Chip Strategy
FPL GW4 rotation pairs: plan your starters through GW9
Compare Leeds–Brighton, Bournemouth–Newcastle and Everton–Fulham for GW4–9, then weigh the budget and selection costs of goalkeeper rotation.
Before buying a cheaper defender or eighth attacker for GW4, pick the weeks you would start him. Then check who takes his place against the opponents you want to avoid. Two affordable players can cost more than one dependable starter once you include the money sitting on your bench.
Leeds with Brighton, Bournemouth with Newcastle, and Everton with Fulham offer useful combinations through GW9. Each pairing has a different weakness. Choose around players you want to own, your spare budget and the formation you can field.
Pick the starting slot before the second player
Start with one position in your XI and write down your preferred starter for GW4–9. Include a fallback for injury or a surprise benching. If two reserves need to replace two starters in the same week, make sure you have both available; you cannot use one substitute twice.
You can rotate across positions. An extra defender can replace a forward if you switch from 3-4-3 to 4-4-2, for example. That flexibility lets you cover a difficult attacking fixture without buying a second forward for the same job.
Use the We Play FPL planner to test future line-ups before spending on the reserve. Compare the starting XI in each week, including your formation and planned transfers. A pairing deserves the extra money when you can identify the starts you gain.
Leeds and Brighton: five weeks of useful cover
Brighton and Leeds have several difficult fixtures in different weeks. One possible starting sequence is:
- GW4: Brighton at Coventry.
- GW5: Leeds at home to Crystal Palace.
- GW6: Brighton at Sunderland.
- GW7: Brighton at home to Crystal Palace.
- GW8: Leeds at Sunderland.
- GW9: Leeds at Bournemouth, with Brighton away to Man City as the alternative.
The limitation comes in GW9. You can avoid Brighton’s trip to City, but you still need to assess Leeds away to Bournemouth. Treat this as a five-week route with a decision to revisit, rather than six weeks of comfortable fixtures.
Muharemović and Vuskovic would cost £10.0m together, at £5.0m each. Both defenders have played 270 league minutes through GW3. Muharemović has recorded 13.00 defensive contributions per 90 minutes, compared with Vuskovic’s 7.33. That gives you more early contribution evidence for the Leeds player, though three matches are too few to assume the same rate will continue.
Their expected goals conceded rates are 1.51 xGC/90 for Muharemović and 1.90 for Vuskovic. You are buying fixture choices in defences that have allowed chances. A favourable opponent does not remove that risk. Check the pair’s cost against how often your other defenders would keep one of them on the bench.
Bournemouth and Newcastle: cover GW5 and GW6
Newcastle provide a useful alternative during Bournemouth’s Liverpool home match in GW5 and Chelsea away match in GW6. You could plan the slot as follows:
- GW4: Bournemouth at home to Brentford.
- GW5: Newcastle at home to Hull.
- GW6: Newcastle at Coventry.
- GW7: Bournemouth at home to Sunderland.
- GW8: Newcastle at Crystal Palace.
- GW9: Newcastle at home to Everton, or Bournemouth at home to Leeds.
Hall and Silva are possible defensive routes at £5.1m and £5.0m. That £10.1m commitment needs enough starts to justify it, especially if you prefer three other defenders in several weeks.
Hall has played 269 minutes through GW3, with 1.82 xGC/90, 0.23 expected goal involvements per 90 and 10.04 defensive contributions per 90. Silva has played 270 minutes, with 1.60 xGC/90, 0.10 xGI/90 and 10.33 DefCon/90. Hall has shown more early attacking involvement; Silva has the lower expected concessions rate in this small sample.
Buy this combination for the weeks you can alternate them. Avoid treating either defender’s contribution average as a guaranteed points return or Hall’s attacking rate as a forecast. If your squad has suitable cover for GW5–6, you may have a better use for the extra bench money.
Everton and Fulham: check the awkward opening week
Fulham begin with Liverpool away and Man Utd at home in GW4–5. Everton offer Spurs away and Ipswich at home over those weeks. The GW5 cover is attractive; Spurs away in GW4 needs more caution.
