Whether or not you have qualified for your fantasy playoffs, now is the time to make your preparations for that possibility.
Dump that mediocre fourth RB and fifth WR that were keeping you afloat during the bye weeks. If you still have a third QB, you're insane. He's not helping you. The only justification for holding onto these guys is a great potential matchup in the semifinal or championship week (usually Weeks 15 and 16) or simply to prevent a potential opponent from using him against you.
This brings up an interesting dilemma. Is it OK to "block" other owners, specifically an upcoming head-to-head opponent, by rostering an inactive player that they might actually use against you? ESPN's default rules say that impeding other owners is not allowed, but it identifies more the practice of cycling guys through waivers, not specifically single-player acquisitions and certainly not simply retaining a player you no longer intend to use.
If allowed, roster moves like these create unique advantages and should be used accordingly. If not allowed, etiquette and integrity prevent using them. It all depends on your individual league, but it's most important that every owner knows what the boundaries are and operates within them. It is your responsibility to know what they are, and it's in your best interest to operate within them to your maximum advantage while simultaneously trying to prevent a similar advantage an opponent can use over you.
Keeping a player that you won't use just to prevent a potential opponent from using him against you is almost universally acceptable. So if one of your potential opponents in the coming weeks is desperate for a quarterback, you may want to keep that third guy after all. Although if he's comparable to multiple guys on the waiver wire already, there's no point because your opponent can just as easily pick up one of those guys. But take a look at potential favorable matchups just in case. Good examples here are Jon Kitna and David Garrard, who host Washington in Weeks 15 and 16, respectively. You'd feel pretty silly if you dropped Garrard and then lost because of him in Week 16. Obviously, if your potential opponents have Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees and Philip Rivers, they're not going to play Garrard. But if they have Eli Manning or Matt Schaub, they might sneak him in.
Cycling players through waivers is almost universally frowned upon, but some leagues actually allow it, either expressly or via a gentlemen's agreement. There are infinite combinations of using this to your advantage if allowed, but it's usually safe to assume it's not.
The gray area falls in single-player acquisitions, specifically acquiring a player that you are unlikely to use with full knowledge that your opponent that week would likely use against you. This commonly occurs with injured RBs, whereby you acquire your opponent's backup when the starter gets injured, even though you still have four viable RBs ahead of him. Your opponent basically gets "unfairly" screwed.
But there is rational justification for such a transaction, the most logical of which is acquiring the player with the intent of trading him to another player that needs an RB. No owner should be denied of a tradeable asset, even if such a trade never comes to fruition. (It's a tougher sell after your trade deadline though!)
The more borderline transaction would be acquiring the best available QB (or two) during your opponent's QB's bye week when there is no real current or future benefit to you. I'm actually in favor of allowing transactions like these because it requires the offending owner to burn a legitimately valuable roster spot. It's thus a critical decision, like any other. Conversely, I'm not in favor of allowing cycling guys through waivers because it does not require using any more roster spots than the single-player acquisition method (thus the sacrifice is much smaller for the individual benefit) and it unnecessarily compromises the pool of available players for the entire field or participants.
Regardless, your individual league's settings and all the participants' knowledge of them are, as stated, the most critical factor in deciding what transactions you can/cannot or should/should not make. Know them and use them, and make sure your opponents know them and use them too. There's nothing better than participating in a league with owners just as savvy and as motivated as you.
If you find yourself in a league debating what is OK and not in terms of blocking, try proposing a rule whereby owners must roster any acquired player through a full week of games. This forces owners to burn that roster spot for the duration and make much more critical choices in terms of its timely use, while still allowing the potential for strategic blocks. And if you want to get really crazy, try requiring owners to activate any player acquired in the week in which they were acquired. That makes all acquisitions even more critical/strategic, but stifles a lot of the vital ability to acquire players specifically for future use. Probably not worth instituting such a rule, but interesting nonetheless.
The subject of future use becomes especially important to keeper and dynasty leaguers at this time of year. Whether or not you've made the playoffs, you can start planning for next year, at least minimally with an available roster spot or two. And the number of keepers you have is the determining factor for your strategy. If you have a small number (four or less) it is highly unlikely any acquisition right now will make your cut for next year, so don't even bother. If you have more though (6-10) you might be able to draw a lucky lottery ticket like Arian Foster. I grabbed him on a whim in a six-keeper league during his late surge last season, thinking he was one conceivable answer in the backfield for an otherwise juggernaut offense, and thus fantasy gold. The drafting of Ben Tate didn't help, but Tate's injury and Foster's solid preseason did. Nevertheless, he was still my final cut, just behind Dallas Clark. Whoops. I also kept Shonn Greene. Double whoops. But these kinds of opportunities are out there all the time, and it's the prudent owner that takes advantage via small calculated risks at this time of year.
If you're in a full keeper dynasty league, the strategies shift considerably. You can build a strong top-to-bottom squad, with a roster full of presently usable assets that will keep you competitive for multiple seasons, or you can use some of your spots for higher upside futures, which is generally the better strategy. There is a long list of guys that qualify as future-but-not-present values, but some of the best bets include Tashard Choice, Bernard Scott, Arrelious Benn, Demariyus Thomas, Sam Bradford and Josh Freeman. Matt Stafford, and more recently James Jones, have extremely high potential dynasty value and should definitely be grabbed if they are still available in your pool. Among the tight ends, I like the Saints' Jimmy Graham, but he may be a tough weekly play regardless given the ridiculously high number of options that Drew Brees has.
