Transcription
Today, Danny and I are channeling our inner Skip and Shannon, and we are going to rage bait each other's rankings. Um, basically what we're going to do is we're going to say, "Hey, dude, you have this guy too low or too high. Explain yourself." Essentially. Um, so that's what we're going to go through today. And it's probably going to get a little heated at times because you and I know we probably will get passionate here, but we'll do our best, Danny, to not interrupt each other because I know that's definitely a risk in a video like this. And we'll also do our best to maybe not try and be the one to get the last word in. Um, like just leave it be kind of thing if we disagree on something because I know that both of those things are a huge risk.
Well, we we'll make a general rule. So the person proposes why it's too low or why it's too high or why it's an absurd take of the others. The other person has their rationale and maybe the the person who responds is like one or two things and then we move on. Like that is the best housekeeping thing we could possibly say.
Say why it's wrong. Rationalize why you have that way and then obviously, you know, if we have any other conversation, um, keep it minimal at the end.
Yeah. So I'll let you go first here with, um, with a guy that we've talked about and argued about before.
Yeah. And uh, this is one I just don't understand from you historically. You have been the heristics, bro. You have been the guy that has said, "Hey, listen, elite prospect going into year two, much better situation, three-down profile, opportunity to lead the league in touches." Corey, how are you fading Ashen Genty? I don't understand it. Like, I understand the range is competitive. I get it, but realistically, if anybody's going to be up there with Bijan, with Gibbs from a talent, from an opportunity, from an overall volume perspective, I'm taking the guy in year two. We had comped on that level.
Yeah. I mean, I have Genty projected for, I believe, the most touches in football, if I'm not mistaken. Like, I have him projected for 322 attempts and 50 receptions. That's 372 total touches. So, I think you could say, okay, volume is king at running back, even if you think the Raiders are going to be bad, which I think in my projections right now, they are the fourth worst offense in football, um, based on what I have projected. So, my like hate for Ashen Genty, and I am the lowest on the site on him at 15th overall, is stemming from the fact that I think that Kirk Cousins will start somewhere between four, six, eight games. And in that period of time, I think that the Raiders will be a terrible offense. As a prospect, I thought Fernando Mendoza did need some time to develop a, you know, drop back under center kind of skill set because that's not what he ran at Indiana. It was a lot of RPOs, a lot of easy screens, a lot of easy touches. He had three great receivers to throw to. He had two decent running backs. I do think there's going to be an adjustment period. As much as I think in the long term, Clint Kubiak, Tyler Linderbaum coming in, Colton Miller going to be healthy, is going to play itself out. And maybe it is like a back-weighted production situation with with Ashen Genty where you want him when he's at his best, which will probably be towards the end of the season. I am just preferring Amariion Hampton, Saquon Barkley, Devon Achane, Chase Brown, James Cook, those types of running backs over him. I'm not going to try and use that as a cop-out because I do ultimately have to make a decision on the board. I just like Genty the least of that group because he also didn't wow me as a rookie talent-wise. I know he's capable of doing that, but he didn't wow me as a rookie talent-wise.
Yeah. And again, my rebuttal here would be you're worried about the offensive projection, yet you are going to talk about Devon Achane in a second. Frankly, when an elite talent is an elite talent, you already made the bet with your Devon Achane ranking that they can overcome it. When I'm looking at Ashen Genty, there's just so much more upside with the offense. Yes, sure, overall baseline projection may be the fourth worst, but having Kubiak in, having the inherent upside, especially down the stretch with the rookie quarterback, and on top of that, having a quarterback historically who has been one of the biggest checkdown artists in the league, like you mentioned, we could see six to eight games of Kirk Cousins. Kirk Cousins last year was number one in checkdown rate at the quarterback position. 18.3% of his attempts actually were checkdowns. So, I do think like Bijan Robinson, we saw how he was weaponized in the passing game. Maybe Genty is not going to reach, you know, 79 receptions, 800-plus yards like Bijan was last year. Obviously, Bijan is a one-of-one, but more so just I think the prospect that Genty was in his second year where he had over a 90 PFF grade. What we saw as a rookie, the overall volume he commanded. I do think there's the upside here where you can get 300 carries, 75, 80-plus receptions, and all of a sudden, this is a guy who can be an 18, 19 point per game scorer.
Yeah, I don't disagree with any of the upside things that you just said. My thing is that I'm valuing the downside a little bit more because the difference between Achane and Genty for me is that Achane's been nothing but a top-six running back in fantasy, and Genty, while I know he has the talent to do that, hasn't done it yet. So that's the difference to me.
Yeah. And don't worry, we'll talk about Achane in a second, guys.
Yeah. And, um, we're literally going to talk about him right now because...
I think that your Devon Achane ranking is just flat-out incorrect. Um, Devon Achane at 18th overall in primarily PPR formats, full PPR formats, especially like you and I play in. I mean, he's my, he's my 11th overall player. I'm actually not even the highest on the site on him. Zach has him at seven. Avery has him at 10.
I know what the the argument is going to be, so I'm just going to get ahead of it. You're going to say the Dolphins suck. And in my projections, I agree with you. The Dolphins are the worst offense in the league in terms of pace of play, total projected plays, projected pass rate, projected win total, and points per game. Dead last in all of that stuff. And I still have Devon Achane over 17 points per game because he projects for a modest increase in target share. I have him at 92 targets on the season. Without Jaylen Waddle, he averages 25 fantasy points per game in his career. And with only 62% of the rushing attempts, which is plenty of volume left over for Jaylen Wright, Ollie Gordon, if that's going to be your argument as well, I have him projected for a career-worst 17 points per game because in his career, he's been nothing but a top-six fantasy running back. And that's kind of the heuristic I'm holding on to here is that when a player is 24 years old, in his prime, just gets a big contract, and an elite receiving back, he can overcome, in my opinion, the worst offense in football.
Yeah, I think he very well could. Um, the issue for me here is more so just, I mean, I don't want it to be the cop-out like you said, but the guys that I prefer to him just have such safer offensive projections. And what I mentioned with Ashen Genty, I don't think Devon can get up to that level of workload. So realistically, the way you felt about Genty in terms of the offensive concern, I think has much more offensive concern in Miami, which you addressed. It's more so just the overall volume projection. And again, you are kind of treating it like a certainty. He is going to be a full-fledged workload or workhorse back, which again, talent-wise, he should be very well, but there is still the risk. This is a new coaching staff. He is a smaller running back. I would say arguably in terms of the grand scheme of how they want their offense to operate. Could he be a souped-up version of Aaron Jones? Are they going to get a complimentary back? Maybe an Ollie Gordon plus Jaylen Wright fulfills the big back type of role on this team. So, I think with Achane, it's more so questions with the offense, questions with in terms of if he's going to get the overall opportunity share he got last year. And I do think having a running quarterback like Malik Willis, I mean, we saw just how dominant he was as a receiver last year. I think from a pure share perspective, he should potentially be in that range, but if Malik Willis is only throwing the ball for 2,700 yards and 17 touchdowns, it's just going to inhibit his upside there.
