527: Mailbag 7/22/21

00:00:02
Speaker 1: This is the lad Podcast with your host JJ Zacher Resa Jay Jake zacher reson what's up everyone? It's JJ zacharieson the editor in chief at fandel and at number fire dot com and this episode five and twenty seven of the Late Round podcast. So when many shows that are part of the FanDuel podcast network, thanks for tuning in the first and hopefully the last, but unfortunately probably not the last. Big Fantasy football injury was announced on Tuesday. Cam Akers torn Achilles out for the season. One of the more polarizing early Round players isn't playing this year. So what now, Well, let me get it out of the way that I don't think backup Darryl Henderson just becomes Cam Akers. Sometimes we get situations where a backup running back being elevated as starter actually means that the backup is a better fantasy asset than the starter initially was a good example of that was when Kareem Hunt took over as a rookie in twenty seventeen for the Chiefs when Spencer Ware hurt his knee. Hunt was elevated ahead of where spencer Ware was being drafted, and it was because he wasn't going to split the backfield with anyone, spencer Ware was going to lose touches to Kareem Hunt. But Kareem Hunt without Spencer Ware was going to lose touches to no one. I don't see that happening to Darryl Henderson. Henderson wasn't a workhorse in college, and he hasn't been a work horse so far in the NFL. The NFL seasons are obviously most important here too, because he's playing for the same head coach that he's played for over the last two years. In those two seasons, Henderson's exceeded an eighty percent running back rush air in just one game, and he's seen half of his team's running back rushes just six times, and that includes games where rookie cam Akers was banged up. Now, of course, Malcolm Brown was there last year, and he's not there anymore. In fact, the Rams depth chart is filled with unproven players. But then I go back to what the Rams have done through their actions after Henderson's rookie year. Instead of just making him the clear cut starter, they went out and they used their precious raft capital on Cam Akers. Akers ended up being a higher pick than Darryl Henderson. Was the previous season. To me, that tells me the Rams didn't really think of Henderson as their obvious three down back. If they did, they would have never drafted cam Akers. If they didn't feel that way, then then why should we assume they feel that way? Now? Now, that's just the argument against Henderson simply being cam Akers. The fact is the offense is good on paper, so even in somewhat of a split backfield, Henderson can be okay as an RB two my rankings, which you can get for free over on number five. Right now, they have Henderson at RB twenty. I wouldn't be shocked if the Rams go out and sign someone, or even go out and trade for someone. And as a result, that's really where the risk lies with Daryl Henderson. Of course, if Henderson's the workhorse back, he's going to be strong. He's gonna be a very good fantasy asset. But I don't know that we can bank on that right now. But let's be honest, there are definitely worse backups in the league. I know I just said bad things about his profile, but that's just in relation to him being a workhorse back. He was a really interesting prospect coming out of College who showed crazy efficiency, and he can catch passes well out of the backfield. I just worry about the ceiling, and honestly, I worry about how the Rams just generally view him. That's why he's more of an RB two and one that could go in a lot of different directions from now until the start of the season. So there's my take on that backfield. I do think you could boost the passing numbers in that offense a little bit as well. Not because I think cam Akers changes the dynamic of that team drastically, but because the Rams, who have been pretty run heavy close to the end zone under Sean mcvag they may be more inclined to throw the ball around there now if they don't trust their running back. I just don't think it changes things enough to move players into new tiers. Now, today's a mailbag episode, but baseball fans don't forget about the MLB Home Run Challenge over on FanDuel. Here's how it works. Each day, you can draft three players. You'll then receive one point for every home run they hit, score three points for a share of the two thousand dollars prize pool, and score six or more points and you'll want to share the ten thousand dollars prize pool. All you have to do is head over to Fandel today and draft your sluggers. Eligibility restrictions apply. Head over to fandel dot com or download the fandle lapp for more details. The first question this week is an email says hi, JJ, thanks for the informative episode on finding breakout wide receivers. One name that came to mind was DJ Chark. I guess you could say he broke out in twenty nineteen, but got hurt last year, and now he's available in the middle rounds. Do you expect him to break out again or return to his twenty nineteen stats. Either way, it seems like he might fit some of your criteria and be of value. Love the pod, sincerely, Jeremy Okay. So I got probably a dozen messages from people this week after that breakout wide Receiver episode where someone would say, well, what about this guy or how about this guy? I know exactly why. That's how you're reacting to the episode. You're trying to find players who fit some of the criteria that I laid out, and you want some confirmation. You want confirmation that you're looking at it the right way, I totally get it. But let me try to be totally clear here. A lot of players fit some of the criteria, like a lot of them. That's why I keep trying to reiterate that the studies may honestly be more important regarding who to fade rather than who to target. But even if you want to focus on who to target, which