Let's examine what we think about these topics as we head into Week 4.
- Rookie Quarterbacks
- Shocking Fantasy Developments And Future Implications
- Potential Running Back Handcuffs
- For Real, Fool's Gold: Tight End Edition
Let's roll...
Rookie Quarterbacks
Matt Waldman: Daniel Jones scored four touchdowns in his debut. Gardner Minshew and Kyle Allen have performed well as first-time starters. Let's discuss these players and young passers in the league:
- Presuming Allen and Minshew earn multiple starts or you're judging these three players on the basis of picking one for next week, which of Allen, Minshew, and Jones to you prefer short-term?
- Is it easier to play quarterback in the NFL than it used to be or are college quarterbacks more prepared? This is a question Joe Bryant asked our staff on Monday.
What are the ramifications of these events in Pittsburgh?
Mark Schofield: If we are talking the-short term, I'm going with Jones. Allen and Minshew have been intriguing over the past few weeks, and Minshew, in particular, was a quarterback I truly enjoyed studying last season, but Jones was extremely impressive in his debut.
He put up some numbers under pressure that are extraordinary, such as being the first passer in the PFF era to have a perfect passer rating in a game when attempting 12 or more throws under pressure. The only one out of 1,674 passers.
That stands out. In addition, when you watch the film on him he was not creating pressure via slow reads or decisions, but he was responding to it extremely well, even making anticipation throws under duress, as I wrote about here. I'll go with Jones.
Dan Hindery: Of this group, give me Daniel Jones. His underrated athleticism should be the differentiating factor both for fantasy and his NFL prospects. Jones might not be quite as athletic as Josh Allen, but he isn’t too far off.
Allen is averaging just under eight fantasy points per game on the ground, which is massive. It’s the equivalent of adding on an extra 200 passing yards to his total each week in terms of a fantasy impact. Jones put up 14.8 fantasy points just as a runner last week. That was obviously an outlier but if he can even add four or five points on average, it greatly increases his odds of putting up QB1 fantasy numbers.
Daniel Simpkins: Of the three, I prefer Jones in the short-term. His next matchup is against a reeling Washington defense that was exploited on Monday night by a not-very-good Mitchell Trubisky-led offense.
Will Grant: Of the three, I think Jones is a great option to add to your season-long roster right now and you'll be able to use him at multiple points this season, including this week against Washington who looked terrible on Monday Night and have to travel to the Giants on a short week.
Jones looked solid last week against Tampa Bay and while four touchdowns aren't going to be an every week occurrence, you can expect he'll get plenty of opportunities with Saquon Barkley out of the lineup for a couple of weeks.
Minshew and Allen are more 'spot starter' or two-quarterback leagues rather than guys you can pick up and feel confident in—even in the short term.
Jeff Haseley: Give me Daniel Jones out of those three. His stellar preseason performance has been duplicated in a regular-season game. I would love to have a larger sample size, but what I’ve seen from Jones tells me he is a quarterback who can make the throws, but also understands the game well enough to make adjusts, proper reads, and above all, execute. I can give similar accolades to Gardner Minshew and Kyle Allen, but Jones, in my opinion, is the one with a higher pedigree who is more likely to succeed
So quarterbacks in college with high skill are taking steps earlier to prepare themselves for the NFL level competition. NFL hopefuls know that they have a very small window to show their value and won't last long if they don't. Few have the luxury to sit out a full season and 'learn from the veteran in front of them'.
Hindery: I believe there has been more cross-pollination between NFL and college coaches in recent years, which has led to a smaller difference between what offenses are doing in college versus the pros. It’s not just the bigger names like Kliff Kingsbury.
There are also a lot of lesser-known coaches like Brian Daboll, who went from New England to Alabama and then back to the NFL as the offensive coordinator for the Bills. There are a bunch of coordinators with similar resumes. This is allowing quarterbacks to make the transition from college to the NFL more smoothly.
Per NFL rules, “in the NFL, coaches are allowed to communicate with quarterbacks and call plays using audio equipment built into the player's helmet. Quarterbacks are allowed to hear, but not talk to, their coaches until there are fifteen seconds left on the play clock.”
