Ian Allan answers your fantasy football questions. In this edition: Should you pick your playoff receivers based on the quarterback your opponent is starting? And should you use a wide receiver or a running back as your flex? What to make of Johnny Football. And how to slot Donte Moncrief into the Indianapolis offense.
Question 1
Reggie Wayne out Moncrief in. I asked this same question a little while back. How much do you like Donte now? I think he could be a top 15 guy. What you think Ian?
David Kennedy (Steamburg, NY)
Moncrief looks really good. I imagine he’ll probably be a top-20 wide receiver on my board next August. But we’re talking about Week 15 right now. Reggie Wayne is banged up, but I believe he’s going to play. It’s his last regular-season home game, and if he plays, he’ll break Peyton Manning’s record for most games played by a member of that team. This is a beloved member of the franchise. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if the Colts made an extra effort to put a bow on that career by getting him a cheap touchdown. Way back when, the Lewiston Cattle Prods lost to those damn Hutton Headerhunters in Krohn Bowl II when I failed to recognize a similar dynamic. I started Neal Anderson, who was Chicago’s best tailback at the time. But it was Walter Payton’s last home game, and they help him go out with a bang by letting him go over the top for short touchdowns on both ends of the field.
Question 2
Here's a conundrum about considering one's weekly opponent (or, maybe about overthinking): First week of playoffs; my opponent has Brady at QB. I have both LaFell and Edelman, with Beckham, Benjamin, Steve Smith, and Martavis Bryant as my other wideouts. Obviously I start Beckham, but do I go with LaFell and Edelman over the other guys for the advantage of possibly neutralizing Brady, even if you rank the other guys slightly higher? If Brady has a huge game, I figure LaFell/Edelman will reap many of the benefits. My real strength is at QB, with Rodgers (although I don't like the at Bills matchup), and RB, with Forte/Ingram/CJ Anderson, and my league scoring is TD heavy, with 6 points for all TDs, including passing, and only 1pt/20yds for rush/rec.
Craig Rinne (Delray Beach, FL)
I’ve done that kind of thing. Most commonly, you either start a pass catcher figuring that if he doesn’t score, then the opposing quarterback probably didn’t have a good game. I’m in a TD-only league, and the other one I’ve tried is the “two-to-make-one” strategy. That is, maybe you’re starting Antonio Brown, so you also start Martavis Bryant, figuring that if Brown didn’t catch a touchdown, then it’s probably pretty likely that the other receiver did. In this case, however, I would just go with the highest rated players. If you worry too much about what the opponent is trying to do, it could backfire. What if, for example, the Patriots simply run the ball a whole bunch with LeGarrette Blount? The weather could be a iffy, and Miami has been really bad against the run recently. The Patriots have had some of these games in December, with Brady finishing with lesser numbers. In their two final games last year, they won both of them by 14-plus points, yet he in each finished under 200 yards and threw just 1 TD. If it goes this way, you’ll get a big advantage over this opponent if he’s using Brady and you don’t use those Patriot receivers. And what if Brady throws for 300 yards and 3 TDs, but the scores all but caught by tight ends and running backs? Maybe Gronk goes over 100 yards. If it goes that way, he’ll get the double value of a good game from Brady and you taking lesser scores from your non-scoring wide receivers. Truth is, you don’t know how it will play out, so best course is to just start your best players and see how the thing plays out.
Question 3
When did the TV contracts change? Used to be, NFC vs. NFC or NFC road team went to FOX. AFC games by the same rules went to CBS. OK, way back it was CBS and NBC respectively. I've noticed this rule hasn't held true lately, and now I see Bengals/Browns will be on FOX. As Vince Lombardi said, "what the hell's going on out here?"
