316: Mailbag 11/15/19

00:00:02
Speaker 1: This is the Label Podcast with your host JJ zacher Resa, jj Zacher Reason. What's up everyone. It's JJ Zachareson, the editor in chief at FanDuel and at Number five dot com And this is episode three hundred and sixteen of the Late Round podcast, one of the many shows that are part of the FanDuel podcast network. Thanks for tuning in. Before getting into your wonderful questions, this week, we've got another free role. Head to Fandel dot com Slash League slash Jim. Make a lineup for this week and have a shot to win free Number fire premium and even a little bit of cash. That's Fandel dot com Slash League slash Jim or the name Jim to enter. This week's first question is from at Lenny Rubin. You were pretty low on Russell Wilson before the season, but he's been pretty great. Was this an oversight in terms of your process or do you think the results are just fluky? And if the former, how will you change your process in the future. Yeah, this is a great question. I'm glad that you asked it after Andrew Luck retired. I think I had Russell Wilson at like QB thirteen or so before the season started. If you guys remember, on one of these mailbag shows, I talked about how we need to stop saying things like this, QB has always finished as a top twelve quarterback, therefore he will this year because that's what people were doing with Russell Wilson. Now, the result hasn't made me look very smart, But I don't know if the process was totally wrong. At the very least, past performance and finishes don't really matter for future predictiveness, So that part was right no matter the outcome. That would have been right. But even my analysis with Russell Wilson said that if you thought Brian Schottenheimer would run this offense in a similar way to last year, then Wilson wouldn't be a worthwhile late round quarterback. I even't talked about positive regression passing wise for that Seahawks offense. They were gonna throw the ball more. It was just a question of how much more. So I think the process from that perspective it wasn't necessarily wrong. What I got wrong is that Wilson not only is throwing more than I projected, I think I had him for like four hundred and eighty attempts or so when he's now pacing towards five hundred and twenty, but that has an increased impact because he's a mobile quarterback. The crazy thing is I even wrote and talked about this in the preseason that Wilson saw a dip in rushing volume last year, not because they ran him less, but because fewer pass attempts means fewer scrambles. But with more pass attempts, there's going to be more scrambling. That's really been my demise with getting the Russell Wilson thing wrong this year, that with mobile quarterbacks you can sort of get into extra bad trouble because if they increase their volume totals from a passing perspective, they're also going to increase their rushing totals. And so I think that I'll adjust that stance moving forward. I'll try not to be afraid of a quarterback who's objectively really good, but one who also can run. Now, the Wilson thing was one that I did start to back pedal on as August move through, but I get it. I was pretty vocal about how I felt about Wilson in July specifically, so people will remember that that's all part of the gig. But I do think that we've seen glimpses of what I was worried about entering the season. Like I said on the ten Trend Show, Wilson's either been amazing because the team's sort of letting it loose, or he's been pretty mediocre. He's got five performances outside the top twelve and weekly scoring out of ten games. But like look at the Atlanta game with Russell Wilson or even the Cincinnati game in Week one. He threw the ball twenty times in both of those contests against very, very beatable defenses, and he finishes the QB sixteen and the QB seventeen. The difference is I just expected that to happen more often than it's happening this season. That's why I was wrong. This next question is from at z Tetlow seven to one to seven. How do you make start sit decisions for defenses, matchups or studs all the way? Forty nine Ers versus Oakland is my decision at the moment, So I think one key thing for me is do I need to make a move in order to start one of these defenses? As in if I have San Francisco already would I then have to drop someone in order to get that Oaklands. If the outlook for those defenses is close, then there's no need to take on that ad and drop. But generally speaking, if I had to pick one side here it said, I'd take the good defense as long as they have at least an average matchup. Like with your situation this week. It's not like San Francisco's playing Kansas City or something, and it's not like Oakland will absolutely perform. It's not like they're a lock. There's still some risk with the Oakland Raiders defense. Despite the matchup, they haven't been very good this year. So even though I don't do start sits on this show, I think that you should be playing San Francisco. This next question is from at TFC NFL. Do you see Robert Woods's production increasing with the offensive line problems in LA and McVeigh planning to get the ball out quick or would someone else benefit from the production. It's really hard for me to say anyone benefits from poor offensive line play. We may look at a situation like this one and say, oh, they're gonna throw shorter passes. That means more volume, which means more fantasy points, especially in PPR formats, But we really should look at it and say, oh crap, this offensive line is hot garbage. So they're not going to be able to extend drives and move the ball down the field, and that's what's most important. You want players in good offenses who are then able to find the end zone and the volume will be there if the offense is efficient. So I would say no one benefits from poor offensive line play, though Robert Woods is still a positive regression candidate this year with five hundred and sixty six receiving yards and zero touchdowns. This next question is from at Fade to Zach Ff. If you had Jamis Winston, Chris Godwin, and Mike Evans on your team and needed a tight end to fill for a bye week, would you pick up Oj Howard So if he was a clear cut top five tight end, sure, but he's on the waiver wire for a reason right now. I think he could have a strong second half, but we can't sit here and predict Oj Howard will have a great game this week. I think you're putting way too much stock into one team. I'm fine with Godwin and Evans because they're seeing such a consistent and high target share, But if the Bucks tank this week, you're in a bad spot to win your game. Now, the opposite could happen, but you're also then capping your ceiling to a degree. With three pass catchers from the same team. You're not playing a GPP here, You're playing ahead to head. So no, I wouldn't go with Oj Howard. This next question is from at Jacob Joe three six, six, two four seven oh eight panic on Saquon. I don't think it's necessarily timed to