you still should keep in mind that there are layers to all of this. I mentioned some players at the end of the show last week who jumped to mind based on all the criteria, and I try to come at it from a perspective that those players fit a whole lot of the criteria. But someone like Chase Claypool or t Higgins, Yeah, I'm very into them too. Just because they're not the first wide receiver being drafted from their team doesn't mean I'm not into them. At the end of the day, you can't only draft wide receiver ones in fantasy football. You can try, but it would be pretty difficult because there are only thirty two of them. You basically have to take team non wide receiver ones, and team non wide receiver ones are still hitting. It would be impossible for them not to considering the sheer number that we're drafting after round five. So if you use some of the other criteria can help you increase your probability of hitting on those team wide receiver twos, like targeting second year players. It's why we should still be really intrigued by Jerry Judy, Chase Claypool, and t Higgins. Judy could very easily be the wide receiver one on the Broncos by ADP. By the time August hits, he already is on some platforms. The point I'm trying to make here is that there are going to be a lot of players who fit this mold fairly well. There are also going to be a group of players who don't at all, and those are the players you probably don't want a draft. When it comes to DJ Shark, he does have teammates going near him in drafts, mainly Levisca Chanault, and we found that team wide receiver ones who don't have those teammates being drafted near them, they tend to do better in terms of exceeding expectation. I would just try to take each of the points in the show layer by layer and apply those layers to wide receivers in the middle in late rounds, you want team wide receiver ones. You also want those wide receiver ones to be more standalone in those middle rounds without teammates near them aside from a teammate tight end. But you also want year two players a match between the two that's ideal, but you're not always going to get that, So instead you separate the pieces of information and try to find the best matches. Hopefully that helps any of you who are trying to figure out specific examples after that show. Like I said in last week's mailbag episode about running backs, it's really important to take a step back first and be a little bit looser with how you're blanketing the criteria. It's about probability, not absolutes. This next question is also an email, says JJ. Does your latest analysis suggest we shouldn't look for the cheapest or cheaper running back in an uncertain backfield? That's kind of been a classic rule or assumption over the years that essentially we don't really know what's going on behind the scenes, and thus we should take the value. Does this analysis suggest, adp Ie, the market is pretty smart, or at least smarter than we think. Any thoughts on where the original logic originated. All the best loved the show, Adam. Yes, this is exactly what the analysis is saying, and this is exactly why I was so excited to share the analysis on the running back position because of exactly what you said. I've been guilty of it plenty of times in the past where I've said I'll just get the cheaper of the two players in a backfield, when in reality you should be doing the opposite. At least when you have a situation where the RB one and the RB two from one backfield, where they're being drafted close together in the middle rounds, it does show that the market isn't nearly as bad as we think at picking out who the RB one is in a backfield. Now, sometimes those situations vary from ADP source to ADP source. I said that last week. But when it's a little bit more obvious, like with Jacksonville or Denver right now, then you should be attacking the RB one. And that brings me to the next question. This one said as Hi JJ, my name is Andrew EM. Hello Andrew M. I'm a big fan of your pod. Definitely one I would highly recommend for improving overall process and decision making. Thank you. My question is just with Chase Edmonds. While I did find the study on number one backs and ambiguous backfields with another highly drafted teammate to be very enlightening, I still can't get on board with Edmund's ADP. It just feels like a huge leap of faith for me to assume a guy who's had very limited usage in production through the first three years of his career is a good bet to do so now even with limited competition. Isn't usage generally an indicator of talent? I feel like he's had about similar usage with Tony Pollard through three years, someone who is a straight handcuff to one of the biggest name running backs in the league. That tells me that he just might not be good enough to earn a workhorse slash belcow role. I understand running backs don't matter, but how can we be so confident as to invest a sixth round pick and someone who's never been trusted with a large role by his team. Nick Chubb hasn't stopped Kareem Hunt from being productive. Has there been any type of study done on the hit rate of running backs who have done very little through the first three years of their career who have a modestly high ADP like Edmunds paying off. I know this probably would be a small sample, since guys who haven't been productive through three seasons probably are very rarely taken in the top ten rounds by fantasy drafters. But isn't that kind of the point what makes Edmunds so exceptional to dismiss the lack of production? Hoping you can provide me some insight, JJ, thanks and have a good rest of your summer, you too, Andrew em I've been tagged in a lot of Chase Edmond tweets since I published that running back episode. A lot of people don't like him, and I get it because I was on that side literally right before I completed the study on