Footballguys Roundtable Week7

This week's panel topics: Alternate takes to common `17 narratives; 2+2 (first-half surprises to keep and sell); what to make of Adrian Peterson; and the fantasy implications of Brett Hundley and C.J. Beathard 

A month into the season, injuries continue piling up, bye weeks are here, and those unexpected contributors are now a reality. This week, we examine a pair of new starting quarterbacks; discuss Adrian Peterson's declaration that his demise was greatly exaggerated; play a game of 2+2 using unexpected first-half fantasy stars; and, share some alternate takes to current football narratives.   

Let's roll...

[return to top]

Adrian Peterson

Matt Waldman: Adrian Peterson showed up in a big way against the Buccaneers. Let's frame our discussion on the Cardinals' new running back around these two topics: 

  • What kind of production as a fantasy RB do you expect moving forward? 
  • Which two players in the passing game benefit most from Peterson's presence, and how much is the improvement in production, if any?
Daniel, what are your thoughts on Peterson? 
Daniel Simpkins: I’m not expecting a season full of performances like the one he gave us against the Buccaneers defense, but I am more optimistic about his outlook now that I’ve seen the fit and the Cardinals’ willingness to commit to him in a way the Saints would never have. Looking ahead, I don’t see any defenses that are stifling against the run on his remaining schedule. I’m very comfortable with him as my second running back starter on my teams. 
Stephen Holloway: The Cardinals have run the ball poorly all season, yet Peterson stormed out of the gate last week. Count me among the doubters that his success can be sustained. The Cardinals’ offensive line struggles and Peterson’s 32-year-old body are too much to overcome.
Jeff Haseley: I see Peterson as a legit stopgap option until David Johnson returns in late November. Like Daniel said, Arizona couldn't find the right back to take Johnson's place and they struggled until they arrived on Peterson. Andre Ellington was best as a receiving back for the Cardinals, but he lacked the power and size to run between the tackles. He will still have a role as the team's pass-catching back, but Peterson can do the heavy lifting of running the ball and moving the pile.
I believe we'll see Peterson get 15-20 carries a game, especially if the offense is responding and creating a rhythm that makes it difficult to predict what's coming. Peterson enters RB2 territory for me and will be especially useful around the goal line. He'll play better in certain matchups than others, plus you can tell his confidence is back. This week at Los Angeles is one of those good matchups. I value him as a low-end RB1 this week in a favorable matchup against the Rams, who have allowed the most fantasy points to running backs this year. 
Mark Wimer: Until David Johnson returns, I think you'll see Peterson produce at a respectable level depending on the matchup. He's benefited from being lightly utilized in New Orleans early this year and so the wear-and-tear on his body hasn't accumulated to the point that his skills degrade just yet. I expect Peterson has enough snaps left in the tank to bridge the time gap until Johnson returns.
This short-season, stopgap role is well suited to his body's reduced ability to regenerate at this late date in Peterson's career. However, I am not excited about Peterson as a long-term option as I think he's reached the point where he doesn't fully recover from each game—the wear-and-tear of a season's worth of hits accumulate and slow him down over time. NFL Football is a young man's game. 
John Mamula: Peterson's value is going to be heavily influenced by game-script on a week-by-week basis. If the game projects to be a tight matchup or a game where the Cardinals are favored, then Peterson is a viable RB2. With this type of game-script, Peterson is locked into touches, such as he was this past week when he had 26 rushes for 134 yards and two touchdowns. If the Cardinals are an underdog, it will probably be a good move to keep Peterson on your bench as he will have an extremely low floor if the Cardinals are playing from behind. With this game-script, Andre Ellington will see the majority of the snaps as the Cardinals are forced to pass the ball. 

Waldman: I see that most of you are still skeptical of Peterson. I will note that we do not know whether Peterson's recovery time from workloads has deteriorated. Considering what the older Frank Gore is doing with an NFL career after two major knee surgeries as a collegiate star and Peterson only major injury was an ACL tear that he returned from in record time to post a 1400-yard rushing season, it's premature to write off Peterson as too old to handle a workload, especially when during the past 10 years we've seen an increasing amount of running backs older than Peterson produce as RB1s. I'm sticking with the fact that Peterson is a way better match than his colleagues on the depth chart for the actual offensive scheme the Cardinals planned to run before Johnson got hurt. This defense is good enough to keep things close and Peterson will open up up the passing offense, especially behind an offensive line that returned two of its three injured starters last week. 
Who benefits the most from Peterson, if anyone stands out despite your mostly skeptical view of the situation? 