This started as the year of the tight end, and stayed true as much, but for different reasons. What was once an extremely deep pool became shallow in a matter of a few weeks, but it still adds up to the same thing: most owners have the same access as any other owner to about the same value at the position. There were a ton of high end guys to start (10+ points per game), and now a ton of mediocre guys (4-5 points per game). Antonio Gates, the only option that was ever truly elite, is now creating fits for his owners. Midseason darling Aaron Hernandez is now being regularly dropped for Rob Gronkowski, as if it makes a difference. You might make a case for Jason Witten, Vernon Davis or Jacob Tamme, but in reality, there are no more truly reliable options available.
Saturday, November 27, 2010
Saturday, November 20, 2010
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
When you're fighting for a fantasy playoff spot, there's nothing worse than picking the wrong guy to play in a given week, and losing the match because of it.
Week 10 was arguably the signature week for this reality in 2010. Jacoby Jones and Joel Dreessen, two of my favorite plug-and-plays against a highly favorable opponent, both put up zeroes. On the other side, Mike Thomas was putting up a much more serviceable line even before his Hail Mary catch made him a top 10 guy.
In a week where former backup Michael Vick broke the all-time fantasy football record for QBs, and at least 10 quarterbacks had monster weeks, Peyton Manning was nearly invisible. He wasn't even in the top 20. But I highly doubt any of his owners DIDN'T play him. It just seems like not having Clark, Collie and Addai is hurting him a lot more in fantasy than in reality. This would be an extremely difficult guy to bench, but if he doesn't start doing more, owners are going to have to at least consider it if they have other high-end options.
I'm going against the grain here, but I'm recommending Kevin Boss as a legit TE plug-in option this week and next. Risky, but good upside. Philadelphia and Jacksonville are both generous to tight ends and Boss got his most looks of the season last week with Steve Smith out, finishing with 81 yards and a touchdown. The problem with taking a stab at Boss is that there are probably now plenty of alternatives, even with all the injuries to elite TEs. With the bye weeks over, owners are dropping their reserves, putting Boss way down the list. The more popular pick is Jermaine Gresham, and I can't exactly argue with that. He's fresh off a big game at Indianapolis and now has a home game against the Bills, who basically hand five points to every tight end as soon as the opening kickoff occurs.
I've written before about tight end matchup ratings being less reliable than others, and I'm not wavering from that. But when you come into weeks where there are a hodgepodge of options after the top four of five, like this week, it's yet another tool at your disposal. Boss is basically a Hail Mary here, but he could easily outproduce Chris Cooley, a much more conventional choice. Gresham is probably mathematically the better play, and it's easy to get excited about his fantasy playoff schedule.
Several sites offer matchup ratings, and ESPN's built-in one on the team pages (OPRK) is about the best lazy man's option ever invented. I give them credit for putting a lot of useful defaults right there for you to make an informed decision every week. (Reminder: Ignore the projections.) Unfortunately, it is reflective of the entire season, which does not necessarily reflect recent performances, either in the positive or negative.
Fantasy football is a lot about What-Have-You-Done-For-Me-Lately. Both in the subjective (the player himself) and the objective (the opponent). The best site I have found so far to give you an idea of what a guy is up against, for the upcoming weeks and for the playoffs, is fftoday.com. The specific section is
http://fftoday.com/stats/fantasystats.php?o=3&PosID=10&Side=Allowed&LeagueID=1
These graphs quickly map out the most favorable schedules by position, reflecting how opponents have fared against each position over the past five weeks. And what you want to be looking at right now are your playoff weeks. Granted, you have to get there first. But now that the bye weeks are over, you should have at least a roster spot or two to prep for the playoffs. Start getting your claims in now, because the attractive plays aren't going to last. You can always switch them later, but you might as well take a few gambles with whatever spots you've got now.
There aren't going to be many position players on the wire that are necessarily going to be better than the guys you've got for those weeks. You definitely want to stick with your studs over speculative picks, even in tough matchups, when the prize is on the line. But if you've got a marginal guy in your starting lineup, it's worth stashing another guy that might be a better option later. The guy that comes to mind for me is Robert Meachem, with plus matchups in Weeks 15 and 16 and a couple of others even before that. (Don't be fooled - Baltimore is a plus matchup this season.) With PT and Bush back soon, this attack will take off once again. I really believe the defending Superbowl champs will be gold in the fantasy playoffs. Great news for owners of Drew Brees. I also like Arrelious Benn (and especially Josh Freeman for you Matt Schaub owners. Totally worth it even if you have to trade for him.)
The wisest use of those extra spots though is to pick out your DST path. I mentioned this before, but it bears repeating now. Based on plus matchups, you can plan right now for which DSTs you want to use in each of the remaining weeks. Ideally, you will find two that you can rely on to compliment each other for the rest of the season, one one week, the other the next, and so on. Carolina is easily the most attractive potential opponent right now - almost any DST against them has an immediate fantasy advantage. They have Atlanta in Weeks 14 and 17, Arizona in Week 15, and have a match-made-in-fantasy-heaven for Steelers owners in Week 16. The Steelers are arguably the best DST play at any time, especially in common playoff weeks 14-16 (THREE home games vs. Cincy, the Jets and Carolina), but they are not going to be available in your pool.
Your focus should be on Atlanta. Arizona is actually one of the stronger DSTs this year, but mostly due to the inordinate frequency of TDs. The Cardinals' DST has scored at least one TD in five of its nine games, and twice has scored two. But hosting a seemingly attractive opponent (Seattle) last week, the Arizona DST did not score and finished in the negative. Very risky play. And their Week 16 opponent is Dallas - who knows which Cowboy offense will show up, the one that was totally deficient for the final four games of the Wade Philips era, or the new Jason Garrett model that humbled a strong DST (Giants) on the road in Week 10? I think Arizona is OK in Week 15, but that may be it.