panic on Saquon Barkley. No, it doesn't sound like they're shutting him down. And in weeks fifteen and sixteen he gets Miami in Washington and all of his peripheral numbers still look good. He's seen eighteen percent of the Giants targets and ninety seven percent of their running back rushes since he returned from injury, So as long as he's not hurt, Saquon Barkley should be fine. This next question is from at Burley Boys seventy seven. Is someone like Robby Anderson a drop when it's prime handcuff season? Yeah, I mean I think in a normal ten or twelve team league, That's a fine move, especially if Robbie is like your wide receiver five. I had Robby Anderson as a by candidate at one point this season, and I did the same thing with Jamison crowd Or given the team schedule and Crowders looking like the only wide out on that team that you can really trust week in and week out. I'm sure with Anderson we're still going to see some spiked weeks and he still does have a chance to be usable down the stretch. But the upside move is to have a high end handcuff, and the safe move is to handcuff your own running back. So if you don't need Robby Anderson, I think that this is a fine move. This nice question is from at B Puzzoles. Love your podcast, JJ. Thanks. So should you ever fret about starting a defense that goes directly against your position players? E g. I have Winston Evans and the New Orleans defense. Now I care a lot less about a non quarterback going up against my defense because we know the quarterback is going to impact opposing defensive scoring most he'll get sacked, he'll throw interceptions, and so on. Points against is important, but turnovers are more important for your defense. Now, with that being said, this is still very much a floor play rather than a ceiling play. Winston may be a little bit different because he can turn the ball over a couple of times and still be very viable in fantasy football like we've seen in the past. But if you can avoid doing something like this, I would recommend it. Like we don't do this in DFS for a reason, and I sort of look at DFS as the optimal way to build a lineup since you're free to do whatever you want with these players. You're not restricted by having the same players each week. And in DFS, in order to get an optimal lineup, we don't use players in a lineup with their opposing defense also in that lineup, just like if you want crazy upside, you stack teams and you stack games. So I would avoid it if I could, but I don't avoid it to the point of being suboptimal since we're playing head to head, not in a big tournament. This The next question is from at Swervin Shirvin. What players that have either disappointed or not lived up to preseason expectations could turn it around for the Fantasy football playoffs. So, looking at preseason ADP. One player who popped for me with this question was Damian Williams, only because he's seeing more work in that offense. He's seen seventy percent or more of Kansas City snaps in each of the last two games. The problem with Williams is that the schedule for Kansas City isn't the best in the world. There's also the Chargers wide receivers they've generally disappointed at least of late. But they get Minnesota, who hasn't played very well in the secondary this year, and then Oakland, both in LA. Both those games in LA during the Fantasy football playoffs, So maybe Keenan Allen and Mike Evans end up helping fantasy teams. And then I'm recording this before Thursday Night's game. But Odell Beckham is someone who's pretty interesting down the stretch for reasons that I talked about on this week's fifteen Transaction Show. The schedule does open up for them, so I guess the same could be said for Baker Mayfield. But again, this is me talking before Thursday Night's game. I may sound like an idiot by the time that you hear this, but that's usually the case. This next question is from at Nick Hilt eighty nine are high end RB three slash flex running backs? Mine, is Brita worth more than high end running back handcuffs or playoff defenses? I'm stacked at running back? Yeah, I mean these types of questions always depend on your specific league. I'd at least try to get something and improve your team rather than flat out dropping that player in your case, Matt Brida, Like, you can always try to upgrade a wide receiver spot in a two for one trade, including Matt Brida in that trade. But if you're stacked at running back and you won't ever use Brita for your team specifically, a high end handcuff might be more important. I'd still at least try to get something because Brita and those high end RB three types they still have value in most leagues. This naxt question is from at jetty Boy eight to oh, if your trade deadline has passed, should we consider benching players that you have as sell candidates? Maybe not bench someone like Aaron Jones, but consider benching someone like Austin Eckler. Thanks for the podcast. So to be clear, the fifteen transactions show shifts to being more ad and drop focused later in the season, but a lot of leagues haven't had their trade deadlines pass yet, and that's why I still talked by and So this past week. And I still will talk by and Sell from a confidence standpoint too, even after the deadlines have passed. So if I say sell Austin Eckler in December, it just means that I'm not feeling confident about Austin Eckler. But no, it doesn't mean that you should bench him. Every transaction needs its own individualized context. Now you asked this before the Matchup Show was posted, but hopefully you heard the Matchup Show and I like Austin Eckler this week. This last question is from at Dean zero toll one listening since a month ago. Loved the show. Thanks. What is your funniest or most bizarre fantasy football story that you can tell in one minute? Well, first off, welcome and thanks for listening. I guess the thing that pops into my head is something that happened two years ago. Remember when Amari Cooper was terrible in fantasy and then he had that big Thursday night game, I think it was against Kansas City. Well, i'd forgotten that I had a trade proposal out there in a league, and someone accepted that trade during that game, so I lost to Marii Cooper. And while it was a fine trade even with that performance, it was totally my fault. It was a dumb thing for me to do. Now, fast forward to Championship week and that team I traded Amri two is facing me. He had lost Antonio Brown to injury, so he was forced to start Amari Cooper. Cooper then went for sixty six yards in a touchdown and I lost the championship. So yes, even I, a fantasy analyst, makes stupid mistakes and tilt my face off. That's gonna do it for today's show, though. Thanks to all of you for listening. If you've yet subscribe to the Late Round podcast, make sure you are by searching forward pretty much anywhere podcasts can be found, and don't forget to follow me on Twitter at Late Round QB. Thanks everyone, enjoy your weekend, and best of luck in week eleven.