A few words on RB handcuffs, and I want to hear your thoughts: Which handcuffs are must-rostered guys? There are some obvious ones, like Tony Pollard and Alexander Mattison. And of course, I'm not counting faux-handcuffs like J.K. Dobbins are Zack Moss--guys who could easily take over in September if things break right. Who are you keeping all season if possible?
In my world, season after season, RB handcuffs are the life-blood of any fantasy roster. I realize some of you play with small benches, and by the time bye weeks hit, keeping all but the elite handcuffs might seem like a luxury.
But like any strategy game, there are pros and cons for each position. RBs are widely viewed as fantasy gold. They can help you win a title, and not having two good RBs in your starting lineup can put you at a disadvantage most weeks. Meanwhile, not having two great ones might keep you out of the title game. I'm comfortable drafting two great RBs in the first two rounds, and I'm also comfortable going WR-WR (as I did Wednesday night). It always depends on what's coming to me, and am I getting the highest and near-safest upside in those early rounds.
"Near-safest" is the key, and it's the con to the RB-RB strategy. Running backs are more prone to injury, and some are more prone to demotion. You'll almost never see a starting WR get demoted. But if your RB2 fumbles twice in a game, that might be it.
Again, there are no right answers to this equation. Managers can win championships any number of ways, and luck always plays some role. But I also believe in manufacturing luck by playing the percentages. And that's why loading up on RB handcuffs makes sense. If you have Lamar Jackson, why are you stashing Carson Wentz? For that one bye week? And what's up with carrying six wideouts? If you have two reliable starters, you don't need more than four on your roster. It's not as if your fifth and sixth best WRs are likely to become top-20 options.
But we all know RBs are in a different class. Handcuffs are worthless. Until they're not. I could try trading Tony Pollard to the guy who has Zeke Elliott (actually, I've already tried). But he's worth no more than an eighth or ninth rounder. If Zeke gets hurt in Week 4 and is out 2-3 games, I could probably trade Pollard for the equivalent of a fourth rounder. If Zeke were knocked out for the season, I could get almost anyone I wanted for Pollard.
Of course, we know this. It doesn't need to be stated. Except it does. It really, really does. Because I see your rosters all the time. Many of you send them to me to evaluate (and I always enjoy it, though this season my life has become crazier than usual). And I often say the same thing: "What are you doing with Travis Kelce and a back-end TE1" or "Why keep Duke Johnson?" If you're not carrying potentially elite talent, find a trading partner, or toss them on the wire and find a higher-upside option. The back-end TE1 and a non-bellcow, change-of-pace back can't help you win a title. But Tony Pollard might.
In my world, season after season, RB handcuffs are the life-blood of any fantasy roster. I realize some of you play with small benches, and by the time bye weeks hit, keeping all but the elite handcuffs might seem like a luxury.
But like any strategy game, there are pros and cons for each position. RBs are widely viewed as fantasy gold. They can help you win a title, and not having two good RBs in your starting lineup can put you at a disadvantage most weeks. Meanwhile, not having two great ones might keep you out of the title game. I'm comfortable drafting two great RBs in the first two rounds, and I'm also comfortable going WR-WR (as I did Wednesday night). It always depends on what's coming to me, and am I getting the highest and near-safest upside in those early rounds.
"Near-safest" is the key, and it's the con to the RB-RB strategy. Running backs are more prone to injury, and some are more prone to demotion. You'll almost never see a starting WR get demoted. But if your RB2 fumbles twice in a game, that might be it.
Again, there are no right answers to this equation. Managers can win championships any number of ways, and luck always plays some role. But I also believe in manufacturing luck by playing the percentages. And that's why loading up on RB handcuffs makes sense. If you have Lamar Jackson, why are you stashing Carson Wentz? For that one bye week? And what's up with carrying six wideouts? If you have two reliable starters, you don't need more than four on your roster. It's not as if your fifth and sixth best WRs are likely to become top-20 options.
But we all know RBs are in a different class. Handcuffs are worthless. Until they're not. I could try trading Tony Pollard to the guy who has Zeke Elliott (actually, I've already tried). But he's worth no more than an eighth or ninth rounder. If Zeke gets hurt in Week 4 and is out 2-3 games, I could probably trade Pollard for the equivalent of a fourth rounder. If Zeke were knocked out for the season, I could get almost anyone I wanted for Pollard.
Of course, we know this. It doesn't need to be stated. Except it does. It really, really does. Because I see your rosters all the time. Many of you send them to me to evaluate (and I always enjoy it, though this season my life has become crazier than usual). And I often say the same thing: "What are you doing with Travis Kelce and a back-end TE1" or "Why keep Duke Johnson?" If you're not carrying potentially elite talent, find a trading partner, or toss them on the wire and find a higher-upside option. The back-end TE1 and a non-bellcow, change-of-pace back can't help you win a title. But Tony Pollard might.