Mamula: Larry Fitzgerald has been the only constant in the Cardinals offense. He will produce regardless of the situation at running back. It has been and will continue to be difficult to project the other wide receivers, J.J. Nelson, John Brown, and Jaron Brown, from week-to-week. 

Wimer: Any legitimate threat to run the ball is going to loosen the coverage somewhat. I think that Larry Fitzgerald is going to get his targets and receptions pretty much no matter what (even though he no longer has top-tier speed) due to his professionalism and ability to exploit coverages, so Jaron Brown and John Brown are the most likely receivers to benefit, in my opinion. 

Haseley: Fitzgerald and John Brown will see the biggest impact from Peterson's presence, especially if the offense continues to play well and move the ball down the field with regularity. An improved ground game opens up more scoring chances and that directly benefits Fitzgerald and the Cardinals next best receiver, John Brown

Holloway: If Peterson can sustain success, Larry Fitzgerald will be the primary beneficiary. Selecting another receiver that might benefit is not something obvious at this point.

Simpkins: Before Peterson’s arrival, the Cardinals offense was like a machine with a missing part. You may be able to take that part that sort of fits and make that machine work, but it won’t be nearly as efficient. Yet if you take the time to acquire a part that fits, even though it may not be the original part, you can get the machine back up to its previous efficiency. The missing part is David Johnson, the part that sort of fit is Andre Ellington, and Adrian Peterson is the spare part that fits.

With Peterson, this offense can do what it wants to do again, which is run the ball, throw downfield, and keep Carson Palmer from taking unnecessary abuse. That being said, I think John Brown and Larry Fitzgerald are your primary beneficiaries in this passing offense. Brown seems to be healthy enough to capitalize on the downfield strikes from Palmer, while Fitzgerald will continue to work the intermediate area of the field and red zone. Overall increased efficiency should put Fitzgerald back at low-end wide receiver one territory while Brown becomes a low-end wide receiver two. 
Waldman: I'm totally on board with Fitzgerald and Brown as the two options. The Cardinals use Fitzgerald extensively as an edge blocker on running plays and he often takes on linebackers and safeties in this role. When this healthy line has success on runs off tackle, around the end, or any run from an alignment where Fitzgerald begins tight to the offensive line, it sets up play-action passes where safeties scream into the box to beat Fitzgerald to the punch and contain the run. 
Veteran safety T.J. Ward is an excellent player, and Peterson and the Cardinals were good enough to get Ward flying into the box to stop the run before Fitzgerald could get position on him. It created targets where Ward's reaction was premature and Fitzgerald ran by Ward for a wide-open target. When a veteran of Ward's import gets caught with his hand in the cookie jar or, a Pro-Bowl cornerback like Brent Grimes gets juked out of his shoes twice by Peterson on edge runs at the line of scrimmage, Peterson still has enough to force defenses into overreacting to the ground game and making the passing game much easier. 
Carson Palmer and Fitzgerald will sustain strong production. As long as the sickle cell issues are behind him, John Brown will earn some idea deep targets more often. If it's not him, look for Nelson and Jaron Brown to trade opportunities but not offer the consistency fantasy owners seek from a starter.

[return to top]

Alternate Takes

Waldman: Every week, I read football analysis that, after watching the games, I disagree with. A good example is that Adrian Peterson was done. Share your analysis of a player, unit, or team that runs counter to the popular analysis that you've seen during the past two weeks. Include fantasy implications for your take.

Wimer: I think that the Raiders' offense is in serious trouble.  After last week's one-point loss, I heard commentators saying that Oakland is missing on the "little things" and needs "fine tuning" for winning football. I don't see that. I see an offensive line that is doing a terrible job pass-blocking.

I see a No. 1-A wide receiver, Amari Cooper, who has lost his confidence and doesn't make plays even when spoon-fed the football (six targets for 5/28/0 receiving last week is a terrible performance for someone who is supposedly an elite receiver).

I expect continued mediocre-to-sub-par performances for the Raiders going forward. Except for Michael Crabtree, who is the one legitimate receiving threat here as things stand, I am avoiding starting Raiders' receivers wherever possible.

Mamula: There is no denying that Deshaun Watson has arrived as a fantasy force at the quarterback position. However, take a look at the quality of the defenses (Cleveland, Kansas City, Tennessee, New England) that he has faced over the past month. All four of these defenses rank in the bottom-third with pass defense. Looking ahead to the fantasy playoffs, the Texans travel to Jacksonville Week 15 and play Pittsburgh Week 16. Both of these defenses are ranked in the top-four in pass defense and represent a significant challenge. If you have another viable option at quarterback, now is the time to sell high on Watson. His value will never be higher.  

