501: Mailbag 4/23/21

00:00:02
Speaker 1: This is the Labor Podcast with your host JJ zacher Retha, j J zacher Resa. What's up everyone. It's JJ Zacharyes and the editor in chief at fandled at number five dot com in this episode five hundred and one of the Late Round podcast. So many shows that are part of the FanDuel podcast network. Thank you for tuning in. Hey, baseball fans, Fandal has a fun promotion going on called five Dollars Dinger Tuesdays. All you have to do is place a twenty five dollars a more bet on the to hit a home run prop on any Tuesday MLB game. You'll receive a five dollars site credit that max is at twenty five dollars for each home run hit in that game by either team. Regardless off your bet wins or loses. So head over to Fandel each Tuesday to play the five dollars Dinger. Must be twenty one years or older in president of Colorado, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia or West Virginia. Refund issued is no withdrawable site credit that expires in seven days. Max refund twenty five dollars. Terms apply. Gambling problem called one hundred and five to two forty seven hundred in Colorado, one one hundred bets off ff in Iowa, one in hundred and nine with it in Indiana. One one hundred two seven zero seven one one seven for confidential health in Michigan. One in hundred gambler in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Virginia, tennessee redline one hundred eight eight nine nine seven eight nine, or visit one hundred gambler dot net in West Virginia. That's a lot of words. Let's get to these questions. First question this week is from at the Underscore Boogie Underscore Bot. Is Gurley done done? Or should we rethink the hard line that we've drawn for him? I think it's very unlikely that Todd Gurley becomes some fantasy relevant asset in twenty twenty one. When you're in the position that he was in last year and then you lose touches to Edo Smith, it's hard to sell that as anything but very bad. And then to top it off, he's still a free agent. The thing with questions like this is that anything's possible. Like sure, I guess we could see Todd Gurley find the home and do something in fantasy, but we can make that argument for other players as well. He's just now lumped into that group. He's in that group of players where you really can't bank on them providing any sort of value for your fantasy team because it's not logical to do that. It's not logical to think that Todd Gurley is going to be worthwhile this year. I don't want to say he's done done, because he's not retired, but the chance that he's a worthwhile fantasy asset that slim. The next question is from at Underscore the Game Script. Hey JJ, congrats on five hundred episodes. Thanks as all hype trains continue for rookies and stud running back rookies from last year, who are a few sleeper year two running backs that can catapult into the RB two conversation? You know, Benjamin McFarlane Von Pirin, DJ Dallas hasty. So it's really not easy to find sleeper year two running backs. Most running backs who are truly good in the NFL and in fantasy, they did something during their rookie seasons. That's what I talked through last off season on an episode called bailing on unproductive rookies. So the answer to this question is, if the rookie running back wasn't productive last year, chances are he's not going to be very good in fantasy moving forward. And honestly, I think of the players that you just mentioned in this question, the only way they find the field consistently is with an injury. McFarlane might be the one who sticks out to me the most, just because there's nothing good ahead of him on the Steelers' depth chart. And maybe Pittsburgh surprises all of us and they don't get one of the big three backs in the draft. I think they will, but maybe they don't. That would make McFarlane an interesting piece. But I don't think actively buying into any of these guys is a very good bet to make. You're better off throwing darts at this year's rookie class. This as questions from at Ryan Charles four three seven. Are you holding out hope for any twenty nineteen rookie bus Harry Isabella Hill, heard Boykin, jj Arthega Whiteside, Campbell, et cetera. Now I'm so cool with Paris Campbell, but that's about it of this group. At least with Campbell, you can make the injury excuse. The other guys are just underperformed, which is a sign that they just aren't very good. They don't have the production for a reason. But Campbell was off to a decent start last year in his limited action before he got hurt, and Edwin Poldos mentioned that he's not all that worried about Campbell on episode four hundred and ninety. That episode was on injury proneen Thiss. I just don't think that he belongs with the other busts from that class, at least not yet. The last question from at Starchucker is Javonte Williams just a first and second down running back in the NFL seems like a lower ceiling. If a running back is projected to just be an early down back, then yeah, that's a far lower ceiling. But that's not the case for Javonte Williams. He's a do it all back. A lot of people are looking at Michael Carter as a satellite back at the next level, and that's totally fine, that's reasonable. But Javonte Williams had the same number of receptions in that North Carolina offense last season. He's not Travis Etn as a receiver, but he's more than capable of being a three down back. If you don't believe that he can be, then yeah, you should bump him down a whole lot. You need that receiving component to be a competent running back in fantasy football, But I don't think it's that big of a question mark given his overall profile. Now, speaking of Michael Carter, this next one is from at Inside Saints and it says will Michael Carter be drafted as a workhorse back or only a satellite back? So I think it's likely that he's just going to be a satellite back. The higher end comp that I have for Michael Carter is actually another North Carolina running back, and that's Giovanni Bernard. Where there may be games here and there where Carter steps in, he sees a bigger workload, but he's mostly going to be that pass catcher in the backfield. The size really just is not there. And this is kind of an aside, but