398: Mailbag 8/7/20

00:00:02
Speaker 1: This is the Late Podcast with your host JJ Zachera, J J. Zacherson. What's up everyone. It's JJ Zacharyese and the editor in chief at fandel and at number five dot com. And this is episode three hundred and ninety eight of the Late Round podcast with many shows that are part of the FanDuel podcast network. Thanks for tuning in. I've talked about handcuffing running backs a lot on this show. Research I've done shows that handcuffs rarely rarely pan out. But admittedly, having discussions about handcuffing running backs is kind of tough because everyone has a different definition for what a handcuff actually is. Like. For example, Kareem Hunt to me, and I think this is logical, but he's not Nick Chubb's handcuff. A handcuff to me is someone who's irrelevant in fantasy football without an injury to their starter, and that starter is typically or should be a stud or a top twelve running back. That's at least the definition that I used when I researched the topic and found that the hit rate for handcuffs is just really really bad. We actually rarely get the handcuff right. But on top of that, when they are called upon, they typically don't perform very well at all. I do think there are exceptions to that rule. There are a couple of players like Tony Pollard, Chase Edmunds, Alexander Madison, and Latavious Murray who probably won't have much standalone value this year, at least in regular redraft leagues, but they'd become really interesting fantasy assets if their starters went down to an injury. Like, I can't fault someone for taking one of those guys and chasing upside. But to the point about handcuffs, something that I talk about on this show is how instead of handcuffing your own running backs, instead of getting Tony Pollard because you have Ezekiel Elliott, you should consider getting another high end running backs handcuff instead. So the other day I fired off a tweet, like usual because I tweet a lot, it said, if you're going to draft running back handcuffs, I beg you please don't target handcuffs for your running backs. Get handcuffs from someone else's actually capture upside. And there was a split among responders and how they felt about that tweet. Some people understood the idea, but others pushed back saying things like, well, what happens if I have Zeke and Zeke gets hurt and I picked Alexander Madison instead of Tony Pollard, then I'm screwed. I mean, yeah, that's sort of missing the point though, if you're going to draft a handcuff, the idea of drafting another player's handcuff is about upside. The responses like that one saying, well, what happens if my running back gets hurt? That's just a glimpse of how fantasy managers operate. Some are more concerned with minimizing risk as opposed to maximizing upside. In some cases, that may be the smart thing to do, Like I'm all about adding handcuffs as the season progresses. You guys will hear that in my fifteen Transactions episodes when week nine or week ten hits, because, by the way, people who draft handcuffs are often dropping those handcuffs off of their bench first. But you can add handcuffs depending on how good your roster is. If you're dominating and your lineup looks great, adding insurance is not a bad idea, But if your roster sucks, then you'd want to maximize upside, and you can do that by getting high end handcuffs from other running backs. And to spell this out more, I'm saying it's maximizing upside because while a whole bunch of people are saying what happens if Zeke gets hurt and I don't have Tony Pollard, I'm saying what happens if Zeke doesn't get hurt, but another stud running back does, and you have that other stud running backs handcuff. This is especially true in best ball formats, where you know that you need a really really high score in order to win a league. If you're stacking a backfield, or if you're getting both Kareem hunting Nick Chubb or something, you're completely limiting your upside. That backfield can only score so many points. But if you diversify, you increase your chances of hitting on multiple backfields and finding multiple plug and play running That's all this is. It's a look at striving for upside versus looking for a floor. I do think there are times where handcuffing your own running back is fine. I just see the upside move as the one to make the majority of the time. If your plan is to get a running back handcuff. I wanted to get that off my chest to open up today's show. It is a mail bag show, though, But before get into those questions, I want to let you guys know about Fandel's home run Challenge. Every day, you'll be able to draft any three hitters on the slate where the only thing that counts as home runs. If your lineup gets three or more homers in a contest, you'll win a share of two thousand dollars in cash. If your lineup scores six or more home runs, you'll earn an additional share of ten thousand dollars in bonus cash. It's a great way to make your night that much more interesting. And don't just take my word for it. Head to FanDuel and play for free today. The first question this week is an email says hi, jj, I'm a big fan of your show and hope you're doing great. Thank you. My question is in regard to the Buccaneers back backfield. When the news broke that they signed Lashan McCoy, it became impossible to predict this backfield. I kind of have a feeling that this is a great opportunity to acquire a breakout running back, but I don't know who and when to target. What do you think? Thanks in advance for answering my question. Yeah, so I talked about Keishaan Vaughn on the show earlier this week, and it was all behind the thought that his ADP is likely to fall a whole lot after this Lashawn McCoy signing. And that's emphasized even further because Bruce Arians came out this week and he said that Ronald Jones will quote carry the load at running back for the Buccaneers. Now, we got to take that with a grain of salt when it comes to running back workloads. Arians has said some pretty wacky things in the past, but I do think it should give us more confidence in drafting Ronald Jones. His ADP is going to rise as a result of that