392: Mailbag 7/17/20

00:00:02
Speaker 1: This is the lad Podcast with your host JJ Zachera, JJ Zacherson. What's up everyone. It's JJ Zacharyesen, the editor in chief at fandel and at number fire dot com, in this episode three hundred and ninety two of the Late Round podcast on the many shows that are part of the FanDuel podcast network. Thanks for tuning in. There's a lot of uncertainty right now surrounding the football season. We don't know exactly when things are going to start for the NFL. We don't know exactly what it's going to look like when players inevitably get the coronavirus. There's just lots of uncertainty, and it's making fantasy managers feel uneasy. Now, please understand that I'm not downplaying what's going on across the country and across the world because I'm focusing on football. It's horrible. This pandemic is bad. This just happens to be a fantasy football show. So I'm going to talk about the pandemic's impact on fantasy football. Listeners seem to want me to talk about that this week too. I got a ton of coronavirus related questions, starting with this email that says HIJJ. Big fan of your show and hope you and your family are staying safe. Thanks same to you. My question is in regards to how fantasy commissioners should deal with the uncertainty of a pandemic season. What are some ways to mitigate the risks of players testing positive and being out for weeks at a time. The first two thoughts that came to me were more IR spots and allowing late swaps and lineups. Due to the report suggesting that players can be inactivated very shortly before kickoff, I'd be really curious to hear your strategies. Best Chris so. First off, regarding the players being inactive shortly before kickoff, I think that's something that you need to ensure that your league mates know and understand going into the season. They need to be aware that things can change very quickly. If you're running a league with some people who may not be as hardcore as a lot of you listen to this podcast are, then maybe you can introduce some sort of rule that allows each team every week to replace their lowest score in their lineup. You run into some other issues in doing that, but at least that's one solution. But I think adding an additional IR spot or two makes sense since we're bound to see more players listed as out. It'd be great if those IR spots don't have to be used, because that means that the spread is controlled. But it's better to err on the side of it's pretty likely that players are going to get this virus. You can also go a deeper rosters to allow for more depth and for handcuffs. Now, on top of the commissioner question, I got one from at CF game Breaker that said, are you factoring coronavirus into your decision making at all? For example, maybe thinking it will take some rookies longer to get integrated into their offenses, or bumping up handcuffs as players may be missing games for testing positive on top of the usual injuries. I think both of those points are very valid. We might worry a little bit more about rookies because their lack of reps and coaches deciding to play a safer choice in a veteran, And then I do think that handcuffs become a little bit more valuable in this scenario since the odds that a player misses time increases and we know backup running backs are going to be more capable of seeing volume than wide receivers in that scenario. Even though the fantasy community tends to overvalue and overstate the impact of running back handcuffs, this year is definitely different. But I'll also say keep in mind that handcuffing is a floor play and not a ceiling play. If you really want to go for a high ceiling lineup, you should draft handcuffs for running backs not on your roster. Like if you don't get Kenyan Drake, you can still get Chase Edmonds. That's a high ceiling play. But regarding rookies, you can't ignore what the market is also doing here. I say it all the time, but player evaluation isn't just looking at the individual player and saying I want this guy or I don't want this guy. Everything is related to where that player is being drafted. So if the masses end up fading rookies, especially rookie running backs where the transition to the NFL is a lot easier, then out capitalize on those cheaper costs. I do think that we should be somewhat concerned about the lack of reps, but I also think it's really easy for us to overstate what that all means. So I don't think this is as simple as saying fade all rookies, especially if we're recognizing that players may get the virus, which would allow those rookies to then see the field. They may see the field more because of the coronavirus. So those are my general thoughts on the current state of the league. There's going to be inconsistency this year. It's going to be a season unlike any other. But at least we hopefully, and I stress the word hopefully, at least will hopefully be able to enjoy a fantasy football season. Now, before getting into the other questions this week, I want to let you guys know that with