Fantasy Football Today - Rankings Disputes and Creating More Fun Fantasy Leagues! (06/11 Fantasy Football Podcast)

Episode Date: June 11, 2020

Dave is going to try to start the BEST FANTASY FOOTBALL LEAGUE EVER this season! Get the details and see if you like it (2:30)! And there's never a bad time to have some rankings disputes. We're debating: Tom Brady and Drew Brees vs. some of the younger QBs (10:00), James White as a #3 RB in PPR (13:40), Adam Thielen's chance to be elite (18:50) and what we'll see from Evan Engram this season (22:30) ... Another edition of "Does Ben Schragger Know it?" (28:30). Nickelodeon's Guts? Steve Urkel? ... We're here to help you make your Fantasy leagues more fun (30:30). We've got plenty of ideas and potential rules changes. Injury replacements when your player leaves a game early? DST points for a turnover on downs? Let's see what our listeners are suggesting via Facebook and Twitter ... Your emails at [e-mail] and your questions via Apple Podcasts 'Fantasy Football Today' is available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, Google Podcasts, Castbox, and wherever else you listen to podcasts. Follow the new FFT Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/FFToday Follow our FFT team on Twitter: @FFToday, @AdamAizer, @JameyEisenberg, @daverichard, @heathcummingssr, @YardsPerGretch, @BenSchragg Watch FFT on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCviK78rIWXhZdFzJ1Woi7Fg/videos Join our Facebook group https://www.facebook.com/groups/FantasyFootballToday/ Sign up for the FFT newsletter https://www.cbssports.com/newsletter To hear more from the CBS Sports Podcast Network, visit https://www.cbssports.com/podcasts/ To learn more about listener data and our privacy practices visit: https://www.audacyinc.com/privacy-policy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit https://podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is Fantasy Football Today from CBS Sports. Here we go! Email us at fantasyfootballatcbsi.com. Here we go! It's time to dominate your fantasy league. Let's go! Now, here's some combination of Adam, Dave, Jamie, and Heath. So you've been playing in the same fantasy league for years, and it's fun.

You know, it's great. You've got your two running backs, your two or three or three receivers your flex you made it a fab league maybe it's half ppr whatever but you're looking for more you want some suggestions some ways to make your fantasy league a little bit more fun like maybe trading fab throughout the year or you know different ways to set a lineup we've got some wacky ideas from our listeners we've got some ideas from ben and from dave and from ben schrager. We're going to help you make your leagues even better and make you enjoy fantasy football even more. And we're going to do some rankings disputes.

Tom Brady, we'll talk about him. James White, Adam Thielen, Evan Ingram. Here's a fun stat for you. James White, in the last five seasons, there have been 28 times where a running back has had 60 or more catches. In 10 of those 28 times, the running back has caught five or more touchdowns. So that's 10 out of 28 times.

James White has three of those five or more touchdown catch seasons. Doesn't happen that often, but James White is pretty damn good at it. Will he be able to do it again? Alongside Dave Richard and Ben Gretsch, and eventually Ben Schrager. I am amateur poker champion Adam Azer. Oh, no. Good day, everyone. You're not a champion. We need to be very clear about this.

Let's be crystal clear. You had a child and needed to quit. Did well, but we were dead even in chips. And so you literally forced me to chop the pot because you had to go. And that's fine. I said, all right, you know, but I wanted to play it out.

And then what happened? And then we did play it out. And then we said, okay, I actually had more chips. We said, okay, we'll just go all in. I go all in with a three, two, you go all in and you get pocket nines on the hole we go,

the hand we go all in on. That's not exactly what happened. I actually beat you a couple of times previous to that. And then you went all in. I actually beat you a couple of times previous to that. And then you went all in. I still had more chips in you at that point because then we had to do a second hand and then you knocked me out. Okay,

fine. Well, whatever. I feel like a champion and I hope you all were able to watch us on Twitch on Tuesday night. Next Tuesday, we'll be doing a mock draft. So it's twitch.com slash FF today.

It's 7 PM Eastern and it's, we're having a lot of fun. So it's twitch.com slash FFToday. It's 7 p.m. Eastern. And we're having a lot of fun. It's really cool. And thanks for being there if you were there. Dave, you know, well, the second half of the show is going to be dedicated to ways to spice up your league a little bit. But you were trying to start what seemed like could be the most fun fantasy league I would have ever been a part of. It got canceled at the last minute, but you were going to start a league last year.

I hope you consider doing it again. Talk about it and what you're going to do. All right, everybody buckle up your seatbelts. This is how this is going to go down. It is a buckle up your seatbelts. What'd you just get off the phone with a DMV or something? Yeah.

12 team, 12 team auction. Everybody starts the auction with $200. Maybe that's even the buy-in for the league. Who knows? You can spend as much or as little in the auction as you'd like. Whatever you don't spend becomes your fab

for the rest of the year. 15 roster spots. You must start one quarterback, and you must start 14 of the 15 players each week. Scoring would be... We never really quite landed on the scoring. It's probably going to be something along the lines of four points for passing touchdowns

and half-point PPR, half-point first downs, something like that. And, yeah, just like a whole big fantasy football knowledge challenge where we see who can build the deepest roster and score the most points from week to week. So you could start 14 quarterbacks? Well, good luck getting 14 quarterbacks, but sure.

Well, it's an auction. You could spend all your money on all the quarterbacks, I guess. Yeah, but then it might overvalue quarterback. Maybe we need to put a limit on how many quarterbacks a team could have, or maybe we do team quarterbacks and you can't have more than two. Maybe something like that would have to happen. Everybody should buckle the seatbelts, but I'm not sure if the car is working perfectly well here.

I do think that even with a quarterback limit, it would be pretty crazy to see what type of teams people would build. And yeah, my favorite part is that everybody's a flex except for quarterback spot. The two things I love about this, and I'm excited to try it too, are the flexibility. Like you said said everybody's a flex and i mean adam makes a point that's true like quarterback's the most scarce position so maybe there's got to be some type of limitation there but otherwise like you could do crazy things

with your roster and then the second thing which we're going to talk about later in the show i'm sure but just like the the deeper roster idea that you were saying is such a... I love leagues like that. I play in a couple. I think all leagues should be like that. I think it's great to have a league where you have to start with 14 people, and people in the league are going to be starting relatively rotational players, but that still matters. Those players still matter, and I don't know. I think that's a fun way to play, personally.

Yeah, but it's not necessarily deeper rosters because 15 roster spots is fairly typical. Sure. It does behoove you to leave some fab. If you're going to play top of your head, what do you think you'd spend in the auction and what do you think you'd leave for fab? Remember what Dave said.

