I write one post a day, every day, from the close of the NBA Finals to 2-3 days after the end of the NFL regular season. Today is column #203.
The uniqueness of this site is driven a lot by all of you. I sit down the night before or early that morning and pull something together that's hopefully coherent and thought-provoking enough to keep people coming back (rather than keep people *from* coming back). And much of the time the column stems from something a reader said or asked me about the day before:
"Who are some DSTs to target for the fantasy playoffs?"
"What do you think about zero-RB drafting?"
"How will yesterday's Jay Ajayi trade impact the Miami and Philadelphia backfields?"
If I think a question might have more universal appeal, it could form the basis of a column. Maybe there's no obvious answer. But at the very least, I can initiate a broader conversation with the FF4W community that might yield some greater understanding on the subject.
A couple days ago, FF4W reader Mark Pretz recommended the movie "Requiem for a Dream," among many others. The context was that I wanted to know what he thought were good movies so I could size up his recommendation of "The Men Who Stare at Goats."
And that got me wondering why I've watched Requiem--one of the most compelling films I've ever seen--only once. And why I don't even like to think about the movie, because it's so damn disturbing. And invariably, that got me thinking about fantasy football.
Falling short of a fantasy title is like watching Requiem for the first time (from my perspective, at least, since art's subjective). During the season, I'm stoked at the prospect of winning it all. And then it all goes to hell at the end, and I don't want to think about it anymore. It generally stays with me, but I try hard not to re-live it.
Winning a title is like watching "The Shawshank Redemption" (again, subjective). I could see that film over and over again. I have, in fact. Andy Dufresne didn't always make the right decisions. But when it counted, he did. And he took a lot of risks (unnecessary spoiler alert, since probably 98% of you have seen it) to recover his freedom.
When I win it all, I can revel in it all offseason and right up until the next draft. Like Shawshank, a fantasy championship is that friend you turn to to remind yourself that things turn out all right in the end.
So my question today is (and I don't know how to answer it, so hopefully some of you can), is a fantasy loss more painful than a fantasy win is euphoric? Basically, which outcome produces the strongest emotion? Maybe another way to ask this is, if you win one finals and have a crushing defeat in a different league finals, which one stays with you longer?
---
In real fantasy news, I'm increasingly bullish on Philip Rivers and Keenan Allen, particularly if Melvin Gordon and Raider CB David Amerson (both questionable) sit. If that happens, Rivers and Allen would be near-elite positional options.
If you need a high-volume RB and Derrick Henry's taken (presumably that'll be the case in nearly every league), consider the Rams' Malcolm Brown, who chould get a lot of run with Todd Gurley sitting.
DeAndre Hopkins won't play against the Colts, elevating Will Fuller. It's not that I trust T.J. Yates. It's that Indy has a bottom-3 pass defense, while Fuller is a very talented receiver. I'd start the young wideout with confidence as a top 30 WR with a decent shot at top 20 production.
Mike Wallace's Week 16 production didn't match my high expectations. That said, he'll once again be the featured receiver with Jeremy Maclin expected to sit. I'm doubling down on Wallace, who's led Baltimore in receiving yards for six straight games.
The uniqueness of this site is driven a lot by all of you. I sit down the night before or early that morning and pull something together that's hopefully coherent and thought-provoking enough to keep people coming back (rather than keep people *from* coming back). And much of the time the column stems from something a reader said or asked me about the day before:
"Who are some DSTs to target for the fantasy playoffs?"
"What do you think about zero-RB drafting?"
"How will yesterday's Jay Ajayi trade impact the Miami and Philadelphia backfields?"
If I think a question might have more universal appeal, it could form the basis of a column. Maybe there's no obvious answer. But at the very least, I can initiate a broader conversation with the FF4W community that might yield some greater understanding on the subject.
A couple days ago, FF4W reader Mark Pretz recommended the movie "Requiem for a Dream," among many others. The context was that I wanted to know what he thought were good movies so I could size up his recommendation of "The Men Who Stare at Goats."
And that got me wondering why I've watched Requiem--one of the most compelling films I've ever seen--only once. And why I don't even like to think about the movie, because it's so damn disturbing. And invariably, that got me thinking about fantasy football.
Falling short of a fantasy title is like watching Requiem for the first time (from my perspective, at least, since art's subjective). During the season, I'm stoked at the prospect of winning it all. And then it all goes to hell at the end, and I don't want to think about it anymore. It generally stays with me, but I try hard not to re-live it.
Winning a title is like watching "The Shawshank Redemption" (again, subjective). I could see that film over and over again. I have, in fact. Andy Dufresne didn't always make the right decisions. But when it counted, he did. And he took a lot of risks (unnecessary spoiler alert, since probably 98% of you have seen it) to recover his freedom.
When I win it all, I can revel in it all offseason and right up until the next draft. Like Shawshank, a fantasy championship is that friend you turn to to remind yourself that things turn out all right in the end.
So my question today is (and I don't know how to answer it, so hopefully some of you can), is a fantasy loss more painful than a fantasy win is euphoric? Basically, which outcome produces the strongest emotion? Maybe another way to ask this is, if you win one finals and have a crushing defeat in a different league finals, which one stays with you longer?
---
In real fantasy news, I'm increasingly bullish on Philip Rivers and Keenan Allen, particularly if Melvin Gordon and Raider CB David Amerson (both questionable) sit. If that happens, Rivers and Allen would be near-elite positional options.
If you need a high-volume RB and Derrick Henry's taken (presumably that'll be the case in nearly every league), consider the Rams' Malcolm Brown, who chould get a lot of run with Todd Gurley sitting.
DeAndre Hopkins won't play against the Colts, elevating Will Fuller. It's not that I trust T.J. Yates. It's that Indy has a bottom-3 pass defense, while Fuller is a very talented receiver. I'd start the young wideout with confidence as a top 30 WR with a decent shot at top 20 production.
Mike Wallace's Week 16 production didn't match my high expectations. That said, he'll once again be the featured receiver with Jeremy Maclin expected to sit. I'm doubling down on Wallace, who's led Baltimore in receiving yards for six straight games.