Atlanta, on the other hand, has just one DST TD this year, but has been much more consistent as a unit even though their average is only middle-of-the-road. The Falcons follow up their Week 14 at Carolina with Week 15 at Seattle, representing arguably the best combination in those critical weeks. I think that's the team to start owning now in preparation for that.
You could also make a great case for Tampa Bay, who draws a suddenly hopeless Washington in Week 14, followed by Detroit and Seattle in Weeks 15 and 16. The Buccaneers have a good team that's in contention - they're going to play hard to the wire and each of those squads can be exploited for one reason or another.
And if you really want to reach, try Dallas. Ordinary at best on the defensive side of things this year, the originally high-ranked DST may be coming back to life under Garrett. If this unit is successfully resurrected, it's looking at Washington and Arizona in Weeks 15 and 16. Arizona might be behind only Carolina in terms of a good opponent to have.
Man Crush Update:
This section is definitely swinging heavily in favor of Tampa Bay. I like all of them, and with cause. It's a wonderful fantasy playoff schedule, so stock up while you can. This goes for redraft leagues and keeper/dynasty leagues. It's time to invest before they turn into the Colts.
Danny Woodhead had a predictably light day against the Steelers, but I still think he's a terrific depth guy to have as needed. Unfortunately, Fred Taylor is due back and the bye weeks are over. Might be worth trying to trade if you don't really need him and someone else does. But if he's back with the Pats next year, especially in the unlikely event that he retains dual positional eligibility, he's an absolutely fantastic draft pick as your #4 RB or #5 WR.
As for Chris Ivory and James Starks, the luster has significantly diminished. I'm not ready to count out either, but they both should be on waiver wires for now.
Week 10 was arguably the signature week for this reality in 2010. Jacoby Jones and Joel Dreessen, two of my favorite plug-and-plays against a highly favorable opponent, both put up zeroes. On the other side, Mike Thomas was putting up a much more serviceable line even before his Hail Mary catch made him a top 10 guy.
In a week where former backup Michael Vick broke the all-time fantasy football record for QBs, and at least 10 quarterbacks had monster weeks, Peyton Manning was nearly invisible. He wasn't even in the top 20. But I highly doubt any of his owners DIDN'T play him. It just seems like not having Clark, Collie and Addai is hurting him a lot more in fantasy than in reality. This would be an extremely difficult guy to bench, but if he doesn't start doing more, owners are going to have to at least consider it if they have other high-end options.
I'm going against the grain here, but I'm recommending Kevin Boss as a legit TE plug-in option this week and next. Risky, but good upside. Philadelphia and Jacksonville are both generous to tight ends and Boss got his most looks of the season last week with Steve Smith out, finishing with 81 yards and a touchdown. The problem with taking a stab at Boss is that there are probably now plenty of alternatives, even with all the injuries to elite TEs. With the bye weeks over, owners are dropping their reserves, putting Boss way down the list. The more popular pick is Jermaine Gresham, and I can't exactly argue with that. He's fresh off a big game at Indianapolis and now has a home game against the Bills, who basically hand five points to every tight end as soon as the opening kickoff occurs.
I've written before about tight end matchup ratings being less reliable than others, and I'm not wavering from that. But when you come into weeks where there are a hodgepodge of options after the top four of five, like this week, it's yet another tool at your disposal. Boss is basically a Hail Mary here, but he could easily outproduce Chris Cooley, a much more conventional choice. Gresham is probably mathematically the better play, and it's easy to get excited about his fantasy playoff schedule.
Several sites offer matchup ratings, and ESPN's built-in one on the team pages (OPRK) is about the best lazy man's option ever invented. I give them credit for putting a lot of useful defaults right there for you to make an informed decision every week. (Reminder: Ignore the projections.) Unfortunately, it is reflective of the entire season, which does not necessarily reflect recent performances, either in the positive or negative.
Fantasy football is a lot about What-Have-You-Done-For-Me-Lately. Both in the subjective (the player himself) and the objective (the opponent). The best site I have found so far to give you an idea of what a guy is up against, for the upcoming weeks and for the playoffs, is fftoday.com. The specific section is
http://fftoday.com/stats/fantasystats.php?o=3&PosID=10&Side=Allowed&LeagueID=1
These graphs quickly map out the most favorable schedules by position, reflecting how opponents have fared against each position over the past five weeks. And what you want to be looking at right now are your playoff weeks. Granted, you have to get there first. But now that the bye weeks are over, you should have at least a roster spot or two to prep for the playoffs. Start getting your claims in now, because the attractive plays aren't going to last. You can always switch them later, but you might as well take a few gambles with whatever spots you've got now.
There aren't going to be many position players on the wire that are necessarily going to be better than the guys you've got for those weeks. You definitely want to stick with your studs over speculative picks, even in tough matchups, when the prize is on the line. But if you've got a marginal guy in your starting lineup, it's worth stashing another guy that might be a better option later. The guy that comes to mind for me is Robert Meachem, with plus matchups in Weeks 15 and 16 and a couple of others even before that. (Don't be fooled - Baltimore is a plus matchup this season.) With PT and Bush back soon, this attack will take off once again. I really believe the defending Superbowl champs will be gold in the fantasy playoffs. Great news for owners of Drew Brees. I also like Arrelious Benn (and especially Josh Freeman for you Matt Schaub owners. Totally worth it even if you have to trade for him.)