Yeah. I, I just, the whole like, his offense is bad, so I'm going to favor guys with better offenses. I just don't want to draft fantasy teams that way. That would have caused you to draft Derrick Henry over Devon Achane last year, for example. And in full PPR, like point production from receiving backs is king. And Malik Willis, I, I think they're going to throw the ball like, Danny, maximum like 440 times. 17-game pace for Malik Willis starting games. But this dude with Quinn Ewers last year had 17 points per game in the two games that he started.
They were actually throwing the rock with Quinn Ewers. And I think Quinn's going to get in at some point this season as well. Like maybe during the money weeks of the fantasy playoffs, that's when Quinn Ewers are starting games because frankly, I don't think the Malik Willis experiment is going to go super well.
Yeah. And again, I don't want this to be a cop-out, but the main difference and how I end up with Achane there. I mentioned the offensive concerns, but it's more so like I'm more optimistic on Kenneth Walker's workload than you. Saquon Barkley is a guy I recently moved one spot ahead of Achane. If you want to argue Achane there, sure, be my guest.
I would take him over those two running backs with ease.
That that's perfectly reasonable. And of course, you know how bullish I am on Drake London. I just personally don't think he should be in the discussions at the very minimum with the Amariion Hampton, the Chase Brown, the James Cook, the Jonathan Taylor, the Ashen Genty. But, um, yeah, we kind of just went over all that.
Yeah. I mean, the last thing I'll say on it is they were 25th in scoring, 22nd in net yards per attempt, and 26th in total yards last year. And he was a 20-point per game running back. Like, he's been on bad offenses and performed before.
Yeah. No, he is a good player, but realistically, is he going to get back to to that 20 points per game? I don't really see it in this offense.
Unlike Genty, he's actually a proven elite player, not...
Player.
I mean, to quote the title, Rage Bait. Not like the rookie who just had 3.1 yards after contact per attempt isn't good.
I mean, we'll see. He should be good, but we don't know for sure. We do know for sure with Ashen Genty. Let's talk about your rage bait number two.
Yeah, like Corey, I understand you have a hard-on for Quinyon Judkins. Like you love him as a prospect. He obviously went on day two, but at the end of the day, this is still one of the worst offenses. He's coming off a very serious lower body injury, and Travis Etienne just got the bag this offseason. I understand that you're a Buccaneers fan and you don't like the [ __ ] Saints. I get that with your whole heart. You think Tyler Shough sucks. You think the offense is going to be horrible, but Quinyon Judkins over Travis Etienne literally makes zero [ __ ] sense.
Yeah. I mean, to be fair, in my Saints projections, they're like a below-average offense. I'm not projecting them as the worst offense in the league. I think they're going to be pretty solid, but I do expect a modest regression as defenses catch up to Tyler Shough a little bit. He caught them by surprise a little bit last year. We've seen that before. My take, I guess, for Quinyon over Travis Etienne would be that Quinyon, um, is a proven bellcow ball carrier. Like the second he got in there in week two, week three, he was commanding upwards of 80% of the Browns carries. And it's kind of just like a volume is king play. Like I know that sounds boring because Quinnon Judkins is an elite athlete. He ran, you know, low 4.4s at 220-plus pounds. I think he has some receiving upside. Like I have him projected for 43 targets. Nothing special there, but I do think he's capable in the passing game. And the Browns are the second worst projected offense in my projections. And Judkins still came out with like 14 points per game, um, on the back of, you know, goal-line work and high carry volume. I think he can just get there pretty much on volume. And as I've talked about on numerous occasions, I question the overall, um, three-down volume, carry share, receiving workload, and goal-line touches of Travis Etienne. And I think that this offense will be, let's say, three, four points per game better than the Browns. Like I have the Browns projected for 18 points per game. I have the Saints projected for about 21 points per game. Um, in that situation, Etienne to me would need to have the same or slightly worse volume than Judkins. And I think that Judkins is going to out-touch him by a decent margin. Like I have Judkins projected for 300 carries.
Yeah. So, you mentioned what about a two to three-point per game difference in terms of where the offense is projected?
Yeah. And if you're bullish on the Saints, maybe a four or five-point per game difference.
Yeah. So, like Vegas currently has it closer to like that four or five-point range. And, uh, for reference, uh, Vegas does have the Browns offense improving. Last year, 16.4. This year projected around 17.9. According to Vegas projections, the Saints are actually one of the biggest positive regression candidates in terms of offensive points per game. Last year, they only had 18. This year projected for over 21. And realistically, when you look at the NFC South, when you look at the overall offensive environments in that division, I mean, how many times you have to see, you know, Falcons versus Saints shootout, Saints versus Bucs shootouts. I feel like every time I watch an NFC South game, both teams are scoring over 21 points. So, realistically, when I'm looking at Travis Etienne, a guy that can make big plays, a guy that's going to be in a fast-paced offensive environment, I like Judkins, the player, but when you're not getting a full-fledged three-down workload, which again, you're optimistic on Judkins, but he's not going to have more than 55 targets next year.
Sammis out-targeting him 49 to 43 for what it's worth.
Yeah. So when I look at Etienne, you're getting the scoring opportunity. You're getting the payday obviously being brought in this offseason. You're getting what I believe more so to be more of a 65% opportunity share. Obviously more bullish on Zamir White, but I think Zamir White is more of a, you know, handcuff type of situation here who's had experience. Realistically, I look at the tea leaves of Travis Etienne. If he has closer to the workload, I believe he will. I think the Saints offense can really hum. I think it's going to be a fast-paced unit. And again, I'm higher on Shough than you are.
Yeah. I, the last thing I'd say on Etienne is I have him projected for 59% of the carries, which would match his career-high total in 2023 with the Jaguars. Like, I, it's not like I'm projecting Zamir White to like out-touch him or anything like that. I have Zamir White projected for 128 rushing attempts and 52 targets. It's not like I have him getting a massive, massive workload. I just think he's going to be enough of a pest on the goal line at times because we know he's very good there still, even at this point in his career, and in the receiving game at times to just limit Travis Etienne from being a three-down workhorse. I get the contract and all that kind of stuff. I just...
Yeah.
Unless he's getting the full workload, I'm worried about the offense in totality.
So, I think that's reasonable when you compare him to like the other running backs that go in the third round. Underdog. Like you're talking about Breece Hall, you're talking about Kyren, Javonte Williams. I think when it's in that context of conversation, I actually agree with you. I have Etienne lower than those guys. I just think Judkins is a tier below where Etienne projects.