breakout running backs. That's why all this is weird to me. I'm apparently a voice for Chase Edmunds stands now. But let's address this question because I do think there are a ton of valid points in it. First off, overall, I would agree with a lot of what you're saying. A player who hasn't had a significant workload until this point in his career, the expectation shouldn't be that he takes this massive leap in work. But I'd argue that that's not the expectation for Chase Edmonds. If it was the expectation, then he'd be a second round pick. And you know how I know that because Kenyan Drake from this same team was a second round pick last year in fantasy football. Under those assumptions, Edmonds is a sixth and often seventh round pick, and he's being drafted there after finishing with ten and a half PPR points per game last year, and now his backfield teammate is with another team, and for what it's worth, he's usually going like ten picks after Kareem Hunt, which is the example that you use in this question, and Kareem Hunt can do well with Nick Chubb because of the circumstances on that Browns team. This is a completely different offense. Now, maybe Chase Edmonds receiving touchdowns should have been lowered last year, but let's not overstate what's happening here. He's coming off a season where he saw a twelve point three percent target chair and one of the more friendly fantasy offenses in all football. At the very least, he's a strong pass catching back, and I think that's what's being missed a little bit with his question here. Chase Edmonds and Tony Paul have not had the same type of workloads at all over the last couple of seasons. Pollard's top target share came last year and it was six and a half percent. And yes, it's because he's playing behind Ezekiel Elliott that's gonna happen. But Edmonds was almost double that. On the ground, we may have seen similar volume from the two over the past couple of years, but receiving is the reason that we can feel good about a baseline with Chase Edmonds in the first place. So we can't downplay that for the sake of argument. Now, of course, you don't want to just draft a player in the sixth or seventh round and have him merely meet expectation. That's not gonna win a fantasy championship. And I understand your argument is likely tied to upside with Chase Edmonds. I mean that was my argument with Edmonds earlier in the offseason. He's only seen one goal line carry his entire career. But my approach to fantasy football is that when we see the market making a general assumption about a player, and when an assumption isn't set in stone at all, we should probably buy This is really another reason my opinion shifted with Chase Edmonds. It's not as though Chase dm dmans is a zero percent chance to see more goal line work this year now that Kenyan Drake is gone. There's not a zero percent chance that Edmonds hits two hundred carries this year. That can still happen. He may not be a massive running back size wise, but he hit two hundred and fifty plus carries in three or four college seasons. The one season he didn't, he only played seven games. We know Edmunds is going to give us some sort of floor production based on his receiving and to be honest, that alone, his receiving production alone should make him a middle round running back selection, which he is. But on top of that, we then have this question mark of well, what if they really do feature Chase Edmonds. Not that we should expect twenty carries per game, but what if we end up seeing twelve or thirteen carries per game and James Connor still plays a pretty big early down role. We've seen seasons like that pan out historically in the middle rounds. In the late rounds of fantasy drafts, one of the key breakout running back indicators is that the running back is a pass catcher. He's someone who sees a disproport amount of touches come through the air. That's likely still going to be chase Edmonds. It doesn't mean he won't see work on the ground or that he can't come close to that two hundred carry mark. But we've seen players in the past with a heavier receiving profile do well in this area of the draft. Lamar Miller comes to mind as a very easy comp but we know players like Austin Eckler or Darren Sproles or James White or Danny Woodhead or Dion Lewis. It's not like these types of things never have happened. It's just that in Edmunds case, his workload wouldn't lean as heavily through the air. Now, to be clear, I don't like Edmonds as a true breakout candidate more than someone like Javonte Williams or Traves Etn. But I've bought into him more and more after that breakout analysis was done. His ADP really is not that bad. The opportunity cost where you get him is not significant. I mean, in recent Bestball drafts, you're getting him right ahead of Juju Smith Schuster and Laviska Chanould and right after Tyler Boyd. Let's not pretend like those players are locked in to win you fantasy titles. Edmonds is a good bet to exceed expectation. I'd say he's not as good of a bet too far exceeded as someone like Javonte Williams or Travis Etn, but it's still in his range of outcomes, and it's something worth betting on. I think, given all the material that I talked about last week. This next question is from at Swave Swaberson. Do you agree that obj is being drafted at his floor given he has a healthy season. Is there any chance everyone is wrong thinking that he will never be a weekly wide receiver one play anymore? I don't think we can say he's being drafted at his floor when he's averaged twelve to thirteen PPR points per game during his two seasons in Cleveland. Is he a good bet to meet expectation at his ADP? Yeah? Probably, But ADP isn't simply about seeing which players can meet expectation we're looking for high upside players, so people are going to opt for guys like Chase Claypool or Brandon Ayuk who have more