Ian Allan answers your fantasy football questions. In this edition. Which rookie running backs will be the best next year? How will snow (or a lack of it) affect the Bills-Jets game? And what to make of 4-TD phenom Jonas Gray.
Question 1
They are saying the Buffalo/New York Jets game probably won't be played until Monday or even Tuesday. Who does this help fantasy-wise? Also, why in the world doesn't Buffalo have a retractable dome?
Dave (MOJO) Smith (Walls, MS)
I don’t think it will affect the game too much. The Jets are still starting Michael Vick at quarterback, right? And the Bills are still going with Kyle Orton? If the game winds up being played in a dome, that’s a slight plus for the kickers, the passing game, and the quickest-based guys like Sammy Watkins and Percy Harvin. If they’re playing outside in 35-degree weather with some wind, then Eric Decker definitely is more appealing than Harvin. Long-term, I hope they don’t put Buffalo indoors. I prefer to see that team outdoors, competing in the elements.
Question 2
With my salary-cap/keeper team sitting at 3-8, it's time to officially give it the ol' "wait till next year" pep talk, with Hyde, West & Sankey all on cheap 3-year deals. Which "waiting in the wings" RBs do you feel will make the most impact in the next 2-3 years? Also, anyone that hasn't hit the field yet that you will be keeping an eye on?
Scott Anderson (Lakewood, CO)
Eight running backs were selected in the second and third rounds. Bishop Sankey, Jeremy Hill, Carlos Hyde, Charles Sims, Tre Mason, Terrance West, Jerick McKinnon and Dri Archer. In that order. But now that we’ve seen them play and know more about them, they belong in a different order now. To me, four belong in the top tier. Hill, Hyde, Mason and McKinnon. You can put them in almost any order. I see some quickness with Mason; he’s had a few runs where I’ve really liked him. McKinnon was a quarterback in college; he should only get better. Hyde looks awfully impressive at times, and I’m thinking Gore will be gone next year. Hill has a pair of 150-yard games. Today, I will put them in this order: Mason, Hyde, Hill and McKinnon. West and Sankey are in the second tier. I think West has been better, but he might not even be the best rookie running back on that team (Isaiah Crowell looks very good). Sims comes in seventh, I guess, and Archer is definitely last. Dipping outside the third round, there are plenty of other viable backs. Devonta Freeman probably will start on opening day for Atlanta next year. Alfred Blue cranked off 156 last week for the Texans. KaDeem Carey is the entrenched handcuff behind Matt Forte. Andre Williams and Lorenzo Taliaferro may have some good days ahead of them. James White in the preseason looked like he might be pretty much interchangeable with Shane Vereen; White will have some productive games before his career is through.
Question 3
I was fortunate to acquire Jonas Gray the week prior to his breakout and I am debating starting him in a TD-heavy league this week. My other option is Alfred Morris, on the road vs. the 49ers. I also have Matt Forte, who is a must-start. This is a huge game with playoff hopes riding on the results, do I play it safe and roll with Morris, hoping he punches in a TD or roll the dice and start Jonas at home vs. Detroit's #1 ranked rush defense?
Benjamin MacLeod (Manchester, NH)
I doubt that either one of them will score. The Lions are notoriously tough against the run; only one team has run for 80 yards against them, and they’ve allowed only 4 TD runs in 12 games. When the Patriots have played against this kind of defense in the past, they’ve often switched gears completely, going to spread offenses and lots of short passing. This looks like one of those kind of games, with Shane Vereen playing a lot more than Jonas Gray. But it’s the same kind of deal out in Santa Clara. The 49ers are really tough, and they don’t tend to let you punch it in on the ground. San Francisco has allowed 23 touchdowns, and all but 4 of them have come on passes. They’ve allowed only 3 TDs (total) in their last three home games. With Washington sputtering, I’m not confident that offense will score more than one touchdown, and that score would come on a pass.