The wisest use of those extra spots though is to pick out your DST path. I mentioned this before, but it bears repeating now. Based on plus matchups, you can plan right now for which DSTs you want to use in each of the remaining weeks. Ideally, you will find two that you can rely on to compliment each other for the rest of the season, one one week, the other the next, and so on. Carolina is easily the most attractive potential opponent right now - almost any DST against them has an immediate fantasy advantage. They have Atlanta in Weeks 14 and 17, Arizona in Week 15, and have a match-made-in-fantasy-heaven for Steelers owners in Week 16. The Steelers are arguably the best DST play at any time, especially in common playoff weeks 14-16 (THREE home games vs. Cincy, the Jets and Carolina), but they are not going to be available in your pool.
Your focus should be on Atlanta. Arizona is actually one of the stronger DSTs this year, but mostly due to the inordinate frequency of TDs. The Cardinals' DST has scored at least one TD in five of its nine games, and twice has scored two. But hosting a seemingly attractive opponent (Seattle) last week, the Arizona DST did not score and finished in the negative. Very risky play. And their Week 16 opponent is Dallas - who knows which Cowboy offense will show up, the one that was totally deficient for the final four games of the Wade Philips era, or the new Jason Garrett model that humbled a strong DST (Giants) on the road in Week 10? I think Arizona is OK in Week 15, but that may be it.
Atlanta, on the other hand, has just one DST TD this year, but has been much more consistent as a unit even though their average is only middle-of-the-road. The Falcons follow up their Week 14 at Carolina with Week 15 at Seattle, representing arguably the best combination in those critical weeks. I think that's the team to start owning now in preparation for that.
You could also make a great case for Tampa Bay, who draws a suddenly hopeless Washington in Week 14, followed by Detroit and Seattle in Weeks 15 and 16. The Buccaneers have a good team that's in contention - they're going to play hard to the wire and each of those squads can be exploited for one reason or another.
And if you really want to reach, try Dallas. Ordinary at best on the defensive side of things this year, the originally high-ranked DST may be coming back to life under Garrett. If this unit is successfully resurrected, it's looking at Washington and Arizona in Weeks 15 and 16. Arizona might be behind only Carolina in terms of a good opponent to have.
Man Crush Update:
This section is definitely swinging heavily in favor of Tampa Bay. I like all of them, and with cause. It's a wonderful fantasy playoff schedule, so stock up while you can. This goes for redraft leagues and keeper/dynasty leagues. It's time to invest before they turn into the Colts.
Danny Woodhead had a predictably light day against the Steelers, but I still think he's a terrific depth guy to have as needed. Unfortunately, Fred Taylor is due back and the bye weeks are over. Might be worth trying to trade if you don't really need him and someone else does. But if he's back with the Pats next year, especially in the unlikely event that he retains dual positional eligibility, he's an absolutely fantastic draft pick as your #4 RB or #5 WR.
As for Chris Ivory and James Starks, the luster has significantly diminished. I'm not ready to count out either, but they both should be on waiver wires for now.
Saturday, November 13, 2010
Week 10 Potpourri
"Potpourri" should never be used in a fantasy football column. Ever. Just like Darrius Heyward-Bey should never be used in a fantasy football lineup. Ever.
But unlike DHB, potpourri seems fitting here given the lack of a consistent theme this week. Let's call it a stew. A beef stew.
The first ingredient is quarterbacks, as in three elite ones on a bye this week. I have no idea how Jason Campbell owners will truly cope without him this week, but there are plenty of sneaky options.
David Garrard is far and away Option #1 if he's available, and he's easily a Top 10 play this week for anyone, threatening for Top 5. His last appearance was a five-touchdown gem at Dallas and he had the bye week to prepare for this week's home game against an even more generous Houston secondary. Three TDs and 250+ yards seems doable.
After him, it's at least a step or two down to the next guys, but they're all viable for a serviceable stat line. I like Josh Freeman the best, despite an unfavorable matchup, and I still say it's only going to get better going forward. Vince Young is worthwhile (albeit risky) if active as Randy Moss adds a whole new dimension to the Titans' vertical attack. Kerry Collins.... not so much.
A follower of the column recently suggested I comment on how late inactives among defensive players affect opposing offensive player matchups. It's a good concept, and one that is too often overlooked and underreported. Unfortunately, I haven't delved enough into that area of gameday research to adequately address it. But it is great food for thought if you want to spend the time to monitor it.
Questionable/doubtful/out tags on Friday's injury reports can clearly improve the outlook for individual offensive players, just as similar reports for offensive linemen have the opposite effect. If you take a little extra time to note who's in and out on Sunday, you may end up with an unheralded gem or at least scrape up an excellent tiebreaker between two otherwise even players.
Branching off of that though, I can comment generally on how some defensive players significantly affect the fantasy potential of their offensive opponents. Darrelle Revis is the best example of an individual player altering an offensive player's matchup, and he was back to his old Revis Island self last week, limiting elite talent Calvin Johnson to just one catch on only four targets. Revis' first dedicated coverage of the season was a resounding success, and every No. 1 WR playing against him for the rest of season must be started with dramatically lowered expectations.
There is a flip side to this, though. For whatever reason, the Jets have not defended against the pass well in general. With Revis dedicated to the No. 1 guy, that means the No. 2 guy is going to get a lot more looks than usual, and should be a fantasy success. Last week, it was Nate Burleson. And after watching what TO did against the Steelers on Monday night when they rolled blanket coverage onto Ochocinco, you can bet he's in for another big game in Week 12 vs. the Jets.
