WEBVTT - Running On Empty

0:00:01.160 --> 0:00:06.160
<v Speaker 1>Time now for Fantasy Football Weekly from iHeartRadio, your weekly

0:00:06.240 --> 0:00:09.840
<v Speaker 1>source for the nation's best fantasy speculation and advice.

0:00:11.480 --> 0:00:14.880
<v Speaker 2>What's up, everyone, and welcome back to another offseason edition

0:00:15.240 --> 0:00:18.440
<v Speaker 2>of Fantasy Football Weekly with your host John mcgaze at

0:00:18.520 --> 0:00:20.680
<v Speaker 2>John mcgaze on Twitter. Hit us up with any questions,

0:00:20.960 --> 0:00:24.600
<v Speaker 2>my friend and yours, mister Jake Trowbridge running backs or

0:00:24.840 --> 0:00:26.840
<v Speaker 2>all the talk right now? Jake, it's because of that

0:00:27.240 --> 0:00:30.240
<v Speaker 2>right kind of perceived week draft class. We're now seeing

0:00:30.280 --> 0:00:33.120
<v Speaker 2>the impacts of that on drafting rooms. What's hold on

0:00:33.159 --> 0:00:35.720
<v Speaker 2>to You? Ready for a jam packed RB episode?

0:00:35.920 --> 0:00:37.440
<v Speaker 3>Oh, I'm ready, I'm ready.

0:00:37.479 --> 0:00:40.160
<v Speaker 1>The question is are the listeners ready to get all

0:00:40.200 --> 0:00:43.199
<v Speaker 1>the all goods on these you know? I was I

0:00:43.200 --> 0:00:45.000
<v Speaker 1>don't know what the title of this thing's gonna be

0:00:45.000 --> 0:00:47.320
<v Speaker 1>when it comes out, John, But when I was referring

0:00:47.400 --> 0:00:51.120
<v Speaker 1>to these, you know, murky backfields, initially I was calling

0:00:51.159 --> 0:00:54.080
<v Speaker 1>them muddy backfields, and I decided I'm gonna stop doing

0:00:54.120 --> 0:00:56.480
<v Speaker 1>that because it sounds too much like a euphemism that

0:00:56.560 --> 0:00:59.600
<v Speaker 1>you'd hear in a commercial for pepto bismol or something.

0:00:59.680 --> 0:01:00.600
<v Speaker 3>Muddy backfield.

0:01:00.720 --> 0:01:03.200
<v Speaker 1>I don't want to be that guy. So messy backfields

0:01:03.280 --> 0:01:04.319
<v Speaker 1>let's let's maybe go with that.

0:01:04.640 --> 0:01:07.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, maybe be careful typing that one into Google. You

0:01:07.080 --> 0:01:09.000
<v Speaker 2>never know in front of people, you never know it's

0:01:09.000 --> 0:01:11.319
<v Speaker 2>gonna come up. Maybe not safe for work. All right,

0:01:11.360 --> 0:01:15.319
<v Speaker 2>So the discussion topic today is write those you know,

0:01:16.319 --> 0:01:19.520
<v Speaker 2>vague backfields right where it's kind of a gray area

0:01:20.080 --> 0:01:23.640
<v Speaker 2>and chaos being a ladder, Fantasy football being a game

0:01:23.640 --> 0:01:28.319
<v Speaker 2>of attrition. League are gonna be one and lost on

0:01:28.319 --> 0:01:31.199
<v Speaker 2>how you play these right, whether it's at the draft

0:01:31.200 --> 0:01:33.960
<v Speaker 2>table or in season. I think having a good idea

0:01:34.640 --> 0:01:37.320
<v Speaker 2>these murky backfields what it's like. So we have half

0:01:37.360 --> 0:01:38.880
<v Speaker 2>a dozen of them. I want to thank you for

0:01:38.920 --> 0:01:41.360
<v Speaker 2>putting them together. I do agree with the teams. We'll

0:01:41.400 --> 0:01:44.640
<v Speaker 2>get through them. First up is Washington. I'm gonna just

0:01:44.760 --> 0:01:47.360
<v Speaker 2>try and set the table as quick as I can,

0:01:47.440 --> 0:01:49.640
<v Speaker 2>and then we'll go from there because it's really just

0:01:49.720 --> 0:01:52.000
<v Speaker 2>an open form here. What do we think? Do we

0:01:52.080 --> 0:01:53.480
<v Speaker 2>like the lead? Are we off the lead? Do we

0:01:53.560 --> 0:01:55.320
<v Speaker 2>like the backup? Or we on both of them or

0:01:55.360 --> 0:01:57.680
<v Speaker 2>none of them or anything in between. So we start

0:01:57.840 --> 0:01:59.720
<v Speaker 2>with the Commanders. You know, they were number one in

0:01:59.760 --> 0:02:02.160
<v Speaker 2>your you have to contact per rush, top five in

0:02:02.280 --> 0:02:06.120
<v Speaker 2>rush rate, although they were fifteenth in running back rush

0:02:06.160 --> 0:02:08.120
<v Speaker 2>yards per game, right because they do run. It was

0:02:08.200 --> 0:02:10.640
<v Speaker 2>Jayden Daniels. It was also a little bit of Mariota

0:02:10.680 --> 0:02:12.840
<v Speaker 2>looking kind of spry at times. So right now the

0:02:12.919 --> 0:02:16.200
<v Speaker 2>room is constituted. They bring in Rashad White ADP one

0:02:16.240 --> 0:02:19.000
<v Speaker 2>to eleven from Tampa. He had two top ten weeks,

0:02:19.120 --> 0:02:21.720
<v Speaker 2>zero top five weeks. My quick note was he was

0:02:21.760 --> 0:02:24.840
<v Speaker 2>better than expected, running, not as much kind of plotted.

0:02:24.840 --> 0:02:26.359
<v Speaker 2>He was a little bit better than I thought. Then

0:02:26.360 --> 0:02:29.160
<v Speaker 2>we have JCM, everyone's favorite seventh rounder from last year,

0:02:29.400 --> 0:02:31.519
<v Speaker 2>ADP one twenty one, so right off the bat right

0:02:31.639 --> 0:02:34.160
<v Speaker 2>very close. He had two top ten weeks, one top

0:02:34.200 --> 0:02:36.000
<v Speaker 2>five week, a little bit of ceiling. I have good

0:02:36.080 --> 0:02:39.800
<v Speaker 2>yak Ypa, especially given the amount of eight men boxes

0:02:39.800 --> 0:02:41.640
<v Speaker 2>that he faced. I was a little surprised with what

0:02:41.680 --> 0:02:44.519
<v Speaker 2>I saw from j CM. And then k Tron Allen,

0:02:44.800 --> 0:02:47.920
<v Speaker 2>the rookie ADP two hundred and six rounder out of

0:02:48.040 --> 0:02:50.840
<v Speaker 2>Penn State, and I noticed a pretty good balance of

0:02:50.919 --> 0:02:54.240
<v Speaker 2>volume and catches decent amount of touchdowns. So where are

0:02:54.240 --> 0:02:57.040
<v Speaker 2>you on Washington? Rushad White is one of the bean

0:02:57.240 --> 0:03:00.519
<v Speaker 2>risers lately. I think just as people died just what's

0:03:00.560 --> 0:03:04.040
<v Speaker 2>going on. He appears to be the RB one and

0:03:04.520 --> 0:03:07.160
<v Speaker 2>that EDP is a little bit cheap for RB one's

0:03:07.240 --> 0:03:09.040
<v Speaker 2>nowadays you have to pick one hundred. What do you

0:03:09.040 --> 0:03:10.600
<v Speaker 2>think about the commander's backfield, Jake.

0:03:10.880 --> 0:03:13.120
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, John, I think that's gonna be a recurring theme

0:03:13.280 --> 0:03:14.280
<v Speaker 1>throughout this episode.

0:03:14.320 --> 0:03:14.960
<v Speaker 3>Probably is.

0:03:15.280 --> 0:03:17.359
<v Speaker 1>You know, with all of these we're going to talk about,

0:03:17.400 --> 0:03:21.280
<v Speaker 1>they're all so cheap with very few exceptions that you

0:03:21.280 --> 0:03:23.520
<v Speaker 1>can take shots wherever you like on any of these.

0:03:23.560 --> 0:03:25.320
<v Speaker 1>It's not a big commitment. You know, if it doesn't

0:03:25.360 --> 0:03:27.680
<v Speaker 1>work out, you can drop them without too much regret.

0:03:27.720 --> 0:03:30.240
<v Speaker 1>So we're just looking for guys that can hit, and

0:03:30.320 --> 0:03:32.160
<v Speaker 1>if they do, you know, you'll be on a much

0:03:32.160 --> 0:03:36.000
<v Speaker 1>more linear route to the Fantasy Championships, like people who

0:03:36.080 --> 0:03:38.680
<v Speaker 1>got Javonte Williams last year. That's the kind of thing

0:03:38.720 --> 0:03:41.640
<v Speaker 1>that we're looking at with this. Of course, Paul Charchion

0:03:41.680 --> 0:03:45.200
<v Speaker 1>always called it the do the Opposite strategy aka zero RB,

0:03:45.800 --> 0:03:48.080
<v Speaker 1>and Rashad White is a heck of a zero RB

0:03:48.400 --> 0:03:51.320
<v Speaker 1>or do the opposite kind of running back because you

0:03:51.440 --> 0:03:54.240
<v Speaker 1>nailed it. I'm not gonna say that he's a great

0:03:54.320 --> 0:03:57.120
<v Speaker 1>pure runner because he's not. But he's a little better

0:03:57.160 --> 0:04:00.760
<v Speaker 1>than he gets credit for. And he's so good at

0:04:00.800 --> 0:04:04.040
<v Speaker 1>earning targets out of the backfield. I think that's where

0:04:04.040 --> 0:04:07.040
<v Speaker 1>I want to start with Washington, is which of these

0:04:07.080 --> 0:04:10.920
<v Speaker 1>guys do I think can actually be the checkdown option

0:04:11.040 --> 0:04:13.280
<v Speaker 1>for Jane Daniels, even though he doesn't check down a ton.