JOHN MACHO (Elko New Mrkt, MN)
That’s the new “cross flex” mechanism, introduced for this year. You’re familiar with the regular flex rules that came in with the Sunday Night Football package on NBC. If that game is a dog, then they shift a higher-profile matchup into that time slot. New this year, they’re also switching a few games between the afternoon networks. That is, if they feel like all of the good games are on CBS on a given Sunday, they’ll switch one over to the FOX said.
Question 4
Thanks again for the fantastic product; been a subscriber since 1997! I've made the the playoffs in 3 of 4 leagues, two #1 seeds and a #2 ... now to finish strong! Anyway, there's been some discussion of this topic on other forums, and I thought I'd like your input: When regarding a flex decision (non-ppr), and you have a WR & RB basically neck & neck in projections, what are your general methods of picking the guy; is it almost all dictated by matchup, or is it just going with your gut? This has been a bugaboo of mine and I'd like to hear an expert's thought process.
Scott Anderson (Lakewood, CO)
My process is to first project the stats for each player. I look at how players and teams have been playing over the season (particularly recently) and account for the level of competition and whatnot. I eventually settle on offensive projections for each team (passing yards, passing touchdowns, rushing yards, rushing touchdowns). Each player is allotted a percentage of his team’s offensive production in each category, so you’ve then got what you feel is “the number” for each player. When it’s time to pick a flex player, I tend to go with whichever is ranked higher, regardless of position. I want to rely on the research instead of outthinking myself. If the players are similar in projected value, then I tend to go off the gut feel between those options. If I’m playing against an opponent with a stacked lineup, I might opt for a player who’s more likely to maybe hit on a big play – maybe Martavis Bryant might catch a long touchdown at Atlanta. If I feel like my fantasy team is definitely favored, I might opt to take the “safer” projection of a starting running back or slot receiver who’s more certain to at least get a decent number of touches. I also accept that when I’m picking between two coin-flip type players, I’m going to get it wrong about half the time. That’s part of the deal of this game we play. When you look into it carefully and determine that two players are pretty similar, the reality is you’re going to miss some of those. Suppose, for example, you’re picking between Randall Cobb and Mike Evans this week. They project to be about the same, in my eyes. You can go back and forth on it all week. Cobb’s in a better offense. Evans has been scoring a lot more recently. Cobb hasn’t scored four games in a row (so is he overdue for a touchdown?). The weather could be problematic in Buffalo. Cobb should catch more passes. Evans has been under 50 yards three games in a row. And on and on and on. Ultimately, you have to pick a guy, and then you hope you’re right. Ultimately, it will probably come down to a single play. There will be a throw, and a guy will get his hands on it in the back of the end zone. If he gets both feet in, he’ll be the better of the two receivers. If not, it’s the other guy. But that’s all stuff you can’t control. You pick a guy, and then you live with the consequences.
Question 5
I know I am in the minority here, but just curious if you, or anyone else, would agree with me that all this "Julio love" after Monday's game is not really warranted. I mean, I watched the game, and as someone playing Matt Ryan at QB and needing every point imaginable to keep my 1st place lead, I was NOT impressed with Julio. Even before the hip injury came into play, I thought he seemed disinterested. First, you had that TD pass in the end zone where he didn't get both feet down. It didn't even look to me like he even tried to get that second foot down. I've seen WRs much less talented looking like Baryshnikov to get both feet in bounds, and here's Julio with what seemed like a "meh" attitude. Then you had that long bomb, and he gets run down and tackled inside the 5 yard line in which he never got out of 3rd gear! I'm sorry, the final numbers may look fantastic, but I was less than impressed.
Matt Tinker (Orleans, VT)
You’re kidding me, right? We’re talking about the Julio Jones who’s piled up 448 yards in the last two weeks? In NFL history, only four players have had more receiving yards in back-to-back weeks. And that gets an I’ve-seen-better grade from Matt Tinker. I will agree that on the early end zone throw, it occurred to me that with more awareness of where he was on the field, Jones could have gotten both feet down for an additional touchdown. But I don’t complain about guys going over 200 yards.