variants to their profiles in that area of the draft, or at least they appear as if they do. Now. I do think Obj is a pretty interesting draft selection this year for a lot of reasons that I talked about on Monday's episode. He's his team's wide receiver one that's a big plus, and I'm still a believer in the talent. And like I said before on the show, we're all making the assumption that the Browns will be super run heavy, which they do project to be. But what if they're a little bit more past friendly, then we're assuming all of a sudden Obj becomes even more valuable. So considering his target share projection, I think is a strong wide receiver three choice for your fantasy teams this year. Like I have no problem with Obj whatsoever. I think there's still a decent ceiling in there if things hit. But I don't think that we can consider this as floor, just given how competitive wide receiver is and the high upside players that are also going around him in drafts. This last question says, Hey, JJ, hope this email finds you well. I can't fathom the nause Harris hype right now. I'm seeing his ADP and ECR squarely in the second round. He's got an old quarterback in decline, a torn down offensive line, and he's in an offense that ran the ball at a very low rate last year. I understand he has the draft capital and very limited competition for running back work, but I don't see how someone can justify drafting him over a guy like Chris Carson. What am I missing here? Especially from a process standpoint? Best Nick, So, I have Naji Harris at RB thirteen in my rankings, which means I'm totally aligned with how the market is viewing him. The bottom line in fantasy football is that you want volume. Naji Harris is a lock to see a ton of volume in the Steelers offense. They're trying to win right now. They spend a first round pick to get him. They don't have good quality depth. He was an incredible prospect. I mean, the list goes on and on as the why he'll see workhorse volume. I don't think that part can really be debated. You mentioned the situation I think each of those points that you made, while they're not wrong, they can at least be argued. Ben Roethlisberger is not great. I would agree there are better quarterbacks in the league for a running back, but he's made note that last year was tough coming off that elbow injury. The offensive line is projected to be bad, but it's almost impossible for it to be worse than it was last year. And we're also not very good at projecting offensive line play to begin with. And the offense has been pass heavy. But number one, that doesn't necessarily matter if the running back is a high projected target share, which Naji Harris has, But number two, they're likely not going to be as pass heavy given their investment in Naji Harris. I think there are a lot of running backs in that range who you could argue over Harris. Don't get me wrong, Chris Carson included. Carson's a great value. But those are the reasons that NASE is ranked where he's ranked it first, and foremost has to do with volume. The last question this week is another email says, hey, JJ, are you able to touch on ceh Clyde Edwards Hilaire and his peripherals. He obviously disappointed last year, and there are a number of narratives surrounding his fantasy output. Is he being slept on potentially having a fifteen plus touchdown season kind regards cal from down under. The big thing that worries people with Clyde Edwards a Laire is the fact that he had all those goal line rushes to start the year last year and then he sort of just disappeared. In Week one last year, the Chiefs ran eight plays from within the opponent's five yard line. Clyde Edwards Hilaire had all six of Kansas City's rushes from that area of the field, and he went for minus two yards and zero touchdowns. Here's the thing, though, from Week two through the Super Bowl, Kansas City ran forty one plays at the goal line. So they had eight in Week one and they had forty one from then on. Twenty five of those plays were passes, sixteen of them were rushes. Of the sixteen, Clyde Edwards a Laire had four of them for six yards and two touchdowns. Patrick Mahomes had three and Le'Veon Bell had three as well, so Cech's share definitely dipped. He had twenty five percent of their goal line rushes versus one hundred percent of them in Week one, But he wasn't bad on the limited sample. After that Week one game, and without Le'Veon Bell there, and with Cech being another year in the league and not being a rookie, it's easy to see him seeing a little bit more work close to the goal line, or at least having that chance. I don't think it's going to be all of the work, but he should see some more work close to the goal line. I mean. The bottom line here is that last year we had a rookie who averaged a sixty eight percent running back rush are per game and an eleven and a half percent target share per game and one of the best offenses in football, and it's one that projects to be one of the best this year. Those are really strong market share numbers for a rookie. People were just so down on Cech because he didn't totally live up to the hype in year one. So in the end, I'm more in on Cech this year than out. Fifteen plus touchdowns is a lot, so I wouldn't go that high, But in that Chiefs offense, he's got just as high as a ceiling as anyone who's being drafted around him, and you could argue that the ceiling is actually higher than anyone being drafted around him. That's going to do it for today's show, though. Thanks to all of you for listening. If you've get subscribed to the Late Round podcast, make sure you are by searching for it pretty much anywhere podcast can be found, and don't forget to follow me on Twitter at Late Round QB. Thanks for listening this week everyone. I will have the tight End breakout show for you early next week. Otherwise, enjoy your weekend