It might be a little backward in that the NFL is running more offensive variations that mimic college spreads/RPO concepts/etc. as opposed to them coming in better prepared. I don't discount that this is happening but there is evidence to suggest that's not it, or at least most of it.
The NFL is opening up to more of the wide-open college-like offenses, but the rules and the way the game is played at the NFL level now play right into it, too.
Very few of the "can't-miss" QBs taken first overall a decade or two ago hit the ground running—see Peyton Manning. Now, we have guys barely drafted making an immediate impact in that they are playing reasonably well.
This ain't your Grandpa's NFL.
Mike Leach is happy to make the case for why the NFL was underrating Gardner Minshew, but I bet he was equally happy to make a similar case for Kliff Kingsbury and B.J. Symons. And say what you want about David Cutcliffe, where were rookie performances like this out of Heath Shuler, Eli Manning, Erik Ainge, Tee Martin, or the rest of his quarterbacks? Even Peyton didn't manage to throw more touchdowns than interceptions until his seventh career game.
I think the West Coast Offense caught fire in the '90s and the Spread is catching fire in the '10s precisely because it's an easier offense to get positive results from. It demands less of your quarterback. I also think coaches are way more willing to meet young quarterbacks on their own terms today. Dan Reeves was old-school; he was still refusing to tailor an offense to Elway's strengths when Elway was a 10-year vet. Now you get young quarterbacks where coaches are simplifying reads and borrowing plays directly from their college playbooks (to great success!)
Hell, teams used to look for quarterbacks who were "coaches on the field" and "called their own offense". Jared Goff just got the richest contract in history and his coach makes no bones about the fact that he doesn't even ask Goff to read the defense or call audibles on his own.
I don't think there's ever been a time in history when more people in the world were capable of starting at quarterback and running an NFL-caliber offense. At least not in modern history. And I think this is a very good thing. Coaches are delegating responsibility away from quarterbacks and meeting them on their own terms and offenses are better for it.
Luke Falk will likely never be a stud. But he's a sixth-round pick from last year who is apparently more NFL-ready than anyone else the Jets could find on short notice.
It's still just as hard to throw a ball in a tight window as it ever was, and the adage of "adapting to the NFL" is not just the speed of the game but the tighter windows. In college, you'll see guys running free and having 1-2 steps on a defender far more often, while in the NFL that may not happen at all against a very good secondary.
The NFL follows success and copies those who are winning, and now that we've seen teams win with RPO-based offenses, the quarterbacks that run similar systems in college are far closer to ready than when they had to learn not just a new playbook and terminology but also different offensive philosophies.
Waldman: Daniel, I will add to your point that opposing defenses also have less practice time and cohesion to maximize the flexibility of its scheme than in the past. Free agency and gentler practices have altered the realistic expectation of how defenses can play. This is something that Steven Ruiz covered in a recent article at USA Today and it supports your idea that in many respects, football has been forced to simplify.
Even so, the professional level of football remains profoundly more advanced schematically, technically, and athletically than the college game and one, two, or even eight games isn't usually a great indicator of how good young quarterbacks are. Opponents adjust and eventually force young quarterbacks away from their strengths. It's at this point of adversity where we can begin determining of these quarterbacks are quality players.
The game is friendlier and coaches are less dictatorial about their scheme. It is becoming a more common practice to install elements into an offense that the draft pick used in college.
Baker Mayfield, Robert Griffin, and Marcus Mariota all received those perks. All three began strong. In fact, Mariota went 13-15-209-4-0 in his rookie debut and delivered another four-touchdown effort in Week 6 and a pair of three-touchdown efforts in Weeks 9-10. He was crowned a future superstar.
Remember the excitement about Bortles and his second season? He still can't read Cover 2 well as a quarterback and makes ridiculous mistakes but he managed a 4,428-yard, 35-touchdown season as a passer during his second year (2015).
But a funny thing happens with 16-24 starts—opponents begin taking away some of those things those young QBs did well and those QBs must show some development with at least 1-2 weaknesses.
Mariota had to learn to not to hold onto the ball too long and be more decisive with leverage. As well as rely less on being fast. Now, there's a Ryan Tannehill vigil in Tennessee.