You get $200 for your auction. Whatever you don't spend is your fab budget for the year uh zero dollar bids dave uh maybe in the fab yes but not in the auction obviously yeah right in fab uh so how much would you save how much you think you'd spend in the draft and save for fab you know you have zero dollar bids that makes me go a little higher like i would probably... Sorry to cut you off there, but I'd probably go a little... I bet we're going to have the same answer. Yeah. If there was no $0 bids in FAB and you needed that money to be

able to make transactions in season, I was going to say 75% or 80% on the draft. If I can make $0 bids, I might go 85% or 90% on the draft. Oh, man. I was thinking more like... Yeah. No. Not the same answer at all. Yeah. I was going to spend $140 and leave $60 for FAB or something% on the draft. Oh, man. I was thinking more like... No, not the same answer at all. Yeah, I was going to spend like $140

and leave like $60 for fab or something like that. Right. So I would have gone... And who knows what I'll do when this thing comes up, but I would say maybe $125 as a floor for how much I would spend. And if I managed to find a couple of good values later on, I would spend more of that and be totally comfortable getting maybe right around where you were saying,

Adam, which is one 50 or so, which isn't too far off from 80% of the total budget. But it, it, it's, it's a, it's an interesting league.

And I think with all the smart people that we have at CBS sports, it, the results could be really interesting. And the fact that there, I don't know how many bargains there would necessarily be. Remember my 2050 rule that we use for auctions? This is just regular auctions where you want to save at least 20% of your budget

for the last half of the auction. That goes out the window here because there might be somebody willing to spend 90% of their total budget on the auction and i'm not sure how many like great bargains there will be right and a lot of times the bargains are a quarterback and that's not going to be the case here right i just want to read i have a league up now decimal scoring four point per passing touchdown half ppr did you say if yours is full i'm sure it was full right it's always full no this one is half ppr half first down oh which is just like

the fishbowl half first down like passing first down as well or just rushing any first down is worth half a point interesting okay which i like a lot better than ppr by the way okay you mean receiving though not quarter quarterbacks don't get a point for passing for a first down. No. Rushing and receiving first downs. Alright. I'm looking at a league that's four points for passing touchdown leagues, half PPR,

no first down reward, I don't believe. Here are your top I'll just read like 20 players. See how many quarterbacks there are. Lamar Jackson was barely ahead of Christian McCaffrey, eight more points. Lamar Jackson, Christian McCaffrey,

Dak Prescott, Jameis Winston, Russell Wilson, Deshaun Watson. So that is what five of the first six players are quarterbacks. Then you have Michael Thomas, Josh Allen, Kyler Murray,

Patrick Mahomes. And then we will get some non quarterbacks in Aaron Jones, Derek Henry, Kyler Murray, Patrick Mahomes, and then we will get some non quarterbacks in Aaron Jones, Derek Henry, Ezekiel Elliott, followed by Carson Wentz, Aaron Rodgers, Matt Ryan, Tom Brady, Dalvin Cook, Jared Goff, Austin Eckler, Jimmy Garoppolo, Phillip Rivers, Ryan Fitzpatrick.

Very, very quarterback heavy. All right. Cool stuff. I hope we can play it this year. It's a fun idea if you guys want to give it a shot. Let's do it. And if there's enough interest from listeners, maybe we'll do one like it for the listeners. Oh, yeah. We can do that too. CBS Fantasy

Football Platform is the best. That's where it'll be. You need to be playing on it. I'm not biased, by the way. It launches on Monday. So that means we're going to be releasing our new rankings, sleepers, breakouts, busts throughout the week. We've got four episodes of this podcast planned to get you ready

for the 2020 season. You've got to tune in to CBS Sports HQ. Go to the website, cbssports.com slash fantasy. Next week is a big, big week. A lot of good content coming out. And mock draft Tuesday night on Twitch. So fantasy, twitch.com slash fftoday. Twitch.com slash FFToday.

Twitch.com slash FFToday. The link is in the episode description. I'm giving you guys 10 minutes for this rankings dispute segment, and I'm sticking to it here. So don't spend all your time on the quarterbacks. All right. First rankings dispute is Tom Brady and Drew Brees. Dave a little higher on these old dudes than Ben,

maybe because he's older than Ben. They're 7 and 8 in the rankings for Dave. They're 7-8 in the rankings for Dave. They're 11-12 in the rankings for Ben. And there are three players specifically that Ben has ahead of Brady and Breeze that Dave has just behind them. Josh Allen, Matt Ryan, Matthew Stafford, and Carson Wentz. It's those four. Josh Allen, Matt Ryan, Matthew Stafford, Carson Wentz.

Ben has those four ahead of the old guys. Dave has Brady and Breeze ahead of them. Ben, you have the floor. I mean, I don't really have a huge negative take on these guys as much as I just... I like Josh Allen's rushing ability. I like Matt Ryan's passing upside. I think they're going to throw a ton again every year. Dirk Keller's been

the coordinator in Atlanta. They've thrown a bunch. I think they led the league in passes last year. I've's been the coordinator in Atlanta. They've thrown a bunch. I think they led the league in passes last year. I've talked a lot about Stafford. Wentz, for me, is in a different tier than Allen Ryan in Stafford, and he's right at the top of the next tier with Brady and Breeze. And I think there's cases for Brady and Breeze, but I'm actually more interested on Dave because I think it's kind of aggressive to have Brady at seven

or Breeze at seven and Brady at eight personally. So Tom Brady finishes the top 12 fantasy quarterback last year with absolute junk at wide receiver and now you're taking him and you're putting him in Tampa Bay with not just Godwin and Evans but

Gronk too and a fortified offensive line and Bruce Arians telling him we don't want you to check it down. Go ahead and chuck it deep. That's a recipe for great fantasy success, especially when you consider that their run game is a big old orange and white creamsicle-colored question mark. I think Brady's going to throw a bunch.

I think he's going to be very good. I think he'll finish in the top 10. And I think he's got a great chance to get well over 4,000 yards and 30 total touchdowns. I don't know if I can say the same thing for Josh Allen. I know that sounds crazy, but I'm not certain even with all the rushing prowess he has and what we've seen in the first two years, I'm not sure if he can do it. And Drew Brees was great last year. He just got hurt. He was second in fantasy points per game at quarterback. He was second in consistency. He's been great nearly every year he's been in New Orleans. His schedule is amazing. His receiving

core got better. His offensive line got better. They don't even have tough back-to-back games until you get to November. So you guys, you go ahead and take your Josh Allen. And Matt Ryan's a tough one. He's got all kinds of potential to be great, but we've seen his, his, his inconsistency on a yearly basis kind of spawn itself. Stafford. If that run game gets going, like I think it will in Detroit,

even if it's a little bit, I think that hurts Matthew Stafford. And I don't think the lions necessarily want Stafford throwing the ball 30 times a game, 35 times a game. I think the old guys are going to put up numbers again. And I really love the idea of waiting for them on draft day. I don't think I can get Brady in the double-digit rounds anymore.

But in our drafts, Drew Brees has been going late. And I've been loving it when I've been able to get him. Brees has not shown any statistical decline. He's just not throwing as much. But yards per attempt, completion percentage. His completion percentage is just getting better and better. He's still amazing. Just a quick follow-up, though.