Yeah. It's just a pure volume bet for me, like I said. And and there's no, there's no optimism for me on the Browns offense. Like I'm admitting they're going to be a bottom-three unit and he still came out with almost 14 points per game. So if they're somehow the 25th best offense in the league, he has 15-plus in his range of outcomes very easily because of the carry share that he was demanding early on in his rookie season. And here's the thing too, like Judkins is an ascending player and Etienne at age 27 coming off two seasons ago, he had like a really bad year. It wouldn't shock me if he regressed. Look at the last running back who was in Liam Coen's scheme who lost Liam Coen. Not that Kellen Moore is a bad offensive coordinator, but Liam Coen run games hit different and Etienne, I think won't be the same level of efficiency he was in Jacksonville last season.
Yeah. Um, I would also counter in Jacksonville though. I mean, it was more competition for touches realistically. I think Tank Bigsby last year is a more of a pest than what Zamir White is, but obviously that's the difference in philosophy for where we're at.
Yeah, for sure. So let's work it back here to, um, Davante Adams. Uh, you've talked about this. I know your response. I'm not even gonna spoil it, but why the hell do you have him ranked at 54th overall when he's coming off of a season?
First of all, since I was a senior in high school, this guy's never not been a wide receiver one in fantasy. So, let's just put it there. Like, that's how dominant he's been for that long of a period of time.
He's 33 and a half years old, but I didn't see any evidence signs of drop-off and decline last year. Touchdown regression be damned. 14 touchdowns. Yes, that's probably unattainable in 14 games yet again. But Matthew Stafford and the Rams project as the best offense in football. Davante Adams lapped the field in red zone and endzone target usage. And I think that's sustainable because that's how they like to operate in their offense. And also too, like even if you regress, uh, if you slowly regress Davante Adams efficiency-wise and you know, overall yardage and stuff, I would argue whatever offset touchdown regression he's going to get. This guy had like a 52% catch rate last year. Like he could regress positively in that regard and that could help curb some of the touchdown regression. So for me, I view him as, yeah, if I'm on the board at like the 3-4 turn, the early fourth round where I have him ranked, why would I not just take like the red zone option for one of the best offenses in football? And even though he's older, I didn't see any evidence signs of regression.
Yeah, and I do think this is totally fair. Again, I am the lowest on the site when it comes to Davante Adams. Um, this is kind of, you know, a two-parter for me with Davante Adams. Obviously, last year we saw the target share go down relative to his career averages. I mean, we're talking about a guy that realistically was at 24.8% and yet you still got only 56.36 yards per game. That's what's kind of concerning to me. If that falls naturally for a 34-year-old player down to the 20, 21% range, if he's not scoring a touchdown per game and his yards per game goes down inherently to 48 to 52, then at what point, what kind of asset do you have? I feel like right now you're kind of paying for Davante Adams based off what he's done before, based off the touchdown equity he had last year in the LA Rams. On top of that, they were the best offense in football last year. I do expect them to be the best offense in football this year, but at the same time, you get Miles Garrett on defense. Who knows, maybe by the time the season starts, Aaron Donald comes out of retirement, then all of a sudden we don't have that passing script in the second half because I mean, the Rams might win 15, 16 games if they get those two guys on the same defensive line. So, it's a twofold factor for me. Older player, regression in terms of the yards per game, regression in terms of the overall receiving aspect of his target share. And then if the defense is even better, we could just see overall the Rams scoring less points.
Yeah, the only counter I'd have to that is them running a lot of 12 and 13 personnel keeps Puka and Davante Adams as the main primary receivers on the field, and that's good for Davante Adams. Them having short fields because Garrett and Donald are wrecking shop is good for Davante Adams because he's the touchdown guy.
Yeah. Um, ultimately though, before last year, we saw a lot of that, you know, regression go to the running game inside the five, inside the 10. Maybe we do see it shift back after an outlier passing year.
Yeah, and I love Kyren Williams too. So, you're not gonna hear me, too, man.
Give me both these backs in this backfield that cost, man.
Yeah. I mean, I almost, I almost took Blake Corum way too high as my other one there because I, I think you're disrespecting Kyren Williams. As you can tell, a lot of these arguments and rage bait stuff are stemming from the fact that I'm favoring proven guys over guys that are like upside guys or whatever, which is kind of like a just a heuristic difference here.
Outside of this one.
Outside of this one. Yeah, this is, uh, you're calling me insane for having a Puka. Do I have him the highest on the site? I'm second on the site.
Oh, wow. Sammy, we're gonna have some big-time discussions in that Flock League draft room. Um, all jokes aside though, I understand why you're optimistic. I can't get him to 34 though. Uh, 44 is where I have him. I have closer to like the early 20s range. And it's just based off a couple of the guys that I, I disagree with you having him over. Like if we go to your rankings, what that means you would have him over Zay Flowers or Puka Nacua or, uh, Jaylen Waddle. Like, is that who you have Puka Nacua over?
Yeah. So I have Puka over Neighbors, Zay Flowers, Waddle, Adams, A.J. Brown, McConnaughey, those types of guys.
I almost made another one. Wide receiver 19 is just flat-out ridiculous for a guy who averaged 18 points per game down the stretch last year. The reason why I had Puka Nacua listed down is more so just the individual names you have him over. If you had him at number 40 overall, wide receiver 18, I would have less of an or less of a problem with your rankings. Malik Neighbors, I understand because he's hurt, but at the same time, we're ranking these from best ball. You cannot be taking a Puka Nacua over Malik Neighbors in a best ball perspective.
I've been burned by injury optimism before, so yeah, that's I'm gonna keep doing that because I expect Neighbors to miss the first four games of the season.
When it's a 300,000 P or entry field and it's one team that can win it all, you totally take that risk of Malik Neighbors over Puka Nacua in my opinion. But, um, on top of that, Jaylen Waddle, I mean, you're super high on the Broncos, number one receiver in that projection. I don't see any way a Puka Nacua in a much worse offensive projection can get over him. Same thing with Zay Flowers. You had Drake London from the Detroit Lions. We love what the short passing game looked like in Detroit. We could potentially get those YAC usage a Amon-Ra St. Brown like type that one. Um, when I'm going through the range though, like if you say he's the top of the tier of the, you know what I mean, you don't have Wilson in this range, but for me, McConnaughey, Wilson, Burks, guys like that, that's one thing. I just think frankly Waddle, Flowers, and Neighbors specifically are the ones you can't.