0:04:13.720 --> 0:04:16.760
<v Speaker 1>I think it's the most valuable thing. Because this team

0:04:16.839 --> 0:04:19.880
<v Speaker 1>also had a change of offensive coordinator, John, We're going

0:04:19.920 --> 0:04:23.520
<v Speaker 1>from Cliff Kingsbury to David Blow. Yeah, Blau was there

0:04:23.560 --> 0:04:27.080
<v Speaker 1>as the QB assistance coach last year. I don't really

0:04:27.120 --> 0:04:31.120
<v Speaker 1>know what that means other than, hey, you're comfortable being around.

0:04:31.160 --> 0:04:32.440
<v Speaker 3>The practice field.

0:04:32.600 --> 0:04:35.640
<v Speaker 1>I suppose David Blow, though we don't know what his

0:04:35.720 --> 0:04:38.320
<v Speaker 1>tendencies are going to be. We know Cliff Kingsbury was

0:04:38.480 --> 0:04:42.200
<v Speaker 1>very good at just getting a good rushing offense. But

0:04:42.680 --> 0:04:45.440
<v Speaker 1>you know, first year OC John, do you think it

0:04:45.480 --> 0:04:48.400
<v Speaker 1>makes sense like I do to say I'm gonna target

0:04:48.480 --> 0:04:51.719
<v Speaker 1>the veterans on this team because of that, because the

0:04:51.720 --> 0:04:54.320
<v Speaker 1>new guy coming in probably needs a little bit of

0:04:54.320 --> 0:04:54.880
<v Speaker 1>help that way.

0:04:55.440 --> 0:04:57.600
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I would say, especially in the running back room here.

0:04:57.600 --> 0:05:01.440
<v Speaker 2>I think with Sean White is one of the veterans here,

0:05:01.680 --> 0:05:03.800
<v Speaker 2>you know he's gonna know where to be and how

0:05:03.800 --> 0:05:06.800
<v Speaker 2>to produce, and you know the EPA and success rates

0:05:06.800 --> 0:05:11.080
<v Speaker 2>were better than I thought. He's actually getting me onto

0:05:11.120 --> 0:05:14.640
<v Speaker 2>Rashad White and maybe away from JCM, who feels like

0:05:14.680 --> 0:05:17.880
<v Speaker 2>again you mentioned White's how prolific he is in the

0:05:17.920 --> 0:05:21.880
<v Speaker 2>past game. Jayden Daniels is so good with RPO stuff.

0:05:22.240 --> 0:05:24.360
<v Speaker 2>This could be a match made in heaven. And yeah,

0:05:24.400 --> 0:05:26.800
<v Speaker 2>I think he's going entirely too late. Even if you're

0:05:26.800 --> 0:05:29.200
<v Speaker 2>gonna give up a little bit of maybe goal line equity,

0:05:29.400 --> 0:05:32.520
<v Speaker 2>I think that's fine at the price. So going through this,

0:05:32.600 --> 0:05:34.720
<v Speaker 2>I think I'm into Rashad White. I think maybe a

0:05:34.760 --> 0:05:37.160
<v Speaker 2>little lower on merrity. Maybe it's just a few picks

0:05:37.200 --> 0:05:39.800
<v Speaker 2>too high. And I think I like Alan. You know,

0:05:39.800 --> 0:05:41.640
<v Speaker 2>if you're doing these Best Bowl drafts and you're looking

0:05:41.680 --> 0:05:44.320
<v Speaker 2>to just fill in to backfill, I'm not sure i'd

0:05:44.360 --> 0:05:46.920
<v Speaker 2>be so into him in redraft. And then they also

0:05:46.960 --> 0:05:48.720
<v Speaker 2>have Jerome Ford, but I think that's a little bit

0:05:48.720 --> 0:05:52.560
<v Speaker 2>outside of our scope. Next up would be Tennessee oh

0:05:52.600 --> 0:05:54.880
<v Speaker 2>Man audible sigh. If you couldn't pick up on the

0:05:54.920 --> 0:05:58.920
<v Speaker 2>audible side, uh led with So my notes say, despite

0:05:58.920 --> 0:06:02.680
<v Speaker 2>the third lowest heavy box rate, they were still a

0:06:02.720 --> 0:06:06.360
<v Speaker 2>bottom five ozer line and a bottom five rushing offense

0:06:06.440 --> 0:06:10.440
<v Speaker 2>in terms of rush rate, rush per game, EPA, rush

0:06:10.520 --> 0:06:13.880
<v Speaker 2>yards per game, yards before contact per rush, rush success rate,

0:06:13.880 --> 0:06:17.440
<v Speaker 2>and explosive rush rate, so basically every single thing that

0:06:17.520 --> 0:06:22.360
<v Speaker 2>matters analytically. They did draft the fifth round guard, but

0:06:22.400 --> 0:06:25.080
<v Speaker 2>they're also ranked again to be bottom five going forward.

0:06:25.480 --> 0:06:28.200
<v Speaker 2>He got powered ADP seventy six. He had one top

0:06:28.240 --> 0:06:31.200
<v Speaker 2>five week. You get volume, but the efficiency not great.

0:06:31.440 --> 0:06:34.360
<v Speaker 2>He really is a pass game asset. Taji Spears pick

0:06:34.440 --> 0:06:37.440
<v Speaker 2>one sixty two, not a single top ten week. I

0:06:37.520 --> 0:06:40.560
<v Speaker 2>put same archetype as Pollared, but worse. I just think

0:06:40.560 --> 0:06:43.400
<v Speaker 2>Pollard is a much better player in both assets of

0:06:43.440 --> 0:06:46.080
<v Speaker 2>the game. And then they drafted Nicolas Singleton. He's only

0:06:46.120 --> 0:06:48.680
<v Speaker 2>EDP one ninety, which is a little bit high for

0:06:48.800 --> 0:06:53.120
<v Speaker 2>a third back, and a couple of thousand yard seasons

0:06:53.240 --> 0:06:56.080
<v Speaker 2>looks like some injuries and some low volume in the

0:06:56.200 --> 0:06:59.840
<v Speaker 2>last one, and he can catch the ball. I think

0:07:00.000 --> 0:07:02.560
<v Speaker 2>I'm just like so out on Tennessee until I see it.

0:07:02.880 --> 0:07:05.320
<v Speaker 2>People are excited about Ward. He could take a step forward.

0:07:05.680 --> 0:07:08.039
<v Speaker 2>They also have not done much in the way of

0:07:08.160 --> 0:07:11.280
<v Speaker 2>protecting him, mister Jake, And That's where I'm worried and

0:07:11.360 --> 0:07:14.160
<v Speaker 2>how defenses kind of react to that right. When you

0:07:14.200 --> 0:07:19.360
<v Speaker 2>don't present a threat to every blade of grass, defenses adjust,

0:07:19.440 --> 0:07:22.600
<v Speaker 2>and I think that kind of rolls downhill. So I'm

0:07:22.640 --> 0:07:24.600
<v Speaker 2>off the Titans. You have anything different. I mean, I've

0:07:24.640 --> 0:07:27.200
<v Speaker 2>landed on Pollard where he's fallen, just to be honest

0:07:27.200 --> 0:07:29.520
<v Speaker 2>when my roster rate comes out. But I'm not into

0:07:29.560 --> 0:07:30.280
<v Speaker 2>the Titans this year.

0:07:30.720 --> 0:07:34.200
<v Speaker 1>I mean, I'm getting more interested in the Titans actually,

0:07:34.360 --> 0:07:38.000
<v Speaker 1>as I realized the pieces they added outside of that

0:07:38.080 --> 0:07:41.520
<v Speaker 1>guard and Nick Singleton, you know, they did add a

0:07:41.760 --> 0:07:44.440
<v Speaker 1>pretty solid wide receiver. A lot of folks seem to

0:07:44.480 --> 0:07:47.400
<v Speaker 1>think fourth overall in the draft by adding Carnal Tate,

0:07:47.440 --> 0:07:50.920
<v Speaker 1>they bring in Wanda Robinson. Maybe those guys can actually

0:07:51.400 --> 0:07:54.160
<v Speaker 1>keep the offense humming along more where all of the

0:07:54.160 --> 0:07:57.520
<v Speaker 1>guys in this backfield get more opportunities. That's the hope

0:07:57.560 --> 0:08:00.400
<v Speaker 1>at least. And of course bringing in Brian Dable change

0:08:00.440 --> 0:08:01.640
<v Speaker 1>of offensive coordinator.

0:08:02.200 --> 0:08:03.400
<v Speaker 3>He's been good.

