upgrade. Use Fulham away and Spurs at home as the next review window, while checking availability and midweek minutes before the deadline.
Sell Fernandes if the complete move improves your squad enough to justify losing him for those matches. On a Wildcard, compare the available midfield combinations from scratch; owning a player beforehand should carry less weight when you can rebuild the squad without another individual transfer.
The GW5 deadline is 18 September at 17:30 UTC. Recheck prices and team news before acting, and use your actual sale value when testing the move.
Differentials
GW10 Liverpool picks: Isak up front or Jacquet in defence?
Isak needs a lasting place in your forward line. Jacquet offers cheaper defensive coverage; compare the costs, performance rates and GW14 plan before buying.
Liverpool give you two useful GW10 transfer routes: commit £9.2m to Isak up front, or buy Jacquet at £5.1m to strengthen your defence. Choose the move that improves your starting XI across the coming fixtures. Buying an attacker because you want Liverpool coverage can leave you paying for a role or scoring rate you have yet to see.
Our preference is Isak if you can afford him without weakening another starter, and Jacquet if you need a defender and have a better use for the extra money Van Dijk would cost. Barcola needs a stronger attacking case at £8.1m. Give Szoboszlai another selection check before buying.
Plan for the Chelsea away game
Liverpool visit Crystal Palace in GW10, host Manchester United in GW11, travel to Everton in GW12 and host Sunderland in GW13. Chelsea away follows in GW14, before home games against Leeds and Spurs in GW15–16.
You can hold a Liverpool purchase beyond four weeks, but account for Chelsea before committing the transfer. A manager who has chosen a GW14 Free Hit can assess that week apart from the regular squad. That is one possible chip plan, rather than a reason to commit the chip to justify a purchase.
Map the transfer and your GW14 lineup in the We Play FPL planner before spending. You can test future squad drafts and chip plans there; predictions and AI recommendations remain informational, with no guarantee of returns.
Isak needs a lasting place in your forward line
Isak has 0.60 expected goals per 90 minutes (xG/90) and 0.64 expected goal involvements per 90 (xGI/90), with an average of 82.1 min/match. Those season-to-date rates give you a stronger attacking basis for a purchase than the fixture list alone.
At £9.2m, he needs a forward slot you intend to keep. Check the midfielder or defender you would have to downgrade to reach him. Buy if the resulting XI improves across your holding period; wait if you would spend another transfer reversing the funding move after one week.
Keep penalty assumptions out of the calculation. Liverpool’s next taker remains unresolved, so judge the purchase without treating spot kicks as guaranteed extra value.
Jacquet offers the cheaper defensive route
Jacquet costs £5.1m against Van Dijk’s £6.4m, a £1.3m gap at current purchase prices. Both give you access to the same fixtures. The current performance rates offer little reason to assume Van Dijk will repay that premium.
Jacquet has 1.14 expected goals conceded per 90 (xGC/90), 0.06 xGI/90 and 9.33 defensive contributions per 90 (DefCon/90), with an average of 85.8 min/match. Van Dijk has 1.18 xGC/90, 0.06 xGI/90 and 9.44 DefCon/90, averaging 90.0 min/match.
The small differences in these historical rates do not establish that either defender will score more points over the next month. Defensive-contribution points depend on reaching the match threshold; a per-90 rate does not guarantee them in a particular fixture.
Prefer Jacquet for a fresh purchase if you can use the £1.3m to improve another starter. Van Dijk remains a reasonable choice if you can afford his longer average playing time without compromising the XI. A Van Dijk owner should compare the benefit of spending a transfer on that saving with other squad needs, rather than treating the cheaper option as an instruction to sell.
Barcola and Szoboszlai need different checks
Barcola costs £8.1m and has 0.32 xGI/90, averaging 73.0 min/match. Buying him requires confidence that he will improve on that attacking rate. The schedule gives him opportunities, but you still need a reason to expect more threat from his role.
Treat him as a punt for a manager willing to accept that uncertainty. Our preference for a fresh attacking purchase is Isak when the forward budget works. These players occupy different FPL positions, so compare the squad changes each route requires alongside their individual numbers.
Szoboszlai costs £6.7m and has 0.47 xGI/90, with an average of 71.9 min/match. Check his next starts and role before committing. His lower price helps with the budget, but you need confidence that he will play the role you are buying him for.