Yeah. So, I mean, I, I'm not trying to be pro-Buccaneers here with this take. I just, I love what I saw from a heuristic perspective. If you have a, a year one receiver as a first-round pick, he comes out and he's producing like a literal like 18-point per game receiver until he suffers a hamstring injury. If we flipped his rookie season upside down, we'd all be taking this guy at the two-three turn. I just think that the Buccaneers offense in the first 10 games of the season is more so what we're going to see. Not necessarily saying that, you know, Baker's going to play like an MVP candidate. I think they're going to be relatively an average offense, give or take. Um, but Puka Nacua heading into year two, like I, I, I just think that he can command a 26, 27, 28% target share on his ceiling range of outcomes and be 16, 17 points per game. And I don't really see that as a possibility for Garrett Wilson or Terrace Marshall Jr. or some of those guys. Like I know that's just going to be a disagreement on our front, but like Flowers, Waddle, those guys I would, McConnaughey, totally reasonable to put those guys over Nacua. I just feel the most confident in Nacua of that group.
Yeah, it's more so just those specific names. Like I have, for example, um, Wilson, Burks, and McLaren ranked higher. If you want to say Nacua over those guys, fair enough. It's more so just those specific names: Flowers, Neighbors, and Waddle. So because you have this as your next one, let's just go right into it.
Let's go into it.
Why do you have Garrett Wilson higher than Puka Nacua? Cuz like obviously the rage bait take, I'll let you make the take specifically, but I want you to actually say why he's over Nacua in the process.
Why is he over Nacua? I have offensive concerns for both offenses. Um, I'm more off equal though.
They're not equal. Sure. But if I think the Bucs are like the 20th best offense in the league and I'm higher on the Jets because you think they're bottom five. I think they're more so probably 25, 26. I don't see a huge offensive advantage for the Bucs over the Jets. Again, that's more so pro-Jets. I like the offensive line. I like the overall quarterback play comparative to last year. We had a whole argument where you thought Justin Fields was better than Geno Smith. That's another rage bait that I'm sure you're probably going to potentially bring up. I don't see any world where the offense is worse than it was last year. And Garrett Wilson was a legitimate alpha in this offense. I have question marks with Nacua if he can be the true alpha because I do believe in Godwin. I do think McConnaughey with Hurst with that entire wide receiver corps are going to kind of eat into each other. And as high as I am on Sadiq and Cooper, I do think they are raw prospects. I do think they're most likely going to be guys that maybe come week eight, week nine, they start fully getting their feet under them. And realistically with Garrett Wilson, we saw what it looked like when he was healthy last year. It looked like he was taking a potential step. And even though you're going to bring up a small sample size, we've seen multiple years of him being a 14-plus point per game scorer. If you want to argue that 14 points per game doesn't win your fantasy league, sure. I just don't really see Puka Nacua being a huge smash compared to where you do.
Yeah. I, so, uh, Mike Clay and some of the projections do actually give the Jets a little bit more grace than I did. Like I gave the Jets I think the fourth lowest projection in terms of points per game. They're like right there with the Raiders and Browns but ahead of the Dolphins for me. That's kind of how I view the offense. It's not because I think Justin Fields is better than Geno. That was just mainly a rage bait opinion.
It's just that things go wrong with the Jets. Geno Smith is like in his late 30s. Like I, you know, Armon Moore and some of the pieces that they have on offense. I just generally think A, they're going to be a run-heavy offense. B, Garrett Wilson has always been the clear-cut, no questions asked number one receiver. And not only is Amon-Ra Cooper and Kenyan Drake a problem, Adonai Mitchell and Mason Taylor are a problem as well, just because of the overall pie of the offense. Garrett's going to be the number one. But I do think he's going to be closer to a 25, 26, 27% target share guy than like the 34% target share he needed to actually be a 17-point per game guy for the first four or five games of last season. So for me, like I've always been pro Garrett Wilson. I think he's a great player. I just don't see, you know, 1300 yards, 10 touchdowns being in his range of outcomes in this bad of an offensive projection.
I think it's totally reasonable to say I don't think he's going to have a 34% target share again. But go back to his career, real quick. I don't think he's going to be at a 34% target share, but I would argue a 26 to 28% target share from Geno is more valuable than a 34% target share from Justin Fields. And on top of that, we did see his routes per game go down dramatically with a rushing quarterback. Geno Smith, more of a pocket passer, more of a guy that's going to stick in there. Obviously, we have Frank Reich coming over as the OC. I do think those routes per game are probably going to be more so in the mid to high 30s. And if that's the case, a 28% target share will totally play in that instance.
Yeah, I mean, going off of Geno Smith's career numbers and Garrett Wilson having a 27.25% target share, which is what I, what you just said you'd project him for. Um, that's what I have him projected for as well is 13 points per game. Like I think Cade Klubnik will start a couple games at the end of the season as well because the Jets are going to be bad in my opinion. I think they're going to need to look at Cade Klubnik not for real any purposes other than to try and continue to tank. Like they have three first-round picks in 2027. Frank Reich is their freaking offensive coordinator and Aaron Glenn will probably be fired by then. Like I just think this is another Jets lost season, but it's productive because they want a quarterback and you know, I just don't think this is the year to be in on Garrett Wilson because if Cooper or Sadiq are good in any facet, then that you can kiss that 27% target share goodbye.
Yeah. Um, again, I'll counter with the fact that you also just completely hate Geno Smith. Like I'm looking at these projections right now, under 3,000 yards, under 18 touchdowns passing.
In 13 games. In 17. If he was playing 17 games, it would be...
Um, yeah, 3,600 yards and 20 touchdowns. I don't think that's outrageous.
I just frankly don't see any capacity where Cade Klubnik actually plays four games. Like Gino Smith is very clearly the best quarterback on the roster. And again, I do think it's going to be a more competitive team than you do. So...
I guess yeah, I just, I don't see why the, the Jets, if they're four and 12, are playing Gino Smith.
Why even bring him in then?
Why even bring them in? Do you think the the Aaron Glenn, Frank Reich, Geno Smith experience is going to go well? Because I think they would need to be like in playoff contention to continue to play Gino at the end of...
I think it's far more likely this defense is the reason why this team sucks than it is the offense. I would put my guess there.
That's fair. Um, yeah, I guess we, a lot of these are just a difference in offensive and team philosophy of a lot of these teams as well. Like we're like, hey, this team is probably not going to be very good. You're like, I think they're going to be a little better than than you think. Kind of thing. Like one of my truth serum takes is quite literally I think the Jets are going to be a passable offense this year. And passable I mean like top 25-ish. I'm not saying they're going to be the [ __ ] 18th best offense in the league.