Burleson was the top WR waiver wire add this week, but I'm not totally sure why. Buffalo does give up points in general, but is more suceptible to the running game. And as the best fantasy matchup for opposing tight ends, you can bet that will a big part of the focus for the Lions in this week's gameplan. (Hello Brandon Pettigrew! And even perhaps Tony Scheffler....) Even when the Lions air it out, Megatron will dominate the looks and endzone targets. Burleson is a low ceiling possession receiver who has just happened to score a TD in three of the last four games. He's got a less-than-100-percent backup QB throwing to him Sunday. I just don't see him as a clear cut choice here over four or five other guys floating around the wires, although I understand he's a viable bye week play. I like Mike Thomas and Jacoby Jones (who has the better matchup against the others' inept pass defense?) but my plug-in pick this week at WR, even BEFORE Steve Smith went down, was Mario Manningham. It's a risky move because players usually ramp it up in Game One of a new regime, so Dallas may not roll over again as they have in recent weeks. I still think it was an attractive play WITH Smith ahead of him, and it's absolutely irresistible with him starting. It will be much more fascinating though to see how the new sherriff affects the numerous former fantasy darlings on OFFENSE given he now has full control.
Tashard Choice is one total wildcard here, but it would be tough to guess on him this week at the Giants. I actually like him better as a higher waiver selection than Mike Goodson though even though Goodson may be a better play this week. 20 touches? Perhaps. But if neither DeAngelo Williams nor Jonathan Stewart can do anything with those, why should you expect the lesser-talented Goodson to do so, even in a supposed cake matchup? The line can't open up holes, the QB position is a mess, and they're going up against a solid if unspectacular defense that is motivated by a run to the playoffs. No no no. I'll be shocked if anyone on Carolina scores a TD, and even 60-70 all-purpose yards for Goodson seems an excessive estimate. The Bucs' DST is the better sneaky play here. Unfortunately, there really isn't much to be had on most RB waiver wires, so Goodson isn't actually far from the top of that. But why bother? He's a one-week desperation play at best, and plenty of depth guys have a better overall likelihood of production this week. In many cases, I'd go with that guy sitting at the end of your bench over Goodson, and I'd definitely go with most RB2/3s over him.
Man Crush Update:
Danny Woodhead: At Pittsburgh this week, the ultimate test. He already did it against Baltimore, but those weren't your father's Reed-in Ravens, remember? Offensive patterns have shown though that the Patriots will lean on him when the normal running game is shut down, as it should be this week. I'll say another 75 all-purpose yards. TD would be a bonus, but not shocking. Also seems he is the only Patriot with value intact post-Moss - no one would have guessed that. Fred Taylor is expected back soon, and that could put a crimp on his touches, but it would be hard to not rely on the guy at least a little (no pun intended), in both fantasy and reality.
James Starks: Unexpectedly activated from the PUP list instead of sent to IR. That makes things really interesting because it means the Packers think he has more value to them for the rest of this season than does another guy. Don't count him out yet - he could be one of the greatest dark horses of all time, but his top value is still in dynasty leagues.
Chris Ivory: Tough to truly stick with this guy, all things considered. But I'd still wait until PT plays a full game before considering bailing out on him as your #4/5 guy. He could still end up being the Mike Bell of 2010.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers: Buy order still in effect for Freeman, Blount and especially Mike Williams, a junior Megatron. Trade perceived equal or even slightly better assets if necessary. I'd trade Orton for Freeman, Welker or Ward for Mike Williams, and Ricky Williams for Blount. Keep an eye on Arrelious Benn as well and possibly a late season re-emergence by Kellen Winslow.
But unlike DHB, potpourri seems fitting here given the lack of a consistent theme this week. Let's call it a stew. A beef stew.
The first ingredient is quarterbacks, as in three elite ones on a bye this week. I have no idea how Jason Campbell owners will truly cope without him this week, but there are plenty of sneaky options.
David Garrard is far and away Option #1 if he's available, and he's easily a Top 10 play this week for anyone, threatening for Top 5. His last appearance was a five-touchdown gem at Dallas and he had the bye week to prepare for this week's home game against an even more generous Houston secondary. Three TDs and 250+ yards seems doable.
After him, it's at least a step or two down to the next guys, but they're all viable for a serviceable stat line. I like Josh Freeman the best, despite an unfavorable matchup, and I still say it's only going to get better going forward. Vince Young is worthwhile (albeit risky) if active as Randy Moss adds a whole new dimension to the Titans' vertical attack. Kerry Collins.... not so much.
A follower of the column recently suggested I comment on how late inactives among defensive players affect opposing offensive player matchups. It's a good concept, and one that is too often overlooked and underreported. Unfortunately, I haven't delved enough into that area of gameday research to adequately address it. But it is great food for thought if you want to spend the time to monitor it.
Questionable/doubtful/out tags on Friday's injury reports can clearly improve the outlook for individual offensive players, just as similar reports for offensive linemen have the opposite effect. If you take a little extra time to note who's in and out on Sunday, you may end up with an unheralded gem or at least scrape up an excellent tiebreaker between two otherwise even players.
Branching off of that though, I can comment generally on how some defensive players significantly affect the fantasy potential of their offensive opponents. Darrelle Revis is the best example of an individual player altering an offensive player's matchup, and he was back to his old Revis Island self last week, limiting elite talent Calvin Johnson to just one catch on only four targets. Revis' first dedicated coverage of the season was a resounding success, and every No. 1 WR playing against him for the rest of season must be started with dramatically lowered expectations.