Waldman: Regardless of whether your take on Watson plays out, John, I love this thought despite the fact that I like Watson. The NFL tends to play out in four, four-week quarters during the season and the collection of scouting intel has a similar cycle. Watson has done a fantastic job executing the game plan and creating when defenses foil the original plan. However, Watson still has the same strengths and weaknesses he showed at Clemson and there will likely be defenses that are more equipped to exploit Watson's weaknesses in the coming weeks. 

Two of these weaknesses is his lack of arm velocity and adjusting to hybrid coverage in the middle of the field. The arm velocity issue from the NFL Combine has been overrated in the sense that analysts concluded Watson could not be a capable NFL quarterback without it. However, it is an important characteristic of Watson's game and like any other strength or weakness of a prospect has to be matched well with his new offense. 

Watson can throw from distance but he cannot drive the ball as well as many starting quarterbacks. It means he's best matched with receivers who excel on routes where they earn separation and run under the target and/or win above the rim in contested situations. Most of Watson's deep routes are passes where he can place a lot of air under the football. 

If opposing defenses can force Watson to deliver more deep comebacks, deep outs, skinny posts, and deep dig routes that require velocity, we're going to see worse results. Watson's efforts on some of these routes for the past 4-5 weeks have already shown that in a limited sample size.

The adjustments to hybrid coverage in the middle of the field is something most quarterbacks must deal with. Hybrid coverage, for those of you who may not have heard that term, is a common category for a variety of NFL coverages where the defense plays man-to-man in one region of the field while playing zone in another. Quarterbacks often read a tell on one side of the field that indicates man-to-man and presumes the entire field is in man-to-man only to discover he's throwing into a zone. Some college teams play versions of hybrid coverage, but it's not nearly as common as it is in the pros.

Watson's greatest issues with accuracy at Clemson were middle of the field timing routes where he was often a step or two behind his receivers when he was inaccurate. He also had frequent issues with safeties or defensive linemen dropping into coverage zones. These are common for most rookie quarterbacks. 

Even so, I expect we'll see at least 2-4 teams capable of keeping Watson in the pocket, getting pressure fast, and forcing Watson into throws that aren't in his wheelhouse. It won't mean that Watson isn't cut out for the NFL if he struggles, it means teams will have adjusted to him and the next step will be for Watson to prove he can address some of the obstacles and his team can hide the ones that he cannot.  

Keep in mind, Carson Wentz has issues throwing the deep ball in a timing offense. His often too far or too short of target and his timing routes in the intermediate range of the field were often too high or wide of target last year. Why? He could not set up or maintain consistent and precise footwork in the drop-back game that is the basis for accurate throws beyond certain distances.

Did Wentz improve? We still don't really know this answer when looking at the film because the Eagles have cut back on his drops from center and instituted an offense reliant more on shotgun where Wentz and take one hop into a position where he's set up to release the ball quickly. This eliminates the need for as many drops where his footwork setups were (and in limited viewings this year, still have been) the problem. 

Wentz can throw accurately from these quick pivot/hop setup stances within the range of 20-30 yards as long as it's not an opposite-hash target. Where his accuracy dwindles has also been addressed with receivers who are better at winning the ball from defenders or running under targets that lead them with their backs to the line of scrimmage. 

Does this mean Wentz is a bad quarterback? Of course not! Otherwise, Tom Brady should be judged as a bad quarterback because he can't scramble or deliver consistently accurate throws when forced to throw on the move. The Patriots can hide his weaknesses and showcase his strengths. The Eagles and Texans are doing the same with their quarterbacks.

We'll see if Watson and his team can continue to do so against tougher competition. My thought is in line with John's: I'm skeptical that the Texans are good enough to consistently do so against a higher tier of defensive competition that's ahead on the schedule.   

Simpkins: I’ve been seeing some suggestions (especially in the dynasty space) that Amari Cooper is the next Braylon Edwards. I don’t think those making that claim understand the reasons that Braylon Edwards failed in the NFL. Edwards failed because of off-the-field incidents, poor work ethic, and maturity problems—not his dropped passes.

Amari Cooper has had some problems with drops, as Edwards did, but drops are given too much weight. Drops are not a death knell to a player’s value, as Matt Harmon so eloquently documented here. I don’t think Cooper has logged two thousand-yard seasons by accident. He’s proven to be a very polished route runner and technician, things that don’t suddenly vanish from a player’s repertoire.

The more likely explanations for his struggles are that Cooper is playing dinged up (he has a nagging knee problem) and his quarterback has also been struggling to be as impactful after suffering a transverse process back fracture. If both can get healthier as the season wears on, I think we’ll see Cooper rebound to post the wide receiver one numbers we expected when we took him early in our fantasy drafts. 