Make the transfer after the selection checks
The GW10 deadline is 6 November at 18:30 UTC. Check Liverpool’s latest fitness news and selections before acting, and leave penalty duty as an uncertainty unless new evidence settles it.
For a squad that needs a defender, we favour Jacquet and a clear plan for the saving. For a squad with room for a lasting forward upgrade, Isak is the attacking purchase to consider. Keep the rest of your XI and the GW14 lineup in view before choosing either route.
Differentials
GW9 budget midfield: Tonali, Enciso or Rudoni?
Tonali offers playing time and defensive contributions, Enciso more attacking involvement, and Rudoni a saving. Match the choice to your planned starts.
Pick your cheapest playable midfielder around the job he needs to do. At £5.3m, Sandro Tonali offers a strong playing-time record and more defensive contributions than Julio Enciso or Jack Rudoni. Enciso gives you more attacking involvement for another £0.2m. Rudoni costs £4.9m, with a shorter average appearance to weigh against the saving.
We would consider Tonali for a slot that needs dependable playing time, Enciso when attacking returns take priority, and Rudoni when the extra cash improves another starter. Each choice involves a compromise. Decide your planned starts before spending a transfer on a small price difference.
Tonali: playing time with a defensive contribution caveat
Tonali has averaged 87.1 minutes per match for Spurs. His 10.07 defensive contributions per 90 minutes, or DefCon/90, exceed Enciso’s 6.84 and Rudoni’s 7.95. He has the strongest case of the three if you want playing time and a route to extra points through defensive work.
Keep your expectations measured. Across his last six league matches, Tonali recorded 12, 11, 11, nine, 15 and 12 defensive contributions. Those near misses show why you should allow for matches without a defensive contribution return. A season average cannot tell you which side of the scoring threshold he will finish on in a particular fixture.
He also has the lowest attacking involvement rate in this comparison: 0.21 expected goal involvements per 90 minutes, or xGI/90. You accept less attacking threat in exchange for his playing-time record and defensive contribution rate.
Spurs host Crystal Palace in GW9, visit Leeds in GW10 and host Ipswich Town in GW11. Tonali fits a plan that needs cover across those weeks, provided the final team news supports his selection. His average playing time describes his record so far; it guarantees no future start.
Enciso: pay £0.2m for more attacking involvement
Enciso costs £5.5m and has averaged 80.6 minutes per match for Ipswich Town. At 0.46 xGI/90, he has offered more than twice Tonali’s attacking involvement rate. You pay £0.2m extra for that route to returns while accepting a lower defensive contribution rate and less playing time per appearance.
His immediate fixtures are Hull City away in GW9 and Bournemouth at home in GW10, followed by Spurs away in GW11. Check whether you need him for that third fixture before treating him as a purchase for the whole run.
We would lean towards Enciso over Tonali if the £0.2m leaves your other plans intact and you want attacking potential from this midfield slot. Expected goal involvements measure season-to-date performance, so avoid reading 0.46 as a forecast for the next match.
Rudoni: the saving comes with a playing-time trade-off
Rudoni costs £0.4m less than Tonali and £0.6m less than Enciso. He has averaged 69.4 minutes per match for Coventry City, alongside 0.52 xGI/90 and 7.95 DefCon/90.
His attacking involvement rate leads this group, but he has played fewer minutes per appearance. Compare the time you expect him to spend on the pitch as well as his per-90 threat. Do not add a permanent penalty role to his buying case while that role remains uncertain.
Coventry host Sunderland in GW9, visit Everton in GW10 and host Crystal Palace in GW11. Rudoni makes sense when you can use those home fixtures and spend the saving on another starter. A cheap substitute you seldom select may be enough; a midfielder you need for several consecutive starts deserves a closer look at playing time.
Choose the slot before making the transfer
All three have the official FPL midfielder classification and current available status. Availability alone confirms no place in the starting XI. Recheck the team news before the GW9 deadline.
Map out the starts you need and compare the midfield options in We Play FPL, where you can review player statistics and upcoming fixtures side by side. Use that comparison to test whether the saving improves your intended XI.
Our preference depends on the squad: Tonali for his playing-time record and defensive work, Enciso for more attacking involvement at a modest extra cost, or Rudoni to release money for a specific upgrade elsewhere. Keep your current enabler if a sideways move leaves the rest of your team no better off.