Do you guys still think Tom Brady is a great quarterback? Because the last two seasons, he's been the number 12 quarterback in fantasy, but on a per-game basis, he's been like 17th, 18th in that range. And there are obviously questions about how good he is at this point. Do you think Tom Brady are obviously questions about how good he is at this point. Do you think Tom Brady is still a great quarterback? I think he's good enough to be fantasy to be. I agree with a lot of what Dave said too.

I don't really hate those guys for fantasy. I think Brady's as good as James Winston, good enough to be good in this offense for fantasy. Like James Winston was. Okay. Let's go to our next player. It's James White. He was 29th and non PPR. This is going to be a PPR discussion though.

It should be with James White. He was a RB 18 last year. Dave has him 32nd and Ben has him 44th and he catches a lot of touchdown passes, five touchdown catches in three of his last four seasons. That's just rare for a running back. Even one that gets as many catches as him, I would say. So, Dave, you're higher on him. You got him as a number three running back, James White.

He's one of my favorite number three running backs, bench running backs to get in PPR. He's given you at least 10 PPR points in 12 of 15 games last year, 12 of 16 the year before. Last year, the floor was good, but the ceiling was right there with the floor. He only had three games with 10-plus and none in 2019, and I think only three games with 15-plus in PPR. So if you're looking for yardage and touchdowns aplenty, I don't see James White giving that to you, but he's going to have his role in the offense. And Jared Stidham, if he is the quarterback,

if it's Brian Hoyer, then no one is going to be that exciting to have in New England. But Stidham to me, just from watching his college film, and I haven't gotten around to the preseason, and I don't know how much I'm really going to watch his preseason film from last year, but I think he handles the pocket well and i think he does a good job of running like a simplified offense where you're getting the ball out quick he definitely leaned on his slot receivers he definitely threw screens to his running backs and dump offs to his running backs i don't think james white's role is going away i think he's still going to be in that exact same passing downs role that he's been in

the last couple of years. And when I'm looking for running backs toward the back half of my fantasy draft, he's going to stick out and there's going to be a lot of people who go, oh, I don't want him. He's the Patriot and Patriots offense is going to suck or, oh, he's old. I don't care. He's still going to catch anywhere from four to eight passes per game. He'll get decent yardage off of that. Maybe he falls into the end zone. Perfect type of running back to use on bye weeks or as a flex. Okay, not so much, Ben. No, I mean, I think Dave kind of laid out the places where you can draft white.

If you're doing a zero running back or something like that, I think these types of receivers make sense. But I think about a whole range of outcomes adam you noted that he's caught five plus touchdowns three times in the last four seasons that's really high for a running back i don't think he does that without brady like i think those touchdowns come down immediately um he had 12 tds one season as well because he had five rushing touchdowns as well uh i i just i don't there's no way that he can kind of match that type of scoring and statistical TDs one season as well because he had five rushing touchdowns as well. There's no way that he can match that type of scoring and statistical prowess. But I also think

the big question is how much does this role change? Dave's right. He's going to still be their passing downs back. But I think there's a really good chance this offense looks a lot different. I think Belichick's probably going to try to win this year based on defense and running the ball i think we'll see a little bit more of damian harris who we didn't see at all in his rookie year if they took like they took him in like the third round and obviously sony michelle's still there um i think there's going to be more of a ball control low scoring type of old school offense we know he's always kind of fit his personnel and he doesn't have tom brady anymore so i don't know why they would throw a

bunch i actually think if they're really bad it is good for white but i don't know how horrible they're going to be i think you're just going to play low scoring kind of defense ball control boring type games i think that hurts white's receiving upside i think that hurts his ceiling in particular he's been able to have a really high ceiling especially in 2018 but now to me he's just one of these boring pass-catching backs with no ceiling, and I would only take him in certain circumstances where I need to actually potentially start him, like a zero-running-back type build or a one-running-back build

where I didn't take my second back until the eighth or ninth round, assuming he's fallen to that point. But otherwise, this is an older back and a much worse offense who's not going to catch the passes or get the TDs that he used to get. Okay. Would you guys rather have Raheem Mostert or James White in PPR? Mostert. Mostert for me, too.

Okay. Would you rather have Keyshawn Vaughn or James White? Vaughn. Any running back with a semblance of upside is going to go before James White. But James White, I mean, he didn't have a special year last year, and he was still RB18 in PPR. Right. You know, like, they tried to be defense and running last year, too.

But we talk about how bad, like, the low-end RB1s are. Like, they're disappointing. They're just the guys who stayed healthy. So you're saying he was RB18 in PPR. Like, in some respects, it's just because he stayed healthy and played 15 games. He had 900 total yards and six touchdowns. Yeah, but you haven't ranked in the 40s.

What's that? You haven't ranked in the 40s. I'm not telling you to rank him 18th. No, I know. Again, he had 900 yards and six TDs, 70 catches. I don't think he gets anywhere near 70 catches. I don't think he gets anywhere near 900 total yards without Brady. I think those numbers

are coming down. I don't think he's getting to 18. I'm just saying, also, 18 for a full season line compared to points per game, it looks different at running back. Well, I'm curious to see. Let me see where he finished points per game. I'll come back to that. Let's go to our wide receiver. Obviously, we're going more than 10 minutes, unfortunately.

Adam Thielen is... You never thought we were going 10 minutes. I thought maybe 12. We can make up time on Adam Thielen if you want. Well, we were going 10 minutes. I thought maybe 12. I don't think we can make a time on Adam Thielen if you want. Well, you guys don't have them that different in the rankings, but I know you wanted to talk about them. If you want, I can inject a little drama here. I've been taking Adam Thielen in the second round and all of our mock drafts after the Stefan Diggs trade. I'm going to pull it back.

I think there's just too much of a chance that they barely throw the ball. And I went and I looked at I looked at the five teams that had the fewest pass attempts in the NFL and their leading target getter. And George Kittle, I gave him a 16 game pace. It was like 122 targets. He was the only one on those five teams that had more than like 106 or something like that, like 106 pace. So there's too much of a chance that Thielen is just a victim of their offense. But I will say, if he gets like 120 targets, then he's going to be second-round player, I think. I think you have to be concerned about the injury and the age

because he's been banged up two straight years, and you have to be concerned about how much they're going to throw the ball. But if their defense takes a step back and they have to throw, I think Thielen's going to be amazing because he's great every time he gets the ball thrown to him. But I guess I just need to bake in the risk a little bit more. Where would you guys take him? I mean, I think that's a good summary of Adam Thielen.

And it's kind of a simple argument because they've removed Stefan Diggs. They're replacing him with Justin Jefferson and Tajay Sharp. And with all credit due to both of those fine, fine athletes, I don't think either one of them will have a chance to lead the Vikings in targets. And I think Thielen might lead the Vikings in targets by a mile. We know that he's got a good connection with Kirk Cousins. We saw it in 2018.