[return to top]


Waldman: I will list players with great first-half fantasy production and you have two tasks: 

  1. Select two players from the list who you think have the best shot of sustaining this surprising start and explain why they've succeeded thus far. 
  2. Select two players who you'd sell high, why you would, and what you'd expect in return for him. Give me a specific player or range of fantasy value at the positions that you'd want in return for each player. 
The list of first-half surprises: 
Have at it, fellas. 
Holloway: For sustaining production, Carson Wentz seems the most likely. He is very comfortable and has better receiving options than many expected. Zach Ertz has been playing very well and Agholor and Jeffery have contrasting styles and have both been effective. It doesn’t hurt that the Eagles defense has played well.

Chris Thompson has been Washington’s most dynamic offensive player and should continue to be heavily involved in the passing game.

Jerick McKinnon has been outstanding, but I would sell him quickly for a top wide receiver. He has no history of sustained success with heavy usage and he will likely wear down sooner rather than later.

Blount is another I would trade, before Smallwood recovers and would again likely seek a similar level wide receiver, possibly an underperformer so far this year like Amari Cooper.

Mamula: Blount is the second name that I would sell high on due to the return of Smallwood. The Eagles running game projects to be a committee moving forward, and Blount will be touchdown dependant to reach value. I would target an RB who is locked into touches with his offense or a low-end WR2. 

Haseley: Cameron Brate is a sell-high. It's definitely possible that Brate is going to be a featured player in the Buccaneers offense going forward, but his value is super high right now after three big games in a row with three touchdowns. Looking a little deeper, half of Brate's six red zone targets on the year came last week and he's fourth on the team in targets this season. In the last three weeks, only Mike Evans had more team targets but overall I don't see Brate getting a ton of volume that would rival some of the better tight ends in the league...

Wimer: I am going to disagree with Jeff Haseley and state that Brate should continue to be a force at tight end. He has the trust of his quarterbacks and O.J. Howard is not panning out as an impact player in his first season (as is usual with rookie tight ends - he has more than one reception in just one game so far this season).  While Jeff is right that Brate hasn't seen as many targets as other top tight ends, I find it hard to argue with a 70% reception percentage and a constant drum-beat of one TD per game over the past four games. Brate is a prime red-zone target for this offense/offensive coordinator. I like him to continue his string of strong games.

Haseley: Compared to Rob Gronkowski, Travis Kelce, Zach Ertz and even Evan Engram, Brate isn't close (granted he has played in one fewer game). 

Ertz 53/34
Kelce 44/33
Engram 41/24
Gronkowski 40/26
Brate 30/21

His four touchdowns are the main reason why his value is so high. Take away half of those and he's not in the conversation. 

Mamula: Brate is one of my two best options on this list with the greatest shot at sustaining production. Brate has established himself as the second option in the passing game behind Mike Evans. When Evans is locked in tight coverage, Jameis Winston immediately turns to Brate, who will finish with double-digit touchdowns this season. 

Jerick McKinnon is also a sell-high. McKinnon is only on this list because of the three touchdowns that he has scored in the last three games. He is still splitting time with Latavius Murray, and Stefon Diggs will return to action soon enough. There's only so much offense to go around in Minnesota. I don't expect that level of production to continue for McKinnon. Sell high while you can. 

Wimer: I agree with Jeff. McKinnon has always flashed for a few big games each season over his career, but I have never seen consistent production. He's a game-flow dependant player who doesn't have a clear-cut featured role. I expect him to return to mediocrity soon. I'd go for an RB 3/Flex option type player and trade him while you can. 

Mamula: McKinnon is the first name on the list that I would sell high. Over the past four seasons, McKinnon has never shown that he can sustain volume. His production over the past two weeks is closer to his ceiling rather than his floor. I would try to trade him to an RB-desperate owner in your league. You may be able to return WR2 value. 

Haseley: Chris Thompson is a keeper. Washington continues to look to Thompson as a receiving threat and he has also shown the ability to run the ball well. He appears to be a fixture in the offense, which means his fantasy value should continue to stay high. The fact that no other back on the team has increased their level of play is a good sign that Thompson will continue to see a high number of snaps and involvement going forward. 

Wimer: Thompson looks like the best back on the team, and is an excellent receiver out of the backfield. He's a multi-faceted player who should continue to see a high number of targets and receptions each week, and he might do more as a runner in the second half. 

