Grayson2401

Established Members
  • Content Count

    1,423
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

778 Excellent

About Grayson2401

  • Rank
    Superstar

Previous Fields

  • Add to Mailing List?
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

1,608 profile views
  1. Chubb basically has a floor of 8-10 points in PPR and his ceiling is about as high as anyone else at the RB position. I am not sure how you justify benching him.
  2. They will need some combination of Cook and/or Mattison for the playoffs. I just don't see MIN having enough success with Boone coming out of the backfield against the top NFC teams. It makes sense to rest both and have them as healthy as possible for the playoffs.
  3. The James Connor we drafted in the top 2 rounds is not the same James Connor we have today. He was mostly mediocre this season with Big Ben and this offense looks completely different with no Ben, no AB, and a banged up JuJu. This does not even take into account that Connor himself is not 100% and we are not even sure if he will see his typical volume or not. There are a lot of options teams might have with the likes of Boone, Washington, AP type players (possibly) getting RB1 type volume. Sure Connor has the most talent and likely offers the most upside, but he might also be just one hit away from giving you a '0' in your championship. If you are an underdog, I think Connor is probably the better play. If not, going a different direction might not be a bad idea.
  4. Get crazy and get rid of the byes and go 6th vs 1st. Just think if Virginia had a bye in March Madness and we never got to see UMBC be the first 16 seed to knock off a 1 seed
  5. So where do you draw the line? By the same logic, do you also think including more teams in the playoffs is a good idea (6-8 teams in a 12 team league; no byes)?
  6. Two week matchups does not completely take away luck or upsets nor does it make the strategy easier or more robotic. We have still seen many 3rd or 4th seeded teams win the championship; maybe just a fraction less than one-week matchup leagues.
  7. We start Week 13 and finish Week 16. 13 weeks is plenty of time to determine playoff seeding IMO. Does one game really make much of a difference? And I completely agree on the upsets and should have worded my comment differently. We still have upsets and sometimes a team gets hot late and is very deserving of the championship. But the two week matchups allow an owner to survive one bad week; one week that might be a complete outlier to their entire season. Fantasy is frustrating and difficult enough-- minimizing the good-luck/bad-luck aspect of it has made it more enjoyable for us.
  8. He had been out or unable to finish a game since Week 8. It is fair to still have very real concerns about his shoulder. If you have safer options and are not relying on a Connor ceiling game, considering other options might be the prudent play.
  9. You guys should look into two-week playoff matchups. We went to it years back and it is great. Seems to reward the best teams and somewhat negates those one-week wonders, upsets.
  10. How is that spinning anything? He is 6th in rushing attempts and I believe 7th in receptions. It should be no surprise his back-up has seen limited work.
  11. You mean to tell me a rookie has seen limited touches and targets playing behind one of the best three-down backs in the NFL? Nah.
  12. I feel like handcuffs (not necessarily of your own RBs) are usually a little easier to roster when you have more of a zero RB draft and they can certainly put your team over the top when you do hit on one.
  13. I do not usually target my RB handcuffs unless they are unusually injury-prone. I look at drafting handcuffs that are behind injury-prone players along with targeting specific backfields where a plug and play is almost assured RB1-2 value (think PIT in years past, DAL, MIN, etc.). It does not matter whether they are on my team or not TBH. I have found I usually get more value out of these picks than only specifically targeting my own handcuffs.
  14. All fair points. But BAL was a completely different team with Lamar under center. It was not necessarily that they began scoring significantly more points with Lamar but more so how the offense was able to control the game. Their TOP went from 27 MPG under Flacco to 35 MPG under Lamar. Their rushing offense went from 92 YPG to 229 YPG. Those differences are jaw-dropping. And still surprisingly, their defense was giving up just a shade more PPG with Lamar than they did with Flacco-- though it should be noted there was much less variation from the mean with Lamar.