the return of baseball on July twenty third, Fandel is celebrating with a special one million dollar contest. Enter the one million dollar MLB Opening Day Special and compete for your share of the one million dollar prize pool, including a chance to bring home the one hundred thousand dollars first place prize. Take your pick of Yankees, Nationals, Dodgers, and Giants and follow along. Use Fandels Live scoring as the game's unfold to see how your lineups are performing. Someone is going to end the night one hundred thousand dollars richer. Don't miss out in the chance for that someone to be you. For more details, visit fandle dot com or download the FANDLE app today. Eligibility restrictions apply the first question this week or the next question. I don't know what we would call it, but it's from at Mr Colton three. How do you modify rankings based on league size and roster spots. I'm in a ten team league that starts only one quarterback, two running backs, two wide receivers, one tight end, one kicker in one defense with no flex and only ten teams. Do you take a onesie spot like tight end early or still stock up on running backs and wide receivers. Yeah, I mean you've always got to be cognizant of the demand for each position when you went to a draft. With this league, you're starting fewer running backs and wide receivers because there's no flex and you only need two of each. Not only that, but it's a ten team league. It's a smaller league, and in a smaller league, you're gonna need to have more of a perfect lineup. That means an earlier round tight end approach makes a little bit more sense because think about it. If you're in a sixteen team league, you may say, well, that means if I get George Kittler or Travis Kelce, I'm gonna have an even bigger advantage at tight end. That's not wrong, but at what cost? Because when you add teams to a league that starts let's say two running backs, three wide receivers in a flex, each of those new teams are starting that many players too, that many more wide receivers and running backs, so it actually makes those positions even more important overall. Though, in a ten teamer with just two running backs and two wide receivers started, I would definitely try to get Killer or Kelsey. You should be able to still get a really good running back in that scenario. Two. This last questions from at ajust Rankings zero. Who is the next best receiving option behind Adam thlen in Minnesota? So, first off, I really like Adam Thielen this year given where he's being drafted, and I feel like I need to let people know that THELAN is definitely a target for me. But I think the answer to this question is justin Jefferson, He's likely going to start right away and should be the number two on that team in targets by season's end. Dalvin Cook has a shot, but Jefferson is easily the second best talent at wide receiver on that roster, and it's not close. But don't forget about my boy IRV Smith either. On the tight End Breakout show that I did a few weeks back, Irv was one of the players who really fit the criteria for spotting a breakout tight end really well. I'm very into IRV as a dart throw and redraft leagues this year, and I think that he's a really good buy in Dynasty. So in order, I'd say justin Jefferson, Dalvin Cook, and Irv Smith in terms of who would be the number two player in targets on that Vikings team this year. That's how things project at least, But I like IRV a lot as a target later in your drafts. This Naice question is from at Brindley Michael. Why is Melvin Gordon being drafted so high and Phillip Lindsay so low. Lindsay has back to back one thousand yard seasons. If Gordon was back in LA, the gap between him and Eckler wouldn't be so drastic, right, Well, I don't think that we should be comparing Eckler to Lindsay because they're completely different running backs. The reason Eckler is valuable is because of his pass catching ability. He's locked into a pretty high target share with the Chargers. The complete opposite is true with Philip Lindsay. We watched his target share per game rate last year go from thirteen point four percent during the first half of the season to six point eight percent during the second half. And Melvin Gordon is a very capable pass catcher, so it only makes sense for him to take on that role. And we should probably expect Gordon to be the goal line back as well. Pat Shermer is also the offensive coordinator in Denver now, and we've seen some spiked seasons from running backs in that Shermer offense. I don't think that we should compare Melvin Gordon to Dalvin Cooker Saquon Barkley. Personnel often drives coordinator data, but at least we know that type of workload has happened under his lead. But I'm not advocating that you draft Melvin Gordon necessarily. He's not really a target of mine given his cost. Also not saying that Lindsay is valued properly. I do think that the gap should at least be a little bit closer than it currently is. I'm just noting that this is not an Eckler Gordon situation. Gordon has a lot