547: Mailbag 9/17/21

00:00:02
Speaker 1: This is the Label Podcast with your host JJ zacher Resa J J.

00:00:06
Speaker 2: Zacher reson What's up everyone.

00:00:12
Speaker 1: It's JJ Zacharyesen, the editor in chief at fandled at number fire dot com, in this episode five hundred and forty seven of the Late Round podcast. So many shows that are part of the FanDuel Podcast Network. Thanks for tuning in. We've got a lot to cover on today's mailbag show. But before I get to the questions, folks, it's back. I've had a lot of people asking for the FanDuel Podcast Network Listener League, and I'm happy to let you know that it's back starting this week. Check out FanDuel dot com Slash League slash Listener League to join. It's a rake free contest that costs five dollars to enter and has fifteen hundred dollars in prizes. You can interrupt the three lineups to the contest, so go to fandel dot com Slash League slash Listener League to join. Eligibility restrictions apply. Go to fandle dot com or download the fandal app for more details. The first question this week is from at Tom Bodenheimer. What is the outlook for Elijah Mitchell. Is he worth dealing a wide receiver two or three like Antonio Brown or Corey Davis for him? And then I got another question from at Chris aaron T that says, do you like Mitchell's chances of being the one A or do you expect someone like Michael Carter to finish higher end of year? So let's talk about Elijah Mitchell here, since he in that San Francisco backfield is probably the biggest story of the week for fantasy purposes.

00:01:29
Speaker 2: One of the things that I.

00:01:30
Speaker 1: Pointed out post draft, and something I talked about earlier this week as well, was how Elijah Mitchell's prospect profile it looks a lot like Raheem Mosterts. He even looks a lot like a Matt Brida type two. Those players have done well in this Shanahan scheme. Mitchell looked like one of those complimentary pieces coming out of the draft, and I noted as much of my analysis of him post draft, this isn't some take that I'm throwing out there because he's all of a sudden being elevated in that offense. I'm not doing this in hindsight. In turn, I think we all may be over complicating this situation with Elijah Mitchell, Like, of course we could see San Francisco having this unpredictable backfield week to week, But is that any different than what could have happened entering the season? Has our opinion really changed there? The backfield was ambiguous for a reason. There was a reason that Mostert and Sermon were middle round picks instead of one of them being an early round pick, because this backfield over the last handful of years has generally been split more than any other backfield in the NFL, maybe outside of Baltimore. So that possibility was and always is there. But Mitchell is probably just the mostt now in that offense. He's got similar measurables. He can bring big plays to the offense. We probably should just view him the way that we were viewing Mostart entering the season. Now, is or was that worthy of a top waiver ad? Yeah?

00:02:53
Speaker 2: I think so.

00:02:54
Speaker 1: It's not easy to find potential RB twos on the waiver wire, and there's still some hope that maybe, just maybe the forty nine ers feature him more than they would feature Mostard, But if we're talking realistic outcomes here, it seems to me that it would make sense to view him like we would view Raheem Mosterard And I've been saying this on the show all week, but don't give up on Trey Sermon after one week. I think you have to prefer Mitchell to Sermon at this point. Given what we saw in week one. He was productive and Sermon was inactive. But it wouldn't shock me at all if Sermon ends up being more of the one A in that offense as the season goes on. He's got to show it. Of course, I'm not saying that's what we should expect, but it wouldn't surprise me. That's why you're holding onto him. So with Mitchell, I think he was a great ad off the waiver wire this week. I think he's gonna be productive, and I would not want a flyer like Michael Carter over Elijah Mitchell. To me, He's likely a low end RB two type behind a good offensive line and an offense is probably gonna see a lot of positive game scripts this year. He can be in a split backfield and still be productive. And that's exactly what Raheem Moster was projected to be. This ask questions from at Legends, Troy, I now have three San Francisco running backs rostered. Is there a chance that the ambiguous backfield remains ambiguous? I didn't recall this from your study. Is there a chance that an ambiguous backfield just stays ambiguous? Also, I've never used the word ambiguous as much of my life before. Okay, so I guess I need to clear this up because this isn't how I intended my running back studies from the off season to be interpreted, whatsoever, when targeting breakout running backs in your fantasy drafts. What I've found is that targeting what I call ambiguous backfields is a better idea than targeting a player who's more of a handcuff or a backup. You can listen to episode five hundred and twenty four that breaks us all down. Ambiguous backfields absolutely do not guarantee one player will eventually emerge. Breakout running backs don't happen very often. We have to remember that we're just playing probability and knowing that they come from ambiguous back fields more often than not. The truth is, the majority of ambiguous backfields won't see a running back emerge. So yes, there's a very very real chance the forty nine ers backfield will remain ambiguous. In fact, that should be the expectation, that should technically be the expectation or the most likely outcome for all of these backfields. Remember this is about probability. We're targeting these backfields because it increases our chances of hitting on a breakout running back. We're not targeting these backfields because it guarantees it. This best questions from act Ganz underscore me. HEYJJ, thanks for all your work this offseason.

