- Admin
- #1
</p>
OK, I think I've finally developed a recurring feature that will allow me to convert all of the "working" time I spend on Twitter into a useful piece of content for my employer. This is no easy trick, so we'll see how it goes. Every Friday, my plan is to take 4-5 tweets on the week's buzziest subjects, then expand on whatever limited-character response I've already offered. And then you'll eviscerate everything in comments, per your usual.
Sound like a plan? Great, let's begin...
[Add a player anytime, anywhere with Yahoo! Sports' Fantasy Football app]
After his brutal effort at Chicago (11 carries, 5 yards, fumble), James Starks' name has probably appeared in a third of the questions I've fielded this week. Like this one:
Two days later, the setup for Starks is looking even better. Ryan Grant is out this week, recovering from a bruised kidney. Starks should get something close to a full workload, and it's a game in which the Packers should be able to get an early lead, then run. This is a perfect make-good opportunity. The only small concern is John Kuhn at the goal line.
Here's a running back with a more complicated story:
So obviously I don't know that this person can do better, because I don't really know this league. And I like Jeremy Maclin as much as the next guru. But it's clear that Rashard Mendenhall is getting dealt this week — or nearly dealt — in many leagues. His original drafters have seen enough, while other owners clearly view him as a buy-low. Have to say, I'm comfortable with the workload he's receiving (19 carries in Week 2, 18 in Week 3), despite the results. His offensive line is a disaster, a sketchy unit entering the season, now with a pair of injured tackles. But don't be surprised if Mendenhall still gives us a useful (if not elite) fantasy season. He'll just need to do it Cedric Benson-style, as a high-volume ball-carrier with poor per-touch productivity. He's still a primary goal line option, he's still tied to a team that should score enough to make him relevant, even at something like 3.6 YPC.
Here's the rare multi-tweet dialogue, with some dude (and I'm not even beginning with the first question):
Then this:
Bottom line: If you want to avoid New Orleans because none of us can figure out the offense week-to-week, then you should actually avoid them. Trade your Saints. Stop picking them up. It's a tough team, I'll agree, because Drew Brees and Sean Payton aren't trying to create fantasy stars. Instead, they're trying to create confusion for defensive coordinators.
It appears that the safest weekly plays on that team are Brees (no shock), Jimmy Graham (almost no shock) and Darren Sproles (some shock, for some of you). Just keep these facts in mind: Over the past three years, the New Orleans passing attack has given us five individual seasons with seven TDs or more, and individual seven seasons of 750 or more yards. Yes, there are many mouths to feed ... but every mouth is reasonably well fed. A healthy Lance Moore is going to deliver terrific full-season numbers. If you're shopping for secondary receivers, chase the yards and points.
I need to mix in something on this guy, because he's a problem:
I really have no good vibes for you on Frank Gore, so if you're fishing for enthusiasm you should probably go elsewhere. Last week, I had to break it to Dalton Del Don — on the radio, in front of everyone — that I would not be willing to deal Cam Newton for Gore.* And that was before Frank suffered the ankle tweaking. It seems likely that he'll share workload with Kendall Hunter, at least in this week's match-up at Philly. I can't spin Gore the same way I've spun Mendenhall here, because A) he's such a clear injury risk, and B) his offense is such a mess. The Niners are averaging a league-worst 213.7 total yards per game.
*I should probably note that Dalton didn't actually ask for Cam, nor was he looking to trade Gore. So there were a few obstacles in an on-air negotiation that went nowhere.
Here's one last Q&A:
As you can perhaps tell, there was a back-and-forth here as well. I've got plenty of faith in Newton, regardless of the apparent difficulty of his match-ups. The rushing potential means a fair amount, plus the Bears will be down a starting safety on Sunday.
The other issue in play here is that I have very little faith in Grossman, no matter the opponent. We all saw the Dallas game, right? I'll acknowledge that a match-up with St. Louis is friendly, and we clearly can't rule out a 300-yard day. But we also can't rule out a three-turnover day. It's just pure recklessness to rely on Grossman in a non-bye week, if you have reasonable alternatives.
If you're looking for someone to blame for a future fantasy loss, and you don't mind having your comments replayed right here, then by all means tweet. I tend to binge-answer, and I'm less likely to respond to a question that's already covered by our published ranks. If you crave other forms of contact, try the Freak Show.
---
Photo via US Presswire