From GW6, you can turn to Fulham for Ipswich away, Hull at home and Coventry away. GW9 leaves Fulham at Aston Villa or Everton at Newcastle. You should budget for those less inviting choices at both ends of the window.
Gonzalo at £6.0m is a way to use the Fulham part of this plan. He has played 270 minutes through GW3, producing 0.48 xG/90 and 0.55 xGI/90. Those are early measures of his attacking involvement, not a prediction of returns against the later opponents.
An Everton outfield reserve could cover him across positions if your formation allows it. Check that player’s price and expected starts before committing. For GW4, compare the Everton option at Spurs with your existing bench rather than forcing a new pairing into the team.
Goalkeeper rotation adds another decision
Verbruggen and Trafford offer the Brighton–Leeds fixture combination for £9.5m: £4.5m plus £5.0m. Both have played 270 minutes, with season-to-date xGC/90 of 1.90 and 1.51 respectively.
You can spend less with one cheaper starting goalkeeper and a reserve. You also avoid choosing between two playable keepers before each deadline. Rotating gives you more fixture options, but a goalkeeper can earn saves in the match you chose to avoid. You cannot count those bench points towards the plan’s return.
Pay for two playable keepers if you value the choice and will make it each week. Keep the calculation separate from outfield rotation, where changing formation can help you cover more than one position across the season.
Check the whole XI before the deadline
The GW4 deadline is 12 September at 12:30 UTC. Recheck fitness and expected starts for the players you intend to rotate, then inspect the weeks where both have an awkward fixture. If you have used your Wildcard, extend the plan beyond GW9 before making a purchase that assumes a quick exit.
Choose the pairing that fixes a specific gap in your starting XI at a cost you can afford. Leave enough flexibility to respond if minutes or availability change.
Chip Strategy
GW10 captaincy: Haaland or Gabriel for the armband?
Haaland leads our GW10 captaincy picks, with Gabriel at home to Hull the alternative. Compare their scoring routes and check Calafiori’s workload.
Haaland gets our GW10 captaincy vote away to Forest. Gabriel is a credible alternative at home to Hull for managers willing to back Arsenal’s clean-sheet prospects and his attacking threat. Choose between those routes after checking selection news, with Haaland our first choice if you own both.
Gabriel’s home fixture deserves consideration. His season-long playing time and several ways to score make him more than a punt on a header. The trade-off is the weight you place on a defender’s clean sheet against Haaland’s stronger attacking involvement.
Haaland offers the stronger attacking case
Haaland averages 88.8 min/match and records 0.74 xG/90, with 0.84 xGI/90 once expected assists are included. At £15.8m, he takes a large share of the squad budget, but owners can captain him without spending a transfer or changing their team structure.
Manchester City visit Forest in GW10. The away venue gives Gabriel’s home match some appeal, though choosing Haaland still means backing the player with the more substantial attacking record in this comparison. His goal threat is the main reason for our preference.
These rates describe season-to-date performances. A 0.84 xGI/90 figure is neither a GW10 points prediction nor a promise of a goal involvement. Use it to judge the attacking case, then check whether new fitness or selection information changes your confidence before the deadline.
Gabriel gives you a different route to returns
Gabriel costs £8.0m and averages 90.0 min/match. He has 0.80 xGC/90 and 0.19 xGI/90, including 0.16 xG/90. Against Hull at home, managers can back the combination of defensive returns and his threat from set pieces.
His 9.00 DefCon/90 adds context to the defensive case. It measures defensive contributions per 90 minutes; it does not guarantee contribution points in this match. The same caution applies to clean sheets: xGC/90 measures expected goals conceded while he is on the pitch, rather than the chance of shutting out Hull.
Gabriel’s attacking rate sits below Haaland’s. That does not settle the captaincy by itself because defenders have other scoring routes, but it explains what you accept by choosing him. You put more weight on Arsenal keeping a clean sheet and on Gabriel adding another return.
