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.
Differentials
GW7 budget picks: Thomas, Mendy and the Mainoo fitness check
Thomas offers more playing time than Mendy despite the lower DefCon/90. Compare their fixtures, and wait for Mainoo’s fitness update before buying.
Bobby Thomas is my first choice of these two cheap defenders when you need dependable playing time. Nobel Mendy costs £0.1m more and has the higher defensive contribution rate, but Thomas has spent more time on the pitch. That matters when you need a bench player to cover a missing starter.
Kobbie Mainoo offers another route to defensive contribution points at £5.5m. His current injury flag makes him a player to monitor before the GW7 deadline rather than a purchase to rush through.
Thomas or Mendy: compare time on the pitch
Thomas costs £4.0m and has averaged 87.8 min/match for Coventry. His 12.64 DefCon/90 gives him a scoring route beyond clean sheets. Mendy costs £4.1m, averages 67.8 min/match for Hull and records 13.81 DefCon/90.
DefCon/90 measures defensive contributions per 90 minutes. You still need the player to reach the scoring threshold during the match. Defenders earn two points for ten combined clearances, blocks, interceptions and tackles. A high rate cannot guarantee that outcome if a player leaves the pitch early or misses the game.
Thomas has the stronger playing-time record for a manager who needs cover. Mendy remains a candidate if you accept more uncertainty over his time on the pitch and prefer Hull’s upcoming opponents. Check expected starts before buying either.
Clean-sheet prospects also belong in the comparison. Thomas records 1.70 xGC/90, against Mendy’s 1.51. Those season-to-date expected goals conceded rates describe past performance; they do not promise a clean sheet in the next fixture. Neither player should enter your team on the assumption that defensive contribution points will arrive each week.
Their home games start in GW8
Thomas visits Spurs in GW7, then faces Fulham and Sunderland at home in GW8 and GW9. Mendy visits Fulham before home games against Brentford and Ipswich Town.
That makes both worth considering for cover beyond this weekend. If you need the new defender in your GW7 XI, assess the away fixture as part of the purchase. A pair of later home games will not help you fill an immediate gap.
You can use the We Play FPL planner to test your GW7–10 line-ups and see which defender covers the weeks your squad needs. Include GW10 in that check: Thomas visits Everton, while Mendy visits Arsenal. Decide how you will cover those matches before committing to the slot.
Mainoo needs a fitness check first
Mainoo has reached the midfield defensive contribution threshold in five of his six appearances. Midfielders need twelve contributions for two points, with ball recoveries counting alongside clearances, blocks, interceptions and tackles.
He averages 74 min/match and records 14.80 DefCon/90. His 0.17 xGI/90, the season-to-date rate of expected goals plus expected assists, shows why the appeal here rests on defensive work rather than attacking output.
At £5.5m, he can suit a manager seeking that scoring route in a budget midfield slot. Fitness and a starting place come first. Mainoo currently has an unspecified-injury flag with a 75% chance of playing; that does not establish a recovery date or confirm that he will start.
Man Utd visit Leeds in GW7 and host Bournemouth in GW8, before Chelsea away and Aston Villa at home. Wait for a reliable fitness update and assess his likely role before buying. An unavailable midfielder cannot provide the cover you bought him for.
Choose the player who can cover your squad
I favour Thomas for the cheaper price and stronger playing-time record. Mendy is an alternative for managers who prefer Hull’s fixture sequence and can carry the playing-time risk. Keep Mainoo on the watchlist until his fitness and starting outlook improve.
Before the GW7 deadline on 17 October at 10:00 UTC, check expected starts and identify the matches in which you need each player. Treat defensive contribution points as a useful scoring route, with the same attention to availability and fixtures you would give any other budget pick.
