No separate intro topic this week since I spent the morning writing a long post expanding on rookie RBs, roster management, and how and when we wait on this stuff.
With how long my posts sometimes get, and how rereading them before I publish can make them even longer, I often don’t necessarily know how things are going to read. After Part 2 this week, I was a bit surprised by some of the specific reactions I saw, most of which were very positive, and then today most of the feedback has been really supportive but in a way where maybe I seemed a little upset. That’s probably better than the alternative; the reason I spent time on that post over three days was the tone the first two days was probably pretty condescending. Throwing in a term like “crashing out” in the final piece and talking about the overall struggles with content creation may have gone too far the other way. I’m good, though. Definitely appreciate the kind words — I say this a lot, but you guys really are awesome — and that was all cathartic to send out and we move on.
One thing about the content of that post to keep in mind is it was mostly in response to specific claims, but it’s not a guarantee that the rookies in 2025 will hit in the same ways as rookies from 2024. I just went through 2024 because I want us to keep the facts straight around here. So much of the discussion in the fantasy football space is only loosely tethered to reality.
Something I should have worked into the post is the framework I’m always talking about that I use for key add/drop decisions. It’s fairly straightforward — basically just a rest-of-season rankings concept — but it’s if I was drafting today and had these two players side by side, who would I select?
A mistake I often see is people decide it’s time to cut someone so then they put in a whole list of claims to cut that player, when maybe the case is just that the top one or two are players you’d actually draft over the player you’re cutting if you were drafting today, knowing what you know. If you don’t wind up getting one of the top players, your long list means adding someone who is more of a longshot than your cut, and who you wouldn’t draft first if looking at things that way.
I don’t know if this helpful for other people, but it definitely is for me in terms of when and where to draw the line. And one of the things to keep in mind with it is the later rounds are kind of one big blob. When I did the four quarters piece, after about Round 12 was all the fourth and final quarter. And the point there is that if someone in the very last rounds of even deep leagues, think Round 18+, suddenly shows meaningful upside, they can pretty quickly jump right to Round 12 or so.
I note this because you might check a favorite analyst’s rest-of-season rankings and see a pretty big gap in rank between some options you’re considering, and the one you kind of like is way down the list. That’s not necessarily a reason to avoid; I’d argue even the analyst whose list you’re using would probably agree that contingent on believing a particular upside thesis, the guy they have ranked way down the list might jump 50 spots.
Last year, I remember some comanager discussions where I was high on Jalen Coker and then after his injury on Adam Thielen, and I couldn’t get buy-in mostly because my teammate rejected the thesis that Bryce Young had started to look alright, and the rest-of-season rankings he was looking at had those guys buried because the thesis of those rankings was there was no upside in Carolina. But contingent on believing Young could support some fantasy production from his pass-catchers, those guys were going to be obvious adds, because it was basically the only passing game in football where you could add two options with clear paths to being the de facto No. 1 in the fantasy playoffs for free off of waivers, even in a deep league like an FFPC Main Event.
That example just gets at the point I’m driving home where the analysts whose rest-of-season rankings were being cited probably just didn’t buy the Young hype early enough, which was understandable. But if you asked them where they’d rank those guys if the Young hype was real, they’d probably move them way up. And so my point is, when you’re trying to make specific add/drop decisions, if you have a way you want to play things — or that I have written about that I want to play things — don’t get bogged down with where a specific analyst has it ranked. Think about what round you think is a fair price for that type of asset, and then whether you’d be happy to draft them there, ahead of or behind the player you’re looking to drop. That’s the key way to think through it.
Alright, let’s get to the games. As always, I offer these considerations solely because you guys have asked, and because I might have a thought about a different part of a range of outcomes in some cases than what it being caught in projections, or you’re seeing elsewhere. I don’t offer these thoughts because I think they will be explicitly great predictions, and it’s basically just me going game-by-game and throwing out what hits me.
Here are the things I’m thinking about as I’m setting lineups for Week 3.
Falcons at Panthers
I don’t have much on the Falcons. I’m intrigued by Kyle Pitts’ usage, as I wrote this week.
You could sell me on Tyler Allgeier as a stopgap against a struggling Panthers’ run defense. You’d be thinking about second-half rush volume in a milk-the-clock situation, but it’s no lock to come like it did last week, and there’s not really a huge ceiling. The range is basically bad to fine.
It’ll be interesting with the Panthers, after all that late pass volume last week. Tetairoa McMillan is fine regardless, but as far as a second pass-catcher, it feels like Ja’Tavion Sanders or Hunter Renfrow, but it might be a week where Xavier Legette gets force-fed a little bit after a really slow start. He’s been so bad, though.
Packers at Browns
Probably pretty huge volatility on both sides here. Dontayvion Wicks is a guy I’d probably have right there with Romeo Doubs at the top for the Packers, and he arguably has more upside. Matthew Golden’s usage could expand quickly.
Tucker Kraft sounds like a game-time decision. I probably wouldn’t use Luke Musgrave, but the injury to Kraft in addition to Jayden Reed being out brings some attention back to the WRs and then also Josh Jacobs.
How many snaps will Quinshon Judkins play? After he easily surpassed my expectations last week, I’m guessing quite a bit of usage here. Kevin Stefanski did mention conditioning when talking about him this week, but the touches per snap rate should be high. I’d also probably expect Dylan Sampson to get a little more work, but he’s a guy I’m trying to bench in this tough matchup where I have good alternatives.
The tough thing for any Browns’ option is the Packers’ defense is so good. I don’t expect them to give much up, though this is their first road game. Jerry Jeudy and Harold Fannin are probably the only pass-game guys I have much interest in.
Texans at Jaguars
I’m probably looking to keep Nick Chubb on the bench where possible. He just didn’t look great to me in Week 2. But if I don’t have alternatives, there’s obviously work there.
Christian Kirk seems like he’s going to step into a significant role after the team has been very hesitant to use the rookies even as Kirk has been out. Jayden Higgins is probably more of a later-year play at this point.
Liam Coen referenced Bucky Irving while talking about Bhayshul Tuten this week, just talking about the path for a rookie RB. For what it’s worth, Bucky first got 15 touches in Week 6, and was below 10 touches just once prior to that (Week 2). I don’t know how quickly Tuten is going to scale up, and Coen likes Travis Etienne, but it’s interesting.
The Brian Thomas thing feels like it can only go two ways: Either he continues to really struggle or he has a massive “squeaky wheel” game. I’m betting the latter.
Travis Hunter feels fine, but I’d probably want to see a little more to feel good about his upside. On teams where I’m deep, I may opt to sit him this week. On teams where I’m not deep, he’s obviously gotta be in there. There appears to be a solid floor and then it’s uncertainty working from there.