Question 4
We are having a debate over a proposed rule change in my league and I'd appreciate you weighing in. The commissioner has proposed a rule prohibiting teams that have been eliminated from the playoffs from trading with teams that are still eligible for the playoffs. Several owners have spoken out against this rule. My feeling is that non-playoff teams owe it to the rest of the league to try their best to win every week regardless of their postseason elimination. If we as a league put that expectation on owners of eliminated teams, can we also prohibit them from trying to improve their team by trading? We had two owners propose a ridiculous trade last year that was blocked by the other owners. This season, the last place team has repeatedly turned down trade offers because he thinks it is unfair to the rest of the league for him to trade away his good players; he has embraced the role of 'spoiler'. In short, we've been effective policing ourselves thus far. If I were on the bubble and I needed an eliminated team to win for me to get into the postseason I would hope that he would use all legal means to field the best possible team, as he did against everyone else all season. Last-place teams still play important games in terms of playoff eligibility and seeding. The commissioner argues that eliminated teams have no incentive to trade and can (and should) still play spoiler by working the waiver wire and fielding their best lineup.
Kee Won Song (Pittsburgh, PA)
To me, it seems like if you fear collusion-type trades enough that you feel eliminated teams shouldn’t be allowed to participate, the logical progression is that you should fear trades at all times during the season. And I think that’s understandable. I’ve been in leagues where there’s that dumb guy in the Mike Lynn role, trading away his 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th round picks so that he can have two picks in the first round. He thinks he’s being aggressive and making a splash, but now the rest of us have to contend with him having overloaded a franchise with talent. Or he simply makes a dumb trade in late September. So I don’t mind at all being in a league where trades simply aren’t allowed. When you get into the bigger-money leagues, that’s how it tends to work. But if we’re allowing trades, let’s just use the same rules for everyone. In the unlikely event that somebody with a 2-9 record tries to help a buddy with a one-sided trade, you’ve got additional rules in place to overturn that kind of maneuver.
Question 5
This is the last week for trades in our league and my RBs are Ingram, Ellington, Bell, Vereen and Hillman. We only use two starters, which look to be Ellington and Ingram the rest of the way. Should I handcuff these two or pick up Devonta Freeman and/or Bryce Brown? Also I'm only going to carry one defense the rest of the way. I have stuck with the Broncos, but they have been mediocre at best. Available are the Bucs, Bears, Titans, Falcons or Rams. Stick with the Broncos or pick one of these up?
PAUL NICKAS (Jacksonville, FL)
I have some interest in Devonta Freeman, but with the running back depth you have, I don’t think he fits into your plans. He’s not as good as any of the five guys you already have. Bryce Brown isn’t even in the discussion. With defenses, I’d like to see you go with a pair, allowing you to mix and match to take advantage of favorable situations. The Rams are certainly intriguing. They’ve got their pass rush turned on. St. Louis had only one sack in its first five game, but it’s got 18 in its last five.
Question 6
I have just been offered Aaron Rodgers for Gronk. I have three nice tight ends: Gronk, Olsen and Bennett. However my 2 QBs are Newton and Wilson. Cam has 2 CAKE matchups during the playoffs. What do you think? I will probably have to throw in Wilson as well since I won't have room for 3 QBs.
John Calvo (Miami, FL)
On my board, I’ve got Rodgers being worth 6-7 points more than Newton and Wilson. I’ve got Gronkowski worth about 4 more points than Olsen. (Those are per-game numbers.) So I will take Rodgers. Schedule-wise, I love all of his remaining games expect at Buffalo in Week 15, and even that one might be just fine.
Question 7
One of my teams is in the playoff meat grinder! Winning these last two weeks should get me in; winning only one I will probably need a little help. At this point in the season I think you have a better idea of expectations for teams and players. My question is in these situations would you be more willing to take chances on a waiver wire player over players you've had in your lineup for most of the year based on matchups? More specifically I'm considering plugging in Anquan Boldin for Julian Edelman and Zach Mettenberger for Matthew "Killing Me Softly" Stafford (standard scoring). Am I nuts? Are we sure Stafford and Eli Manning are two different people?
NICK FRITZ (Minneapolis, MN)
You know me. I have essentially no loyalty. I just want to play the guys that I think will help me win. I like the idea of using Mettenberger. He’s shown some ability to chuck it around, and that’s an awfully passer-friendly defense he’s facing. Only two teams have allowed more passing yards than the Eagles, and they’ve allowed at least 2 TD passes in all but one of their games. But when I push around the numbers and put pen to paper, I can’t quite get Mettenberger ahead of Stafford. When the rankings came out on Wednesday, I had Stafford at No. 9 and Mettenberger 12th.