here's the thing with the size argument at running back. I've found, and I've said this plenty of times in this podcast, but I found that BMI matters for running backs. Way more than it does at wide receiver. And for the record, Michael Carter's BMI is fine. He's just a smaller back. Whether or not a smaller built running back can or can't handle a big workload isn't really what that's determining. By me saying BMI matters at running back, I'm not saying it's because smaller backs can't handle big workloads. I don't know the answer to that. It's just based on what's happened historically. There could very easily be coaching biases at play here where coaches just don't like throwing small backs on the field touch after touch after touch. It may not actually have to do with ability, But what we're trying to solve here is a fantasy football problem. We're trying to maximize the amount of fantasy points that we can get from our running backs, and coaching decisions drive volume at the running back position. So Carter's smaller frame does matter as a result. This es question is from at fut Bumbles, Hey, JJ love the show. Is there a material difference in how you'll view the Patriots pass catchers if they draft a quarterback versus if they stick with Cam for the whole season. I say stick with Cam for the whole season because I assume Cam will at least begin as the starter regardless. Yeah, I mean hypothetically, their offense could change drastically based on the quarterback that they get. Mac Jones is nothing like Cam Newton, so they're passed a rush ratio that might change the way touchdowns get divided close to the goal line. That changes a lot can change. There would be some trickle down that impacts every skill player on that team if it's Mac Jones versus Cam Newton. Now, what did it mean that I'm all of a sudden buying New England pass catchers. No, I'm just noting that there could be a material difference depending on the quarterback. Since New England is on one side of the spectrum offensively right now, they're a very run heavy offense. If that changes, that impacts everyone, and it can impact everyone in a decently sized way. This last person says, are you worried about JK Dobbins upside considering Lamar Jackson doesn't dump off the ball often and can steal some goal line and red zone carries. Yes, I've been worried about this for a while now. Now, I've got a ton of Dobbins in dynasty. This is partially a diversification thing, but I just want to let you guys know I've traded away JK. Dobbins this offseason. Just look at what's happened over the last two years with Lamar Jackson as the full time starter for Baltimore. Baltimore's average of fifteen point four percent targets here per season to their running backs. That's the fourth lowest mark in the league. But because it's such a run heavy scheme, only Tennessee has seen fewer targets go to their running backs over this timeframe. Tennessee has one hundred and twenty one running back targets over the last two years. Baltimore's at one hundred and twenty six. And for the record, this is based on positional eligibility, not where players lined up on the field. So if JK. Dobbins saw a target when he was like lined up out wide, that's being credited here. That's a running back target. Now, obviously, Derek Henry is a monster piece for fantasy football, and he's on the team that doesn't target their running backs or hasn't over the last two years. But Derek Henry is also sort of an outlier from a fantasy perspective given that receiving profile. The way Derrick Henry scores fantasy points is not normal whatsoever. I don't think Dobbins is that kind of running back where he can get away with carrying the ball well over three hundred times per season. Now, the touchdown upside might be there. He might have a spike season JK. Dobbins might where he has like fifteen touchdowns, but it's highly unlikely he's able to number one do that consistently and then number two get close to the type of volume with Derrick Henry type running back seas. And again I'm bringing up Henry because it's really the only player among the teams who don't throw to their running backs. He's like the only player who's been able to thrive. There's tons and tons of data that shows us that high end running backs need that receiving production to be a high end running back. But Derek Henry's an alien on a football field. And this isn't to say that there's no fluctuation in data like this. There is the rams, for example, they've been towards the bottom of the league and running back target share over the last couple of seasons, but they weren't there when Sean McVeigh first arrived. It's just how things fluctuate and change based on scheme and personnel. The problem is, I don't think Baltimore's scheme is going to change dramatically as long as Lamar Jackson his quarterback, and I'm looking at that more at a high level, They're never gonna be this pass heavy team with Lamar Jackson or I don't think it's at least easy to project that right now. Now, what that means is that in order for Dobbins to see a true difference making season as a receiver, he's gonna have to see a much much higher target share. And while that can happen, I'm hesitant to bank on that given the fact that Baltimore hasn't even had good pass catches around Lamar Jackson since he's become starter. What happens if they get a receiver in the NFL draft who ends up hitting that could limit the stealing a bit in that backfield. In my eyes, it's going to take a legitimate, conscious effort for the Ravens to target their running backs at a higher rate to target them more. Maybe it happens, and if it does, then Dobbin's skyrockets. But I think you can make a similar argument for other players, and when you weigh the odds of it happening given his price, I can then make the argument that Dobbins is more of a cell than a buy. I think he's more of a hold though. Don't get me wrong, I'm just saying that this situation really is an ideal for fantasy purposes. The nice part about Dobbins, though, is that he's likely going to be efficient and he's a really, really good running back. This has nothing to do with talent, So despite the lack of pass catching, given the offense that he's