Chip Strategy
FPL GW3 Transfers: Buy Wissa for Four Fixtures, De Cuyper for Two
Wissa offers a four-match forward run; De Cuyper needs a two-Gameweek plan before Brighton host Arsenal. Use holding period and squad need to decide.
Yoane Wissa and Maxim De Cuyper enter Gameweek 3 with returns on the board and useful prices. Each move needs a different holding period. Wissa offers a four-match forward run at 6.1m. De Cuyper offers two inviting fixtures at 4.7m before Brighton host Arsenal.
Wissa has started both Newcastle matches, played 171 minutes and scored 12 points through one goal and one assist. De Cuyper has 17 points from two starts and 167 minutes, but every return came in his 17-point Gameweek 1 haul. His zero against Chelsea in GW2 showed the week-to-week swing that comes with an attacking defender.
Your squad should decide which transfer fits. A weak forward slot can justify Wissa through GW6. A defender problem can justify De Cuyper for GW3 and GW4 when you already have cover for the Arsenal fixture.
Give Wissa the full GW3 to GW6 run
Newcastle host Bournemouth in GW3, visit Leeds in GW4, host Hull City in GW5 and travel to Coventry City in GW6. That sequence gives Wissa buyers four matches before they need another decision.
His opening minutes support the plan. Wissa has started twice, played 171 of 180 available minutes and remains available. One goal and one assist have produced 12 points. At 9.1% ownership, he offers a route away from more crowded forward picks without asking you to accept an unproven starting role.
Buy Wissa when the move removes a weak starter, replaces an unavailable forward or improves the use of money elsewhere. Keep the transfer when it forces a sale from a forward who already has secure minutes and a comparable fixture run. The 6.1m price helps when the full squad benefits from the saving.
Managers who buy should plan to hold through GW6 while Wissa starts and stays available. One blank against Bournemouth or Leeds should not trigger another transfer. A benching, reduced minutes or a fitness flag would give you a reason to review sooner.
Treat De Cuyper as a two-match defender move
Brighton host Leeds in GW3 and visit Coventry City in GW4. Arsenal then visit Brighton in GW5, which changes the short-term appeal. Sunderland away follows in GW6.
De Cuyper costs 4.7m, has started both matches and sits in 13.3% of teams. His one goal, one assist and clean sheet all came in GW1. Brighton conceded four goals in GW2 and De Cuyper returned zero points, so buyers should separate his attacking upside from the clean-sheet part of the pick.
The move works when you need a starting defender for the next two deadlines and can bench him against Arsenal. It also works when the 4.7m slot releases money for a stronger upgrade elsewhere. The plan becomes weaker if your bench cannot cover GW5 or if buying him would force another defender transfer after two matches.
De Cuyper can still earn a place beyond GW4, but buyers should set the review date now. Check Brighton’s defensive form, his starts and your GW5 bench before deciding whether to keep him through Sunderland away.
Match the transfer to the squad problem
Wissa and De Cuyper solve different problems. Wissa fills a forward slot for a four-match run. De Cuyper fills a defender slot for two fixtures with a planned review before Arsenal.
Start with your weakest starter. Compare the replacement’s minutes, fixtures and price with the player leaving. Then check the second effect of the move: the money released, the bench cover created or the next transfer it might require.
A points total from two Gameweeks should not settle the call. Wissa has spread his returns across both matches. De Cuyper collected his returns in one match. Their upcoming fixtures and your intended holding period provide a stronger transfer test.
Set the review date before the GW3 deadline
Wissa buyers can target GW6 as the first planned review while he keeps his place. De Cuyper buyers should review before GW5 and make sure another defender can cover Arsenal at home.
Check Newcastle and Brighton team news before the deadline. If both remain available and start, choose the player who fixes the more urgent slot and commit to the planned run.
Chip Strategy
FPL GW5: King or Calafiori for your starting XI?
Our narrow GW5 preference is King, but Calafiori’s attacking involvement and clean-sheet route keep the choice close. Check minutes and formation before benching either.