00:05:37
Speaker 2: You're welcome.

00:05:38
Speaker 1: How are you viewing Broncos pass catchers while Jerry Judy is out? Did either Tim Patrick or kJ Hamler do better in your model coming out of the draft? Thank you as always. Oh, kJ Handler was a way better prospect in my model. Hamdler's still only twenty two years old, Tim Patrick's twenty seven, and honestly, Hamdler's better than Patrick in my model because Patrick's not even in my model. He went undrafted in twenty seventeen, and he's not my database because he wasn't part of the NFL combine. My database looks at guys who went to the combine and guys who were drafted. That's how under the radar of a prospect Tim Patrick was kJ Hamler was an eighty seventh percentile wide receiver in my model. The reason I mentioned Patrick on the fifteen Transaction Show was because he ran more in that game, and he's a safe for bet.

00:06:25
Speaker 2: In general.

00:06:26
Speaker 1: There's not that much upside though Hamdler. If you want more upside, that's the way to go. And as the week has gone on, I've leaned going Hamdler much more frequently than Tim Patrick. That's why I talked him up on yesterday's Sleeper Show. This could be exactly what kJ Hamler needed to break out. This best question is from at not in my leagues, hijj. I enjoyed the pod, Keep it up? Thanks?

00:06:52
Speaker 2: How should I approach rostering Mike Davis? Buy? Sell or hold? Thank you?

00:06:58
Speaker 1: I don't think Davis is a cell right now because his stock has probably dropped since before Week one. He wasn't all that productive from a Fantasy points scored standpoint given his RB thirty two performance, so I doubt anyone is lining up to get Mike Davis. Buying Davis right now doesn't seem wise either. I liked his peripherals in that game. He had sixty two and a half percent of the team's running back rushes, and he had an impressive eighteen percent target chair. I like the usage for the most part. I just am worried about the offense a bit. That offensive line looked really, really bad against Philadelphia.

00:07:31
Speaker 2: So I'd hold Davis if you have him.