0:08:03.920 --> 0:08:06.280
<v Speaker 1>You know, he has a good history of utilizing his

0:08:06.360 --> 0:08:09.080
<v Speaker 1>running backs. Probably more important, he has a good history

0:08:09.120 --> 0:08:13.040
<v Speaker 1>of emphasizing one running back, which is not common in

0:08:13.120 --> 0:08:15.200
<v Speaker 1>a lot of these backfields. We're talking about John So

0:08:15.280 --> 0:08:19.760
<v Speaker 1>that's why I'm into Tony Pollard, thinking that based on

0:08:19.840 --> 0:08:23.080
<v Speaker 1>Nicholas Singleton. You know, he broke his foot before the

0:08:23.120 --> 0:08:24.960
<v Speaker 1>senior ball. I think that's part of the reason that

0:08:25.040 --> 0:08:28.880
<v Speaker 1>caused him to slide down draft boards, and so Tony

0:08:28.880 --> 0:08:30.720
<v Speaker 1>Pollard should be the one who at least gets the

0:08:30.760 --> 0:08:33.800
<v Speaker 1>hot start, and you know in redraft that's more valuable

0:08:34.920 --> 0:08:38.439
<v Speaker 1>and his adp for a guy who's put up a

0:08:38.640 --> 0:08:42.160
<v Speaker 1>thousand yard rushing seasons four years in a row and

0:08:42.240 --> 0:08:44.640
<v Speaker 1>hovers around thirteen hundred scrimmage yards.

0:08:44.920 --> 0:08:48.199
<v Speaker 3>I'm not gonna lie. I'm kind of enticed by it. John.

0:08:48.440 --> 0:08:52.079
<v Speaker 1>I The issue is how long will Tony Pollard keep

0:08:52.120 --> 0:08:54.920
<v Speaker 1>that role? And will because I agree, I don't think

0:08:54.920 --> 0:08:57.040
<v Speaker 1>ty J. Spears is much to worry about. So I'm

0:08:57.080 --> 0:08:59.760
<v Speaker 1>just showing him away and I'm waiting on Nicholas Singleton

0:08:59.800 --> 0:09:02.440
<v Speaker 1>to get healthy. Maybe that's when he sneaks in and

0:09:02.440 --> 0:09:04.160
<v Speaker 1>then this rupts this whole thing, and then you're kind

0:09:04.160 --> 0:09:04.600
<v Speaker 1>of screwed.

0:09:05.120 --> 0:09:08.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, the audio only people couldn't see, you know, luckily

0:09:08.120 --> 0:09:11.240
<v Speaker 2>for them my face and cheshire Cat's smile, because I

0:09:11.280 --> 0:09:14.280
<v Speaker 2>was a huge proponent of Tony Pollard last year. But

0:09:14.360 --> 0:09:16.920
<v Speaker 2>remember those total stats could be a little bit misleading.

0:09:17.440 --> 0:09:20.080
<v Speaker 2>By the time he was delivering. It was a little

0:09:20.120 --> 0:09:22.840
<v Speaker 2>too late for me. Although I don't want to blame

0:09:22.880 --> 0:09:26.520
<v Speaker 2>it on Pollard. I went down the Bucky Irving road

0:09:26.960 --> 0:09:29.800
<v Speaker 2>last year. That injury kept getting delayed and delayed and delayed.

0:09:30.040 --> 0:09:33.480
<v Speaker 2>You can't really keep fulling behind in fantasy football. Maybe

0:09:33.480 --> 0:09:35.600
<v Speaker 2>I wasn't proactive enough, but I did fall for it.

0:09:35.840 --> 0:09:39.160
<v Speaker 2>But it was funny with Pollard, who just I mean

0:09:39.200 --> 0:09:41.360
<v Speaker 2>by the time we were into week twelve, right, so

0:09:41.440 --> 0:09:44.040
<v Speaker 2>the two games after coming out of the by when

0:09:44.040 --> 0:09:46.520
<v Speaker 2>you're like, okay, maybe we'll get explosive again, he goes

0:09:46.559 --> 0:09:49.480
<v Speaker 2>ten for twenty two, then eleven for twenty. I made

0:09:49.480 --> 0:09:52.480
<v Speaker 2>a few catches but only total twenty five receiving yards,

0:09:52.679 --> 0:09:54.560
<v Speaker 2>and then like who would have funk it? You know,

0:09:54.600 --> 0:09:58.240
<v Speaker 2>he just went absolutely crazy. So he's also n plus one.

0:09:58.280 --> 0:10:00.959
<v Speaker 2>We talked about those lower body inches removed from Matt

0:10:01.000 --> 0:10:05.160
<v Speaker 2>tightrope surgery. Pollard was like a top ten overall pick

0:10:05.480 --> 0:10:08.120
<v Speaker 2>like two years ago. So I think I'm with you.

0:10:08.120 --> 0:10:10.240
<v Speaker 2>I think I am buying it again because of the price.

0:10:10.280 --> 0:10:11.520
<v Speaker 2>I also want to take a little bit of a

0:10:11.520 --> 0:10:15.120
<v Speaker 2>lowercase L on Tait And it's just like you mentioned,

0:10:15.200 --> 0:10:18.480
<v Speaker 2>the the draft capital is so high. Think about where

0:10:18.480 --> 0:10:21.480
<v Speaker 2>we were taking Marvin Harrison. Now that didn't work out,

0:10:21.760 --> 0:10:23.960
<v Speaker 2>and maybe this is an example of kind of once

0:10:24.000 --> 0:10:29.719
<v Speaker 2>bitten twice shy, But just to equate draft capital to

0:10:30.120 --> 0:10:33.960
<v Speaker 2>fantasy draft capital, you gotta think his sixty ADYP Tate

0:10:34.440 --> 0:10:36.000
<v Speaker 2>is a steal for we went in the draft, right.

0:10:37.480 --> 0:10:41.280
<v Speaker 1>I'm more lukewarm on Carnal Tait as an individual fantasy

0:10:41.360 --> 0:10:44.640
<v Speaker 1>asset than most. I like him to hopefully help the

0:10:44.720 --> 0:10:47.640
<v Speaker 1>offense overall. And so if you're somebody in a two

0:10:47.720 --> 0:10:50.240
<v Speaker 1>QB league who wants to draft, you know, cam Ward

0:10:50.440 --> 0:10:52.600
<v Speaker 1>or again wants to invest in one of these running backs.

0:10:52.720 --> 0:10:55.360
<v Speaker 3>I like Carnal Tait for that. For real life.

0:10:55.480 --> 0:10:58.000
<v Speaker 1>I'm a little lukewarm because I actually think his ADP

0:10:58.160 --> 0:11:00.480
<v Speaker 1>is too high. Personally, I think he gets a pro

0:11:00.640 --> 0:11:03.320
<v Speaker 1>ready wide receiver. That's fine, But I don't see this

0:11:03.679 --> 0:11:05.760
<v Speaker 1>crazy high ceiling that a lot of people do.

0:11:06.880 --> 0:11:09.360
<v Speaker 2>Interesting. Yeah, a lot of it is just based on

0:11:09.440 --> 0:11:13.320
<v Speaker 2>draft capital, and we've seen that mislead. But I'm a

0:11:13.320 --> 0:11:17.600
<v Speaker 2>price guy. I have not drafted Tait once. I tend

0:11:17.600 --> 0:11:21.840
<v Speaker 2>to be that kind of strict drafted Jake. I do

0:11:21.880 --> 0:11:24.360
<v Speaker 2>a lot of zeroing out. I zero out a lot

0:11:24.360 --> 0:11:26.360
<v Speaker 2>of teams in a lot of situations. I don't like

0:11:26.400 --> 0:11:28.800
<v Speaker 2>to put my hard earned money on players and teams

0:11:28.840 --> 0:11:30.439
<v Speaker 2>I don't really believe in. I like to see it.

0:11:30.480 --> 0:11:33.880
<v Speaker 2>First call me and Missouri, all right, next our third backfield,

0:11:33.920 --> 0:11:36.560
<v Speaker 2>that's buddy is Pittsburgh, right. We generally think of as

0:11:36.559 --> 0:11:39.720
<v Speaker 2>a running team. This is kind of interesting. Pittsburgh last

0:11:39.800 --> 0:11:44.000
<v Speaker 2>year bottom five in attemps per game. That's a running team.

0:11:44.000 --> 0:11:46.480
<v Speaker 2>With the Steelers or any Aaron Rodgers team. They move

0:11:46.760 --> 0:11:49.400
<v Speaker 2>like they're in molasses. However, they were top ten and

0:11:49.440 --> 0:11:52.480
<v Speaker 2>success rate. They do it well, low play volume in general,

0:11:52.520 --> 0:11:56.280
<v Speaker 2>like I mentioned. So it's Jalen Warren ADP seventy five.