Question 6
Ian, I am faced with the greatest of wild card quandaries this week and I need your advice! I play in a 2 QB league and am currently starting Philip Rivers (against Denver) and Mark Sanchez (against Dallas) but I recently snagged Johnny Football off the waiver wire. Should I take a chance and start him ahead one those guys in perhaps the biggest boom-or-bust scenario ever?
Jon Telencio ()
I see the bust. I don’t see the boom. Manziel is an intriguing scrambler. Maybe he runs for 30-40 yards and a touchdown to salvage a serviceable day. But he’s not much of a passer. No way is he in the same ballpark as Rivers and Sanchez right now as a fantasy option.
Question 7
I have both Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck in a standard league. I am worried about Manning and leaning toward Luck in week 15. Any thoughts? One more...I have Kansas City D with Giants D and Carolina D available on waiver wire. I saw your rankings on front page but not sure why Kansas City was so low week 15 against Oakland? My league has a points scale for defense for points allowed and yards allowed along with turnovers and sacks. I am leaning toward Giants so I can use both weeks. Any thoughts?
BRETT CARON (Lewis Center, OH)
To me, there’s no decision to make with Manning and Luck. Manning is a great quarterback, and most of us would be very happy to have him in a lineup this week. Maybe he will be better. But all of the indicators suggest that Luck will put up better numbers. He runs, and he’s playing against a Houston defense that’s been awfully leaky. As far as Kansas City, the grade depends on how you score them. Oakland has been shockingly good at avoiding sacks and interceptions. So in that kind of format, Kansas City doesn’t look particularly good. If you want to start richly rewarding defenses for now allowing many points, then they move up draft boards in a hurry. That’s why we’ve got customized stat projections as part of the Fantasy Index Weekly product. That allows you to see exactly how each defense should fare using your exact scoring system.
Question 8
In complete NFL terms, rather than just fantasy terms, I was wondering how you're feeling about Martavis Bryant's future. On the one hand I get a bit of a Patterson vibe about him right now - most of his plays seem to be purely about height and speed, not elite hands or route running or body control. On the other hand, he's got a huge advantage over fellow rookies like Evans and Watkins in that he's going to be catching passes from a Pro Bowl-caliber QB for at least the next 5 years. What do you think - is he an overall average talent who will stay a role player, or do you see signs of him developing into an elite WR someday? Thanks.
BILL REHOR (Culver City, CA)
I like that size and speed. I’ve seen him run past some defenses for long touchdowns. And they’ve also looked to that height inside the red zone. The Steelers have been very good at developing receivers. So I think he’s for real. But I wouldn’t put him up there with Watkins and Evans. Those guys were both top-10 picks, and they both look like they’ll be starts for years and years.
Question 9
Wither Christine Michael in a keeper league. This guy has been hyped for 2 years. Sure, there are late bloomers, and perhaps Lynch has mouthed his way out of Seattle, but really, if this guy was all that, shouldn't we have seen SOMETHING by now? I have Charles, Lynch, Hyde, and Knile Davis, do I continue to spend a roster spot on this guy? We keep 8, and I have plenty of WR and TE I find more valuable today and potentially next year. Is he worth a continuing stash over the likes of both Bronco Thomases, Hilton, Beckham, Garcon, Patterson, G Olsen, or even Crabtree?