Yeah. I mean, there's not a huge difference for what it's worth between 30 and 25. Like they're both bad offenses. So moving into my, uh, rage bait take number three. You went with the Buccaneers bias on mine with Nacua. I'm going to go after your Cowboys bias because having Jalen Hurts, a quarterback who in his career has never finished worse than quarterback 8 as a starter at quarterback 10 is insane Cowboys bias. Insane Cowboys bias. Um, yeah, I understand historically how much he scored, how many, you know, uh, uh, tush pushes he'll take, and, uh, the overall finishes he's had in fantasy. I'll give respect to Jalen Hurts, the fantasy quarterback. Again, I'm not going to say that this is a cop-out here. I'm just going to mention this and then move on to why I'm negative on Hurts compared to this range. He's my quarterback 10. And the difference between my quarterback 6 and 10 in my rankings is 71 overall versus 78 overall. So, realistically, if you wanted to argue quarterback six, sure. The reason why I prefer Daniels, Prescott, Herbert, and Lawrence specifically is because I'm very concerned about the passing projection for Jalen Hurts. We saw him hit career lows this past year. Obviously, you can argue, well, Kellen Moore, he was a big factor. Listen, you could be optimistic about Shane Steichen while also accepting the fact that Shane Steichen and Kellen Moore are much better offensive play callers because they're proven to be the fact that the next stop after the Eagles was a head coaching gig. Even if you're optimistic on Steichen, are you projecting him to be a future head coach? I wouldn't lean that way. On top of that, you lose your true number one wide receiver. Again, we'll see if DeVonta Smith can fully take that role. I do think A.J. Brown is going to have an impact in terms of losing him in terms of the what the offensive output would be. The biggest difference that we have and why I'm lower is that you have a more optimistic offensive passing projection than I would. You have him projected for the most passing attempts in his career. You have him projected for the most passing yards in his career. I think it's probably going to be more league average in the passing game. And on top of that, we did see a significant decline in his rushing production last year. While I think he's going to potentially gain back closer to where he was in 2023, at the same time, I think it's going to be some sort of middle ground between 2025 and those years.
So, there's five teams so far through my projections, and when I look at the remaining teams in the NFL, maybe the Seahawks would be worse. There's five teams that I have a lower pass rate for than the Philadelphia Eagles. I'm not projecting an obscene increase in passing rate, but Danny, in the last Nick Sirianni era, their 51% pass rate since 2021 is second lowest only to Baltimore and 50% in neutral scripts. So Shane Steichen coming out very boisterously and saying they want to pass the football more. They want to force Jalen Hurts to throw over the middle of the field. They don't want to cover him up. They don't want to hide him in those situations. And also too, you know, Barkley's 29 years old. You're probably not getting a 2024 type of Barkley season again where the whole offense runs through him and he's ending all these drives with 70-yard touchdowns and stuff. I'm just like looking at the surrounding narrative and that's why I have him highest projected passing yards. That's why I have him highest projected yards per attempt and touchdowns. It's not necessarily that I think he's like, I went off of his like career average rates and stuff. I didn't really give him much more efficiency. It's just that the volume should increase.
So again, that's where I'll battle back. I don't think the volume is guaranteed to increase because again, it's increased to the point in the projections where they're at a career-high. I don't see him being a career-high passer because ultimately too, you said, well, Steichen's going to ask more out of him. What if by week four, week five, he realizes Jalen Hurts can't handle more? Jalen Hurts has to operate a certain system and every single system has been tailor-made in that capacity because Jalen Hurts cannot handle those middle-of-the-field reads. I do think that's in a range of outcomes. On top of that, you do lose Jeff Stoutland. The offensive line's getting older, was regressing last year. I just think there's a lot more concerns with the Eagles offensive projection than the market does. So, that's why I have him at 10. Again, 78 overall is still, you know, top 80 overall capital. It's just more so when I'm looking in that range. Dak Prescott's a top-five offensive projection, top-five passing projection. Trevor Lawrence was the quarterback one down the stretch last year. Obviously, you're very optimistic on Justin Herbert. I don't really have to make the case for him there. You bet. You get Mike McDaniel, you get one of the most talented quarterbacks in the NFL. It's more so just the range of players I have after him. I prefer straight up, but I do understand it is a hot take having him at 10.
Yeah, I think just the math is something that is hard for me to get there. Like I have Matthew Stafford, for example, with one of the best passing projections in the league, 37 passing touchdowns and 4,600 yards. And he isn't even close. He's like three points per game worse than Jalen Hurts. Because another thing that Shane Steichen has come out and said is that they don't want to limit Jalen Hurts' rushing like they did last year when he rushed the ball like four less attempts per game than he was rushing historically. So I gave him 8.38 rush attempts per game, which is like below his career average, and he comes out just way better because of the rushing projection. Last year the issue was that he wasn't running as much as he normally does. And the Eagles only ran 1,000 offensive plays when historically the Nick Sirianni era has run over 1,000. So again, even just increasing their pass rate 2 to 3%, 54% pass rate is the sixth lowest in the projections right now and getting the plays back to what they normally were is a massive increase in passing production and overall volume for the team. So again, it's all just math here on Jalen Hurts. I wasn't super high on Jalen Hurts coming into the projections, but when I worked out the math, I was like, "Yeah, he's probably too low in ADP and in my rankings."
Yeah. The difference for me, of course, I just think more so what we saw last year is about more of my expectation than what we saw when the Eagles were a much better football team between 2022 and 2024.
Yeah. And I, I didn't project them for that amount of plays. I, I projected them for less than that average. But anyways, let's...
Regardless, um, I think he profiles more so into the range of quarterbacks that are probably going to be between 19 and 21 points per game than I do the quarterbacks that are going to profile for 21 and above.
Yeah. And that's exactly the range I have him in. He's just at 21. And Prescott, Lawrence, and Stafford and those guys are at 19 essentially. Um...
Fair enough. Like I would probably have a flip, but again, if you want to argue Hurts even quarterback six, I think that's reasonable. Dak has to throw 45 touchdowns to hit 21 points for FYI, just because of his rushing and same with Stafford and those guys.
I think it's more likely that Dak does that than Jalen Hurts sets career highs as a passer.
Okay, let's go into, uh, this one is our biggest discrepancy, biggest disagreement. I have Michael Pittman, Jr. at 61, you have him at 107.
Yeah.
Why? Um, well, I mean, I think this is a two-sided why because you are 15 spots higher than anybody else on the site and I am, I guess I would say what, 20 spots lower than the average on the site. So...
I'm beating ADP by about 40 spots and you're five spots lower than ADP.
Yeah. So, I guess this is a two-sided question. I'll make the anti-Michael Pittman case. Ultimately, I think it's a lot of target competition. Obviously, D.K. Metcalf's already there. Pat Freiermuth, I think, could potentially have a big year. We're talking about, you know, adding a guy like Jeremy Chinn, who I thought was a pro-ready type of receiver. I think ultimately we both agree that the passing game should be better than what the market expects. My counter to that would be I don't think Michael Pittman's going to have the overall share of volume that you think he will.