0:11:56.400 --> 0:11:59.400
<v Speaker 2>He had three top ten weeks, one top five week,

0:11:59.760 --> 0:12:02.440
<v Speaker 2>and I have to admit this is one of the

0:12:02.520 --> 0:12:04.960
<v Speaker 2>reasons that I'm very glad to be doing the show

0:12:05.480 --> 0:12:08.800
<v Speaker 2>because when I kind of uncovered this stone, I was

0:12:08.840 --> 0:12:11.760
<v Speaker 2>really impressive what I saw from Warren. I were underrated

0:12:11.800 --> 0:12:15.360
<v Speaker 2>duel threat, you get efficiency, plus there was volume. I

0:12:15.400 --> 0:12:18.720
<v Speaker 2>didn't realize it, you know, kind of got out shown

0:12:19.200 --> 0:12:21.680
<v Speaker 2>by gain Well a little bit, who was fantastic. But

0:12:21.760 --> 0:12:24.440
<v Speaker 2>now he's gone. They bring in Rico Daudo, who I

0:12:24.440 --> 0:12:27.760
<v Speaker 2>put slightly better runner, but not much. He's the biggest,

0:12:27.960 --> 0:12:30.400
<v Speaker 2>so he's probably in line for all the you know,

0:12:30.440 --> 0:12:32.560
<v Speaker 2>empty calorie work, maybe a little bit more of the

0:12:32.559 --> 0:12:35.040
<v Speaker 2>goal one work. But man, I'm kind of getting into

0:12:35.160 --> 0:12:38.520
<v Speaker 2>Jalen Warren at ADP seventy five. What do you think

0:12:38.559 --> 0:12:42.720
<v Speaker 2>about the Steelers backfield? It's also split. They're a little

0:12:42.760 --> 0:12:45.760
<v Speaker 2>more expensive where I don't think you could take them both.

0:12:45.800 --> 0:12:47.559
<v Speaker 2>I think you have to have a stand here if

0:12:47.600 --> 0:12:48.960
<v Speaker 2>you like someone for Pittsburgh.

0:12:49.200 --> 0:12:52.400
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, John, I think they're more expensive than the rest

0:12:52.400 --> 0:12:56.240
<v Speaker 1>of these guys. Because even though the Steelers had what

0:12:56.360 --> 0:12:59.440
<v Speaker 1>the fifth lowest team rushing attempts last year, because as

0:12:59.480 --> 0:13:02.319
<v Speaker 1>you said, they moved so slow, Warren and Gainwell were

0:13:02.360 --> 0:13:06.439
<v Speaker 1>the only backfield mates to eclip eclipse a thousand scrimmage

0:13:06.480 --> 0:13:09.880
<v Speaker 1>yards each, which is wild. That just speaks to how

0:13:09.920 --> 0:13:14.320
<v Speaker 1>efficient that both of them were, and frankly, how much

0:13:14.360 --> 0:13:17.880
<v Speaker 1>old man Rogers just dumped that ball off because he

0:13:17.960 --> 0:13:20.160
<v Speaker 1>was terrified if anybody on the defense looked at him

0:13:20.200 --> 0:13:22.640
<v Speaker 1>the wrong way. So I think leaning into that run

0:13:22.679 --> 0:13:27.160
<v Speaker 1>game was obviously a necessity. Maybe Michael Pittman coming on

0:13:27.240 --> 0:13:29.920
<v Speaker 1>board with this team gives him another option to feel

0:13:29.960 --> 0:13:34.199
<v Speaker 1>comfortable getting the ball out quick but not necessarily having

0:13:34.240 --> 0:13:37.280
<v Speaker 1>it go to one of these running backs or if

0:13:37.280 --> 0:13:39.520
<v Speaker 1>you're one of these Sikos out there, John, who've been

0:13:39.559 --> 0:13:43.240
<v Speaker 1>doing you know, a million rookie dynasty drafts. At this point,

0:13:43.600 --> 0:13:47.280
<v Speaker 1>this Eli Heidenreich name keeps popping up, and oh, we

0:13:47.360 --> 0:13:51.600
<v Speaker 1>have another next CMC, so drop the balloons. That's the

0:13:51.679 --> 0:13:53.800
<v Speaker 1>thousandth player that we've heard is going to be the

0:13:53.840 --> 0:13:57.720
<v Speaker 1>next CMC with zero actual basis for that other than

0:13:58.160 --> 0:14:00.520
<v Speaker 1>he caught a bunch of passes at Navy, so he's

0:14:00.559 --> 0:14:03.720
<v Speaker 1>got to be the same guy. But John, can we

0:14:03.760 --> 0:14:08.679
<v Speaker 1>at least agree Caleb Johnson is gone right, like completely

0:14:08.720 --> 0:14:11.000
<v Speaker 1>out of the realm of possibility of coming back.

0:14:11.040 --> 0:14:12.880
<v Speaker 3>Is that fair at.

0:14:12.840 --> 0:14:16.880
<v Speaker 2>Least for right now, especially after the draft pick here

0:14:17.320 --> 0:14:20.000
<v Speaker 2>and all the reports coming out, And I think, if anything,

0:14:20.520 --> 0:14:23.720
<v Speaker 2>you know, lessons learned because I unfortunately bought some of

0:14:23.720 --> 0:14:28.640
<v Speaker 2>that last season, and there's a place for rookies. You

0:14:28.760 --> 0:14:31.400
<v Speaker 2>just shouldn't really paying up for it, you know, because

0:14:31.440 --> 0:14:35.600
<v Speaker 2>you're oftentimes paying for the production that hasn't happened. And

0:14:35.640 --> 0:14:37.520
<v Speaker 2>I've joked about it before on my own show. On

0:14:37.600 --> 0:14:40.280
<v Speaker 2>this show, sometimes there's value and just knowing where to

0:14:40.320 --> 0:14:44.040
<v Speaker 2>stand right. Veterans know where to stand. They understand Cole's

0:14:44.080 --> 0:14:46.800
<v Speaker 2>and how to do audibles and be in the right

0:14:46.800 --> 0:14:51.040
<v Speaker 2>place at the right time. And we know, particularly in Pittsburgh,

0:14:51.120 --> 0:14:53.640
<v Speaker 2>there is a tax for not standing in the right place.

0:14:53.640 --> 0:14:55.560
<v Speaker 2>It's called the not standing in the right place tax.

0:14:55.680 --> 0:14:58.160
<v Speaker 2>And Aaron Rodgers make sure to get his pound of

0:14:58.200 --> 0:15:00.880
<v Speaker 2>black and yellow flesh every time that you betray him

0:15:00.880 --> 0:15:03.040
<v Speaker 2>on that it's the truth. Will he will grab you

0:15:03.080 --> 0:15:05.080
<v Speaker 2>by the face mask like you will hear it in

0:15:05.160 --> 0:15:07.360
<v Speaker 2>the press conferences and stuff, and then you see it

0:15:07.400 --> 0:15:10.360
<v Speaker 2>in the utilization. So I think you make a real

0:15:10.560 --> 0:15:12.440
<v Speaker 2>you make a well, you make a lot of great points,

0:15:12.560 --> 0:15:16.160
<v Speaker 2>but the usage point. If you saw me scrambling to

0:15:16.240 --> 0:15:19.000
<v Speaker 2>my post it note, I want to make sure that

0:15:19.120 --> 0:15:22.640
<v Speaker 2>I go back and circle all of these backfields you

0:15:22.720 --> 0:15:26.520
<v Speaker 2>mentioned Tony Pollard having a good route to singular use.

0:15:26.680 --> 0:15:29.800
<v Speaker 2>One hundred percent agreed that that's mostly gone the way

0:15:29.800 --> 0:15:33.560
<v Speaker 2>of the Dodo Jake. We're looking for two running back right.

0:15:33.600 --> 0:15:35.680
<v Speaker 2>That was the real point that I took from that

0:15:35.800 --> 0:15:38.760
<v Speaker 2>is ooh, a backfield with only two and not three

0:15:39.640 --> 0:15:41.920
<v Speaker 2>really boosts both of their value. Maybe I have to

0:15:41.920 --> 0:15:43.960
<v Speaker 2>pump the brakes on what I was saying about them

0:15:44.040 --> 0:15:46.880
<v Speaker 2>being a little too expensive. They are more expensive than

0:15:46.920 --> 0:15:49.760
<v Speaker 2>other tandems. But man, if you think even at a

0:15:49.800 --> 0:15:52.560
<v Speaker 2>slower rate and a lower like a smaller pie, that

0:15:52.600 --> 0:15:54.400
<v Speaker 2>they're going to be splitting all of it, which is

0:15:54.680 --> 0:15:57.560
<v Speaker 2>all the pass catching, all the garbage time, all the

0:15:57.680 --> 0:16:00.320
<v Speaker 2>end zone work. Young man, I think I'm getting sold

0:16:00.400 --> 0:16:03.720
<v Speaker 2>on the Pittsburgh Backs. I haven't really drafted them, but

0:16:03.880 --> 0:16:05.440
<v Speaker 2>I think I'm going through it. And again we saw

0:16:05.600 --> 0:16:09.320
<v Speaker 2>Rogers just hyper target game. Well, a little bit of

0:16:09.400 --> 0:16:12.680
<v Speaker 2>that goes to war and he's a smash. Well, let

0:16:12.720 --> 0:16:13.680
<v Speaker 2>me give you a little bit more.

0:16:13.880 --> 0:16:15.800
<v Speaker 1>Just onto the fire here real quick, John, because I'm

0:16:15.800 --> 0:16:18.120
<v Speaker 1>gonna get you drafting both of these guys.

0:16:17.760 --> 0:16:19.760
<v Speaker 3>So many times by the end of this offseason.