JOHN MACHO (Elko New Mrkt, MN)
Christine Michael remains tied to Marshawn Lynch. The talk all along has been that Lynch would be done in Seattle after this year, but that’s hard to visualize right now. Lynch might be completing his eighth year, but he’s still running as hard and as effectively as ever. He’s only 28. He’s definitely still one of the top 5 running backs in the league, and it’s hard to imagine Seattle would let him walk. In his limited chances, Michael hasn’t done enough to demonstrate that they’d be able to plug him into that all-important spot (they run the ball more than other teams) and get the same kind of production. He had problems with ball security in the preseason. Right now, it’s not even 100 percent certain he’ll be their next tailback (they’ve also got Robert Turbin). In my eyes, you should be locked in on your first seven keepers: Charles, Lynch, Thomas, Thomas, Hilton, Beckham and Davis. The final keeper spot, I think, goes to either Carlos Hyde, who’ll start for San Francisco next year, or Michael. If you were to just ignore the other seven keepers, I’d probably keep Hyde. Factoring in that you have Lynch, that makes Michael a logical fit. Greg Olsen is also a nice player, but if you’re keeping Julius Thomas, you don’t have room for a second tight end.
Question 10
Is Matt Ryan a start if Jones is out? Just when he had a prime matchup this has to happen.
Bill Petilli (Larchmont, NY)
Maybe. Losing Julio Jones would be a blow. Most (not Matt Tinker, but most) agree that he’s playing lights out right now. But Ryan might still be able to put up 300 yards and multiple touchdowns. Pittsburgh’s defense has been awfully weak against the pass.
Question 11
I was all on board to play J. Stewart this weekend but when I looked back to CAR's week 1 matchup with TB (with Derek Anderson under center), he only gained 20 yards on the ground. Does that give you pause when ranking J. Stew so highly this week? Thanks and keep up the great work!
Raymond Pettway (Louisa, VA)
I wouldn’t worry about that too much. That was a long time ago. Teams change. Players change. In the initial game, DeAngelo Williams was starting, with Stewart getting mixed in off the bench. This time around, he’ll be their starter and really their No. 1offensive option. He ran really well last week at the Superdome.
Question 12
Long-time subscriber, first-time writer. As with everyone it's playoff time and I face a tough QB decision in Week 15. It's a classic case of 'do you play the matchup' versus 'do you go with who has been producing more?' My decision is between Philip Rivers (with one lonely productive game in the past month, but facing a Denver D that is giving up lots of fantasy QB points) or Russell Wilson (more productive lately, but in a matchup vs the 49ers that historically has meant conservative game plans and little fantasy production). The guy I'm up against will start either Brady or Big Ben, so I know I can't whiff on this decision. I am seeing valid arguments on the web for and against each of my QB choices ... would love to hear your two cents. Thanks!
ANDREW MCCLURE (Aliquippa, PA)
Rushing production, I think, is the key. Russell Wilson is consistently running for 40-50 yards per game. That’s like an extra 80-100 bonus passing yards. Rivers, on the other hand, doesn’t run. Rivers also has the deal where he doesn’t seem to match up that well against this defense. All four of the matchups the last two years (including the playoff game) he’s finished with lesser passing yards. I don’t think it’s a no-brainer. Whatever touchdowns the Chargers score almost certainly will be through the air. But I would cast my lot with Wilson.
Question 13
Ian, I have reached the semifinals and have a questionable cast of running backs to choose from. Herron, Bush, D.Robinson and Steven Jackson. No way to add a back. I am leaning towards Herron and Jackson. Any insight or thoughts. Thanks Jay Monahan Cincinnati, OH.
Jay Monahan (Cincinnati, OH)
Agreed. Denard Robinson is now out for the year. Coming off the ankle injury, Bush hasn’t shown enough yet. He seems to be little more than a third-down back. The correct, logical decision is to start Herron and Jackson. Even if I had a crystal ball that showed Bush busting loose for a 60-yard touchdown, I’d probably still start Herron and Jackson – I’d figure there was some kind of glitch, and the crystal ball was mistaken.
Question 14
Matt Ryan vs Tannehill ? I got great running backs but have paid for it with these two QB's. Scoring system is 1 point for every ten yards, pass or running. I know you have Tannehill ahead by a small margin. But its for all the marbles,
Ray Phillips (Cornelius, NC)
Sorry, I’m just seeing this now. I put the Mailbag together on Thursday/Friday. Hopefully you went with Ryan.