You think a 22% target share is completely ridiculous because that's what I don't think it's completely ridiculous, but I also think at the same time with D.K. with Freiermuth, what would what I expect in terms of the target share from the backfield? Again, I am more optimistic on Chinn potentially making an impact right away than maybe you do. I'm not sure if you projected Darnell Washington for anything, but he did lose 50 pounds this offseason could be notable. Like...
45, I got him projected for.
Yeah. Like I just see a situation where it's going to be, you know, five to six guys. You're not going to be able to predict it on a week-to-week basis. If you want to argue in best ball because he's going in the 80, 90 range, you don't have to predict the week-to-week. I think that's reasonable. I just don't think he's going to have anywhere close to the role he had in Indianapolis. So I guess my, my whole thing that I keep coming back to is D.K. Metcalf last year and, you know, Freiermuth and all these other guys were in an Arthur Smith offense. Arthur Smith, known tight end terrorist and also terrible pass rate type of offense. Not a super uptempo offense. Mike McCarthy in his, in his coaching tenure, 2018, last time he was with Rodgers, 64% neutral pace pass rate, 67% overall, which was first. Obviously, different Rodgers can't really, uh, hold that to him. With Dak Prescott, the entire Cowboys tenure, they were literally the best offense in the league in terms of pace of play and also pass rate. So, even if you look at it and go, they're not going to do that, which I didn't project them for. I have them for a 59% pass rate. That's a pretty significant decrease from Mike McCarthy's tenure. I just think that the pie of this offense is quite big. And when D.K. Metcalf can only muster 21, 22% of the team's targets when Calvin Austin, a bunch of tight ends is his target competition, I just don't view him as a target-earning alpha. And Michael Pittman, conversely, when Daniel Jones was healthy, was like a 15-point per game receiver with Josh Downs, with Tyler Warren, with Alec Pierce having a breakout season, Adonai Mitchell was still on the team at that time for most of those games, like I think he outproduced.
A lot of people in Target share last season with better target competition than Pittsburgh has. To a degree, but also you got to factor in that, um, it's also a different situation and they did spend a second-round pick on a rookie. I think that's ultimately what lies. Is he better than Josh D? Maybe not. But at the same time, Josh Downs is a 5'9, 170lb receiver that maybe they didn't trust in 12 personnel, which is kind of what we saw happen. Jeremy Bernard is a bigger stature receiver. I could definitely see that being a factor. And ultimately, I would agree the early season projection, if you're just saying weeks one to six, probably closer to where you have Pitman ranked. I'm factoring in that by week seven, by week eight, by week nine, if Jeremy Bernard is looking impressive, Michael Pitman could be in threat for those 12 personnel, uh, snaps. Michael Pitman could be relegated to the third overall wide receiver in snaps on this team. You don't view that as in the range of outcomes, which is why you're more bullish on him. I am factoring in it a little bit, which is why I'm lower.
Yeah, man. I, when Daniel Jones was healthy last year, this guy had a 23% target share alongside a breakout season from Pierce Downs, who's way better than Jeremy Bernard, and Tyler Warren, who is way better than Pat Fry, and Jonathan Taylor on that team, who was a career-high in receiving himself.
Sure. Again, if I'm ranking on redraft rankings, he would be a little bit higher. Again, keep in mind we're we're citing our best rankings, so you have to factor in what you think could happen throughout weeks 1 to 17. And because of the potential concerns, the hurdles in the second half of the year, again, with what I believe Jeremy Bernard to potentially be, that's why I'm factoring it in there. If you want to say in redraft, he's a top 85 pick, because realistically, if you take them, you could potentially sell high after the first five to six weeks because he starts out strong. I think that's a very valid case. It's just Pitman's not a guy that I want to be hitching my wagon to through 17 weeks.
I guess that's fair. I just noticed you had like six backup running backs ranked ahead of him in your overall rankings.
Applied upside. Yeah, it's like Pitman is a proven target earner. Anyways, we can move on. Um, do we want to go? Let's go to your last rage bait take that you have here.
Yeah, and this is more so poking fun cuz uh, am I really mad at you for fading a tight end coming off an Achilles? Probably not. This is just more of my question to you. We had Dr. James Faretti on the channel what, two weeks ago, three weeks ago at this point.
Yep. And when you asked him about George Kittle, he said with the speed, with the speed bridge surgery, he had very minimal concern. You're very optimistic about the 49ers, top 10 level offense in the league. We're very optimistic about the passing projection with Brock Purdy. And we know that if George Kittle is even 85% George Kittle, the guy is the single best value on the board. So I guess my question is how can you rationalize having 14 tight ends ahead of him? Even with the upside case, say 15% of Kittle's gone after the injury, 85% Kittle easily outscores a lot of the tight ends ahead of him. You have.
Well, so I have him tight end 12. So I don't have 15 tight ends.
Oh, so you must have risen him then.
But he's 126 overall in my in my ranking. So he is below ADP. So I guess I still am low on George Kittle relatively speaking. So to be clear, James was talking about his reinjury risk when he said we shouldn't have concern of him, but he was not talking about his efficiency bounce back. He w like he was basically saying like, hey, he's probably not going to reinjure the issue.
At 33 years old. Could he regress in terms of efficiency? Could he regress in terms of target share? Also knowing that Mike Evans is coming in, who's a better target earner than, you know, Jauan Jennings last year, who was their number one receiver. Ricky Priester missed significant time. Like I just don't want to bet on George Kittle where he's going when I like Dalton Kincaid, Sam LaPorta, Kyle Pitts, Hunter Henry, um Jake Ferguson, even like I just prefer those guys who are not coming off of major injuries, who are not 33 years old. As much as I like Kittle and the 49ers projection, I just did it this morning. Um, they're still a a very slow-paced offense. They don't run a lot of plays. It's not like this this is a massive pie of an offense to go around. Like Mike Evans taking an additional two to three points off of Jennings target share and Priester having an increased target share himself because he's actually healthy is a big deal. That that takes a lot of targets off the table.
Yeah, I guess my main qualms would be with, um, personally, if I'm going to take an aging tight end, I still slightly prefer Kittle to Kelce, but again, I understand that there's less concern with no injury for Kelce. So I understand that. Uh, Dalton Kincaid, as much as I want to be optimistic on him, at the same time, we haven't seen him become a full-time snap player. I think that concern alone is at least going to offset the potential 15 to 20% down we get from Kittle. And on top of that, I mean, we just disagree with Ferguson. I think he is more of a tight end 14, 15 when Pickens and LaPorta are on the field as opposed to tight end nine.
Yeah. Again, I just I I don't think we're going to look back on this season and go, "Yeah, that was George Kittle's best season of his career."
I don't disagree, but he doesn't need to be that career low across the board. Probably yards per game, targets per game, touchdowns per game. Like I just don't see a great outcome for him coming off of this injury.