quote, though, which may force me to be out on him because evidence, in my eyes doesn't necessarily favor Ronald Jones. He hasn't been a great pass catcher, and last year with Peyton Barber as his biggest competition, Jones is his highest single game snapshare was just fifty three percent. That quote's also being thrown around without additional context. The whole quote is quote Rojo is the main guy. He'll carry the load. All of those other guys are fighting for roles for who goes in second when he gets tired, maybe who is the third down guy. But they're all fighting for a role, and special teams will have a lot to do with that. So my worries are still there when it comes to what Ronald Jones's receiving role is going to look like. But in the end, none of this is good news for Keishan Vahn. He was put on the COVID nineteen list and that was really the nail in the coffin for him to see early season work. I still like him as a high upside dart throw late in drafts, but he's something that you're gonna have to hold on to and hope for a breakout late in the season. I think my fear is that Jones's ADP is just gonna rise, and then I'll be out on him if he gets too high. I play in a lot of leagues, so it's easy for me to diversify, but if I'm playing in just one, I can understand the urge to be out on this backfield. Assuming Jones's ADP does rise, a good bit. This next question is from at poco FFB. Do you consider starting two tight ends as a premium on the position with the scarcity of value, Yeah, this is one way to make tight ends more important for sure. This just goes back to the supply and demand side of fantasy football. The supply of tight ends isn't changing when you do something like this. You're still using the same number of tight ends in your player pool. But the demand side does change. That's going to force the cost of tight ends to go up. It's the same thing that we see in two quarterback in super flex leagues. So yes, if you have multiple tight ends being started, it's a way to put a premium on the tight end position. The next question is from at Bruce Kennerson one. I like to go late round tight end of the players being drafted tenth or later, who has a good opening schedule or who are you targeting at the position this year? And why? Thanks JJ So. I talked about IRV Smith as a fun late round tight end through earlier this week, but I wanted to answer this question this week because I don't think that you should be targeting specific tight ends for their early season schedules that doesn't get you to a place where you're actually finding one of those tight ends who's going to be a week in, week out starter. All that kind of does, more than likely is delay finding that player. Not only that, but tight end matchups are generally tougher to navigate than say, quarterback matchups. Quarterback streaming is a lot more viable than tight end streaming. It's why you can go into a season saying I like Jimmy Garoppolo's early season schedule, therefore I'm going to draft Jimmy Garoppolo. It doesn't work as easily with tight ends. There aren't as many options, and they're not as predictable a week to week. So my advice is to get late round tight ends who you think could have true season long upside. I think you should also do that at quarterbacks. So don't get me wrong, but streaming is a lot more viable at that position, and I like a lot of later round tight ends. If Hayden Hurst or Mike is sicky drop, I like them. TJ. Hockinson fits the mold really well of breakout tight ends, which I covered about a month ago on this show, And like I said, I like IRV Smith super late as well. This next question is from at Saint Stephen twenty curious on your thoughts on the Singletary Moss situation in Buffalo. Just drafted Moss in my Dynasty league, but feels like everyone is largely on the fence with him. He ran a slow forty time, but his numbers from college look great. Is he a potential bust? My model cares a lot more about production than it does athleticism for both running backs and wide receivers. Moss had really good college production, which is a huge plus. But within my model, he now ranks below Ceh Jonathan Taylor, DeAndre Swift, JK. Dobbins, Cam Akers, AJ Dillon, and Keishn Vaughn, which isn't that surprising given their draft capital. Now, given how the Bills used Singletary last year and how they envisioned using him this year, I do think Moss is a good compliment. I just worry about both touchdown and receiving upside. Josh Allen is bound to steal some looks of the goal line, and Singletary was used and they're planning on using him as a receiver. I think Moss has the potential to be an all around warhorse type back that's in his range of outcomes. One of his top comparables was Kareem Hunt, but I think we're looking more at a David Montgomery type player, and without a ton of volume, that's not something to get really really excited about. So the potential is certainly there. They're good things to like about Zach Moss's profile, but the situation isn't super great and there are some bad comps too. I think he's a worthwhile dart and redraft leagues given his cost, but he's not someone I'm actively looking to grab right now. He's just sort of there where I don't have a strong opinion either way, just being honest. This last question says how to draft strategies change based on the numbers of flex players. I have a league with zero flex and another with two, and it feels like they are completely different. This goes back to what I talked about earlier with supply and demand. Let's say you've got to line up with one quarterback, two running backs, two wide receivers, and one tight end. That's it. That means tight ends and quarterbacks carry more weight in your starting lineup than they would if you were starting four running backs and four wide receivers. When you increase the number of players who can be started, if one position is left out, that position that's left out sees a decrease in value. I always like to go to the extremes when trying to explain these types of concepts because I think it's helpful. Imagine a league where you start one quarterback, ten running backs, ten wide receivers, and