There is a flip side to this, though. For whatever reason, the Jets have not defended against the pass well in general. With Revis dedicated to the No. 1 guy, that means the No. 2 guy is going to get a lot more looks than usual, and should be a fantasy success. Last week, it was Nate Burleson. And after watching what TO did against the Steelers on Monday night when they rolled blanket coverage onto Ochocinco, you can bet he's in for another big game in Week 12 vs. the Jets.
Burleson was the top WR waiver wire add this week, but I'm not totally sure why. Buffalo does give up points in general, but is more suceptible to the running game. And as the best fantasy matchup for opposing tight ends, you can bet that will a big part of the focus for the Lions in this week's gameplan. (Hello Brandon Pettigrew! And even perhaps Tony Scheffler....) Even when the Lions air it out, Megatron will dominate the looks and endzone targets. Burleson is a low ceiling possession receiver who has just happened to score a TD in three of the last four games. He's got a less-than-100-percent backup QB throwing to him Sunday. I just don't see him as a clear cut choice here over four or five other guys floating around the wires, although I understand he's a viable bye week play. I like Mike Thomas and Jacoby Jones (who has the better matchup against the others' inept pass defense?) but my plug-in pick this week at WR, even BEFORE Steve Smith went down, was Mario Manningham. It's a risky move because players usually ramp it up in Game One of a new regime, so Dallas may not roll over again as they have in recent weeks. I still think it was an attractive play WITH Smith ahead of him, and it's absolutely irresistible with him starting. It will be much more fascinating though to see how the new sherriff affects the numerous former fantasy darlings on OFFENSE given he now has full control.
Tashard Choice is one total wildcard here, but it would be tough to guess on him this week at the Giants. I actually like him better as a higher waiver selection than Mike Goodson though even though Goodson may be a better play this week. 20 touches? Perhaps. But if neither DeAngelo Williams nor Jonathan Stewart can do anything with those, why should you expect the lesser-talented Goodson to do so, even in a supposed cake matchup? The line can't open up holes, the QB position is a mess, and they're going up against a solid if unspectacular defense that is motivated by a run to the playoffs. No no no. I'll be shocked if anyone on Carolina scores a TD, and even 60-70 all-purpose yards for Goodson seems an excessive estimate. The Bucs' DST is the better sneaky play here. Unfortunately, there really isn't much to be had on most RB waiver wires, so Goodson isn't actually far from the top of that. But why bother? He's a one-week desperation play at best, and plenty of depth guys have a better overall likelihood of production this week. In many cases, I'd go with that guy sitting at the end of your bench over Goodson, and I'd definitely go with most RB2/3s over him.
Man Crush Update:
Danny Woodhead: At Pittsburgh this week, the ultimate test. He already did it against Baltimore, but those weren't your father's Reed-in Ravens, remember? Offensive patterns have shown though that the Patriots will lean on him when the normal running game is shut down, as it should be this week. I'll say another 75 all-purpose yards. TD would be a bonus, but not shocking. Also seems he is the only Patriot with value intact post-Moss - no one would have guessed that. Fred Taylor is expected back soon, and that could put a crimp on his touches, but it would be hard to not rely on the guy at least a little (no pun intended), in both fantasy and reality.
James Starks: Unexpectedly activated from the PUP list instead of sent to IR. That makes things really interesting because it means the Packers think he has more value to them for the rest of this season than does another guy. Don't count him out yet - he could be one of the greatest dark horses of all time, but his top value is still in dynasty leagues.
Chris Ivory: Tough to truly stick with this guy, all things considered. But I'd still wait until PT plays a full game before considering bailing out on him as your #4/5 guy. He could still end up being the Mike Bell of 2010.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers: Buy order still in effect for Freeman, Blount and especially Mike Williams, a junior Megatron. Trade perceived equal or even slightly better assets if necessary. I'd trade Orton for Freeman, Welker or Ward for Mike Williams, and Ricky Williams for Blount. Keep an eye on Arrelious Benn as well and possibly a late season re-emergence by Kellen Winslow.
Saturday, November 6, 2010
Dissecting DSTs
Halfway into the 2010 season, we have a pretty good idea of which teams are the closest to locks as DST plays and which teams represent the best and worst matchup plays for opposing DSTs. The trick is getting the right one in at the right time, as matchups matter more there than any other roster position. Even a stud DST like Pittsburgh may not be a smart play against an opponent that generally doesn't make many errors. Whereas a poor DST like Buffalo may actually be a good play this week, going up against Jay Cutler. He's usually good for about 10 points for any opposing DST.
If you have a stud DST, you have the luxury of using them relatively safely in most matchups and thus preserving the additional roster spot for vital depth at other positions. But if you don't, it's perfectly acceptable to stream DSTs (substituting one for another every week, including the possibility of grabbing one a full week in advance of a great matchup) or carry two that you can alternate through good matchups for a lengthy portion of the season. The latter is an especially smart play at the conclusion of the bye weeks, when you know roughly what to expect from matchups through the fantasy playoffs, and you don't need that extra roster spot to cover bye week holes. You can start mapping that out now as there may be several decent combinations still available. Peace of mind for you, and extra time to research your other needs.
A league's individual scoring setting is obviously the most critical factor in determining which DST to play when. In general though, aggressive playmaking defenses (that generate turnovers and sacks) are just as if not more valuable than conservative defenses that merely limit their opponents' scoring and yardage without making highlight defensive plays. But there is a flip side to that coin. Specifically, a team that is reliant on the big play (defensive TD) for its average value (Arizona this year) represents a major risk for any owner that elects to use them. Short of that defensive TD, teams like this are destined for failure. It's very similar to the role of the goalline RB, who will likely end up with a zero if he does not get a touchdown. Those TDs are great equalizers, but unreliable, so those players/DSTs probably should only be used when there are no other viable options available.