0:16:19.960 --> 0:16:23.720
<v Speaker 1>The Steelers also have i would say, arguably the easiest

0:16:23.760 --> 0:16:26.960
<v Speaker 1>first half schedule of any team in the NFL. In

0:16:27.000 --> 0:16:30.280
<v Speaker 1>their first eight weeks, they're only going against one team

0:16:30.360 --> 0:16:33.360
<v Speaker 1>with a winning percentage in twenty twenty five, and that's

0:16:33.400 --> 0:16:37.080
<v Speaker 1>New England. The rest of these seven teams collected having

0:16:37.160 --> 0:16:40.600
<v Speaker 1>a total win loss record last year of forty six

0:16:40.680 --> 0:16:44.560
<v Speaker 1>wins and seventy three losses. Obviously, things change. We can't

0:16:44.600 --> 0:16:46.840
<v Speaker 1>just assume it's going to be the same year year

0:16:46.880 --> 0:16:49.600
<v Speaker 1>over year. But if you're looking at a team that's

0:16:49.600 --> 0:16:53.000
<v Speaker 1>gonna have positive game scripts, which we often need for

0:16:53.080 --> 0:16:55.440
<v Speaker 1>running backs, especially split backfield, to be.

0:16:55.440 --> 0:16:57.960
<v Speaker 3>Successful, then I think this is the one to go with.

0:16:58.080 --> 0:17:00.640
<v Speaker 1>Don And both have three down potential, so I think

0:17:00.640 --> 0:17:03.280
<v Speaker 1>both can handle the workload. Doudo does have the connection

0:17:03.360 --> 0:17:07.240
<v Speaker 1>with Mike McCarthy coming in from their year really or

0:17:07.320 --> 0:17:09.879
<v Speaker 1>year and a half, I guess in Dallas. So if

0:17:09.880 --> 0:17:11.480
<v Speaker 1>I had to choose, when, I'm going Dado, but I'll

0:17:11.520 --> 0:17:11.920
<v Speaker 1>take both.

0:17:13.320 --> 0:17:15.480
<v Speaker 2>Wow, another awesome point. You had me scrambling to my

0:17:15.520 --> 0:17:20.160
<v Speaker 2>post it notes again about early scheduling, dude, it matters.

0:17:20.240 --> 0:17:24.439
<v Speaker 2>I have ignored it too often in redraft, where you

0:17:24.520 --> 0:17:26.040
<v Speaker 2>want to get out to a good start, they might

0:17:26.080 --> 0:17:30.000
<v Speaker 2>be injuries you don't plan for Week fifteen. In redraft,

0:17:30.000 --> 0:17:33.000
<v Speaker 2>get out to a good start. Those players have more

0:17:33.119 --> 0:17:36.399
<v Speaker 2>value out of the box. I think that was really great.

0:17:36.520 --> 0:17:37.960
<v Speaker 2>Sorry to rush on now, and I'm glad we got

0:17:37.960 --> 0:17:40.719
<v Speaker 2>that in. All right, So that's three of the six teams.

0:17:41.320 --> 0:17:44.520
<v Speaker 2>Let's take about at a quick breather, let's circle back.

0:17:44.560 --> 0:17:46.119
<v Speaker 2>I have another three teams that I really want to

0:17:46.119 --> 0:17:48.000
<v Speaker 2>get into. I think we're making good pace and we're

0:17:48.000 --> 0:17:52.840
<v Speaker 2>going to get through everything today. All right, Jake, let's

0:17:52.840 --> 0:17:55.080
<v Speaker 2>start a page into the second half here. Next up,

0:17:55.119 --> 0:17:57.480
<v Speaker 2>it's the Patriots, now a team that people are really

0:17:57.520 --> 0:17:59.800
<v Speaker 2>excited about, and another team right with that kind of

0:17:59.800 --> 0:18:02.360
<v Speaker 2>two had a backfield. They were sixth in rush yarts

0:18:02.400 --> 0:18:05.280
<v Speaker 2>per game, but eleventh in running back rush arts for him,

0:18:05.320 --> 0:18:08.159
<v Speaker 2>of course, Drake may taking that up. I wanted to

0:18:08.160 --> 0:18:11.280
<v Speaker 2>look at the goal to go carries. Henderson had sixteen

0:18:11.359 --> 0:18:15.080
<v Speaker 2>led the way, Mandre fifteen May thirteen, but Romandre did

0:18:15.119 --> 0:18:17.000
<v Speaker 2>miss three games in the middle of the season. They

0:18:17.000 --> 0:18:20.560
<v Speaker 2>faced the second heaviest, heaviest, highest box rate, and then

0:18:20.640 --> 0:18:23.040
<v Speaker 2>you know it's I just wrote the word frustrating in

0:18:23.080 --> 0:18:25.520
<v Speaker 2>the biggest letters that I could, where it didn't go

0:18:25.640 --> 0:18:28.320
<v Speaker 2>across the line. You know. The biggest surprise to me

0:18:28.640 --> 0:18:32.080
<v Speaker 2>was that in the games together, Romandre actually out snapped

0:18:32.600 --> 0:18:36.479
<v Speaker 2>Trevion when the Patriots were tied or trailing. They had

0:18:36.480 --> 0:18:39.040
<v Speaker 2>the same amount of targets, but Mandre actually had one

0:18:39.119 --> 0:18:42.399
<v Speaker 2>hundred more receiving yards. The reason I mentioned that is

0:18:42.480 --> 0:18:46.119
<v Speaker 2>I think I kind of been these players as thunder

0:18:46.160 --> 0:18:47.879
<v Speaker 2>and lightning. Right, It's very easy for us to do

0:18:47.920 --> 0:18:50.800
<v Speaker 2>that there's a bigger back that rungs and a more

0:18:50.880 --> 0:18:53.840
<v Speaker 2>scatty back that catches. That's not always the case for

0:18:53.960 --> 0:18:56.600
<v Speaker 2>Mare was a really good runner. He was also pretty

0:18:56.680 --> 0:19:00.919
<v Speaker 2>darn good in the past game man, their ADPs are

0:19:00.960 --> 0:19:05.240
<v Speaker 2>fifty one Henderson seventy five Madre who I think maybe

0:19:05.280 --> 0:19:08.280
<v Speaker 2>those should be flipped, And that, again is not a

0:19:08.400 --> 0:19:11.080
<v Speaker 2>very popular opinion. I was not drafting Henderson last year

0:19:11.200 --> 0:19:13.240
<v Speaker 2>because I was worried. We did see the potential in

0:19:13.240 --> 0:19:16.600
<v Speaker 2>those games about Stevenson, so that to say, it's still

0:19:16.640 --> 0:19:19.119
<v Speaker 2>it's a lot of gray matter going on here. What

0:19:19.160 --> 0:19:21.400
<v Speaker 2>do you think about the pet about the Patriots backs.

0:19:21.400 --> 0:19:22.840
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, John, I don't.

0:19:22.920 --> 0:19:26.639
<v Speaker 1>I don't know why didn't Henderson's ADP drop like at

0:19:26.680 --> 0:19:28.520
<v Speaker 1>all from last year. It feels like this is right

0:19:28.600 --> 0:19:31.560
<v Speaker 1>around where folks were drafting him last year. And I

0:19:31.640 --> 0:19:35.159
<v Speaker 1>understand the upside is very enticing. I get it, but

0:19:35.640 --> 0:19:37.840
<v Speaker 1>I just would have assumed he would have dropped down

0:19:37.880 --> 0:19:40.760
<v Speaker 1>because of the disappointment he gave everybody last year. And

0:19:40.800 --> 0:19:43.320
<v Speaker 1>I guess folks are looking at the end of year

0:19:43.560 --> 0:19:46.639
<v Speaker 1>stat totals, which I'm victim of doing sometimes myself. But

0:19:47.040 --> 0:19:49.800
<v Speaker 1>if you look at the time where Henderson actually started

0:19:49.840 --> 0:19:52.800
<v Speaker 1>to shine. It wasn't until week nine of last year,

0:19:52.800 --> 0:19:55.960
<v Speaker 1>and that's when Ramondra Stevenson got injured, as you said.

0:19:56.320 --> 0:19:59.880
<v Speaker 1>And when Stevenson got healthy again, then he was again

0:20:00.000 --> 0:20:02.360
<v Speaker 1>playing a lot more snaps than Henderson was because he's

0:20:02.359 --> 0:20:05.720
<v Speaker 1>a better pass blocker and a better pass catcher even

0:20:05.760 --> 0:20:08.760
<v Speaker 1>than Henderson was. I think the assumption was Henderson will

0:20:08.760 --> 0:20:11.840
<v Speaker 1>grow into this role as a receiving back, and he might.

0:20:12.320 --> 0:20:15.520
<v Speaker 1>He might, but Ramondre Stevenson looked better than he did.

0:20:16.000 --> 0:20:18.200
<v Speaker 1>And I just want to focus on the snap counts

0:20:18.200 --> 0:20:21.880
<v Speaker 1>from week thirteen on because that's when Ramondre came back

0:20:21.880 --> 0:20:25.080
<v Speaker 1>from his injury and was basically healthy. And you talked

0:20:25.080 --> 0:20:28.080
<v Speaker 1>about the snap counts. But week thirteen on, including the

0:20:28.119 --> 0:20:33.240
<v Speaker 1>actual NFL playoffs, Remondre Stevenson three hundred and eighty snaps

0:20:33.560 --> 0:20:37.880
<v Speaker 1>Traveon Henderson two hundred and twelve snaps. That's a wild

0:20:38.160 --> 0:20:41.760
<v Speaker 1>difference at the tail end of the season. To still

0:20:41.800 --> 0:20:44.399
<v Speaker 1>have a guy like that have such high ADP and

0:20:44.480 --> 0:20:46.760
<v Speaker 1>to have the ADPs not flipped like you said, so,

0:20:47.560 --> 0:20:49.880
<v Speaker 1>I don't know. You give me Ramondre Stevenson a few

0:20:49.960 --> 0:20:54.960
<v Speaker 1>rounds later if eventually things shift, I'll adapt, I'll move,

0:20:55.119 --> 0:20:58.440
<v Speaker 1>i'll trade, I'll drop him to waivers, whatever. But I'm

0:20:58.440 --> 0:21:00.800
<v Speaker 1>not going to start with Henderson on thessumption that he's

0:21:00.840 --> 0:21:02.520
<v Speaker 1>just gonna come out of the box looking great.