Winston has to show wiser judgment and account for underneath coverage. Not happening yet.
Mayfield starred at OU in an offense that gave him quick reads to attack downfield in 2.5 seconds or less. If it didn’t happen, he was boom-bust as an improviser. More boom because he was an above-average athlete. In NFL, he’s average at best with his legs and the same issues in the pocket and poor anticipation occur with his game when opponents fluster him.
Goff didn’t get any booster seats with his scheme as a rookie and struggled. Prescott earned boosters of a simplified plan and great surrounding talent. When he struggled last year, he was missing surrounding talent and he was no longer good enough to be a starter according to many.
Jones played well yesterday. Eventually, opponents get enough tape to force the young QB to adjust beyond physical play. Then, we learn whether the QB has NFL skills.
Until then, it was a good game from a rookie QB. Whether Jones is good or bad is a question that may take 10-20 more weeks. Right now, he’s a viable fantasy play. Doesn’t make him a good NFL QB. At least, not yet.
Mark, you were a college quarterback. I'm especially interested to hear your thoughts on this.
Schofield: One thing to keep in mind is money. It makes the world go 'round. We've come to understand how valuable a quarterback playing on his rookie deal can be, so the game has changed. The days of sitting and learning are gone because in that scenario an organization might be wasting their best means of being competitive early.
Now the economics of the NFL requires teams to play that rookie QB early, get what you can from him production-wise, and load up around him. Hopefully, by the time he's ready for a second contract, he can stand on his own two feet.
So that's led to teams doing everything they can to make them effective. Whether it is Sean McVay whispering in Jared Goff's ear before every play, or Matt Nagy treating Mitchell Trubisky like he's Tim Tebow at times. Because waiting until they're truly "ready" to stand on their own just wastes years of that rookie deal, and that chance to be immediately competitive by building around them.
So in a sense, I don't think it is necessarily easier to play quarterback in the NFL these days, nor are college quarterbacks more ready. It's just that the economics are forcing teams to play early, and coaches are doing what they can to make them productive.
Doug Drinen: I reject the question. To me, it's (almost) tautologically true that it's equally easy "to play QB in the NFL" during all time periods.
If we gave the offense a 12th man, would that make it easier to play quarterback? I don't think it would. It would make it easier to rack up stats that are higher than the stats we're used to seeing, but that's not the same thing.
The number of NFL quarterbacks is fixed. The number of above-average NFL quarterback s is essentially fixed. What's hard about being an NFL quarterback is not throwing passes and reading defenses and whatnot, it's being one of the 32 best people in the world at throwing passes and reading defenses and whatnot.
Even if we accept the premise that, let's say, systems are simpler than they used to be, then they're also simpler for all the dudes who are trying to take your job, and take your spot on the all-pro team, and win the one available ring.
If Chase's Stuart's point in our staff conversation is that it's never been easier for a guy with a big arm but a head full of rocks to play quarterback in the NFL, then we can talk about that (though Gardner Minshew doesn't help make the case). If the point is that it's never been easier for young guys to play quarterback in the NFL, then it's necessarily true that it's never been harder for old guys to play quarterback in the NFL. Is that the point being made here?
Harstad: Doug, If we accept your premise that a quarterback's job is to be better than other quarterbacks, I'd say your conclusion follows logically. My premise is that a quarterback's job is to be better than the defense.
If you invented bricks that were the exact same size and shape with the exact same structural integrity as previous bricks at just a tenth the weight, the ordered list of all bricklayers in the world from best to worst probably wouldn't change very much, but I'd still think it'd be easier to be a bricklayer than ever.
Similarly, the invention of safety nets doesn't increase the difference between the best trapeze artists and the worst but I'd still submit that it makes it easier to be a trapeze artist.
Drinen: Adam I don't want to go too far with the bricklayer example, but under your hypothetical, I don't know that it would be easier than ever to be a bricklayer.
Why not? Because you'd be expected to lay a lot more bricks a lot faster. And if you didn't, you'd presumably be out of a job, because someone else would.
[I don't have an immediate answer on the trapeze example, to be honest.]