Josh King gets our narrow nod over Riccardo Calafiori for GW5 if you own both, expect both to start and can keep a legal formation. King hosts Manchester United; Calafiori travels to Brighton. You can make a case for either, so check the rest of your XI before choosing your first substitute.
King has the higher early attacking involvement rate. Calafiori offers attacking returns alongside Arsenal’s clean-sheet potential. The gap is small enough that fresh minutes news should carry more weight than a firm verdict based on four matches.
King offers the attacking edge
King has started four matches and played 346 minutes. His season-to-date expected goal involvement rate is 0.41 per 90: 0.30 xG/90 and 0.11 xA/90. At £5.5m, the Fulham midfielder has contributed through shooting as well as chance creation.
For an existing owner choosing one starter, we favour that attacking involvement at home to Manchester United. Treat it as a preference under uncertainty. Those rates describe the chances King has had and created so far; they do not predict a return this weekend.
You also need to separate selection from recruitment. You can start King from your bench without spending a transfer or committing to a longer holding period. This comparison gives you no reason to manufacture a new purchase.
Calafiori keeps the decision close
Calafiori has started four matches and played 326 minutes. The £5.8m Arsenal defender has recorded 0.33 xGI/90, split between 0.17 xG/90 and 0.16 xA/90. His attacking involvement sits close enough to King’s that benching him carries a clear risk.
His defensive measure is 0.68 expected goals conceded per 90 over those same 326 minutes. That describes the quality of chances conceded during his minutes so far, rather than a clean-sheet probability for Brighton away. Still, you should account for both his clean-sheet route and his involvement going forward when comparing him with a midfielder.
Choose Calafiori if the latest team news gives him the clearer route to a full appearance, or if your formation requires another defender. King’s small attacking-rate advantage does not justify ignoring either condition.
Check the formation before moving the bench
King is an FPL midfielder and Calafiori is a defender. You need at least three defenders in your starting XI. Replacing Calafiori with King works only if the remaining lineup still meets the formation rules.
You can test the two lineups in We Play FPL and compare the players’ performance data before settling on your bench order. Start with the squad you own, then check whether you are choosing between these two or overlooking a weaker starter elsewhere.
Both players currently have available status. Recheck fitness and expected starts before the GW5 deadline on Friday 18 September at 17:30 UTC. With no adverse news and a legal XI, our preference stays with King. Keep Calafiori as a strong alternative rather than treating this close call as a reason to change your transfer plan.
Chip Strategy
FPL GW5: Groß or Mamadou Sangaré, who should you start?
Lean towards Groß if both midfielders are in your squad. Compare his attacking involvement and set pieces with Sangaré’s defensive contributions and shorter minutes sample.
If you own Pascal Groß and Mamadou Sangaré and have one GW5 midfield place to fill, lean towards Groß. His attacking involvement and set-piece duties give him the stronger case, even with Arsenal visiting Brighton. Sangaré offers a different route through defensive contributions against Chelsea, but his early numbers need a minutes check before you treat him as the safer starter.
Both cost £5.7m and occupy a midfield slot. For this decision, leave the transfer button alone: choose which of your existing players earns the place in your XI or sits first on your bench.
Groß has the stronger attacking case
Groß has played 360 minutes across the opening four Gameweeks, with 0.42 expected goals and 0.15 expected assists per 90. His combined expected goal involvement rate is 0.57 per 90, compared with Sangaré’s 0.32 over 300 minutes.
Those are season-to-date performance rates, not GW5 points predictions. Groß will face Arsenal at home, so carrying his four-match average into this fixture would overstate what the number tells us. The appeal lies in how he can contribute: he ranks first in Brighton’s current penalty, direct-free-kick and corner/indirect-free-kick orders. Those responsibilities offer routes to a return even when Brighton struggle to create from open play. Duties can change, and a penalty opportunity is never guaranteed.
His 360 minutes also matter. He has completed four full-match equivalents, while Sangaré has started four matches but accumulated 300 minutes. That difference strengthens the case for Groß if you expect both to start again; it does not confirm either player’s next appearance.