We saw it at the beginning and the end of 2019. But what stood out to me with Thielen, and this is particularly in the case of a team like the Vikings that wants to run the football a lot, his success was predicated on how well the run game was going. And just to tie it into fantasy, eight of 15 games in which a Minnesota running back did not have 15 or more PPR points, Thielen did. He got to that 15-point mark. And in 2018, he got to the 20-point mark a lot. Only a third of the time over the last two seasons, five – I'm sorry, a quarter of the time, five out of 20 games,

where a Minnesota running back had 15 PPR points, Thielen also did. So if Dalvin Cook doesn't hold out and he shows up and he stays healthy and he's awesome, I would not expect a good year from Adam Thielen. And if Dalvin Cook gets banged up or he holds out or the Vikings' defense isn't 100%, then Thielen's going to be well worth that second-round pick that you've been taking him with. Yeah, and we've talked, Dave, you and I, obviously,

about how some of that stat is tied into game script, running back score points when they're leading. When the Vikings win, they're going to run the ball. They want to run the ball. It's not very dissimilar to who's that guy that we talk about? Oh yeah, A.J. Brown. The Titans are going to run the ball when they're leading, and they want to. Thielen's situation is not very dissimilar to that. I just don't understand why he goes so high and as a 30-year-old before the season starts who's coming off a hamstring

injury, compared to somebody season starts, who's coming off a hamstring injury, compared to somebody like Brown, who is an emerging young player whose ceiling might be ahead of him, as opposed to Thielen, whose ceiling is probably behind him. I don't know that he's going to go that high. I think that it might just have been me. Because I think ADP might put him more

toward the end of the third round. And maybe that's where everybody's going to be more comfortable with Adam Thielen. But we shall see. Evan Ingram is our last guy. Believe it or not, he was on pace for 136 targets last year. If Evan Ingram gets 136 targets, he could be a league winner. And the weird thing is he didn't even have that high of a target share in the eight games he played. It was lower than

Kelsey's. It was lower than Kittle's. It was lower than Waller's. So the Giants, obviously their defense stinks and they threw the ball a ton. But Evan Ingram is eighth for Dave and fifth for Ben. Ben, first word on Ingram. Yeah, I think we've

talked all offseason about how tight in five is where things get tough and you kind of have a preference we know dave likes higby he's talked about him um ingram for me it's the targets and and yes he's injury prone and and that's true and but you you totally talked about his target pace um he's been that way essentially since he he joined the nfl uh three years ago he's also been injury prone since he joined the nfl but he had 115 targets as a rookie in 15 games he had a good start to 2018 before getting hurt. He had to start to 2019 before getting hurt. You know, I don't necessarily subscribe to the injury prone ideas. I do think there are guys that I think recurrence of injuries is a concern, right? And so like I

said that with Adam Thielen, who's a 30 year old coming off a hamstring that's one we know recurs um i don't know that we should have as much of a concern with ingram specific injuries uh but they're like foot injuries for the most part right yeah um he's it's a little scary you're about to find out he's he's 25 yeah i know foot injuries can recur to i mean we've had that concern with julio and a lot of guys, but he's 25. He's going into his prime. It's just one of those things where I can't write this guy's whole career off. I feel like there's going to be at some point in a year where he plays 16 games. And when he does, based on how much volume he's seen per game, his whole career, he's going to be a top five tight end, maybe a top three tight end. He's just such a good athlete and such a good receiving player. So it's just one of those guys that I know people are exhausted with how hurt he's been and he's

sunk so many people's teams. When I look at this big group from tight end five on, he's the guy that I think has the biggest upside. Really, it's just can he stay healthy? I agree with a lot of what Ben's saying, including the recurring injuries part because Ingram's had a lot of them. Since the start of 2017, he's had two concussions, he's had an MCL, he's had a hamstring, and he's had foot surgery. So this isn't a case of where he pulls a hamstring, comes back a little too soon, pulls it again,

and has to miss a bunch of time like Adam Thielen had to do last year. He's gotten himself beat up, and I hate it because the potential is there. 12 of 19 games the past two seasons, double digits in PPR points. It's exactly what you're looking for at tight end. If you could promise me that he'd play at least 12 games, I'm taking him as my fifth or sixth tight end because I really like Tyler Higby a lot. But I can't count him for all that.

But I do agree with you on the point that you made where if you take Ingram and if you want to take a second tight end, it's not that big of a chore. And in fact, it might be kind of fun to hunt and peck for that second tight end on draft day and then carry that tight end. And the worst case scenario is you strike out with Ingram and then you strike out with the other tight end. But if one of those tight ends hits, it's going to be good. And if both of them hit, Ingram stays healthy

and you get Johnnie Smith and he ends up being great for Tennessee, then your team's loaded and you can move one of your tight ends. Maybe even it's Ingram. And the case I used to always make with Jordan Reed, another obviously very injury-prone tight end, and it never really worked out because Reed's been obviously very injury-prone tight end, and it never really worked out because Reed's been just so injury-prone lately, but if you know a guy's going to be really good when he's on the field, and you do what Dave just said and draft a second tight end,

what you're getting from your tight end spot on a week-to-week basis is the Ingram production when he's healthy and the other guy when Ingram's out, because you get the advantage of knowing he's not playing that week, and you can put someone else in your lineup. That's a more advantageous to your lineup for the full season in terms of your team's tight end production than a player who might score more points in England for the full season, but not be as good on a week to week basis just because that player played 16 games because their duds are in your lineup, right?

Like they're active. I don't know that we know how good he is yet though because in his first two seasons, Ingram, he really wasn't good when Beckham played. All of his production basically came without Odell Beckham. And then last year, he had two huge games, week one and week three. 116 yards and a touchdown, 113 yards and a touchdown.

He was pretty crazy. He was pretty lousy, yeah. I mean, he was usually around 50 yards every other game, and he only scored in one other game. It was disappointing. But I think it's two years in a row he's been, like, number seven tight end on a per-game basis. Lots to say about him. We will get to it.

It's June 11th, so we've got plenty of time. I asked for a 10-minute segment. I think you guys gave me a 17-minute segment. You guys always give me 170%. That's why I love you, Dave and Ben. I also love Ben Schrager. We're going to find out if he has ever heard of... Who's on this show today? Has he ever

heard of the show Guts? We'll find out when we come back and we'll talk about the best league rule ideas if you're looking to spice things up a little bit. We'll be right back on Fantasy Football today. Kick off an exciting football season with BetMGM, an official sportsbook partner of the National Football

League. Yard after yard, down after down, the sportsbook born in Vegas gives you the chance to take action to the end zone and celebrate every highlight reel play. And as an official sportsbook partner of the NFL, BetMGM is the best place to fuel your football fandom on every game day. With a variety of exciting features,

BetMGM offers you plenty of seamless ways to jump straight onto the gridiron and to embrace peak sports action. Ready for another season of gridiron glory? What are you waiting for? Get off the bench into the huddle and head for the end zone all season long. Visit betmgm.com for terms and conditions must Must be 19 years of age or older. Ontario only. Please gamble responsibly. Gambling problem? For free assistance, call the Connex Ontario helpline at 1-866-531-2600. BetMGM operates pursuant to an operating agreement with iGaming Ontario.