The job of a QB is to help his team win games. How can that possibly be easier for all of them?
Harstad: If the league changes such that teams are abler than ever to win with the 30th-best-caliber quarterback play, say?
I get that there’s some offset. Lighter bricks equal higher demands. I just don’t know that I buy that the offset is 100 percent.
I’m also don’t think that hardness is only (or even best) measured by a difficulty to achieve some relative position. Maybe I’d rank in the same relative percentile at ditch-digging, firefighting, and filing, but the ones where I’m sacrificing my body or risking my life still seem harder.
My friend is as good of an Occupational Therapist at her new job with a functional office dynamic as she was at her last job with a dysfunctional dynamic, but she’d be the first to say her old job was harder.
If coaches are meeting quarterbacks partway more, if offenses are coming up with more hacks so that mediocre quarterbacks are able to compete, if quarterbacks are healthier and better protected than at any point in history, I think it makes sense to say that quarterbacking has gotten easier.
Though I also get where you’re coming from and think this is less a substantive disagreement than a semantic quibble over meanings.
Drinen: First off, I think the health and safety stuff is outside the scope of this conversation. I could be wrong, but I don't think that was part of Chase's point, nor how anyone else interpreted it. But sure, I'll give you the health and safety.
And I guess I see where you're coming from on the rest of it. If the forward pass were outlawed and quarterbacks were required to wear 100-pound shoes, then playing quarterback in the NFL would be easier, in the sense that it would be less important. QBs would essentially be interchangeable snap-takers whose only job is to pitch to someone. Sort of like long-snappers, now that I think of it.
Strictly speaking, I think my argument would have to imply that being a QB and being a long-snapper is equally easy. But I don't believe that.
So I'm somewhat convinced. If the difference in value between the best and worst QBs is getting compressed, then I'd be willing to interpret that as signifying that "it's easier than ever to play QB." And that's what you're saying here, right?
If so, then the question is: Does Josh Allen's and Kyle Allen's and Gardner Minshew's adequacy constitutes evidence that the difference in value between the best and worst QBs is shrinking?
Harstad: Yes, that's about the long and short of it, other than I'd say maybe comparing to the best and the worst is the wrong way because it makes you especially prone to outliers. E.G.
But I do think the 40th-best quarterback in the world can probably get you results a lot closer to the 10th-best quarterback in the world today than he could in, say, 2009 or 1999 or 1989 or 1979.
Although I was thinking about it more and I wonder if it's not just a result of teams being willing to do more diverse things on offense than ever before. Like maybe 20 years ago everyone wanted a guy who could stand tall in the pocket and throw into tight windows, and there were only 10 guys who could do that, and everyone else was stuck with guys who couldn't and sucked.
Whereas now maybe teams will be happy with "stand tall in the pocket" guy, but they'll also be happy with "beat teams with his legs" guy and there are five more of those, and they'll be happy with "spread the field and throw to open space" guy and there are eight more of those, and now the pool of viable quarterbacks has more than doubled. And coaches who can't get one of any of those types are more willing to look at what they guy they have *can* do and try to find a way to make him viable, too.
I mean, the whole point of the West Coast Offense was that it was specifically designed to increase the pool of viable NFL quarterbacks by one (Virgil Carter). It just wound up overshooting.
Shocking Fantasy Developments and Future Implications
Waldman: What fantasy development has shocked you this month, and how would you recommend fantasy players to proceed?
Howe: I’ve been stunned by the quality of the backup quarterback play. It’s been the early-season cheat code in Superflex leagues, that’s for sure. Once upon a time, fantasy players immediately discarded guys like Kyle Allen and Gardner Minshew from their weekly lists—and rightfully so. They rarely wound up being sharp plays; there’s only one Billy Volek out there, after all.
Here in 2019, where offenses are less regulated and more explosive, it’s not silly to expect stability in a team’s passing production under the backup. At the very least, you won’t see many of us downgrading guys like Evan Engram or D.J. Moore due to their quarterbacking.
Hindery: The biggest shock for me is how few of the running backs drafted in the first four rounds have lived up to expectations for whatever reason.