0:21:03.520 --> 0:21:06.080
<v Speaker 2>There's no reason to think that. I mean, and the

0:21:06.359 --> 0:21:13.840
<v Speaker 2>playoff touchcounts were very heavily in favor of Stevenson thirteen

0:21:14.160 --> 0:21:20.760
<v Speaker 2>to ten against the Chargers, twenty to thirteen Houston, twenty

0:21:20.840 --> 0:21:24.880
<v Speaker 2>five to three at Denver. That's a blowout, and then

0:21:25.240 --> 0:21:28.760
<v Speaker 2>twelve nine Seattle, Like there wasn't a single time where

0:21:28.760 --> 0:21:32.040
<v Speaker 2>they said when the chips are down, Henderson is the guy.

0:21:32.160 --> 0:21:37.480
<v Speaker 2>He's just And it might be and Henderson drifters, might

0:21:37.520 --> 0:21:39.760
<v Speaker 2>get lucky. Maybe Stevenson, you know, hits the lottery and

0:21:39.760 --> 0:21:42.480
<v Speaker 2>goes into that mindful this retreat I'm always talking about. Maybe,

0:21:42.520 --> 0:21:44.600
<v Speaker 2>and then there's a case that Trevion could legit be

0:21:44.880 --> 0:21:47.880
<v Speaker 2>the RB one or among at least the top five

0:21:47.960 --> 0:21:51.840
<v Speaker 2>running backs. But until then, I think you're overpaying. And Stevenson,

0:21:51.880 --> 0:21:55.879
<v Speaker 2>to me at least is the most obvious smash zero

0:21:56.000 --> 0:21:59.840
<v Speaker 2>RP pick ever, right because generally when I go zero RB,

0:22:00.119 --> 0:22:03.720
<v Speaker 2>I'm asking myself, Jay, are there any points in Week one?

0:22:03.840 --> 0:22:06.560
<v Speaker 2>Are there anything? Because where I've made the mistake is

0:22:06.600 --> 0:22:09.119
<v Speaker 2>having the pendulum swing too far leave myself out in

0:22:09.160 --> 0:22:11.800
<v Speaker 2>the cold in the early weeks. Right, So would you

0:22:11.880 --> 0:22:16.560
<v Speaker 2>buy that like Rashad White and Ramandre Stevenson are going

0:22:16.600 --> 0:22:18.359
<v Speaker 2>to score points week one? Yes or no?

0:22:18.840 --> 0:22:21.960
<v Speaker 1>I say yes, and I say definitively yes, and so

0:22:22.119 --> 0:22:24.200
<v Speaker 1>I think yeah, redraft and by the way, and I

0:22:24.240 --> 0:22:27.560
<v Speaker 1>will say even dynasty value for Trey Van Henderson way

0:22:27.600 --> 0:22:30.600
<v Speaker 1>too inflated. That's another one that took zero hit based

0:22:30.600 --> 0:22:32.520
<v Speaker 1>off of a performance last year. And I don't get

0:22:32.560 --> 0:22:33.640
<v Speaker 1>it in either format.

0:22:34.359 --> 0:22:38.679
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I don't. Sometimes this is really interesting when we

0:22:38.720 --> 0:22:41.800
<v Speaker 2>talk about market machinations and going against the trend and

0:22:42.040 --> 0:22:44.520
<v Speaker 2>wisdom of the crowd, sometimes you have to be willing

0:22:44.600 --> 0:22:46.399
<v Speaker 2>to say, like no, and you know, again, we're not

0:22:46.400 --> 0:22:48.720
<v Speaker 2>taking a player in the three hundred snowes I've heard of.

0:22:48.760 --> 0:22:53.040
<v Speaker 2>We're talking about an accomplished like back with success on

0:22:53.080 --> 0:22:56.359
<v Speaker 2>a winning team that's healthy and leading the way. I

0:22:56.359 --> 0:22:58.200
<v Speaker 2>don't know, it's weird. I asked her if they could

0:22:58.200 --> 0:23:00.320
<v Speaker 2>both score week one. I should have asked, can lead

0:23:00.640 --> 0:23:02.520
<v Speaker 2>the running back room in Fantasy points Week one? And

0:23:02.560 --> 0:23:05.919
<v Speaker 2>again the answer Jeffs. Next team up, Carolina Panthers. Okay,

0:23:05.920 --> 0:23:08.680
<v Speaker 2>so they were top twelve in rush rate, but bottom

0:23:08.720 --> 0:23:12.520
<v Speaker 2>ten in explosive rush rate. They're also thirtieth in rushing touchdowns.

0:23:12.880 --> 0:23:16.080
<v Speaker 2>You got Twoba Harbard his back ADP seventy three. He

0:23:16.119 --> 0:23:18.520
<v Speaker 2>had three top ten weeks, not a single top five week.

0:23:18.600 --> 0:23:21.200
<v Speaker 2>There's a question about ceiling here. We know what happened

0:23:21.200 --> 0:23:24.800
<v Speaker 2>when he got replaced by Rico Dawdel. I have not

0:23:24.920 --> 0:23:28.840
<v Speaker 2>been drafting Harvard at all. His ADP is now converging

0:23:28.880 --> 0:23:31.680
<v Speaker 2>with backup Jonathan Brooks. I haven't listed at one five,

0:23:31.720 --> 0:23:34.480
<v Speaker 2>but I've been in these draft room, Jake. They're getting

0:23:34.520 --> 0:23:38.399
<v Speaker 2>closer to about the low nineties. They're both they're going

0:23:38.400 --> 0:23:40.520
<v Speaker 2>next to each other in the low nineties. So ADP,

0:23:41.280 --> 0:23:42.960
<v Speaker 2>let me get closer to the season. We'll be using

0:23:43.000 --> 0:23:46.960
<v Speaker 2>tighter windows for larger samples. But John Brooks, I mean,

0:23:47.040 --> 0:23:51.000
<v Speaker 2>he had a really great twenty twenty three, but last

0:23:51.000 --> 0:23:54.520
<v Speaker 2>I checked, it's twenty twenty six. We haven't seen much

0:23:54.560 --> 0:23:57.440
<v Speaker 2>from him. They are over the moon about this guy. Though.

0:23:57.480 --> 0:24:00.359
<v Speaker 2>There was not a single report out of that teams

0:24:00.359 --> 0:24:02.879
<v Speaker 2>camp that does not include Brooks and how he looks

0:24:03.000 --> 0:24:05.760
<v Speaker 2>like he could be everything. So again, to me, if

0:24:05.760 --> 0:24:08.760
<v Speaker 2>you're playing for two types of ceiling in zero RB

0:24:09.680 --> 0:24:13.720
<v Speaker 2>Stevenson and White being that more vanilla lower higher floor,

0:24:13.760 --> 0:24:16.360
<v Speaker 2>lower ceiling Brooks. If this works out right, he could

0:24:16.359 --> 0:24:18.639
<v Speaker 2>be the RB one by week three, maybe sooner if

0:24:18.680 --> 0:24:21.320
<v Speaker 2>he outperforms him. In camp. We saw the Panthers be

0:24:21.359 --> 0:24:23.480
<v Speaker 2>willing to go away from Hubbard. So what do you

0:24:23.480 --> 0:24:26.720
<v Speaker 2>think about the Brooks room. You started nudging me into Brooks,

0:24:26.720 --> 0:24:28.960
<v Speaker 2>and the more I've looked, the more I've liked. Again,

0:24:29.040 --> 0:24:32.000
<v Speaker 2>the price is getting high. So I saw you nodding,

0:24:32.359 --> 0:24:35.360
<v Speaker 2>where's the cutoff for Brooks? Make sure you include that, please.