Take back your free time with PC Express Online grocery delivery and pickup. Score in-store promos, PC Optimum points, and more free time. And still get groceries. Shop now at pcexpress.ca Do you have them? Ben Schrager, do you have guts? No

idea what this refers to. How about you, Dave Richard? Mr. Agro Craig over there. Do you know it? What? Dave? No. I don't think I do.

Ben, you know Guts, right? Yeah, it's like one of those old Nickelodeon shows. What's the other one? Legend of the Hidden Temple and all those shows, right? Guts was amazing. Old Nickelodeon shows. To me, an old Nickelodeon show is you can't do that on television yeah not that old in guts it was like a kid's uh physical type game show where they did things and and then they got like slimed

on guts right was it i know i don't think they got slimed on guy i think i think guts was a slime free show believe it or not uh oh, that was Family Doubledare. Yeah, there's a lot of these old Nickelodeon shows. This is a good callback. Is that Marco Mali who was hosting Guts? I don't know. Yeah. We got to look at it. Okay, so no on Guts.

Let's keep going on the list. Ben Trager, do you know Ali G? No. Really? Oh, Ali G? really oh Ali G I think like a singer you know Borat

yes okay Borat was a character on the Ali G show Ali G was one of the characters Borat Bruno and Ali G

it was a Sacha Baron Cohen show that wasn't even that long ago yeah I thought he had a chance to do that one

yeah me too oh you know this will be a fun twist I'll say a name Ben and Dave do you think Ben knows it? And then we'll get the answer. Well, the submission was Jaleel White, but I'll change it to Steve Urkel.

Steve Urkel, do you think Ben Schrager knows Steve Urkel? Yes. Yeah. Schraggy B? Oh, yeah. Boy can dance. Okay. And then finally, has Ben ever burned anything downloaded from napster have you ever burned something downloaded from napster ben and dave

do you think he's burned a cd with napster songs i think he knows what this is but has never done it i don't think he even knows what it is i do no idea i would ask for itunes gift cards for christmas get my music that way no idea what napster is thank you wow napster was uh you know what it's it's a safe bet to say no to anything unless it's like related to sports like directly related to sports or like memes napster like no there's no chance he knew that. Napster was like a big deal. It changed the whole music industry. Yeah, it did. Michael Mallet. Yeah, but Ben was like four when it happened.

I thought maybe he learned about it in a history class. Yeah, right? I mean, it was a huge deal. All right, let's get an email of the day from Pat in Ohio. Pat from Ohio, you know him. He says, what is up, fellas? I'm a proud commissioner of three leagues,

and in all three leagues, my roster spots consist of two wide receivers, two running backs, one tight end, one wide receiver tight end flex, and one wide receiver running back tight end flex. I really like the wide receiver tight end flex spot a lot. I feel like this format, I like this format the best since some real NFL teams run two tight end sets. how do you feel about it so he's got the standard flex but then he also has just the wide receiver slash tight end flex cannot be a running back this is a little twist here uh maybe a way to jazz up your league what do you think about this from pat in ohio and he says have a lovely evening i've played in a bunch of leagues that do this, just the wide receiver tight end flex.

Years and years ago, we got rid of tight end in my main league and did three wide receiver tight end flex spots, but then nobody really played tight ends. I didn't like that as much, but I've also played in ones that have a dedicated tight end spot like he describes, plus a wide receiver tight end flex. And the other flex, instead of being all three is just wide receiver running back um it's actually a super flex league so there's like a a qb flex as

well but there's one that's only wide receiver and tight end i like it i think it's a good way of splitting it out and we know that a lot of tight ends um kind of play both positions as well and um i i think if you add too many flexes, like you can get people to just go really running back heavy and maybe that's not, you know, the best solution for, for fantasy,

for somebody to be able to start four or five running backs. So I kind of like this. Well, those people that go running back heavy, they'll go to set their lineup and they'll think, all right, this is awesome. I'm going to start four running backs this week.

And then they realize they can't because one of the flexes won't let you do it. So I feel like it's just one of those things that you have to keep in mind if you've got unique types of flexes. It's a lot easier to handle if you're in a super flex where you know that most weeks it's going to be a quarterback that you'll start there anyway. Not that you have to, but you probably should, unless you've got a really good replacement for the quarterback,

if your quarterback sucks and whatever. But this is one of those things I think people really don't think about until something happens that affects them. And if you know that you're starting a few more receivers or tight ends from week to week, or that you might want to start an extra receiver tight end, maybe you prioritize that position a little bit more when you get to the middle of your draft,

not necessarily at the beginning of the draft. Okay, so Shraggy B got a lot of responses on Facebook and on Twitter of some league rule ideas. So let's see what we got from Facebook. Shrager, this was your baby, so I'll let you go ahead and read some. Read the first one from Dave Pitsnoggle. This is the most common response. It was

no trade vetoes. Dave, what do you think of this rule? It goes without saying you shouldn't have trade vetoes at all. A commissioner should let everybody act as grown adults. You make your own decisions. You're in this league.

You paid for the league. You run the team the way you want. If you make a dumb trade, a commissioner is not going to help you. If you make an unfair trade, the commissioner can step in and say, all right, look, that's a trade veto. That's a trade veto.

You veto it. Exactly. That's a trade. But it's not. There's no trade veto. It should be a trade that's so bad the rest of the league is in an uproar. Fine. You're describing a veto. That's fine. Yeah, that's that's so bad the rest of the league is in an uproar. Fine.

You're describing a veto. That's fine. And then you veto it. Yeah. That's what I'm saying. I agree with you, Dave. If everyone else in the league is upset about it and you call that a veto, then fine. But one commissioner vetoing a trade, I'm against that completely.