- Saquon Barkley is going to miss almost half of the season with an injury.
- James Conner and the entire Pittsburgh offense are struggling.
- Something still seems off with Todd Gurley.
- Injuries and Sam Darnold’s extended absence are hurting Le’Veon Bell.
- Joe Mixon is having a hard time finding room to run behind a bad Bengals line.
- Leonard Fournette is having the same issue in Jacksonville.
- Chris Carson keeps fumbling, which is landing him on the bench.
- Aaron Jones as a true lead back hasn’t happened with Jamaal Williams out-snapping him in Week 3.
Josh Jacobs, Devonta Freeman, Sony Michel, Damien Williams, Tevin Coleman, Duke Jonhson, Miles Sanders… the list just goes on and on.
In terms of how to proceed, the dreary running back landscape means we need to be aggressive whenever an interesting option shows up on the waiver wire. On one hand, it is hard to get excited about somebody like Wayne Gallman.
However, within the context of the running back position right now, he could be a really valuable addition over the next month. We also simply have to be patient and hope that some of these players we invested significant draft capital in figure it out.
Conner, Mixon, Bell, Fournette, Carson, Jacobs, and others listed above are far from lost causes. They may not be carrying our teams early on but there is a reason for optimism on each.
Schofield: Now look, as someone who covers the New England Patriots, I view things through a Patriots-colored set of lenses. So the start we have seen from Sony Michel is cause for concern, and if you look at how this Patriots' offense operated down the stretch last season, it has been truly shocking. At the end of the 2018-2019 season they morphed into a base 21 offensive personnel team, running Michel behind fullback James Develin and then building the play-action passing game off of that.
This season, however, Michel has been used sparingly, his rushing production is low (albeit with two touchdown rushes) and we have seen other players featured more, such as Rex Burkhead. During training camp, the word was that New England was using Michel more in the passing game and that Tom Brady was "perfect" when targeting him in the passing game. Yet he has just one target this season in the passing game (to be fair, in the red zone) and is used more as a decoy on play-action passing plays.
If you are a Michel owner (and in the interests of full disclosure, I am in many leagues) I think you still ride this out a bit. The Patriots' RB room is always tough to predict, and I am rarely correct when trying to do so (so take this with a grain of salt) but the Patriots have the flexibility to morph yet again. Historically they use the first half of the season or so to identify what they do best, and then rely on that down the stretch. There is still time to get back to the ground game and Michel...but the clock is ticking.
Haseley: In years past we have seen 12-15 tight ends who are, or could be, weekly starters. This year, only 8 or maybe 10 are worthwhile weekly starters at the position. The odds suggest new tight ends will emerge but the Top 8 includes those who have already emerged, like Darren Waller, Mark Andrews, Greg Olsen, Will Dissly, etc.
As of now, the position is not deep and fantasy owners will need to adjust by scouring the waiver wire and hoping that prospect emerges. Those who managed to hit pay dirt in the draft are pleased are likely benefiting in the win column as a result.
Grant: The obvious one to anyone is the increasing number of quarterbacks who are injured for an extended period of time, if not the entire season. No one expected Nick Foles to be a 4000-yard passer, but most expected him to make it beyond the first game. Ben Roethlisberger is a guy who many overlook in fantasy drafts and that 'hidden value' is now on the sideline for the rest of the season. Drew Brees is out for several weeks and even Sam Darnold will miss a good chunk of the season. Cam Newton is all but done for this season now too.
Eli Manning has already been replaced and guys like Marcus Mariotta and Case Keenum have very short leashes at this point. We've barely completed the three weeks and 25 percent of the teams have replacement quarterbacks or will in a very short time.
So what to do? The same thing we tell folks every year— play the waiver—hard. Don't be afraid to rotate quarterbacks if you can find a favorable matchup.
Don't carry guys like Newton or Brees unless you have a viable backup or are in a keeper league. Fantasy championships are won or lost with waiver wire pickups and if your quarterback is down, you need to be comfortable going with other options if it helps you win.
