Do you have a question? Send your thoughts to DMFantasyFootball@cbs.com and we'll address as many as we can. Put Attn: Dear Mr. Fantasy in the subject field. Include your name, hometown and state.
Do you have a quarterback?
Then consider yourself lucky. Because with all the injuries to some of the bigger names at the position and all the struggles by some of the others, chances are someone in your league doesn't have a quarterback.
And chances are that someone also doesn't have a win.
Because you can't win with a nothing quarterback in Fantasy. You don't need a stud necessarily, but if you get nothing more than drops in the bucket from the position that typically scores the most on a week-to-week basis, you probably won't have much success.
Take this week's Dear Mr. Fantasy as evidence. More than ever, readers have questions about quarterbacks because everybody either needs one or knows somebody who needs one.
Mr. Fantasy just needs a way to sort through them all.
|
|
|
Owners are either looking to deal Matt Schaub or acquire him it seems.
(US Presswire)
|
|
I am in a dynasty league and have the luxury of owning both Drew Brees and Matt Schaub with the thought that if Brees suffered an injury, I would not lose any sleep starting Schaub. I am now wondering if I should trade Brees for an elite wide receiver or running back and roll with Shaub. Should I make the move? If so, what caliber player should I be targeting? -- Fred Brown, Atlanta SW: It depends. Are you falling behind in your league because you can't fill out your starting lineup with enough adequate running backs or wide receivers? If so, you have to trade your depth just to stay afloat. If not, though, I'd rather keep myself insured at a position where having an adequate Fantasy option isn't just nice, but vital. Take it from a former Tom Brady owner who's had to resort to Jason Campbell and Matt Cassel and whatever other garbage he could find on the waiver wire. You might not want to draft a quarterback in the early rounds because you could get someone almost as good in the middle rounds, but if you get no one at all, your Fantasy season will fall apart fast. Try holding on to Schaub just in case the unthinkable happens to Brees.
I have Steve Slaton, Earnest Graham, Brian Westbrook and Thomas Jones. My receivers are Terrell Owens, Braylon Edwards, Greg Jennings and Bobby Engram. With Engram a nonissue and Owens and Edwards struggling, Jennings is my only legit wide receiver. Which RB-WR tandem do you suggest I trade to get some consistency back in my lineup? -- Chris K. Gainesville, Fla.
SW: Though I realize you usually have to give up something good to get something good, I think you can get away with trading your worst running back here -- Jones -- and still get what you want, especially since he just had two monster performances -- a three-touchdown game in Week 6 and a 159-yard game in Week 7. His trade value will never get any higher than right now, and you want to capitalize on it since you know he has to come back down to earth soon, considering his track record. He averaged 54.5 yards per game in the four games leading up to his season-best performance in Week 7. And his longest run of the season before then? Try 16 yards. Of course, he does have the Chiefs and Rams coming up on his schedule, but you can actually use that information to your advantage when negotiating a trade. Trust me: With the running backs you have, you won't miss Jones.
I don't know that you want to deal a wide receiver with the running back because you'll end up selling low on Edwards and Owens right now. Edwards can only improve, and I have no doubt Owens will in a pass-heavy offense. I'd think Jones alone could land you someone like Roddy White or Santana Moss, especially if you find a team desperate for a running back. If you need to look deeper, try getting someone like DeSean Jackson, who has consistent yardage and receptions even if he hasn't gotten the touchdowns yet. If you have to settle for him, though, I might not even bother.
I have a dilemma. I've been offered T.J. Houshmandzadeh and Terrell Owens for Matt Forte and Kevin Jones. We play in a 16-team points-per-reception keeper league and my other running backs are Ronnie Brown and Maurice Jones-Drew. I have one stud wide receiver and a bunch of scrubs. Is it a good idea to trade Forte, or should I stay put? -- Jerome, Jacksonville, Ark.
SW: I hesitated for a moment because I don't feel particularly good about Housmandzadeh's prospects with Carson Palmer's ongoing elbow trauma, but in a points-per-reception league, you shouldn't even think twice about making this deal. You probably shouldn't anyway -- not when someone offers you Owens and you have enough running backs to compensate for the loss of Forte. I understand your insecurity over Owens after what's happened to Randy Moss and Torry Holt this year, but Owens has a completely different situation. He didn't lose his star quarterback for the season, and his team didn't suddenly forget how to play offense. He'll rebound and produce the numbers he always has, and with the reports on Tony Romo growing more and more optimistic, you should only feel more confident about pulling the trigger. And then you throw in Houshmandzadeh, whose average of 7.3 catches per game over the last three weeks is golden in this format. Easy call.
I am being offered Peyton Manning for Kurt Warner and Santonio Holmes. I still have plenty of firepower among my receivers, so that's not an issue. Should I take the trade? -- Mike O'Neill Fayetteville, N.C.
SW: Well, I certainly wouldn't blame you if you decided to stand pat, but even with Manning's struggles this season, I can't help but point to his track record when assessing his Fantasy value. He's just been too good for too long. He also had reason to start slowly with the knee surgery, the missed preseason, the injured offensive linemen and everything else. Granted, you could make excuses for any player's struggles, but we're talking about Peyton Manning here. Personally, I think he already turned the corner with his five touchdown passes in Weeks 5 and 6 and then just happened to have a bad game against the Packers in Week 7. Even though Manning might not end up outproducing Warner statistically, the peace of mind he offers in contrast to Warner's injury history gives you reason enough to make this trade, assuming you don't take a hit a receiver.