Sangaré’s contribution rate deserves a closer look
Sangaré has recorded 13.50 defensive contributions per 90, compared with Groß’s 5.25. Managers who want exposure to that scoring route have a reason to consider the Brentford midfielder. His attacking profile is more modest: 0.12 expected goals and 0.20 expected assists per 90 across his 300 minutes.
The risk is treating a season average as a guaranteed return in one match. A per-90 rate describes performance over a full-match equivalent. It does not tell you how long Sangaré will play against Chelsea, how his contributions will fall across individual matches, or whether he will earn contribution points this week.
Chelsea at home gives him a demanding assignment too. Choosing Sangaré because Groß faces Arsenal would skip half the comparison. Weigh each player’s likely minutes and scoring routes, then decide which uncertainty you prefer.
Set the XI, then the bench order
With both available and no fresh minutes concern, start Groß ahead of Sangaré. If neither makes your XI, the same preference puts Groß ahead in your bench order, subject to the formation rules for automatic substitutions.
You can compare Groß and Sangaré in We Play FPL using player statistics and upcoming fixtures, then test the two lineups in the planner. Keep any projected points separate from the season-to-date rates above; neither can guarantee the result of a single match.
Revisit the choice if team news changes the minutes outlook. A credible indication that Groß will miss out or play a reduced role would weaken the recommendation, while stronger evidence of a full match for Sangaré would narrow the gap. Check availability before the GW5 deadline on Friday 18 September at 17:30 UTC. Until then, Groß’s attacking involvement, set pieces and minutes record give him the edge for an existing squad’s starting spot.
Chip Strategy
FPL GW5 captaincy: Haaland or Gibbs-White?
Haaland leads our GW5 captaincy choices against Sunderland. Gibbs-White offers an alternative against Coventry, with equal-minute attacking data to compare.
Captain Haaland in GW5 if you own him and he remains available. Manchester City host Sunderland, and his opening four matches give us the stronger attacking case. Gibbs-White offers a credible alternative at home to Coventry for managers without Haaland, but owners need a football reason to pass over the City forward.
Haaland has the stronger early attacking numbers
Haaland has played 360 minutes, producing 0.83 expected goals per 90 and 0.96 expected goal involvements per 90. Gibbs-White has also played 360 minutes, with 0.39 xG/90 and 0.65 xGI/90. Those equal samples make the comparison useful: Haaland has generated more shooting threat and more combined goal-and-assist involvement.
These are season-to-date performance rates through GW4. They do not forecast either player’s GW5 score. Four matches leave room for opponent strength, individual chances and match circumstances to influence the numbers. We prefer Haaland because his attacking record supports the home fixture, while accepting that Gibbs-White can outscore him in one match.
Gibbs-White gives non-owners a credible captain
Gibbs-White faces Coventry at home. At £8.0m, he occupies a different budget slot from the £15.5m Haaland, so a manager can own him in a squad that spends its money elsewhere.
His 0.65 xGI/90 supports considering him for the armband. His 0.39 xG/90 also shows why we would keep Haaland ahead in this comparison: Gibbs-White has produced less direct goal threat in the same minutes. Remember their different FPL positions when comparing them. Haaland is a Forward; Gibbs-White is a Midfielder. A chance-involvement rate alone cannot settle their eventual FPL points.
If you already own Gibbs-White without Haaland, you have a viable home-fixture captain to assess. This captaincy preference does not establish that you should restructure your squad to buy Haaland for one deadline. Buying a premium forward involves the players you sell, the transfers you spend and the team you can field afterwards.
Choose your captain within the squad you plan to keep
Compare the available captains before making a transfer to change the armband. You can test line-ups and assign future captains in We Play FPL, which helps you see whether a proposed purchase suits more than the next match.
For Haaland owners, our first choice is Haaland. For managers without him who own Gibbs-White, the Forest midfielder deserves consideration against Coventry. Choosing Gibbs-White over an available Haaland means accepting the weaker early attacking numbers in exchange for a different outcome; being different alone is not our reason to recommend it.
Check fitness and expected availability before the GW5 deadline at 17:30 UTC on Friday 18 September. Both players currently have available status and no injury note in the game. Revisit the choice if that changes, and select an available vice-captain alongside your final armband.