Simpkins: I too have been surprised by the fact that so many valuable fantasy offenses have been downgraded by injuries to their quarterbacks. Injuries to Roethlisberger, Brees, and Newton have capped the ceiling of their respective offenses to varying degrees. Unfortunately, there is nothing to do but soldier on with the players you drafted, watch the waiver wire closely for emerging talent, and try to make savvy trades with people who have not caught up to the new reality.
Wood: I think in our business, we take stances but it's hard to be outright shocked since we often debate a range of possible outcomes. For example, I'm disappointed that the Vikings appear to be foregoing the pass—as they did in the final three weeks of 2018 under Kevin Stefanski— but even though that's not how I expected things to play out, it was certainly a well-known risk.
I'm shocked at the collective inability for teams to run the ball. It seems like this year, more than ever, fantasy outcomes hinge on touchdowns. So many teams are struggling to move the ball effectively, and are using committees on top of suboptimal per-carry metrics. It's maddening.
Potential Running Back Handcuffs
Waldman: Pick three handcuffs, not on this list below.
- Tony Pollard
- Kareem Hunt
- Malcolm Brown
- Justin Jackson
- Latavius Murray
- Ronald Jones
- The Broncos backfield
Henry: Alexander Mattison has emerged as perhaps the premium handcuff in the league due to the Viking's ability and commitment to run the ball and a strong defense to support this. Dalvin Cook has league-winning potential this year, but if he misses time for any reason, Mattison appears to be locked and loaded to continue their prowess on the ground while ceding some carries to Mike Boone.
Does it matter who starts in the Chiefs backfield? With Damien Williams already missing time and slowed by injury and LeSean McCoy playing through an ankle sprain, Williams vaulted preseason darling Darwin Thompson to demonstrate his own ability to produce at a high level both on the ground and through the air. Darrel Williams is trusted by the coaches and his teammates and offers more between the tackles production at this stage than Thompson and he should be owned in all formats given the high-powered nature of the Chiefs attack.
Wayne Gallman may not have the pedigree you'd like from a handcuff to maintain an RB1 or RB2 level of fantasy production, but here we are with Saquon Barkley set to miss the next four to eight weeks. Gallman's ceiling may be limited and the Giants offense is not a high-powered one (although Daniel Jones is breathing new life into it). The Giants may still add a back off the street to share touches with Gallman until Barkley returns, but until then Gallman is the answer and he should see enough touches to warrant at least RB2/flex consideration for a span covering half of the regular season for fantasy.
Wood: Damien Harris hasn't been an active part of the Patriots game plan yet, but Sony Michel averaged one yard per carry in two games already, and Bill Belichick won't hesitate to move on from a once-promising player in favor of another. Given how potent the Patriots offense looks (again), why not add Harris as a lottery ticket? Sure, he has to wade through Rex Burkhead and James White, too, but Harris has the ability to flourish if a role opens up for him.
I was down on Leonard Fournette coming into the year, so there's a bit of bias in touting his backup. To his credit, Fournette has been decent through three games. He's had 17 or more touches in each game, has 273 yards from scrimmage, and has 14 catches already setting him up to smash his career-high (36). And that's why Ryquell Armstead intrigues. If Fournette gets hurt—as he has in prior seasons—Armstead jumps into a lineup committed to the run. Jacksonville's offense isn't prolific enough for Armstead to have flex value while Fournette is healthy, but he's an ideal handcuff who could pay dividends later in the season.
Mattison was a favorite of mine coming into the season because the Vikings are committed to a run-heavy system and Dalvin Cook has a problematic injury history. Cook has arguably been the league's best running back through three weeks, but even with his dominance, the Vikings have found a way to get Mattison 25 carries for 132 yards and a touchdown in three games. That's a 133-carry, 704-yard, 5-touchdown pace. Mattison has already proven he can flourish in limited snaps, imagine what he can do as the starter? Mattison gets just enough work to be an emergency bye-week flex play for now but would be projected as a top-10 back in standard leagues if Cook misses times.
Simpkins: I agree with Bob. Mattison is the best reserve available in most leagues and sits behind a back who has had some problems staying healthy early in his career. If Cook were to get dinged, Mattison could very well be a contributor to a championship team.