I have three solid quarterbacks in Jay Cutler, Ben Roethlisberger and Kurt Warner, and I have been trying to move one of them for a running back. Currently, I have Brian Westbrook, Brandon Jacobs, Cedric Benson and Maurice Morris. We start two running backs, and there is no flex spot. I am trying to trade Warner or Roethlisberger for Matt Forte, but the other guy will only accept Cutler. He has no solid quarterback option and has a greater need at that position than I have at running back, but I am worried about Westbrook's health. What should I do? -- James Sullivan, Syracuse, N.Y.
SW: I'd give in and make the move, James, particularly after Cutler's latest performance against the Patriots on Monday night. He now has five touchdown passes and five interceptions over his last four games, averaging 194.3 over his last three, and no longer looks like the clear choice to start among your three options. In fact, you might drive yourself crazy trying to choose between Warner and Cutler all season. I fully endorse having a capable backup quarterback, particularly for Warner, who remains brittle as ever at age 37, but Roethlisberger can fill that role on his own. Two quarterbacks is nice; three is just overkill. Make the deal for the sake of improving your team at a position that could use some improvement.
I have good problems at running back and defense. I have Steve Slaton, Earnest Graham and LenDale White all at running back, and I can only play two. At defense, I have Tennessee and Tampa Bay, and I can only play one. Which two running backs and one defense should I play? Thanks! -- Adam Aldridge, Eldorado, Ill.
SW: Slaton has all but emerged as a must-start in Fantasy, so you probably wouldn't consider benching him even if he didn't have a great matchup against the Bengals this week. Your choice really comes down to Graham or White, and while White seemingly has the better matchup against the Colts, Graham faces the Cowboys, and you can't overlook what Steven Jackson just did to them, rushing for 160 yards and three touchdowns. Besides, Graham simply has more talent than White -- an observation you might dispute if you saw White pile up 149 yards and three touchdowns against the Chiefs in Week 7. But the Chiefs haven't stopped anybody this year, and White entered the game averaging 2.6 yards per carry. You really want to give him the credit? Go with Slaton and Graham.
Hey Mr. Fantasy, here's a quick one for you: Roddy White for Steve Slaton. Good deal or not so much? -- Chris Bruce, Danville, CA
SW: Whether it's good or not depends so much on need, but it's certainly a fair trade. If we redrafted today, I predict Slaton would go in the second round and White would go in the third, so in a vacuum, I guess I'd rather have Slaton than White. I'd love to have either, though, and kind of think White has reached the point where we should call him a low-end No. 1 Fantasy wide receiver. Granted, he has a rookie throwing him a ball, but if you've watched the Falcons play this season, you know the entire passing game goes through him. He likely won't have many "down" games, and that measure of consistency gives him plenty of value in Fantasy.
I'm in a 12-team league with three divisions of four teams each. There is a significant prize awarded to each division winner. For this past week, I made an uneven trade, giving up Sammy Morris for Chris Perry to a team that was playing against the team that looks like it will be my only competition for a division prize. The owner needed Morris to fill a bye-week hole, and I wanted to see him win. He knows I did him a favor and said I could have Morris back after this week. If we make the same trade back in reverse, should this action be stopped by the commissioner? Take into account that trades and waiver transactions do cost money in this league. I then, in a sense, "invested" a few bucks to try and protect my division prize. Is this practice considered unethical? -- Chip Garrett
SW: Let's see ... two teams combining their resources in pursuit of a common goal. Yup, sounds like collusion to me -- the cardinal sin of the Fantasy sporting world and, in my opinion, the reason trade review processes came to exist in the first place. I don't mean to pick on you, Chip, but your little tactic is no different from you and that other owner combining the best players from each of your two teams, forming one super team, and then splitting the prize money at the end of the season. You just did it on a smaller scale. In a legitimate trade, two owners have equal incentive to improve their teams and come to an agreement for that purpose. You in no way thought giving up Morris for Perry would improve your team. You just had a spare part and tried to "share" your bench with another owner for one week in a way that, ironically enough, happened to benefit you. No, I believe in a free market, but I wouldn't stand for you and your buddy turning around and undoing that trade one week later. And if a commissioner in my league didn't step in and overturn the trade, I'd feel the need to interject my feelings.
Quarterback dilemma ... Kurt Warner (at Panthers), Matt Schaub (vs. Bengals) or Matt Cassel (vs. Rams). Warner is the best of the group, but he has the worst matchup. It seems this year, the story is all about matchups. You want to play anyone you can against the Lions, Chiefs, Broncos, Bengals and, until recently, the Rams. Right now, I'm liking Schaub. What say you? -- Peanut Brown, Raleigh, N.C.
SW: I say I like your selection, but I don't entirely know if I'd make it myself. Maybe I can talk myself into it. Let's see ... Schaub has averaged 317.7 yards over his last three starts, throwing six touchdown passes during that span, but Warner has multiple touchdown passes in five straight games. Warner seems like the kind of Fantasy stud you'd start regardless of matchup, but Schaub is no slouch himself and just so happens to have the better matchup. Still, I can't talk myself out of my decision to start Warner instead, even knowing what the Panthers just did to Drew Brees (who might not have struggled so much, mind you, if not for the injury to Reggie Bush). I just keep coming back to Warner having emerged as a stud this season, and I don't make a habit of benching studs. If he struggles and Schaub blows up on my bench, I'd have an easier time forgiving myself than if Schaub struggled and Warner blew up on my bench. Notice, by the way, I didn't even mention Cassel. I did so intentionally. One three-touchdown performance like he had against the Broncos in Week 7 doesn't make him part of this discussion -- especially when he threw for only 185 yards.
Do you have a question? Send your thoughts to DMFantasyFootball@cbs.com and we'll address as many as we can. Put Attn: Dear Mr. Fantasy in the subject field. Include your name, hometown and state.