one tight end. There'd be almost no reason to heavily target a quarterback or a tight end early in that type of league. Why would you use a significant pick on those positions? Because when you do that, you're foregoing the opportunity to get a better player at a more important position in your lineup. A position that's at least ten times is important. That's no different with flex spots. You're bound to start more running backs and wide receivers and may be tight ends, which makes those players more important as long as the other lineup restrictions are the same versus the league with no flex spots. This last question is from at JR Underscore Stats. Could you weigh in on the Cech versus Jonathan Taylor dynasty debate? I like Taylor's profile and college production. But Cech has the edge when it comes to situation, involvement in the receiving game and Draft Capital. Would love to hear your thoughts. I still have Edward Zelaire higher than Jonathan Taylor. Pre draft I had Taylor as my RB one and my model liked him a lot too. How could it not. My model has Ceh in that spot now though, because of Draft Capital, and then you have to love the landing spot. We've got a good history of Andy Reid running backs performing well in fantasy football, and he's now tied to a player who could end up being the greatest quarterback of all time. Situation matters so much at the running back position, and I'm not downplaying Taylor's situation here either. It's just one of those things where I can't let running back talent win alone, because every ounce of research that I've done shows that situation matters at the running back position. Good fantasy running backs come from good offenses. There's been great research done showing that offensive line play is far more important to the run game than the player himself who's running behind that offensive line. And Cech is a really good fit with what Kansas City does That's why I have him at the one oh one, but I still love Jonathan Taylor too. The next question is another one about Clyde Edwards Hilaire is from at Wagner one one zero nine one eight. What level of risk would you assume Edwards Hilaire has now that he could be a mid late first round pick before his upside in this offense made his price worth it. Now, how does he stack up against other running backs in that first round range. I wouldn't be taking Cech ahead of the locked in workhorses in fantasy football. I'd put Alvin Kamara in that group two because there's absolutely still question marks around what Edward Hilaire's workload is going to look like he's a rookie, there's a slow ramp up to this season. It shouldn't shock anyone if someone like DeAndre Washington has a bigger role than we expect to start the year. But the reason you're still drafting Cech high and in that first round range mid first round range is because he has a crazy high ceiling. Part of that range of outcomes is that he does see that workhorse roll right away, and you should be striving for that type of upside because if he does get that kind of role, he absolutely can compete with the other players that are ranked above him. Once you get to Derrick Henry or Joe Mixon or Miles Sanders, who I love this year, there are at least question marks around their situations as well. So I think he's at the top of that tier. I'd be taking him ahead of Derrick Henry in a PPR format. I just think he's below some of the stud running backs who can catch a lot of passes, and then maybe below Michael Thomas and DeVante Adams too. There's risk, but don't let that risk overshadow the risk of other running backs in the first round. Derek Henry has team regression coming Miles Sanders, even though I think this is overstated, we don't know exactly what his workload will look like. Joe Mixon has receiving upside questions. Kenyan Drake has a ton of upside, but is he going to be used like he was when he joined araz last year. There are question marks for these other running backs, and I think that's the main point to make. With Clyde Edwards Hilaire, he has risk, but others have risk too. The last question this week is from at pell three one six. Why are people not lowering CMC from RB one overall rankings when he is under a new coach and a new quarterback in twenty twenty, considering there is no preseason in limited camp to learn new schemes, what a player like Kamara who has some stability in these chaotic times not be a safer pick? I mean, I think you have to ask yourself this. You have Christian McCaffrey on your team, You're the Carolina Panthers. Are you going to not use him a lot? And if the answer is, well, yeah, I'd use him, but maybe not as much as the last coaching staff used him. The thing is, you can lower CMC's volume totals and he would still come out as a projected RB one This year, Like last season, Christian McCaffrey sold ninety one percent of Carolina's running back rushes. That's the highest number of n running back since twenty eleven. All the while, he hit a target share of twenty three point seven percent. That was also the highest number of any running back since twenty eleven. You know who owns the top three target shares of any running back? Over this time over the last nine years, Christian McCaffrey does every single year. Christian McCaffrey is seeing a very very high target share, so a lot would have to change for CMC to not have elite projectable output. He's a special running back talent. You don't keep that in the garage. As excited as I am for Alvin Kamara this year, he's never had a running back rush are above fifty two percent. That's like forty percentage points lower than where CMC was last year. And it's not like the Panthers have talent in that backfield to seriously compete with Christian McCaffrey. Now, I'm not saying he's absolutely going to end the season as the RB one. I'm just saying that from a projectable output standpoint, CMC should be the RB one that's gonna do it. For today's show, though, thanks to all of you for listening. If you've yet subscribed to the Late Round podcast, make sure you are by searching for it 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 I'll catch you next week.