0:24:35.560 --> 0:24:39.280
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, the cutoff if Brooks starts going, you know, into

0:24:39.320 --> 0:24:42.080
<v Speaker 1>this dead zone running back area, which to me starts

0:24:42.080 --> 0:24:45.440
<v Speaker 1>at around round six round seven, when he starts creeping

0:24:45.520 --> 0:24:47.360
<v Speaker 1>up at around six in round seven, as we get

0:24:47.400 --> 0:24:50.359
<v Speaker 1>more and more positive reports, I'm assuming that'll happen. I

0:24:50.359 --> 0:24:52.840
<v Speaker 1>don't know for sure. Then I'm gonna be out just

0:24:52.840 --> 0:24:55.440
<v Speaker 1>because we're still talking about a guy who's had two

0:24:55.680 --> 0:24:59.119
<v Speaker 1>ACL tears, you know, in the last two years to

0:24:59.160 --> 0:25:02.320
<v Speaker 1>the same AC, and I know he's gotten some distance

0:25:02.320 --> 0:25:04.720
<v Speaker 1>from the injury, and I'm excited to see what his

0:25:04.800 --> 0:25:07.880
<v Speaker 1>upside can look like but it's store up to bank

0:25:07.960 --> 0:25:10.440
<v Speaker 1>on something like that right now. But I do want

0:25:10.440 --> 0:25:12.680
<v Speaker 1>to try to follow the money on this, John, because

0:25:12.680 --> 0:25:15.960
<v Speaker 1>that's in these dicey backfields where you're just trying to

0:25:15.960 --> 0:25:19.240
<v Speaker 1>figure out who could be the real lead back. I

0:25:19.280 --> 0:25:21.720
<v Speaker 1>was working my way through this, and so the Panthers

0:25:21.720 --> 0:25:25.440
<v Speaker 1>signed Toba Hubbard to a four year extension thirty three million,

0:25:26.000 --> 0:25:29.520
<v Speaker 1>a few months only after spending their second round pick

0:25:29.720 --> 0:25:33.360
<v Speaker 1>on Brooks, and Brooks was coming into the season injured.

0:25:33.520 --> 0:25:36.520
<v Speaker 1>Obviously he was still recovering from that first ACL injury,

0:25:36.840 --> 0:25:39.360
<v Speaker 1>but Hubbard gave him a ton of or Hubbard got

0:25:39.359 --> 0:25:42.320
<v Speaker 1>a ton of money before Brooks tore the ACL a

0:25:42.400 --> 0:25:45.600
<v Speaker 1>second time, so they were already The Panther is being like,

0:25:45.800 --> 0:25:48.320
<v Speaker 1>we want Hubbard to be our guy, but I don't

0:25:48.359 --> 0:25:51.879
<v Speaker 1>know that it matters anymore, John, because a year prior

0:25:51.920 --> 0:25:53.720
<v Speaker 1>to that, they gave Miles Sanders.

0:25:54.000 --> 0:25:56.440
<v Speaker 3>Remember that guy. They gave Miles Sanders.

0:25:56.200 --> 0:25:59.440
<v Speaker 1>Almost an equivalent contract, And then we're just like, no,

0:25:59.720 --> 0:26:00.480
<v Speaker 1>it's through this guy.

0:26:00.480 --> 0:26:01.040
<v Speaker 3>We're moving on.

0:26:01.160 --> 0:26:05.320
<v Speaker 1>He says he's terrible. We're turning the backfield over to Hubbard.

0:26:05.400 --> 0:26:08.040
<v Speaker 1>So if Brooks is really as good as they're saying,

0:26:08.800 --> 0:26:11.000
<v Speaker 1>and they spent that second round pick on him, he

0:26:11.040 --> 0:26:13.919
<v Speaker 1>could absolutely leap frog Hubbard. And he does have a

0:26:14.000 --> 0:26:18.159
<v Speaker 1>higher ceiling, a much lower floor, but a way higher ceiling.

0:26:18.240 --> 0:26:20.640
<v Speaker 1>Like you said, So, I'm kind of willing to absorb

0:26:20.680 --> 0:26:21.280
<v Speaker 1>the risk here.

0:26:22.119 --> 0:26:25.240
<v Speaker 2>Yep, one hundred percent love it, especially in redraft where

0:26:25.720 --> 0:26:28.520
<v Speaker 2>the floor is zero. Okay, snip snip, ceil aer pal.

0:26:28.800 --> 0:26:31.840
<v Speaker 2>You know, thanks for playing where again best ball, and

0:26:31.880 --> 0:26:35.040
<v Speaker 2>these year long commitments. It's a little harder to pay

0:26:35.040 --> 0:26:38.719
<v Speaker 2>the premium without at least the information that we want. Now,

0:26:38.840 --> 0:26:41.120
<v Speaker 2>keep in mind that I'm kind of setting you up here, Jay.

0:26:41.800 --> 0:26:43.320
<v Speaker 2>If you had the guess of the one hundred and

0:26:43.400 --> 0:26:46.480
<v Speaker 2>thirty four rush attempts that Chew Bahabber had in twenty

0:26:46.520 --> 0:26:49.439
<v Speaker 2>twenty five, do you know exactly how many went from

0:26:49.440 --> 0:26:50.600
<v Speaker 2>more than twenty yards?

0:26:51.280 --> 0:26:53.600
<v Speaker 3>Ooh, more than twenty It's.

0:26:54.040 --> 0:26:56.720
<v Speaker 2>How many twenty yard rushing a Bobber had in twenty

0:26:56.760 --> 0:26:57.200
<v Speaker 2>twenty five.

0:26:57.359 --> 0:26:59.320
<v Speaker 3>I'll give him one just to be nice.

0:26:59.520 --> 0:27:02.800
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, the zero. And you know there's a lack of

0:27:02.840 --> 0:27:06.200
<v Speaker 2>explosivity here, right, there's a lack of explosivity. In fact,

0:27:06.359 --> 0:27:09.560
<v Speaker 2>he only didn't stay away from the goose egg and

0:27:09.680 --> 0:27:13.399
<v Speaker 2>explosive rush rate. I think explosive rush rate might be thirteen,

0:27:14.040 --> 0:27:17.720
<v Speaker 2>so he had won between thirteen and twenty. But that's it.

0:27:17.800 --> 0:27:21.639
<v Speaker 2>So he's gonna like writs that three yards and a

0:27:21.680 --> 0:27:25.000
<v Speaker 2>cloud of dust thing because the success rate is actually

0:27:25.760 --> 0:27:28.600
<v Speaker 2>pretty good, right, forty eight percent success rate. You're gonna

0:27:28.600 --> 0:27:31.720
<v Speaker 2>take that and maybe the most impressive number. And this

0:27:31.760 --> 0:27:33.800
<v Speaker 2>is why they like him so much. Jake, is I

0:27:33.960 --> 0:27:38.399
<v Speaker 2>like to account for negative or zero? I guess like not,

0:27:38.520 --> 0:27:41.639
<v Speaker 2>so let's call it non positive. A tenth rate records

0:27:41.640 --> 0:27:43.919
<v Speaker 2>of zero is not great either. Some people just do losses,

0:27:43.920 --> 0:27:46.240
<v Speaker 2>but I don't think that's good either. And his was

0:27:46.280 --> 0:27:49.960
<v Speaker 2>down at just twelve percent. That is fantastic. There are

0:27:50.040 --> 0:27:54.159
<v Speaker 2>running backs that operate full workloads up and around or

0:27:54.200 --> 0:27:58.080
<v Speaker 2>above twenty, which is the truth. So he doesn't get

0:27:58.119 --> 0:28:01.040
<v Speaker 2>stopped for nothing, but he's not gonna get you everything.

0:28:01.160 --> 0:28:04.000
<v Speaker 2>And I think the more we kind of talk through

0:28:04.000 --> 0:28:09.600
<v Speaker 2>this analytically, you see why he's gotten replaced without being removed.

0:28:09.600 --> 0:28:12.520
<v Speaker 2>Does that make sense? Right? He got replaced, There areb

0:28:12.680 --> 0:28:15.520
<v Speaker 2>one kind of got replaced, but he didn't get removed

0:28:15.520 --> 0:28:18.640
<v Speaker 2>because his role is still extremely valuable. He's not gonna

0:28:18.680 --> 0:28:20.200
<v Speaker 2>give it up. He's not gonna put on the floor.

0:28:20.320 --> 0:28:22.560
<v Speaker 2>He's not gonna burn you. He's not gonna do happy

0:28:22.560 --> 0:28:24.879
<v Speaker 2>feet in the backfield and lose your six yards. He

0:28:24.920 --> 0:28:27.960
<v Speaker 2>doesn't do that. And those are like sacks, which we

0:28:28.040 --> 0:28:31.840
<v Speaker 2>all know kill drive. So I'd like Hubbard as a

0:28:31.920 --> 0:28:35.160
<v Speaker 2>real football player. I think I'm off him completely now

0:28:35.160 --> 0:28:38.200
<v Speaker 2>as a fantasy asset. Right, he kind of had that chance,

0:28:38.240 --> 0:28:40.720
<v Speaker 2>didn't run away with it. Man, This has been really

0:28:40.720 --> 0:28:43.400
<v Speaker 2>good episode. When I have quick notes, I keep myself

0:28:43.400 --> 0:28:46.240
<v Speaker 2>from tangenting too much. Last, but not least, of course,

0:28:46.280 --> 0:28:50.200
<v Speaker 2>Denver Broncos high expectations, bottom twelve rush rate, but also

0:28:50.280 --> 0:28:53.400
<v Speaker 2>bottom twelve in EPA per attempt. They were thirty first

0:28:53.440 --> 0:28:57.440
<v Speaker 2>in yards after contact per rush. Not great. You've got RJ.