I have this nagging feeling that won’t go away that we’ll be talking about Darwin Thompson as a starter before the end of the year. Behind LeSean McCoy, I think he’s the most talented runner on the roster. Yet McCoy’s ankles continue to have problems and it seems like a matter of time before his body fails him. I know Darrel Williams is the short-term option for this week, but I would keep Thompson on the back of my bench, just in case this scenario plays out.
I’ll go with Chase Edmonds as my third choice. I’ve been advising folks who read my dynasty waiver wire column to not forget about Edmonds. If David Johnson were to go down, Edmonds would become the primary pass-catching back in an offense that has been utilizing Johnson a great deal in that capacity. He’s no David Johnson, but he can catch well, and that’s all you need out of him to be viable in a PPR league.
Grant: Wayne Gallman is the easy choice since Barkley will be out for several weeks. Opportunity alone makes him a guy you need to target this week on the waiver wire.
Chris Thompson is going to see more and more action this season - especially if Washington shifts to Dwayne Haskins at some point. With the offense struggling to move the ball and find the end zone, Thompson becomes a valuable check-down option and he'll also see a few carries per game as well. If Adrian Peterson goes down to Injury, Thompson becomes a starting running back in most PPR leagues.
Jordan Scarlett isn't going see a ton of action unless Christian McCaffery gets hurt, but CMC already has almost 75 touches over the first three games. If you're looking for a true handcuff play at running back, Scarlett is your guy. He's dead weight on your roster until he's not, but his ceiling if McCaffery goes down is huge.
Frank Gore continues to produce when his number is called. This week he played almost 50 snaps, turned in almost 90 yards from scrimmage and added his second touchdown of the season. Stater Devin Singletary is out with a hamstring injury which can sometimes linger for several weeks. Gore is nice option who will see decent action and have an opportunity to reach the end zone as well. I like his near term upside and season-long potential of Singletary's hamstring injury drags on.
Howe: Mark Ingram has looked great thus far as a Raven, taking advantage of one of the league’s best lines and some great matchups. But the 29-year-old has never been a ball-dominant back, and the team is steadfastly devoted to rotating its bodies.
Gus Edwards is taking on 22 snaps and 10 touches a game in the No. 2 role, including 3 short-yardage attempts in Week 1. (He was actually the NFL’s leader in short-yardage success last season.) And if Ingram misses any time, Edwards’ ceiling is strong. Last year, over Lamar Jackson’s 7 starts, Edwards averaged 93 ground yards a game as the lead dog.
Waldman: I was hoping someone would mention Edwards. Good call, Justin!
Howe: Thanks. Jaylen Samuels is also on my list. He hasn’t seen much usage yet, but I have to believe it’s coming. James Conner has wheezed to just 2.9 yards per rush thus far; he’s a one-speed runner who will no longer benefit from a prolific offense. Samuels was worked all over the formation in camp and the preseason, and the team does value his versatility. Conner is no slouch catching out of the backfield, but Samuels is more dynamic and can be split out wide as well. Remember, most of his background is in the tight end/h-back milieu.
Mattison is a popular mention in this discussion. The Vikings are fiercely devoted to pounding the ball whenever possible, and they should keep finding themselves in a lot of positive scripts. The team isn’t shy about keeping Cook fresh and healthy, so any small ding could send him to the bench for a week or more. If that happens, and Mattison draws starts, he’ll likely dominate the offensive volume.
Hindery: Mattison seems like the clear top answer. First, the Minnesota running game is looking like a well-oiled machine for three weeks. The Vikings rank second in the NFL (behind the 49ers) in terms of most points scored by the running back position. This is a big pie. Second, Mattison is the type of workhorse style back that would likely step right into 20 touches per game should Cook get hurt. I don’t think this would be much of a committee. Third, Cook has had a hard time staying healthy back to his college days. Not that he can be labeled injury-prone, but he might have a slightly higher injury risk than the average back.
After a pretty even split Week 1, David Montgomery has dominated the Bears backfield touches. Mike Davis looks like the backup while Tarik Cohen is basically playing slot receiver. Should anything happen to Montgomery, I expect Davis would step into almost a 20-touch per game role. He is talented to put up big fantasy numbers with that type of workload.