Differentials
GW9 cheap forwards: Evanilson, Calvert-Lewin, Jackson or Barry?
Evanilson gets our vote for regular starts. Calvert-Lewin and Barry suit planned rotation, while Jackson offers Villa’s six-match run at a higher price.
Evanilson is our GW9 pick if you need a forward to start through the next fixture run. At £6.2m, he costs £0.1m more than Dominic Calvert-Lewin and £0.5m less than Nicolas Jackson. Calvert-Lewin suits a squad with cover for difficult away matches, Jackson deserves consideration over six Gameweeks, and Thierno Barry offers the cheapest route at £5.6m.
Choose the role before making the transfer. You can accept a difficult fixture on a rotating third forward. You have less room for one when you need him in your XI each week.
Evanilson: our first choice for regular starts
Bournemouth face Leeds at home in GW9, Ipswich away in GW10 and Nott’m Forest at home in GW11. Evanilson gives you a route through those three matches without planning an immediate benching or another transfer.
He has started eight league matches and averages 84.8 minutes per match. His 0.41 xG/90 and 0.13 xA/90 produce 0.54 expected goal involvements per 90. Those season-to-date measures describe the chances he has had and created; they do not promise future returns.
We prefer him to Jackson when the extra £0.5m matters and you want a forward for the next three deadlines. Bournemouth then visit Fulham before hosting Brighton and Hull in GW13–14, so you can also consider a longer hold.
His selection record supports the purchase, but competition can change. Check the team news before treating eight starts as a guarantee of the ninth.
Calvert-Lewin: plan the bench before buying
At £6.1m, Calvert-Lewin has averaged 85.4 minutes per match and produced 0.47 xG/90 alongside 0.02 xA/90. He also has first penalty priority. You can make a sound case for him when you can choose his starts.
Leeds visit Bournemouth in GW9 and host Spurs in GW10. The matches that demand planning are Chelsea away in GW11 and Man City away in GW13. Between them, Leeds host Coventry in GW12, with Ipswich at home in GW14.
Name the player who would replace Calvert-Lewin in your XI for those two away trips. If that player has a good fixture and a dependable role, the rotation can work. If you would have to start a doubtful substitute or spend another transfer, the £0.1m saving against Evanilson offers little comfort.
You can test those GW11 and GW13 line-ups in the We Play FPL planner before confirming the move. Planning future squad drafts and transfers helps you judge whether you have enough cover.
Jackson: consider the full Villa run
Jackson costs £6.7m. Villa host Fulham in GW9, visit Man Utd in GW10, then face Sunderland at home, Ipswich away, Everton at home and Crystal Palace at home through GW14.
For a manager planning six Gameweeks of starts, that run makes him a credible alternative. The cost is the £0.5m premium over Evanilson. Jackson averages 78.1 minutes per match, with 0.30 xG/90 and 0.14 xA/90. His 0.44 xGI/90 trails Evanilson’s 0.54, so the extra spend depends on how you value Villa’s fixtures and Jackson’s role.
He sits second in the penalty order. Make the purchase on his open-play prospects and fixture run rather than assuming penalty returns.
Barry: the lowest-cost rotation option
Barry costs £5.6m, saving £0.6m against Evanilson. He has started eight matches, averages 85.3 minutes per match and has produced 0.67 xG/90 plus 0.02 xA/90. His 0.69 xGI/90 leads this group, though you should read it alongside the fixtures rather than turn it into a scoring forecast.
Everton visit Newcastle in GW9 and host Coventry in GW10. Brentford away, Liverpool at home and Villa away follow before Fulham at home in GW14.
We favour Barry when you want a playing third forward and can pick his starts. Coventry and Fulham at home offer two clear uses. Buying him for six automatic starts would require more confidence in the difficult matches between them.
Pick the forward your XI needs
For regular use from GW9, Evanilson gets our vote. Choose Calvert-Lewin when you can cover Chelsea and Man City away. Consider Jackson when you can afford £6.7m and want Villa’s six-match run. Barry suits a lower-cost third-forward spot with planned rotation.
Before committing, check the latest selection news and your intended XI for GW11 and GW13. A forward who fits those line-ups will serve your squad better than one chosen on price or the latest return alone.