Totally fair, but I would argue that even 85 to 90% Kittle would be live to score anybody in our outscore anybody in our BTR tight end.
Yeah, I mean, 80 I I have him projected for 11.09 points per game, which is like tight end 11, tight end 12. I just think I I'm I'm being pretty optimistic on him. Like I didn't really regress his yards per reception. In fact, I gave him higher than his average for his career. And his uh catch rate is also about average for his career and his touchdown rate is about average for his career. Like I didn't even regress him at all. Um, and he still only came out 11.09 points per game. The re the only thing I regressed was a four-game ramp up in his target share. That was the only thing I regressed for him.
Yeah. Um, again, I understand uh also at the same time uh holistically versus what I believe to be the valuable point per game upside guy cuz here the theoretically if he starts off slow, maybe he's a 45% target share player in week one, a 52% target share player in week two and it is a ramp up. I do think the overall value of a replacement when he is fully up to speed is more valuable than tight end 12.
Yeah. So, what I did was I gave him a 14% target share for the first four games of the season and then I gave him a 21.8% 8%, which is a 1% decrease from his target share last year for the remaining part of the season. And again, he doesn't come out as a significant producer. 11.09 points per game is worse than Dalton Kincaid produced last year despite dealing with injuries.
Yeah. Um, I'm just looking at the touchdown upside. I'm looking at again if he's 21% weeks five on, I can stomach him being a 14% guy in the first four weeks.
Which is what I haven't projected for, and he's not a significant producer. That's kind of my whole point with him anyway.
Well, let me ask you, what's the point per game you haven't projected week five on? Because I do think that's more valuable to me than again week three, week four, if he starts off slow in the first two weeks, you could always play an alternative option at tight end.
Um, if I gave him his his week five on target share, he would project for uh 12.4 points per game, which again is like tight end 8 to 10. It's not like significant production either.
And that's with you being a little more bearish on him than me. So, yeah.
No, I didn't regress his his yardage, uh, his catch rate, his yards per. I didn't regress anything other than his target share. So, if I gave him the target share I wanted for the second half of the season, 12.4 points per game is not that.
Is it the Is it the offense or the passing projection you have less than? Because last year he was a 14 and a half point per game scorer on that exact usage.
41 passing 4100 passing yards, 7.9 yards per attempt, 32 touchdowns for Brock Purdy. It has nothing to do with the offense. It's just the pace and the overall plays that they run.
So, how does exactly when you take what he basically did last year and he goes from a 14 and a half to a 12-point game projection, I guess, is what I'm asking.
Mike Evans and Ricky Priester all healthy. No, I know. But you said there was only a 1% decrease in target share. How do you get two and a half point per game less?
Because he uh in on this score.
He would score the same amount of touchdowns because he's not really having any more receptions. I guess it just didn't change for him. He might have seven or eight touchdowns instead. It's it's not a huge difference is what I'm saying. Like you can work out the numbers in the math. It doesn't come out to oh yeah, George Kittle would smash assuming he's healthy.
Yeah. Again, I'm not saying he he would smash if he's healthy. I'm I'm asking cuz it's like two and a half point per game difference in the projections when he's getting basically almost the same target share. 1% less. Very very not different. That's what like 10 targets across the year.
Not even.
Like I I just don't see how.
Last year's target share, he has 12.87 points per game.
But that's what I'm saying. It's like how does it decrease nearly two points per game when you're giving him the exact same usage unless you're projecting a dip in efficiency for the offense. I mean, 85 for 977 and six touchdowns is quite good.
I'm not saying it isn't, though. I'm saying based off what he did last year efficiency-wise, like, you definitely have to be projecting in an efficiency drop off if he's going to get two points per game less on the same usage.
Uh, I'm not projecting an efficiency drop off because he averaged about the same yards per reception. I guess the only drop off would be I gave him his career average touchdown rate instead of the implied inflated touchdown rate that he had last season. That would be the difference, I guess.
Okay. So talking about that point then let me ask you then do you think it's more contextually accurate to take maybe the last two or three years of the passing projection with Brock Purdy as opposed to his full career? Because I do think with Jimmy Garoppolo they weren't nearly as much of a passing threat as they have been.
Well, let me ask you this. Who do you think leads the team in touchdowns? Because I would argue it's definitely Mike Evans, not George Kittle.
Um, I would probably put it 65 35, 70 30 in in favor of Evans.
Assuming both play week one. The last five years, Mike Evans has like four double-digit touchdown seasons and Kittle has like one.
Yeah, I mean, again, we'll see what it looks like in the context of this team.
Yeah. Again, it's going to be um for this team is going to be very difficult to figure out because of all the moving parts for sure, but at the same time, like I in Brock Purdy's career, his career high is eight touchdowns. I'm not going to project him for more than eight. I have him for six, which is the lowest of uh Brock Purdy's tenure. And I think that's fair given that Mike Evans is coming in.
Yeah, reasonable. Um, but, um, yeah, that was just the difference on George Kittle. I'm higher a little bit on Consensus. You're lower than Consensus, but ultimately tight end of the top 100. It's not really going to be a big needle mover if you prefer Kelce versus Kittle.
Yeah. Again, it's more just about the guys that I like in that range better. But anyways.
Rhamondre Stevenson. This one confused me because the Danny lad I know would not rank Trevion Henderson lower than me because you were higher on the player coming out of college and would also not be the second or I guess tied for the highest on the site on Rhamondre Stevenson, a 28 and a half-year-old running back who's pretty uninteresting relative to um what people think of him. I get that people go, "Okay, Rhamondre Stevenson when it mattered most, he was the guy." You know, they didn't trust Trevion Henderson, even though Trevion was good when he got the opportunity. I just think from a heuristics perspective, I just don't recognize the guy that I'm talking to right now. Like, I can't imagine you not being higher on Trevion Henderson than me.
So, I wanted to be, but um, I just feel like I'm doing a disservice to Rhamondre Stevenson with how good he looked um if I just say, "Oh, older, stinky running back, young, exciting running back going to take his vote." Like nothing he did last year which points to the fact that he should lose significant work. Like I think a 32% carry share, 24.6 receiving yards per game. Like I don't think it's that's an outrageous projection for what he could do next year. I do think it's going to ultimately be a committee and I think if Trevion Henderson is a much worse version of Gibbs and Rhamondre Stevenson is like the slightly better version of what David Montgomery was. I just think mid-70s is probably fair like where he goes on Underdog. Was that RB 30 or RB 29 off the board is where he's ranked. Like, I just think that's a reasonable click. If you have an RB1 and you drafted a hero running back build and you need an RB2 in round six, I think Rhamondre Stevenson, given how he played last year, given the touchdown equity and what would be a very good offense is fine. Again, if you want to say it's disgusting if it doesn't fit what I usually value, totally reasonable rebuttal. I just think the projection alone is worthwhile of a top 80 selection in basketball.
