Here is a mix of interesting questions I received from fantasy players
this past week, and the response provided. If you have a question
for the HTH Mailbag, just drop
me an email.
Note that not all questions will be answered because it just isn't
possible to respond to them all. Also there are no certainties in
fantasy football. The responses represent one opinion to consider
in your final decision managing your fantasy team. Overall, I just
Hope This Helps...
Eric Johnson is a FA in our WCOFF league and we could use
a TE. What do you think we would have to bid on him there? I can't
see spending a lot on TE, but it is a definite weak spot on our
team. We only have Jeb Putzier from Denver, who I still think
should produce decent numbers. - Chris
[Note for those unfamiliar with WCOFF, it uses a blind bidding
system for free agent acquisitions. Each owner starts the season
with a fictional $1,000 bidding dollars to purchase free agents.
Also, WCOFF scoring gives 1 point per reception, which puts the
value of having a good TE into perspective.]
Tough call. The bidding does tend to vary wildly from league
to league. I was always fairly conservative on the bidding (didn't
want to blow my wad on one or two players) but did pretty well
acquiring guys over the course of the season. Sometimes it was
the benefit of being in early though. I remember winning Domanick
Davis last year for $117, which was way overbid at the time I
got him, but then he was going for $400-$500 in other leagues
where he was still available just a week or two later.
For Johnson I'd think something like $71-$81 would be a solid
bid. A number you are comfortable paying, but if someone bid more
than that you'd consider it overpaying. Of course check the other
teams to see what their need is at TE. Actually, I'm in a couple
AntSports $50 leagues for kicks. They use blind bidding, same
scoring rules and $100 bidding dollars. Let me check... Johnson
went for $17 in one and $6 in the other. You could somewhat equate
that to a WCOFF bid of $170 and $60. I can't tell if there were
any competing bids on Johnson. In another one of my leagues with
blind bidding, Johnson just went for $15 ($100 cap). Someone could
very well bid $150 or more. I would consider that too much for
a TE. I like the idea of $71 or $76.
I agree with you on Putzier. He will get used more as Plummer
and he get more comfortable with each other. Johnson is still
a high injury risk
Mike, Love your site and insight and have a few questions for
The 2004 Ron Dayne: will he shine or split carries all
Tai Streets has an opportunity in Detroit with Charles
Rogers going down. Will he seize it or be the forgotten man?
Marcus Robinson: past ignored, is he the # 2 receiver in
Minnesota or not?
Finally, is there a player you have you eye on these days,
even this early in the season? Is there a Dominick Davis of
P.S. Jim Brown was on my fantasy team in '64.
Hi Phil. Thanks! Glad you like the site. Wow! You've been playing
since 1964?!? I should be asking you these things! :)
Here is one man's opinion on your questions:
1. Ron Dayne will split carries. He isn't good enough to be a
starting RB in the NFL. Further complicating things for Dayne,
when the Giants fall behind he doesn't fit the game plan nearly
as well as when they are tied or leading, trying to wear down
the defense and/or grind out the clock. It would appear the Giants
are going to be playing from behind A LOT this year.
2. Tai Streets will be okay as a backup for most fantasy teams.
He is worth picking up and taking a chance on. I don't think he
will exceed his prior year fantasy numbers of 47-595-7 though.
Maybe he can push it closer to the 72 catches, 756 yards from
his 2002 season, but I expect fewer TDs for him.
3. Marcus Robinson did okay in week 1; better than Nate Burelson
who is his main competition. Robinson should hold off Burelson
for the #2 receiver spot as long as he can stay healthy, which
has been his Achilles' heal his entire career.
4. This week I like ReShard Lee for Dallas. I watched him in
preseason against the Titans and I was impressed with what I saw
(8-21, 1 6-yard TD) and I was impressed with his output in week
1 (5-35, 1 TD) with Julius Jones out and Eddie George on the sideline.
I don't necessarily trust Bill Parcells that he will absolutely
go with Julius Jones as his guy. He will go with the guy who is
producing, and so far Lee has done pretty well when given a chance.
Plus Jones seems a bit brittle.
Now don't get me wrong, I still strongly think Jones will be
the guy, but Lee is someone worth taking a shot on while we see
how this plays out if you have room on your roster. Parcells will
get production out of a runner one way or another. Heck, Troy
Hambrick had almost 1,000 yards and 5 TD last season. Other than
Lee, none have really come to light...yet! ;)
Hi Mike, I enjoy your articles. I was wondering if you could
give me some advice on trade. I've been offered Tom Brady in exchange
for Trent Green. Should I pull the trigger? Thanks, Joe
Hi Joe. I kind of see it as a wash really, so go with whichever
guy you are more comfortable with. Certainly Brady looks to be
the better option after week 1, and you have to wonder if opposing
teams will disrespect the Chiefs receivers as much as the Broncos
did, taking Gonzo away from Green, but I don't like to let a single
week influence me too much. I think Green bounces back fine. Brady
should continue to be solid although they could mix in Dillon
a little more going forward depending on the matchup. I sure wouldn't
be against the deal and just might do it myself (to get Brady).
He is the younger of the two with a better group of receivers
with not as much reliance on a single teammate or two.
I have an off the wall question for you. A friend of mine
and I have been arguing back and forth about the validity of player's
"listed" weights. For example, we started talking about
Quentin Griffin, and my friend commented to the fact that even
though he is short, he didn't really understand why everyone was
questioning his durability since he was listed at 195 pounds.
My reply was that I think it's quite common for players' "listed"
weights to not exactly be accurate. In other words, I remember
hearing quite often that the big guys are exaggerated down at
times, and the little guys exaggerated up. Who is correct? - Trent
Hi Trent. Definitely there is some fudging the numbers between
the listed weights and the actual weights. Perhaps some on purpose,
and perhaps others just because the weight can fluctuate a fair
bit with pro athletes. It is difficult to even find consensus
weights for players across different media sources, likely for
I'm not sure about the general idea that big guys exaggerate
down and vice versa, but I think that has some validity to it.
That is what you often hear on the broadcast that so-and-so offensive
lineman is listed at X, at which time the colour commentator says,
"there's no way he is only X." Exactly how much fudging
goes on I'm not too sure.
While your friend might think 195 is plenty for a RB, he does
understand that opposing LB, and not to mention DT, make a 195
guy seem like a featherweight? I just checked the Bills' LB and
they are all listed in the 240-250 range. That's a pretty significant
difference if they get up a head of steam. Travis Henry is listed
at 215 so he has a good advantage on Griffin in the weight department
as a more typical RB.
When it comes to durability though, it isn't all going to be
about weight. It seems center of gravity has something to do with
it (lower the better), and ability to make people miss so they
don't get a "clean" hit on you, a la Barry Sanders.
Griffin does seem to possess some of those qualities. Actually,
I haven't heard too much negative about Griffin's durability,
especially since his good showing week 1, but people do like to
knock smaller players as not being "prototypical" RBs,
who can't carry a full season load. Here
is a good article on Brian Westbrook (same idea) by one of
our writer's Matt Waldman where he tries to debunk some of these
traditional theories It's a good read and I think it will be of
some interest to you.