So you're good for vetoes against a commissioner veto. It's got to be like a unanimous league-wide veto. The only time I would allow vetoes, and this is not even when necessarily, it's even more limited than what Dave said. There could be a unanimous league-wide veto, but if the person vehemently defends their trade and they want that trade, I think we all have different opinions of value. I think I may have mentioned this before,

but I go back to Cam Newton's rookie year. He was a late-round pick in my league, and Eric Decker was a free agent taken off the waiver wire. Somebody traded Michael Vick, who they had taken in the first round with the Eagles, and Deshaun Jackson. They had taken the sixth round after week three for Cam Newton on his hot start and Eric Decker, who he had picked up off waivers. And everyone was like, you can't trade your first round pick and your sixth round pick for a 14th round pick and a free agent three weeks into the year. And that's not good value. But he wanted to make the trade and we ended up not allowing it. And what happened was from that point on, Cam Newton and Eric Decker were better. I mean, sometimes people are just early on

something. You can't decide what's good value and's not good value i think the only time you do it is when somebody is not actually interested i mean obviously collusion right but inclusion is a hard one yeah inclusion is not a is a hard one to prove but sometimes people just do it because they don't care enough and when you like i think the way you handle it as a commissioner goes and questions that person can you defend this trade and they'll just be like ha i just did it i think it's fun i can do whatever i want kind of thing but if they're not actually trying to make their team better that's when i know you can get into vetoing absolutely veto everything okay uh ben why don't you combine our next two next two let's see what heat's not here so can't defend the kicker band but kyle olsen says no kickers and jacob

andrew biller says kickers should get decimal points. 49-yard field goal, 4.9 points. So where do you guys stand on that? I like that second option better. I'm not in on the ban kickers thing. I think it's a cool idea to give them a decimal point

for every yard. I think kickers should be lumped in with DSTs. Interesting. And you can make the scoring exactly what you said, Ben, and that certainly makes it more interesting. And, you know, kickers, I guess, are just like kind of random for fantasy anyway. But I would rather, and we've been doing this in our mock drafts.

We've been removing kickers from our mock drafts and using the extra round so that people can go and get one extra player. And you can do that in your drafts if you eliminate kicker or if you include the kicker with the DST. Or just add a round. I'm ban kicker one, and then the scoring would be definitely two. I've never understood why field goal scoring didn't include decimals. Every other, you know, as soon as decimals started started every other yard mattered to the decimal except field goals a 49 yard field goal was the same as a 40 yard field that made no sense ever to me

all right keep it going do you lose points if you miss a field goal another cool idea if you miss a 50 yard field goal is that a minus five no i think it's like a like an interception like a minus two maybe a minus one not a minus five i like that, maybe a minus one. Not a minus five. I like that. I think a minus one. All right. All right. I can dig that. Like, you know, I never understood in our points leagues in baseball,

why it's stolen bases, two points, but a caught stealing is minus one. It should clearly be minus two. All right. Keep going. Christian Elias says your skill player shouldn't lose points on a muffed punt since he can't score you any points in that scenario. That's if you've got a guy who plays a running back, who plays special teams, muffs a punt,

it's a minus two. I think this is ridiculous. Agreed. You think it's a good idea? Great idea. Terrible current rule. Agreed. Next one. Wait. If he can return the punt for a TD and get six points,

then he should lose points. Right, but if your league doesn't allow special teams, because you're starting special teams, I can agree with that for sure. All right, this one's more controversial. Stephen Meyerson, QB taking a kneel should not be negative yards.

Not controversial at all. Yes, it's a great idea. There's nothing worse than Monday Night Football losing a fancy matchup because your quarterback kneels out the win. There's nothing worse. It's never happened to me. I see the complaints all the time, but it's never

happened. I've never lost a Monday Night Football game like that. I've won in that scenario. It's great. I'm kind of in favor of it. It's a horrible rule, and yeah, do away with it. The next one, yeah, call it a sack is fine. Ray Zegri says, ditch PPR for points per first down. Or like Dave said earlier,.5 PPR,.5 first down. What do you guys think of the first down scoring?

I feel like you accomplish more. It's an accomplishment to catch a pass in a football game, right? And that's what we're doing. We're rewarding stats for accomplishments. But getting a first down is a pretty big deal too. So I either like the combo or maybe we should do a little bit more of this with our drafts. It's just more no PPR and full point per first down.

The old PPFD. Well, so my issue with that is you're kind of just replacing one issue with another. Everyone hates PPR because, oh, some of these catches are at the line of scrimmage. You don't get any yards. A reception doesn't matter. You shouldn't get a point for a catch behind the line of scrimmage. Well, first downs are a lot like touchdowns sometimes where the person who scores them is not necessarily the person who deserves it or got you the closest.

Like just because a fullback runs in a one yard TD or, you know, a one yard run potentially doesn't necessarily convert a first down doesn't necessarily mean they were that player. And it actually happens quite a bit where any essentially any completion that's not a first down, you know, these eight, nine yard completionsions they wind up being rushing first downs a lot of the time not every time but it happens quite a bit running backs rack up a lot more first downs and um it impacts receivers negatively compared to ppr because not every catch the point and all these eight seven nine yard completions that don't go for first downs i i like the half and half like i don't i don't want to ruin one issue with the other. So we minimize the value of these zero-yard catches, but we also don't overdo it to where we're giving a bunch of value for two-yard in clouded us runs out of goal line formations on third and one. I don't like that.

Adam, this one's for you. Brett Greaser says swap one bench player into your lineup if they go off. You can only do it once a year. You swap the bench guy retroactively. Ooh. I don't think so. I think that's too unfair. I love it.

Even if it's once a year? I can't. I don't think you can do it once a year because then what if it happens to the same guy? Imagine being on the other side where everyone used their one time against you just because that's how it worked out. That would suck. I think maybe you give every fantasy manager...

Do you get the right to swap out a player after the fact too? Or maybe you get one veto a year. Maybe like... Could I play a little defense? Could I play a little defense? Could I play a little defense and say, okay, you can swap out one player,

but I get to take another player from your lineup and put them on the bench for somebody else. Maybe that's not right. Maybe it's just you also get to replace a player. You get rebuttal, I think, if someone does it against you, but that counts as your one for the whole year. I don't know about that. If someone does it against you, but that counts as your one for the whole year, I think.

I don't know about that. If someone does it to you, you should get a freebie that time. It's like getting a challenge successful. You get an extra challenge. How about if you do this? You swap one bench player into your lineup if they go off. Maybe allow it only once per season. It has to be

during the early games. Either Thursday or 1 p.m. on Sunday. You have to have some level of uncertainty about whether or not you're going to win. Yeah, I like that. That's true. It can't be a mathematical equation. Yeah.

Maybe it has to be done before the Sunday night game. The other way we've talked about this is turning two bench spots. Or maybe it has to be done before that player's game ends. Yeah, I would like that. I like that. there's uncertainty i definitely agree with that you swap someone in and then the person you took out it goes off of the fourth quarter so yeah okay all right you know the way we we've talked about this though and i added into uh a column that we wrote in our magazine that you should read it's on uh newsstands everywhere um that we talked a little bit about the you know some of these ideas and one one of the notes I had was like, make a couple of the bench spots.

We talked about this on the show back in January, but a couple of the bench spots, backup spots and you have to dictate them before the week. And you do this every week and not everyone on your bench. It's not full best ball, but you have a couple spots in case somebody gets hurt in the first quarter or something. You do have somebody that swaps in. If he plays better. I like that.