in, Dobbins Cannon should still be a solid higher end RB two piece in fantasy football in the short term. There's nothing wrong with that. I just don't know if we'll see him ascend to that truly elite tier. This next question is also about the Ravens is from at Best Ball uk NFL. Is it reasonable to think of twenty twenty as the floor for the Ravens passing game in twenty nineteen as the ceiling. I wouldn't say last season was the floor. No, I mean it all depends on expectation and how you define floor. But the Ravens passing offense was still pretty good when you give it context last season, Like just look at straight up passing touchdowns regression from twenty nineteen to twenty twenty. That was inevitable, that was gonna happen. In twenty nineteen, Baltimore was first in the league by touchdown rate, which is just touchdowns divided by pass attempts. As a team, they had an eight point four percent touchdown rate. Lamar Jackson's rate was nine percent. That's why he won MVP. Touchdown rates were higher in twenty twenty in total, but Baltimore, even with that context, they still rank seventh in the NFL in touchdown rate. So even though the passing touchdowns dropped from twenty nineteen, they actually threw for a good number of passing touchdowns given the number of passes that they threw. So even just by that simple statistic, I don't think it's reasonable to call twenty twenty their floor. It can get worse than twenty twenty. I think what they did in twenty twenty is more in line and closer to expectation in the short term, but I don't think expectation equals floor. Expectation to me is the median. The best questions from at Grant Lincoln are the top tier of running backs older slash Do they have more questions than usual this year? So Najee Harris is an older prospect, Yes, and I think the majority of prospects have some sort of red flag. But I think this question might just stem from a comparison to last year's class, which was objectively better. Last year's running back class was great. This class is not very good in total, but the guys at the top are pretty good. I think this class comps better to the twenty nineteen class than the twenty twenty one, and I would argue that that class had more red flags at the top. And I would say at the top of this class, so Najee Harris, Javonte Williams, and Travis etn they look better than what we saw in twenty nineteen. So I don't think there are more question marks this year for the big three. I think it's just easy to compare them to last year, which had a lot of great running backs. This last question is from at Tea Steppin noticed an uptick of hashtag zero wide receiver content lately and would be interested in your take. It appears to ignore fantasy roster turnover through the season and is focused on having the best roster out of the draft. Feels over confident to assume it's easy to hit on later. Why receivers consistently? Yeah, So I did a study last summer on where league winning players come from in fantasy football. There are plenty of ways to define what a league winner is, but I just looked at players who finished in the top eight at wide receiver and the top ten at running back because historically that's where things sort of flattened in points per game. Those were the players who were giving you an edge in fantasy football. Now, what I found was that the vast majority of wide receiver league winners were drafted in the first five rounds of twelve team league drafts. Eighty nine percent of wide receiver league winners were drafted in the first five rounds. That was seventy three percent for running back. And when you look at that from the perspective of hit rates, you're saying, here's how many wide receivers were drafted in this round. And here's how many wide receivers gave you a league winning season. Early round wide receivers win. Again, when you get to round six or so, your odds of hitting on a league winning wide receiver plummets. Round seven, it really plummets. At running back, your odds of finding a league winning running back in round eight is better than a wide receiver in round six. Now, what the study didn't talk about was the exact edge that you're gaining at either position by having one of those league winners. It's been proven that uber elite running backs are generally the ones giving you the biggest advantage in fantasy football. That's a huge reason, along with the hit rates of running backs in the first, second, and third rounds. That's a big reason I'll start my drafts with a running back or two. But if you're truly going zero wide receiver, depending on how people are defining it, that means that you're not taking a wide receiver for at least the first four or five rounds of your draft. And then you have to ask, what's the alternative. If you're not going wide receiver there, what position are you getting? And the alternative in that scenario is that you're getting a running back or a tight end, maybe a quarterback. The problem is that we know quarterbacks don't hold much value and generally aren't worthwhile that early. At tight end, we know that middle round and non elite tight ends have been pretty worthless in fantasy football through the years, And then with running backs, there's a legitimate dead zone at the position when you get to rounds four and five. Those two rounds are usually not a very good place to bet on the running back position, and based on the league winner data, it's better to go wide receiver at that point in the draft than it is to go running back. So I'm not really a believer in a zero wide receiver approach, and i'd agree with what you're saying in this question. The strategy often seems like it's being built on how your team looks post draft, as opposed to how usable that team is on paper. Your team will look great if you go more zero wide receiver, but it's not as usable as you think because the wide receivers that you're starting, if you go more zero wide receiver, they're not going to finish as well as you probably think. That's at least what history's taught us. 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 no't forget to follow me on Twitter at Late Round QB. Thanks everyone, I hope you enjoy your weekend and I will talk to you next week