I just I think that the Danny lad I know would think that Trevian Henderson takes more of the work as the season goes on. And anti-Pitman argument that you just made is that you maybe want Rhamondre in redraft and flip him after the first five weeks. And in these are best rankings, why would you want Rhamondre Stevenson in week 17 of 2026? I'm starting to get concerned if Henderson's a better pure rusher than Rhamondre Stevenson.
I think that's fair. But ultimately what I've because I went through and I combed through this because I've been lower on Henderson pretty much the entire time he's been a thing in the fantasy space.
The thing that I combed through was essentially these Patriots beat writers saying that the team wants him to be the starting running back. Assuming he can improve in pass protection and, you know, be more decisive and do the things that he needs to do. The job is his. So, if you believe in Henderson, the player, then you should probably be lower on Stevenson. He's like the floor raiser of the offense. If if Henderson still has major discrepancies as a player, then Stevenson's going to play more. But if Henderson can take those necessary steps, then Stevenson's going to play less.
It could. And I ultimately do think hitting on this backfield uh can be twofold where if Henderson missed time or could be a very much league winner and obviously in vice versa. Stevenson missed time. We saw Henderson be a type of league winner with what three 25-plus point games down the stretch last year. So this is a backfield I want to be in on. Like I again, I don't have Henderson ridiculously low. Like I have him exactly in line with where he goes ADP. I just have both these guys in line because I think the backfield is what I want to target. And I think ultimately it's probably going to be a 55-45 either way.
Yeah. I just um the only thing I'll say differently the only thing I'll say differently is is Trevian Henderson to me is the archetype of a Josh McDaniels running back. Dion Lewis, James White, those are the types of players that smashed from this backfield in years past. If he can figure out the pass protection element, which is definitely going to be something I'm keeping my ears peeled for during training camp, during preseason, who's getting the two-minute drill snaps during the preseason games, etc. I mean, Henderson had what, five touchdowns of like 50-plus rushing yards. Like, that's that's not something you can manufacture. And this offense, like you said, is very profitable if you can be accurate on it.
The old me would have had Trevon Henderson, RB16, RB 17.
You'd had him at the two, three turn probably. Um, I try to be a little more level-headed now. And when I look back on the season, I'm like, Henderson should get a workload increase because a year or two back that went in the top four. Like heuristics I understand would totally point to the fact that Henderson will break out, but when I watched Rhamondre Stevenson, he looked [ __ ] good. He was breaking tackles. He was more consistent between the tackles than Henderson was. Like I just don't see how you completely phase this guy out of the offense. And in fact, I think nine carries, 45 rushing yards per game, especially with the context of how he played in the playoffs might be about an average type of projection for him.
Yeah. Again, I have him 172 attempts for Henderson, 160 for Stevenson, eight rushing touchdowns a piece.
Henderson averaging 5.2 a carry, which is what basically he was averaging last year. Stevenson in his career has been Jekyll and Hyde. He's got seasons of five yards per carry. He's got seasons of 3.9 yards per carry. So, I think betting on him to have a Hyde, not a Jekyll, is kind of what I'm doing where he like looks like the old Rhamondre where he's fumbling and he's not efficient because it's not like we have a staunch unfettered record of him of him just being David Montgomery because David Montgomery's season overseas has been very consistent. Stevenson has not been.
Yeah. And on top on top of that too, I mean I understand like it's Deebo and Hyde, but in the playoff run with three of the what the four best defenses in terms of rush defense last year, it was Stevenson. It wasn't Henderson. Was basically under 10 touches in every single playoff game. Like I I can't just look that over.
Yeah, I can't do it either. That's why I said if the if the team's saying like he's taking a step and all that kind of stuff, that's when I'm going to get higher on Henderson. I I think that like I just said, Stevenson's the floor raiser. When you're heading into a playoff run and Henderson's not ready, that's why you use Stevenson in that scenario. But again, this is a backfield that is, in my opinion, going to be the most profitable to figure out because if Stevenson is the guy that you want here and, you know, he's going in the, you know, 75, 80 P range and probably a little bit lower, I'd imagine on home league uh sites, then he's going to be extremely good pick at cost and maybe could be like this year's Javonte Williams reasonably. If Henderson's the guy you need, he will be a top five to 10 fantasy running back.
Yeah. Well, that's why I have Henderson ranked higher is even though I think it's about a 50-50 claim in terms of who leads in touches. At the same time, the implied upside Henderson getting those touches is why he's 20, 25 picks more expensive.
Yeah. My only thing here is I've never heard you weigh someone's floor so heavily, especially a second-year running back who you loved coming out of college.
When you have to spend 24 hours at Denny's, it really changes your perspective on [ __ ].
So, is this the flock league curse? He's on the far end list now.
Yeah. Yeah, I mean uh [ __ ] if so what I learned just from fantasy in general is again I want to have heuristics. I want to have implied upside. I want to make sure like that's the basis of my argument. But when there are cases where I'm like this is probably what's going to happen. This is probably the eat your vegetables type of play. Rhamondre Stevenson, even if he's probably less talented than Trevor Henderson, he looked better last year and he's going to have a goal line or like it's like the the devil and the angel on my shoulder and the angel wants me to point out and say, "Take all the upside you can." And the devil's like, "Bro, be [ __ ] real with yourself."
That's why I'm like, "Why do you have Luther Burden ranked so high then?" Cuz like he's the same exact argument as Henderson. Like we haven't seen him be a full-time player yet. But anyways, we're not going to get into more stuff here. Um, if you guys enjoyed this video, leave a like down below. Um, we tried to rage bait. I didn't get as passionate as I thought I was going to be. I thought we were going to be a little bit more mad in this video, but maybe we disappointed you. We We purposely avoided Cowboys players because we knew that would take 87 years. We purposely avoided Michael Wilson and Marvin Harrison because we knew that would take a million years. And you guys have heard that already. But, uh, yeah, let us know what you thought down below. Make sure to check out everything we got going on on the site. The season pass is live right now. All of our redraft rankings and officially the redraft rankings manifesto 1.0 and the projections 1.0 or version the first version of them are all live on the site right now. And you can get those with the season pass. You can also get um some action on some of these players. If you think, hey, um, you know, Danny's right, Rhamondre Stevenson is a good value or Bush is right, Henderson is a good value, you can head on over to Underdog Fantasy and use the promo code FSE when you sign up and make your first play. When you make your first play within 24 hours, you'll actually get our redraft rankings manifesto, our dynasty rookie draft guide, the projections, and when it comes to it, the weekly rankings for the start of the season, all in your email inbox for using our promo code over on Underdog. So, both of those will be linked down below in the pinned comment. But with that being said, peace out. We'll talk to you soon.