David Johnson has been nearly an every-down back in Arizona’s high-paced offense. Edmonds would likely step into a similar role should Johnson get hurt. The two things I’m looking for in an RB handcuff are a good fantasy situation and the likelihood that the backup would take on a lead role and not be part of a big committee. Edmonds checks both of those boxes.
Schofield: We can start with Gallman. The Saquon Barkley injury provides an opportunity for the Giants to roll with Gallman in the short term, and with games against Washington and Minnesota coming up, as well as the Patriots lurking, there are chances to see Gallman carry a heavy workload. Jones looked great against Tampa Bay and might put up numbers against Washington, but the Vikings and Patriots might be weeks when New York relies on the run game a bit more.
Mattison is another player to watch. The Vikings want to run the football. No QB with three starts this season has attempted fewer passes than Kirk Cousins, and while Cook is playing well, Mattison has some talent to his game. I would not be surprised if Minnesota gets him more opportunities, and in addition, Cook's injury history is something to keep in mind.
Rashaad Penny. Three fumbles through three weeks for Chris Carson is not a good start to the season. Carson owners would be wise to hedge if they still can. Seattle still wants to run the football—much to the dismay of Russell Wilson owners—so Penny could be in line for some opportunities in the next few weeks.
Haseley: Alexander Mattison has been named several times and I agree with him being one to target. I’ll go in a different direction and say, Edwards, Devin Singletary, and Rex Burkhead.
For Real, Fool's Gold: The Tight End edition
Matt Waldman: Explain which player has the fantasy goods for 2019 and which are short-term thrills who won't pan out.
Who makes the cut?
Haseley: I’m not so sure any of these four players will pan out in the short-term. T.J. Hockenson benefited from a porous Cardinals defense in his lone big game – it just happened to be Week 1. He has had opportunities to make plays but has yet to come through. Last week alone, he was targeted three times in the end zone and came away with nothing—one of which was a penalty for him going out of bounds before catching a touchdown.
Like many tight ends, the opportunities tend to come on the opponent's side of the 50, especially the red zone area. In order for him to become a fantasy-relevant player he will need to see more action between the ’20s and become a reliable target for Matthew Stafford. He has caught only 50 percent of his targets. That area of his game must improve.
Waldman: I'll supply the optimistic side of the argument for Hockenson's difficult box-score outing against the Eagles last week for those interested.
Schofield: I have such a soft spot for young tight ends, that I want to list all as "for real," but I shall refrain.
However, I think Hockenson, Dissly, and Knox belong in that category. Hockenson is a complete tight end already, seems to be on the same page with Matthew Stafford, and is only going to get better from here.
Dissly seems to be the guy now in Seattle, with the recent trade of Nick Vannett to Pittsburgh. Having just studied Knox's debut against the Cincinnati Bengals, he seems to be the real deal, and also seems to be on the page with his quarterback. Josh Allen was looking for him in a number of different scramble drill situations. Those three guys seem legit.
Hindery: Will Dissly is the guy on this list I believe in most over the short term. Unlike others on this list, we have a few more positive data points other than just the first few games of this season. Dissly was also off to a hot start last season before suffering a season-ending injury in Week 4.
He was actually the overall TE3 (standard scoring) after three weeks last season, which makes his current TE5 status this season feel slightly less fluky. The Seahawks seem convinced of Dissly’s ascendance as well. They traded away Nick Vannett, who had been the 1B to Dissly’s 1A. This will open even more snaps for Dissly. He looks like a top-12 fantasy option the rest of the season.
Howe: Hockenson is for real...kinda. The numbers are sobering: 124 yards over the season’s first 4 quarters, 15 over the last nine. Yikes. Hockenson and Danny Amendola were used as glaring mismatches in Week 1, but aren’t fundamental pieces of this attack. Kenny Golladay and Marvin Jones won’t be conceding too much of their respective shares. Still, he’s a playmaker, which makes for strong streaming appeal at such a weak position. As Bob points out, he came quite close to a pair of short-yardage touchdowns last week.
Akins is fool’s gold. We’ve seen this song and dance many times: a Houston tight end popping up with a multi-touchdown game out