more upside than Lindsay seems to have because he's gonna likely walk into seeing goal line work and a lot more receiving work. Philip. Lindsay's pass protection isn't good, and that's a concern. So to me, Lindsay's someone that you'll likely not be playing a whole lot in your lineup unless an injury happens to Melvin Gordon. If you're in a deeper league, Lindsay makes a little bit more sense as a deeper flex, But that's generally how I'm viewing the situation. This next question is from at Jake Underscore chesser. Do you ever sacrifice process for diversification across leagues? I have the two spot in multiple PPR superflex leagues. Barkley is my clear number two, but a part of me doesn't want to put all my eggs in one basket, so I wouldn't say it's sacrificing process. It's recognizing variants and that I'm in your going to be wrong on players. So I do generally diversify, but not at the cost of being suboptimal. I think you can make the case for other players in that one h two spot, like Ezekiel Elliott, so I would at least consider that. But also i'd need to know how many leagues you're playing in here. If it's like three or four leagues, I don't think it's that big of a deal to get Barkley in two of them. If it's twenty leagues, getting Barkley in seventeen of them, that's a tough sell. Just don't be totally suboptimal. But yes, diversification is not a bad thing. The next question is from at Bird's underscore. The underscore words who would you rather have in a dynasty league? Courtland Sutton or Kenny Golladay. So one of the things that I love about Kenny Galladay is that there's plenty of room for him to just take his fantasy football game to the next level. His contested catchability is off the charts, and he was able to score eleven touchdowns last year, largely because the Lions loved targeting him in the end zone. According to PFF, he was third in the NFL last year in end zone targets. But Galladay did what he did last year, in particular, on just one hundred and sixteen targets, he had a twenty one point three percent target share, So there's room to grow there. With Courtland Sutton. I think he's really really good, but there's less of that growth potential. Analytically, You've got a whole bunch of weapons entering that offense, and Sutton had a twenty six percent target share last year. That's likely going to be closer to his ceiling from a target share standpoint moving forward. And then you have to factor in quarterback play, which could go in his favor, but right now you have to give the nod to Matthew Stafford. The one area that favors Courtland Sutton is age. He's two years younger than Galladay, but I think largely in three year terms in dynasty, and I also think there's a higher likelihood that we see Sutton drop statistically than Galladay over the next year given the changes in that offense. That makes Sutton a riskier bet despite that age advantage, So I'm going Galladay here. This nice question is from at example zero. Why are analysts so high on Terry McLaurin not denying his ability? Just don't see the path to touchdowns certainly has a floor, but don't see the ceiling for him playing on a bottom five offense. If you're talking like twelve or thirteen touchdowns, sure I would agree with you. If you're talking seven to ten touchdowns, I don't know why he couldn't get there, because he did get there last year. He scored seven touchdowns in an offense that had the worst net yards per attempt rate in the league, and it was in an offense that ran the second fewest plays that we have seen from any team since twenty eleven. Meanwhile, his Opportunity adjusted touchdown marker OTD, which is a metric created by ESPN's Mike Clay, it pegged McLaurin for five point two touchdowns, so he overachieved there, and his yards to touchdowns conversion basically says the exact same thing. It showed that he should have had closer to five and a half touchdowns, but again, that's under really really crap circumstances. As a rookie. We can't lose sight of that either. Terry McLaurin was a rookie last year. Is he gonna have a tougher time reaching ten touchdowns? And someone in an offense is bound to score a lot more points than Washington. Sure, but given his price, the market isn't expecting McLaurin to go bonkers in the touchdown column, despite the fact that there are enough unknowns and enough things that should improve to give us some faith that McLaurin can maintain a seven or eight touchdown season and with a lot of volume, which is also very possible. That means there's certainly a ceiling there. I love Terry McLaurin at his cost this year, but that's gonna do it for today's show. Thanks to all of you for listening. If you've got subscribed to the Late Round podcast, make sure you are by searching for it pretty much anywhere podcasts can be found. Don't forget to follow me on Twitter at Late Round QB. And if you could go to Apple Podcasts and leave a rating and review, it really helps this show. Thanks everyone, enjoy your weekend and I'll talk to you next week.