For a manager who owns Gabriel without Haaland, he is a defensible captaincy option. For an owner of both, we lean Haaland unless fresh team news changes the assessment. Keep a purchase decision separate from the armband: Gabriel’s captaincy appeal this week alone does not justify spending a transfer and £8.0m.
Check Calafiori’s workload before choosing another Arsenal captain
Calafiori shares the Hull home fixture and costs £5.9m. He records a higher attacking-involvement rate than Gabriel at 0.29 xGI/90, alongside 0.85 xGC/90 and 4.64 DefCon/90. His average playing time is lower at 77.7 min/match.
That combination makes a selection check important. Reassess his workload after the midweek match and the available information about his next start. A good fixture gives little protection from reduced playing time, and a short appearance can leave you relying on the captain you chose rather than your vice-captain.
We prefer Gabriel within this Arsenal captaincy comparison unless team news gives a reason to change. Calafiori’s stronger xGI/90 alone is insufficient to move him ahead when Gabriel has the longer played average and stronger defensive-contribution rate. Neither historical average guarantees a start this weekend.
Make the call with the players you own
You can test captains and future line-ups in the We Play FPL planner before changing your live squad. Compare the armband choices within your current team, then consider transfers as a separate decision. A captaincy change costs no transfer; buying a player for one attractive fixture can affect several later weeks.
Our order is Haaland first, Gabriel the alternative, with Calafiori requiring a closer workload and selection check. Recheck availability before the GW10 deadline on 6 November at 18:30 UTC and choose a vice-captain you expect to play.
Chip Strategy
GW10 defenders: Silva or Vušković for a deeper squad?
Silva edges Vušković for a new defender purchase. Compare their rates and planned starts, then build defensive depth without forcing five at the back.
Silva gets our vote over Vušković for a new defender around £5m in GW10. At £5.1m, he costs £0.1m less and combines a lower xGC/90 with stronger attacking involvement and defensive contribution rates. The gap is small enough that your intended starts should decide a close call.
First, check whether you need another defender. You can build a squad with five usable options and choose four or five at the back when their fixtures justify it. You can also leave two on the bench when your attackers offer more. Spend a transfer on a defender you expect to start in a specific week, rather than buying one to complete a preferred formation.
Silva has the stronger balance of rates
Silva averages 90.0 min/match for Bournemouth. His 1.11 xGC/90 sits below Vušković’s 1.44, while his 0.18 xGI/90 edges the Brighton defender’s 0.16. He also leads on DefCon/90, 10.33 to 9.60.
Those differences support the buying preference, but none promises a return. xGC/90 describes expected goals conceded during the player’s time on the pitch; it does not rank an entire defence or predict the next clean sheet. xGI/90 describes expected goal involvement to date. DefCon/90 measures defensive contributions per 90 minutes, so a higher rate does not guarantee contribution points in a particular match.
Vušković costs £5.2m and averages 88.6 min/match. Both offer substantial playing time on their season averages, though managers still need to check selection news before the deadline. Silva has three yellow cards to monitor; Vušković has none.
For a fresh purchase with no fixture-specific reason to choose otherwise, we lean Silva. For an existing Vušković owner, the small rate differences give little reason to spend a transfer switching between the two.
Choose the weeks you need the extra starter
Bournemouth visit Ipswich in GW10, host Forest in GW11 and travel to Fulham in GW12. Brighton host Brentford, visit Hull and host Newcastle across the same three Gameweeks.
A manager who needs a home starter this week may prefer Vušković. A manager buying across the whole period may accept Silva’s opening away match for his combination of price and performance rates. Neither choice requires starting the new defender in all three fixtures.
Write down your likely XI for each week before buying. If both players would spend most of that period on your bench, keep the transfer for a clearer improvement. If one fills a specific gap, judge him against the player who would otherwise start in your team.
You can test future line-ups in the We Play FPL planner to compare those starts before changing your live squad. Use that plan to check whether a fourth defender improves your XI and whether the fifth offers cover you will use.