0:28:57.560 --> 0:29:01.040
<v Speaker 2>Harvey to choose from. ADP eighty seven, also very late

0:29:01.240 --> 0:29:04.920
<v Speaker 2>for an RB one depending he had three top ten weeks,

0:29:04.960 --> 0:29:07.160
<v Speaker 2>two top five, so there is some ceiling because of

0:29:07.200 --> 0:29:11.960
<v Speaker 2>the rushing floor. JK. Dobbins ADP. One hundred, no top ten. Again,

0:29:11.960 --> 0:29:14.880
<v Speaker 2>it's all kind of rushing impact. This when I put

0:29:14.920 --> 0:29:18.320
<v Speaker 2>that phrase I mentioned before thunder and lightening, because this

0:29:18.400 --> 0:29:20.880
<v Speaker 2>really is the closest we have to it. Dobbins is

0:29:21.000 --> 0:29:24.800
<v Speaker 2>all the important ground yards and if they're down, he's

0:29:24.880 --> 0:29:27.400
<v Speaker 2>kind of out and they go right to Harvey. So

0:29:28.080 --> 0:29:30.800
<v Speaker 2>you have like weekly floors where you can get games

0:29:30.800 --> 0:29:36.080
<v Speaker 2>scripted out. They both seem startworthy on a per week basis,

0:29:36.240 --> 0:29:38.280
<v Speaker 2>though the Broncos have been known to go to RB three,

0:29:38.400 --> 0:29:42.640
<v Speaker 2>four and five sometimes. I've been finding myself kind of

0:29:42.640 --> 0:29:47.000
<v Speaker 2>out though Harvey's been one of the foilers Jake, and

0:29:47.320 --> 0:29:50.160
<v Speaker 2>when I've seen him in the triple digit ADP, I've

0:29:50.160 --> 0:29:53.040
<v Speaker 2>seen him at pick one hundred, then I'm jumping on board.

0:29:53.280 --> 0:29:55.240
<v Speaker 2>Dobbin's not so much because I like my running backs

0:29:55.240 --> 0:29:57.640
<v Speaker 2>to catch. What do you think about the Broncos tailbacks?

0:29:58.080 --> 0:30:01.080
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Harvey had the kind of season fall that I

0:30:01.160 --> 0:30:04.400
<v Speaker 1>expected from Trayvon Henderson last year, even though Harvey ended

0:30:04.440 --> 0:30:07.120
<v Speaker 1>on a much better note. Granted that was because JK.

0:30:07.160 --> 0:30:10.160
<v Speaker 1>Dobbins got injured and Harvey came in and he looked solid.

0:30:10.600 --> 0:30:13.520
<v Speaker 1>But I'll be honest, John, I hate this backfield. I

0:30:13.600 --> 0:30:17.760
<v Speaker 1>hate it with a burning, white hot passion because here's

0:30:17.800 --> 0:30:18.160
<v Speaker 1>the thing.

0:30:18.520 --> 0:30:19.600
<v Speaker 3>I know that JK.

0:30:19.680 --> 0:30:22.480
<v Speaker 1>Dobbins is going to lead this backfield and touches until

0:30:22.480 --> 0:30:24.760
<v Speaker 1>he gets hurt. But I don't know when that's gonna be,

0:30:25.120 --> 0:30:27.760
<v Speaker 1>and I'm not sure that I even care because, as

0:30:27.800 --> 0:30:31.640
<v Speaker 1>you said, Dobbins doesn't catch passes. Last year, ten games

0:30:31.680 --> 0:30:34.920
<v Speaker 1>he had eleven catches. He had more games with negative

0:30:34.920 --> 0:30:38.040
<v Speaker 1>receiving yards than games with double digit receiving yards.

0:30:38.280 --> 0:30:38.960
<v Speaker 3>So you're just.

0:30:38.920 --> 0:30:42.480
<v Speaker 1>Banking on touchdowns with him and Jonah Coleman. The rookie

0:30:42.560 --> 0:30:45.800
<v Speaker 1>comes in, who I've started to grow to like a lot,

0:30:46.000 --> 0:30:49.640
<v Speaker 1>especially in Dynasty. He's a legitimate three down running back,

0:30:49.840 --> 0:30:52.840
<v Speaker 1>so I think he's more competition for Dobbins straight up

0:30:53.040 --> 0:30:57.840
<v Speaker 1>than Harvey or Julia McLoughlin were last year. So I

0:30:57.880 --> 0:31:00.600
<v Speaker 1>think the bull case for any of these eyes and

0:31:00.640 --> 0:31:03.680
<v Speaker 1>it's picked your your poison. But the ball case is

0:31:03.720 --> 0:31:06.560
<v Speaker 1>the Broncos take a step forward as a scoring offense.

0:31:06.800 --> 0:31:09.520
<v Speaker 1>You know, they bring in Jalen Waddle, bow Knicks just

0:31:09.560 --> 0:31:10.560
<v Speaker 1>continues to improve.

0:31:10.720 --> 0:31:11.800
<v Speaker 3>All that's great.

0:31:12.040 --> 0:31:14.360
<v Speaker 1>We expect them to throw less because they threw a

0:31:14.400 --> 0:31:17.840
<v Speaker 1>ton last year, six hundred plus passes from bow Knicks.

0:31:18.360 --> 0:31:20.880
<v Speaker 1>You know bo Nix's late season ankle injury. Maybe he

0:31:20.920 --> 0:31:22.920
<v Speaker 1>doesn't take off and run himself so much and he

0:31:23.000 --> 0:31:25.560
<v Speaker 1>gives that to the actual running backs on the field.

0:31:26.080 --> 0:31:26.880
<v Speaker 3>But I don't know.

0:31:27.240 --> 0:31:30.400
<v Speaker 1>It just feels like even when Dobbins was healthy last year,

0:31:30.720 --> 0:31:32.600
<v Speaker 1>he was the RB twenty four in points per game.

0:31:32.680 --> 0:31:35.480
<v Speaker 1>That's fine, that's where you're drafting him. I'm not saying

0:31:35.480 --> 0:31:38.000
<v Speaker 1>there's anything wrong with that, but I don't know that

0:31:38.040 --> 0:31:40.240
<v Speaker 1>we're getting ten games, John. What if we get five

0:31:40.320 --> 0:31:43.920
<v Speaker 1>games of JK Dobbins as sort of this fringe RB two.

0:31:44.800 --> 0:31:45.280
<v Speaker 3>I don't know.

0:31:45.320 --> 0:31:47.200
<v Speaker 1>I kind of just don't even want to deal with it.

0:31:47.320 --> 0:31:51.000
<v Speaker 1>I don't think Harvey did anything to usurp Dobbins this year,

0:31:51.080 --> 0:31:54.560
<v Speaker 1>so I'm not banking on him. And yeah, Jonah Coleman

0:31:54.640 --> 0:31:56.920
<v Speaker 1>is somebody I'll probably just look at for a midseason

0:31:57.000 --> 0:31:59.240
<v Speaker 1>waiver pickup, assuming that JK.

0:31:59.320 --> 0:32:00.000
<v Speaker 3>Dobbins gets hurt.

0:32:00.960 --> 0:32:02.960
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I'm with you. Coleman passes a lot of the

0:32:03.000 --> 0:32:07.120
<v Speaker 2>sniff tests usage and abilities and both sides of the game.

0:32:07.200 --> 0:32:10.760
<v Speaker 2>But it's always gonna be difficult because you know, last

0:32:10.800 --> 0:32:14.560
<v Speaker 2>year we saw it. You mentioned Julia McLaughlin, right, he

0:32:14.600 --> 0:32:18.560
<v Speaker 2>had at least four carries in eight of their last

0:32:18.680 --> 0:32:22.920
<v Speaker 2>nine games. Those are touches we want. And that as

0:32:22.960 --> 0:32:26.080
<v Speaker 2>if like that wasn't bad enough, you know, Tyler Batty

0:32:26.240 --> 0:32:29.280
<v Speaker 2>made at least one grab in more games than not,

0:32:29.880 --> 0:32:32.520
<v Speaker 2>and it doesn't sound like a lot, but when a

0:32:32.760 --> 0:32:39.360
<v Speaker 2>split backfield is sacrificing seven, eight, nine RB touches, that's

0:32:39.400 --> 0:32:42.800
<v Speaker 2>a bunch of snaps and it just hurts everybody across

0:32:42.840 --> 0:32:45.080
<v Speaker 2>the board. I guess I'm still taking Harvey as like

0:32:45.120 --> 0:32:47.440
<v Speaker 2>a flex pick, but I'm with you. I'd say you

0:32:47.440 --> 0:32:49.080
<v Speaker 2>talked me off and I was already kind of heading

0:32:49.080 --> 0:32:52.840
<v Speaker 2>towards the ledge. I'm gonna stick with my If Harvey

0:32:52.880 --> 0:32:56.400
<v Speaker 2>post one hundred, then press yes button. But other than that,

0:32:57.080 --> 0:33:00.560
<v Speaker 2>I'm really out. Like you mentioned, not only the Broncos

0:33:00.600 --> 0:33:03.400
<v Speaker 2>really creative with usage. They brought in pieces which is

0:33:03.440 --> 0:33:05.760
<v Speaker 2>going to shake up that etches ketch a gun Jake.

0:33:05.840 --> 0:33:08.240
<v Speaker 2>That was really awesome and we got through all six teams.

0:33:08.320 --> 0:33:10.520
<v Speaker 2>Like you said, you believed in us, and you were right.

0:33:11.160 --> 0:33:13.800
<v Speaker 2>So from John mcgay's and mister Jake Shrobridge, thank you

0:33:13.800 --> 0:33:16.800
<v Speaker 2>everybody for listening to Fantasy Football Weekly. Hit us up

0:33:16.840 --> 0:33:18.640
<v Speaker 2>on social media if you have any questions, and everyone

0:33:19.080 --> 0:33:20.440
<v Speaker 2>enjoy the weekend, take care of