00:07:33
Speaker 1: As you guys know, I wasn't in on Davis entering the season, but I actually feel better about him after Week one than I did entering the season because of those peripherals, more specifically the receiving peripherals. I just don't feel as good about the offensive situation in general. That's what's changed for me on the negative side, and that's why he's just a hold. This last questions from at poco ffb JJ Health considered. Do we believe Sammy Watkins can sustain any production this year after his Monday Night Football showing. Is eight to ten targets a reasonable projection rest of season? Or will that be given to Bateman upon his return with Marquise Brown keeping his usual role. Appreciate all you do. I also got another one that's loosely related to this, that said, has your opinion on Rashad Bateman as a prospect changed since the mountains of injuries to the Ravens. Okay, so let's talk Ravens. First off, my opinion about Bateman as a prospect has been consistent. I've always loved him as a player. I hated the landing spot in Baltimore because as long as Lamar Jackson's quarterback there, the team's going to be run heavy. And even with all these injuries in the backfield, in a non obvious positive game script on Monday night, they were still run heavy against the Raiders. Baltimore finished the day with a pass of rush attempt ratio of point eighty eight. Their ratio in a neutral gamescript situation in that game was still below one. They were still running more than they were throwing. So to the point about what Hawkins, Yes, he saw eight targets, but that was on a significantly high target share given how pass heavy they were. He had a twenty eight percent target shair. I highly highly doubt he's going to sustain that for the rest of the season, and all the while, if the Ravens hit more positive game scripts are going to be more run heavy. That would lead to even fewer targets for their pass catchers. Now, this doesn't totally apply to Week two because they get Kansas City, we could just naturally see a more pass heavy game script. But overall, no, I don't find pass catchers in Baltimore aside from Mark Andrews. I don't find them to be very attractive in fantasy football. And Watkins is probably going to see a dip and share when Bateman gets acclimated and when he's healthy. This last questions from at Andrews strand HEYJJ loved the show.

00:09:47
Speaker 2: Thanks.

00:09:47
Speaker 1: Thoughts on David Montgomery this year After Week one, he seems like he is going to be a monster this year. How would fields change his usage? Yeah, so I talked about how my tune changed a little bit over the summer with David mit Montgomery, and by the eye test, I thought he looked great in Week one. He was the best player for the Bears in that game. Where I'm a little bit concerned is with the receiving side of things. Damian Williams had a twelve and a half percent target chair in that game, David Montgomery two and a half percent. Damian Williams had five targets, David Montgomery had one. If Montgomery isn't gonna be used as a pass catcher, he's gonna have a tough time being a top notch fantasy asset like he was down the stretch last year, because he becomes pretty touchdown dependent. We see that all the time with players who aren't catching passes out of the backfield, and I don't really want a running back in that offense who's gonna be touchdown dependent. I'm not gonna say to sell him or anything, because it's just one game and he may be able to perform well this week too. But if that target chair continues and he has another good performance, he might be a sell candidate next week.

00:10:52
Speaker 2: We'll just have to see this.

00:10:55
Speaker 1: Next one is from an account on Twitter that was strictly made for asking questions for this. It's from at thanks for tuning in. It says thirteen hours late, so this will probably get lost in the sauce. But for those who grab Tyson Williams, how are we evaluating his value now after Monday night football? Hold due to decent production and a chance for one a status or sell because value likely will never be higher. If sell, what's the ballpark fair return? I think in situations like with Tyson Williams, it's a lot easier said than done to sell. Everyone knows he wasn't the starter a month ago. Everyone knows he doesn't have much of a history, So people inherently are going to be more down on a player like Williams. Like if Najee Harris had done what Williams did in Week one, from a production standpoint, if Harris was the one who scored eighteen PPR points, it would be totally different because Harris is a top notch prospect with high expectations. So with Tyson, I don't think you can sell reasonably. It's the same deal with someone like Elijah Mitchell. You have to find a person who's a true believer to deal those guys at a reasonable price. What I liked about Tyson's game was that he was utilized heavily as a pass catcher. He had almost a fourteen percent target share in that offense in Week one. The backfield was split, and we should expect it to be split. We expected it to be split even when JK. Dobbins was the starter, So that shouldn't be any sort of surprise and it shouldn't be something that we're reacting strongly to. That was expected, But Williams had the right kind of peripherals as a receiver, and he was also just the better runner between himself and Latavius Murray. So I would still want Williams of all the running backs in this backfield. I think managers are going to be frustrated when Latavius Murray steels work and when Murray scores touchdowns. But that's the exact same thing that would have happened with JK. Dobbins and Gus Edwards. I'm not saying Williams is going to have the workload that JK. Dobbins would have had. I'm just noting that this was always going to be a split backfield, and in that split backfield, I would want Tyson Williams the most. Now, as for selling him and what you should look for in return, I try to not approach trades that way. I talked about this last week, but I'd do my best to first find a manager who would desperately need an RB two type player. I would then look at that manager's roster and then make a deal. But I would value Williams as maybe a high end RB three type moving forward, if that helps. And keep in mind I was viewing Dobbins as a mid range RB two before he got hurt. I think I had him at RB eighteen or RB nineteen and PPR formats before he went down. This backfield just isn't as attractive for fantasy as people think, mostly because of how it's split. The last question this week is from at Raquel Jerome. At what point in the season do you start to panic on players? My wide receiver group is Ridley Woods and Ayuk. I felt pretty secure before week one, and I'm totally freaking out after week one.