The same is true for playing a DST whose opponent has allowed some big plays. San Diego and New Orleans are terrific examples of statistically attractive matchups this year that you would never expect to be so. These are two of the least defensible teams, so they'll rack up yardage and points, but for some reason both have been extremely generous in allowing big plays on defense and special teams. Very risky play to go against either of these, as a negative number is well within reason. But if you're desperate for a big game, why not?
A common trap to fall into for owners prospecting for a plug-in DST is choosing one simply based on average point production. Settings, followed by opponent, have been articulated as the most critical factors, but average value is right up there. Two things dramatically affect that average: the opponents they have faced (opportunity) and the occasional huge game (25+ fantasy points). Past opponents is a given - you don't want to carelessly disregard a team that has been below average against great offenses, nor undeservedly elevate a team's potential value if they have played a string of weak opponents. As for huge games, there is at least one team per year that has one monster defensive game that skews their average value for the rest of the season. Beware of that anomaly vaulting a team into ranks it shouldn't be placed. The best example this year may be New England, who had a huge game against Miami in Week 4. The Patriots' DST has a respectable average in most leagues because of that, but has had abyssmal production in four of its seven games. Plugging them in is dangerous.
One of my biggest pet peeves in fantasy football is the fact that DSTs start at a specific value (based on not having allowed any yards or points at the start of the game) and then deteriorate from there unless enough defensive plays are made to offset the natural progression of the game. The starting total is usually a pretty good number, but the final number is usually below that. This of course affects your "live" bottom line total and those crazy projections. There has to be a better way, but it probably involves a much more complicated algorithm that isn't user-friendly or simply logical. Still would be my preference.
Perhaps my only bigger pet peeve is the requirement of using a kicker in most leagues. I accept the element of luck in fantasy football, but at the kicker position, it is just too great a factor. No amount of research can predict a ridiculously poor start by preseason favorite Garrett Hartley, a -2 by Nick Folk last week or three straight monsters by Dan Carpenter.
The problem is that matchups are hardly indicative of opportunity, because opportunity for kickers tends to be much more random. Granted, if you expect an offense to score five TDs in a game, you can count on five extra points. But that may mean no field goals, which are worth much more.
I've yet to see a formula for effectively streaming kickers, but I'm sure there are "sure-fire" theories out there, like how to win at roulette. The basic argument involves getting a kicker whose team can move the ball, but struggles in the red zone for one reason or another. And vice-versa, an opponent that allows yardage, but tightens up near the goalline. Carpenter is the flavor-of-the-month in that regard but could easily be off the radar two weeks from now. Accuracy and range are obviously good things, but opportunity is way more important, and that is too often totally unpredictable from game to game.
The credo of never drafting a kicker until the last round of your draft has never been more prevalent than this year. There are none that are ever worth a waiver selection and it would be extremely difficult to justify keeping one on your roster during his bye week. I'm certain that I'm not the only one crying out for an elimination of kickers in fantasy leagues, but I certainly would expect more of a common outcry for this, and I just don't hear much about it.
Man Crush Update:
Chris Ivory: Stinker against Pittsburgh, and now splitting touches with two other guys: Ladell Betts AND Julius Jones. Talk about writing on the wall, but I still like the guy. Sean Payton seems to love him, and is not too enamored of the seemingly malingering Pierre Thomas (although I give PT the benefit of the doubt here given he's certainly motivated to play for a contract.) Now there's a rumor that PT may be put on IR. At this point, Ivory is still just a high potential upside play that hasn't yet panned out. A 50/50 shot going forward, but probably worth a roster spot if you've got one handy.
Danny Woodhead: He sure doesn't seem like a good play, but he is. He's a better version of Kevin Faulk, the ultimate bye week replacement, and as mentioned before, has the extremely rare dual positional eligibility. He's not going away folks, even after Fred Taylor comes back. He's just about the best bet in a reliable five points every week, although he has very little high side. No better band-aid for an ailing lineup.
James Starks: Two possibilities here. He's inserted into the lineup in Week 11 and puts on a good late season run, or he disappears completely until next season. Too tough to call at this point.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers: Buy now if you can, specifically Blount, Freeman and Mike Williams. The Buccaneers are 5-2, plenty motivated for a run to the playoffs, and now with the pieces to do it. Freeman's probably the least of the three, but only because you usually only play one QB and he's just on the cusp of the Top 10 right now, but I like him a lot better than Cutler, for example. Hail Mary Blount appears to be panning out with authority, and has only better things ahead. And Williams is a stud-in-the-making. Watch the tape. Every week. Given the team's record and motivation, I'd even consider placing heavier expectations on the Bucs DST, but don't go too crazy. Just a possibility going forward.
P.S. Anthony Gonzalez sure lasted, didn't he? So much for that idea.
If you have a stud DST, you have the luxury of using them relatively safely in most matchups and thus preserving the additional roster spot for vital depth at other positions. But if you don't, it's perfectly acceptable to stream DSTs (substituting one for another every week, including the possibility of grabbing one a full week in advance of a great matchup) or carry two that you can alternate through good matchups for a lengthy portion of the season. The latter is an especially smart play at the conclusion of the bye weeks, when you know roughly what to expect from matchups through the fantasy playoffs, and you don't need that extra roster spot to cover bye week holes. You can start mapping that out now as there may be several decent combinations still available. Peace of mind for you, and extra time to research your other needs.