Build the bench through available transfers
Five playable defenders give you more choices after an injury or a difficult fixture. You still need enough money in attack. Avoid a hit whose only purpose is to impose four or five at the back, and keep a healthy starter if the replacement would spend the next week on the bench.
Defensive contributions add another scoring route, but managers should assess them alongside clean-sheet potential and attacking involvement. Buying the highest DefCon/90 alone can leave you paying for a player whose fixtures or playing time do not fit your squad.
Use the next free transfer to fix the weakest planned start. Silva is our first look if that means buying a defender around £5m; Vušković remains a close alternative when Brighton’s fixtures better match your needs. Recheck availability before the GW10 deadline on 6 November at 18:30 UTC, then choose the XI from the players you own.
Chip Strategy
GW9 Liverpool defence: Jacquet, Araujo or Van Dijk?
Jacquet offers Liverpool defensive value at £5.1m; Van Dijk has the stronger playing-time record. Compare the price tiers and plan your starts from GW10.
Jeremy Jacquet is our first Liverpool defender to consider if you want to keep the cost down. At £5.1m, he costs £0.3m less than Ronald Araujo and £1.3m less than Virgil van Dijk. His playing-time record and defensive contribution rate make that saving worth taking seriously.
For a new purchase, we would reassess after Arsenal at home in GW9. You can then decide whether Liverpool’s GW10–14 fixtures suit the weeks you need a defender. Van Dijk offers the stronger playing-time record if you have room for £6.4m; Araujo needs a clearer reason for the extra spend over Jacquet.
Jacquet offers the cheaper route
Jacquet has averaged 85.3 minutes per match, with 9.37 defensive contributions per 90. Araujo has averaged 61.6 minutes per match and 7.85 defensive contributions per 90. Neither average promises a future start, but Jacquet has given owners more playing time so far.
The attacking numbers offer little reason to pay up for Araujo. Jacquet has 0.07 expected goal involvements per 90 (xGI/90), compared with Araujo’s 0.02. Both rates are low, so we would buy either for the defensive role and budget fit rather than an expectation of regular attacking returns.
Araujo has the lower expected goals conceded rate: 0.97 xGC/90 against Jacquet’s 1.16. That deserves a place in the comparison, but the players have spent different amounts of time on the pitch. We would not treat it as proof that choosing Araujo gives you a better chance of a clean sheet in the next match.
Our lean is Jacquet when choosing between the two at current prices. Fresh selection news could change that call. Paying another £0.3m makes more sense if you can identify a role or playing-time advantage that the current record does not show.
Van Dijk costs £1.3m more for a stronger minutes record
Van Dijk has averaged 90.0 minutes per match. That is the strongest record of the three, alongside 9.75 defensive contributions per 90. His 1.20 xGC/90 and 0.05 xGI/90 do not establish a large expected-performance advantage over Jacquet.
At £6.4m, we would choose Van Dijk when you can afford the premium and place a high value on his playing-time record. You still need to check availability and selection news; a historical average cannot guarantee his next start.
For a tighter budget, Jacquet leaves £1.3m available elsewhere. Compare what you gain from that saving with the extra playing-time confidence you want from Van Dijk before committing to either player.
Plan the starts from GW10
Liverpool’s schedule after Arsenal includes three away matches in five:
- GW10: Crystal Palace away.
- GW11: Man Utd at home.
- GW12: Everton away.
- GW13: Sunderland at home.
- GW14: Chelsea away.
You need a plan for that whole stretch. A lower price helps, but you may still want another defender available for selected away fixtures. You can compare Liverpool’s defensive options in We Play FPL using player statistics and upcoming fixtures, then map out the starts in the planner.
We would shortlist Jacquet for value and Van Dijk for the stronger playing-time record, then revisit the choice after GW9 with fresh team news. Araujo’s lower xGC/90 merits attention, but his shorter average appearances and higher price leave us preferring Jacquet for the cheaper slot. These season-to-date rates describe past performance; they do not predict clean sheets or attacking returns.