So that matches up with Bluegrass resistance suggestion, a halftime substitution. If someone gets hurt in the first half, you can dedicate one player to be that sub. Love that. Once upon a time, we had a fantasy game on CBS where you could do that in game and it wasn't a once a year type thing you could do it every week but it was before the time of

iphones and mobile devices and instantaneous notifications and so it didn't really work then but it could work now because people are so locked into their fantasy games and we have ways to contact people and everybody carries their cell phone with them most of the time if if you got an alert on your phone julio jones went out first quarter against new orleans would you like to replace him now well of course everybody's going to stop what they're doing and and replace them with someone on their fantasy bench. So this could be a direction where fantasy goes in the future for sure. This is just for injury, we're saying?

Just for injury. Yeah. Yeah. And it says you get the first half points from one player and the second half points for the other, and the player can't have started their second half. So you don't get that other player's full game. You just get the second half points for the other and the player can't have started their second half so you don't get that other player's full game you just get a second half so now what happens if julio is playing in the one o'clock game and he gets hurt in the first half and i

want to replace him with philip dorsett who's now with seattle and he's got a late game you only get second half yeah not the whole game yeah fine. Whatever it is, you'll take it because nothing's worse than having, you know, DJ Moore gets hurt and he's gone for the game. That happened late last season. In the championship. Crush people. Yep. Ben, why don't we go – and by the way, there has to be some –

like, it can't be a quarterback. You know, you can only substitute a quarterback for a quarterback. You cannot – Yeah, it has to be same position. Same position. Well, what if it's super flex? Then you can only – Then you're fine. quarterback for a quarterback. You cannot say it has to be same position. Same position. What if it's super flex? Then you can only then you're fine.

If it's not, I am not a person Hill and only get a second half receiving. All right, let's go to the tweets. Ben, what are people saying on Twitter? All right. First tweet, JVK, you should be able to trade fab dollars. I do this on a lot of weeks. Yeah, that's that's fine.

Good one. Mike Franco, DST points for a fourth down stand. Oh, yeah. I like that too. That makes sense. Hey, could you trade waiver positions? For trading fab dollars. Yeah. Like a player?

Yeah, I'll give you this player. You let me have your spot on waivers this week. Yeah, I like that. I mean, it's the same thing as saying pick up this guy off waivers for me if you want this player for your waiver spot and then do it after the fact, but I don't see why you shouldn't be able to do it before.

I love this fourth down stand though. It's a turnover. It's a turnover on downs. Why do we not get two points for it? It should be worth two points just like any other turnover yeah but does it matter like at the end of the game every team is going for it fourth and 25 you should get two points for that that's a good point i think so i mean technically yeah because it's a turnover it's a stand some of those situations that i mean that defense won that game and they're they're getting these late stands sometimes they didn't even get a lot of points because of how the game went. Well, they should get some points there.

They won. They did good. I like it. And it's not any different than like, oh, Hail Mary at the end of the first half gets intercepted. It plays meaningless and you get two points for it. True. All right, what else?

Last one. This is right up Ben Gretch's alley from Philly TM. I want three wide receivers and two flexes for every 10 to 12 team lead. The more the merrier. 22 round draft, real deep teams. Go for it.

Five receivers, four flexes. Put it on the board. I don't see a reason why not to like have more, more lineup spots. It's let's, let's start that already. Yeah.

Yeah. Agreed. All right. So this is great. This is a great start. What are some of the best suggestions that we saw today? They were all really good. There's a lot of stuff that we can take to our developers for sure. Kicker Decimal Points is great.

I think the fourth down stand. Kicker Decimal Points we can already do on CBS. I'm assuming Schrager cultivated these from a lot of comments and he picked some really good ones so what were some of the bad ones well there were most of the ones that were bad were stuff that you could just do you could ask your commissioner to do some of it's hard logistically the first half second half scoring that even the muff punts it's hard in in a box score to, to, to figure out where the fumble came from. You have to kind of go to the play by play level. So some of it,

I understand the logistical stuff on where you don't know where the stats came from, but like the field goal thing should be done. Now turnover on down should be easy to do now. I mean, I don't know that that shows up on a box score, but it should be easy to do to keep me taking a new knee. Shouldn't be negative yards. I'm all on that too. I like the, the half a point for the first down and switching to half PPR, half point for a first down.

I mean, I like all these. The most impactful one would be the substitute for an injured player. Yeah. That would be one that I think is really worth looking into. You guys want to hear some that might not be as popular? Sure. Okay. These are some of the ones that I remember from years and years of listening to people pitch ideas. You guys want to hear some that might not be as popular? Sure. Okay.

These are some of the ones that I remember from years and years of listening to people pitch ideas. Here's one. You get a point if your player is on the field, even if somebody else scores the touchdown. So if it's a scoring play and the running back scores, but you've got the receiver on the team, you get a point. The worst idea I've ever heard. Yeah. Awful. No. Goal line touchdown should count for half. Not terrible.

I like it. No, it's a touchdown. Yeah, but it's valuable to touchdown. It's bad. It's actually pretty bad. It's pretty bad. Versus somebody that's going to go and get a long yard. My argument to that is, well, if someone scores a long touchdown run,

you get the points for the yardage anyway. You get the yards, yeah. If it's a short TD, I would say if you're going to do something like that, you should give the other half of the touchdown points to the longest play on the drive, whoever had the longest play on the drive. If there was a 20-yard run

that set up a one-yard touchdown run, a 20-yard run gets half the touchdown points. What if the longest play on the drive is a penalty? Well, hold on. Pass interference call. What if the longest play on the drive is a penalty? Hold on. What if somebody gets stopped inside the one yard line or at the one yard line and then another player scores a touchdown? What if you split the touchdown

points? But it's vulturing. It's one of the most fun things in fantasy, right? Well, you weren't really saying that. You said to the longest play on the drive. I'm saying specifically somebody gets inside the one yard line, doesn't score, next play, running back score next play running back, runs it in now, AJ Brown and Derek Henry split those points. Right.

And what if it's not even, what if it's like a, a big fullback that anything, anything that takes points away from Derek Henry and gives them to AJ. I did that. I knew I'd get, I'd get you on board. All right.

Last, last possibly bad idea. Any points in obvious garbage time. So if a team's down 21 plus in the fourth quarter, cut in half. Call this a Blake Bortles rule. Yeah. It's just game script though, right? If your team is up by a lot, your running back is going to get a ton of points.

Do you then cut that running back's points because the team was up by a lot? I mean, technically it's garbage points, right? This is the worst one yet. So one of the ways that you can impact this, and Scott Fish did it in the Scott Fish Bowl this year, is to give quarterbacks negative points for like incompletions and things like that. They tend to throw more in garbage time.

They tend to throw more completions in garbage time and more interceptions. And he has negative four points for an interception as well and negative one for every incompletion. So the James Winston type stat lines, he's the guy that's like most affected by that change where he would rack up so many yards and even touchdowns, but also rack up interceptions and a lot of incompletions in the traditional scoring.