A league's individual scoring setting is obviously the most critical factor in determining which DST to play when. In general though, aggressive playmaking defenses (that generate turnovers and sacks) are just as if not more valuable than conservative defenses that merely limit their opponents' scoring and yardage without making highlight defensive plays. But there is a flip side to that coin. Specifically, a team that is reliant on the big play (defensive TD) for its average value (Arizona this year) represents a major risk for any owner that elects to use them. Short of that defensive TD, teams like this are destined for failure. It's very similar to the role of the goalline RB, who will likely end up with a zero if he does not get a touchdown. Those TDs are great equalizers, but unreliable, so those players/DSTs probably should only be used when there are no other viable options available.
The same is true for playing a DST whose opponent has allowed some big plays. San Diego and New Orleans are terrific examples of statistically attractive matchups this year that you would never expect to be so. These are two of the least defensible teams, so they'll rack up yardage and points, but for some reason both have been extremely generous in allowing big plays on defense and special teams. Very risky play to go against either of these, as a negative number is well within reason. But if you're desperate for a big game, why not?
A common trap to fall into for owners prospecting for a plug-in DST is choosing one simply based on average point production. Settings, followed by opponent, have been articulated as the most critical factors, but average value is right up there. Two things dramatically affect that average: the opponents they have faced (opportunity) and the occasional huge game (25+ fantasy points). Past opponents is a given - you don't want to carelessly disregard a team that has been below average against great offenses, nor undeservedly elevate a team's potential value if they have played a string of weak opponents. As for huge games, there is at least one team per year that has one monster defensive game that skews their average value for the rest of the season. Beware of that anomaly vaulting a team into ranks it shouldn't be placed. The best example this year may be New England, who had a huge game against Miami in Week 4. The Patriots' DST has a respectable average in most leagues because of that, but has had abyssmal production in four of its seven games. Plugging them in is dangerous.
One of my biggest pet peeves in fantasy football is the fact that DSTs start at a specific value (based on not having allowed any yards or points at the start of the game) and then deteriorate from there unless enough defensive plays are made to offset the natural progression of the game. The starting total is usually a pretty good number, but the final number is usually below that. This of course affects your "live" bottom line total and those crazy projections. There has to be a better way, but it probably involves a much more complicated algorithm that isn't user-friendly or simply logical. Still would be my preference.
Perhaps my only bigger pet peeve is the requirement of using a kicker in most leagues. I accept the element of luck in fantasy football, but at the kicker position, it is just too great a factor. No amount of research can predict a ridiculously poor start by preseason favorite Garrett Hartley, a -2 by Nick Folk last week or three straight monsters by Dan Carpenter.
The problem is that matchups are hardly indicative of opportunity, because opportunity for kickers tends to be much more random. Granted, if you expect an offense to score five TDs in a game, you can count on five extra points. But that may mean no field goals, which are worth much more.
I've yet to see a formula for effectively streaming kickers, but I'm sure there are "sure-fire" theories out there, like how to win at roulette. The basic argument involves getting a kicker whose team can move the ball, but struggles in the red zone for one reason or another. And vice-versa, an opponent that allows yardage, but tightens up near the goalline. Carpenter is the flavor-of-the-month in that regard but could easily be off the radar two weeks from now. Accuracy and range are obviously good things, but opportunity is way more important, and that is too often totally unpredictable from game to game.
The credo of never drafting a kicker until the last round of your draft has never been more prevalent than this year. There are none that are ever worth a waiver selection and it would be extremely difficult to justify keeping one on your roster during his bye week. I'm certain that I'm not the only one crying out for an elimination of kickers in fantasy leagues, but I certainly would expect more of a common outcry for this, and I just don't hear much about it.
Man Crush Update:
Chris Ivory: Stinker against Pittsburgh, and now splitting touches with two other guys: Ladell Betts AND Julius Jones. Talk about writing on the wall, but I still like the guy. Sean Payton seems to love him, and is not too enamored of the seemingly malingering Pierre Thomas (although I give PT the benefit of the doubt here given he's certainly motivated to play for a contract.) Now there's a rumor that PT may be put on IR. At this point, Ivory is still just a high potential upside play that hasn't yet panned out. A 50/50 shot going forward, but probably worth a roster spot if you've got one handy.
Danny Woodhead: He sure doesn't seem like a good play, but he is. He's a better version of Kevin Faulk, the ultimate bye week replacement, and as mentioned before, has the extremely rare dual positional eligibility. He's not going away folks, even after Fred Taylor comes back. He's just about the best bet in a reliable five points every week, although he has very little high side. No better band-aid for an ailing lineup.
James Starks: Two possibilities here. He's inserted into the lineup in Week 11 and puts on a good late season run, or he disappears completely until next season. Too tough to call at this point.
Tampa Bay Buccaneers: Buy now if you can, specifically Blount, Freeman and Mike Williams. The Buccaneers are 5-2, plenty motivated for a run to the playoffs, and now with the pieces to do it. Freeman's probably the least of the three, but only because you usually only play one QB and he's just on the cusp of the Top 10 right now, but I like him a lot better than Cutler, for example. Hail Mary Blount appears to be panning out with authority, and has only better things ahead. And Williams is a stud-in-the-making. Watch the tape. Every week. Given the team's record and motivation, I'd even consider placing heavier expectations on the Bucs DST, but don't go too crazy. Just a possibility going forward.
P.S. Anthony Gonzalez sure lasted, didn't he? So much for that idea.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)