00:13:53
Speaker 2: This was the question that I received the most this week.

00:13:56
Speaker 1: People want an exact number of weeks I want to start panicking overplay, and I get it. We're anxious about our fantasy teams when players we thought would be good aren't good or they didn't perform well. I'll say that one week should not make you freak out, or at least for the majority of players. I think Brandon Ayuk in that situation that's not great, But I'm still on the side of buying Ayyuk now that his cost has dropped. My answer to this question, though, is that it completely depends on the player in the player situation. If you're just riding out a player because of your preseason take. But that player has done absolutely nothing in any notable statistical category through two or three games, you can probably drop him, especially if that player is a veteran where we know his upside, like Giovanni Bernard. Bernard is someone who you could honestly think about dropping right now. But if we get another week of him doing absolutely nothing, of the Buccaneers having the right script for him, and him not seeing the field that much, then what's the point in rostering him. We know the upside is probably not significant anyway. Mike Issicki is another one. Plenty of people were high on him entering the year, but he barely ran more routes than the other tight ends in that Miami offense, and he had a seven point seven percent target share in Week one. You could consider dropping him even in twelve team leagues right now because the initial investment was not significant. But if he does something like that again this week, you know, it's probably just not happening. But Calvin Ridley at least had good peripheral numbers in Week one. Robert Woods, the investment was high because of his situation and what we've seen from him in the past. The target share wasn't there, but you know to give him more time because we have a lot of evidence of him being good and providing good value to your fantasy teams. It just depends on the player period. There's never going to be a blanket answer for something like this, and I know that's an answer that no one wants to hear.

00:15:44
Speaker 2: It's just a truthful answer. But I'll give you a process. I'll say this, look at production and look at the peripheral numbers. If both things are.

00:15:53
Speaker 1: Lacking for multiple weeks, and if the player in question has no history, has no upside, and wasn't costly to acquire, you can drop them. If the player in question doesn't have good usage but was a good prospect, is still young, something along those lines, then you have a decision to make. You have to look at your roster and ask yourself what your roster needs. If you don't need immediate production, then you can hold on to that uncertain upside like Elijah Moore right now. If you do need immediate production from someone on the waiver wire who maybe is just a safer option, like a James White type, then you got to make your move. These questions are team build and player dependent. Walking through that exercise should help though. That's gonna know for today's show though. Thanks to all of you for listening.

00:16:37
Speaker 2: If you get.

00:16:38
Speaker 1: Subscribed to the Late Round podcast, make sure you are by searching for it pretty much anywhere podcast can be found and difficult to follow me on Twitter at Late Round QB. Thanks for listening everyone. As a reminder, I'll be answering start sick questions on Fandel's YouTube channel at noon Eastern on Sunday. I do that every single week, and I give some non start sit advice there too. Like last week, like I mentioned on the fifteen Transactions episode, I talked about picking up Elijah Mitchell when we heard that Trey Sermon was inactive.

00:17:05
Speaker 2: So I think it could be a helpful show.

00:17:06
Speaker 1: For everyone, even if you don't have a pressing start sit decision to make. So I hope to see you there otherwise, good luck and Week two