James Winston could be a top five quarterback in that type of scoring where there's more negative for bad quarterback events and these garbage time events. He goes down to the 14th quarterback or something. Wow. It's a huge change. I like that. Well, thank you everybody for the suggestions. Dave, thank you for the horrible

suggestions at the end there. Fun stuff. Let's make some changes. Let's put this into action. For the record, they weren't suggestions. I totally made it clear that they weren't necessarily good suggestions. I know. I thought that was fine. And I'm not going to out the person who came up with those suggestions. I didn't even tell you the worst thing I've ever heard.

What's that? Yeah, tell us now. The worst one I've ever heard, and I'm not going to say who came up with it, other than it's a former CBS employee, wanted to create a mechanism where fantasy managers could pay to change their lineups and, and have it count. So the idea of putting in a good player who's on the bench, you'd pay $10 to CBS and CBS would make that change for you in your league.

That would not even to the league pot. It doesn't go to the commissioner. It doesn't go to the guy you're playing against. It goes to CBS. I looked at him. I said, are you crazy? People are going to leave in droves if you do that.

It's not worth it for any amount of money. The integrity goes out the window. And the league pot, now you're just talking about hardcore capitalist league, which maybe, I don't know. I am going to start- Worst idea ever. I'm going to start compiling a new statistic this year, guys. I thought maybe it could be done in an automated. No, no. I think everybody's going to start... Worst idea ever. I'm going to start compiling a new statistic this year, guys. I thought maybe it could be done in an automated... No, no.

I think everybody's going to like this. Maybe some people are already doing it. I don't know. I'm going to start multiplying fantasy points by start percentage so we can see the players that are actually contributing the most to fantasy teams. Love it. Yeah. I actually like that.

But at what point do you multiply? You're going to do that on a weekly basis? Yeah, every it. Yeah. I actually like that. At what point do you multiply? You're going to do that on a weekly basis? Yeah, every week. Look, I should say I want to do this. There has to be a way to export this star percentage data. It can be done, Adam. We don't need to talk about it. But like James White, for example,

he had one huge game against the Texans. Luckily, I had his star percentage in my notes. He was started in 34% of leagues that week. So, you know, I think it's not going to be great necessarily just for one year, but when you can compile this year over year and find out, well, yeah, he finished top 12 or whatever, but he was on the bench for like three of his good games.

You know, that happens year after year with some players. I think it could be useful. Dude, this is, I mean, that's honestly like a really good idea because it's a big reason why like we look at like league winners late in the year who have these really good stretches we're starting them every week we're all experiencing how good it was and then we go look at the year in numbers and even their points per game it doesn't seem quite as good and then you compare it to you know stuff like james white like you were saying where if he's really boom or bust and then he's typically not very good.

He's not in a lot of lineups when he's doing well. I think that's a good way to get at the players that are actually impacting fantasy championships and wins and all that. Thank you. I thought it came to me when I was crushing everyone in poker the other night. Actually, I've been wanting to do this for years.

Right after your Tecmo Bowl victory. Here's some Apple Podcast questions from Great White Hark. Dear Clint, Tony, Bruce, and Peter. Those are comic book characters. Yeah, that's the Marvel Universe, right? Probably. Sure, why not? You answered a question in one of the recent pods about robust running back draft strategy.

What would a strategy be for the opposite, taking three wide receivers in the first four rounds? The old zero RB, right? With a little bit of a concentration on wide receivers. Nothing wrong with it. In PPR, I would hesitate to do it in non-PPR.

He said take three in the first four. You can take one running back, and it obviously wouldn't be the strict zero RB idea idea but it would be essentially like a modified zero it's the same kind of strategy yeah you're not solo rb like you're not getting um the the argument for doing that is running backs get hurt um at a higher rate and you're the more running backs take early robust running back you're going to be able to um start some of those running backs even if

others get hurt you're building some depth um zero rb is like we're going to completely avoid or one rb we're going to try to completely avoid that risk and hope that we hit on some upside late round running backs that end up playing like top players because you do see those guys occasionally and then you can build just a dominant team because you have these elite receivers and everything else. So it's a different strategy, but it works. From Swimmy Joe. It can. I got a question from Swimmy Joe.

I'm in a 10-team Dynasty League, half PPR. Should I trade Chris Godwin and my 2020 2.6 pick for A.J. Brown and the 2020 1.2 pick Godwin and 2.6 for AJ Brown and 1.2

of this year's rookie draft I mean I'll let Dave answer first I wonder what you're gonna say Ben I'm sticking with Godwin in the 2.06 I think you're crazy wait a minute is it 1.02 I'm sticking with Godwin in the 2.06. I think you're crazy. Wait a minute. Wait a minute.

Is it 1.02? Yes. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I misread it. I'm taking it back. Yeah, I'm taking it back. You can get either Jonathan Taylor or Clyde Edwards-Hilaire. And you get A.J. Brown.

Yeah, that's a no-brainer. I thought it said 2.02. Okay. That's what I get for not listening to Adam. I wonder how this guy got the nickname Swimmy Joe. Probably a great story there. And last one, no name on this one, sorry. I'm not even convinced AJ Brown's a downgrade from

Chris Godwin, but we can move on. I have the number one pick in my dynasty startup draft, and I want to trade down. How much should I try to get for the number one pick in a dynasty startup draft? This would be a great time to use Heath's dynasty trade chart and see what the drop-off is from Christian

McCaffrey to not a running back like saquon barkley or ezekiel elliott but someone a notch down from there maybe it's nick chubb who i think is a really good long-term running back for dynasty and whatever that difference is that's what you should ask for yeah and then go find the player that's worth that amount and see like what type of pick it is. I think Dave's absolutely right. It depends on how far you're trading back. It's like six overall or something like that.

Well, yeah, it depends how far you're trading back. If you're trading back to fifth or whatever, I'm fine adding just a third round or fourth round. If somebody's going to give you to come back from 101 to 105 and also a top 30 or 40 dynasty player, that's a pretty big addition. It's a win. It's a win, plain and simple.

But on the flip side, you are giving up McCaffrey. You are giving up McCaffrey. He's pretty damn good. Heath's chart is a great piece of advice. So I pulled up Heath's chart, and two trades that he would make are the last pick in the first round, first pick in the second round for McCaffrey or that 1.05 pick plus a late third rounder for McCaffrey.

A late third rounder. That makes sense to me. Well, but it wouldn't necessarily be a late third rounder because if you're dealing with the person that's got 1.05, he's going to have the fifth pick in the third round. Yeah. So try and get that.

So the one in the three. Alright, well, why don't you just ask for one and two first and then go, alright, I'll take one and three. Well, of course, that's what you should do. Yeah, easier trade. Everybody, thanks so much for the great suggestions. Fun show today. We'll talk to you. We got four episodes next week. We'll break down the

top 30 on Monday, then we'll do sleepers, breakouts and busts on Tuesday, Thursday and Friday. We're really looking forward to it. Have a wonderful weekend. Thanks again for listening. For Dave, for the Benz, I'm Adam. Na, na, na, na, na, na.

Na. Na.