Haseley: Evan Engram is also a keeper. The injuries in the Giants receiving corps have opened the door for Evan Engram to thrive. Given the current state of the Giants, Engram could find himself being one of the team's top 2 targeted receivers going forward. As a result, his stock should rise and could land him in the Top 6 at season's end.

Mamula: Engram will sustain or increase his production moving forward. Engram has an impressive 41 targets through the first 6 games. Those targets are secure with the injuries to Odell Beckham Jr Jr., Brandon Marshall, and Sterling Shepherd. Eli Manning will be forced to pass to Engram, who has a realistic shot at finishing in the top 3 at the tight end position.  

Wimer: This is probably personal bias against Agholor as I suffered through his horrid 2015 and 2016 seasons as a dynasty owner in multiple IDP dynasty leagues, but having watched him often for two years, and thus witnessing the easily-catchable balls bouncing off his hands left and right (69 targets for 36 receptions last year, for example), I have a hard time believing that he'll continue with the current 66.6% reception percentage.

He may prove me wrong, but I just can't get behind him as a sure-fire, continuing threat in the second half of this season. I'm a skeptic here. See if you can find someone enamored of his hot start and try to get a better, legitimate WR 2 for him while his value is high - you might even get a mid-round draft pick thrown in. 

Simpkins: Brate has the best shot of sustaining his success. Mike Evans is getting blanketed by defenses and Brate has proven to be the middle-of-the-field and red zone mismatch that Winston and Fitzpatrick go to when Evans is covered. I also believe Engram has a high likelihood of continuing to produce for owners. He has become the primary pass catcher for a Giants team that is missing its best options. His size makes him a problem for those linebackers and safeties with whom he’s currently being matched.

In terms of selling, this was a tough list to pick from, but in the end, I would pick Thompson and Devin Funchess. Thompson has proven to be highly game-script dependent. Like most of us, I like consistent options that give me some predictability in terms of week-to-week output. I would love to deal Thompson for Jerick McKinnon or someone who I think will get better as their situation improves, such as DeMarco Murray.

As for Funchess, I think it will be hard for him to find that consistent week-to-week production with all the different pieces of that offense. Also, if Cam were to get hurt and miss significant time (and it seems we get an injury scare just about every week), the drop-off to Anderson is significant enough that I feel Funchess would lose some gusto. If I can trade Funchess for Nelson Agholor, T.Y. Hilton, or maybe someone who has disappointed so far like Alshon Jeffery or Amari Cooper, I’m going for it. The problem is, he doesn’t have the name cache, so getting Hilton, Jeffrey, or even Cooper away from their owners still is going to be tough.

[return to top]

young guns

Waldman: Brett Hundley and C.J. Beathard are now starters for the Packers and 49ers, respectively. Let's discuss these topics:
  • Which one do you prefer as a fantasy option and why?
  • For each team, which supporting cast member benefits most from the change and does it change their current value? 
  • For each team, which supporting cast member is hurt the most and how much in fantasy terms? 
John, lead this one off. 
Mamula:  If I had to choose, I would select Brett Hundley mainly due to his supporting cast. Jordy Nelson, Davante Adams, and Randall Cobb are far superior talents as compared to Pierre Garcon and Marquise Goodwin

For the Packers, Ty Montgomery stands the most to gain from the change. The Packers will lean more on the run and Montgomery will be a viable check-down option for Hundley.

Nelson's value takes a significant hit. Nelson has been a touchdown-magnet with Rodgers at quarterback as the duo has connected for 33 touchdowns over their last 38 games together. Nelson drops from a mid WR1 to a low WR2 and maybe even a high WR3 with difficult matchups. 

For the 49ers, Pierre Garcon stands to benefit the most from the change. Garcon has not been able to find any consistency with Brian Hoyer at quarterback this season. Expect Garcon to see a slight bump in value with Beathard under center. The wide receiver was targeted a season-high 12 times this past Sunday.

The 49ers have invested in Garcon with a five-year deal worth $47.5 million this past offseason. They will make a serious effort to make him fit in the offense. I don't see any supporting cast members taking a hit with the quarterback change. 

Haseley: The bridge to Aaron Rodgers is burned until he returns. There is no possibility that Rodgers will play in the coming weeks. It's Hundley's job to keep unless he performs so badly, Green Bay will be forced to turn to option C. You can't say the same for C.J. Beathard. There's always the possibility of Brian Hoyer returning, especially if Kyle Shanahan has a short leash on poor performance

Hundley has more experience than Beathard and he had the pleasure of watching Aaron Rodgers play effectively for two years. The experience factor is in his favor, which could be the difference between committing a turnover or not.

The Packers have a more stable set of receivers who have more experience. I feel more confident in Jordy Nelson, Davante Adams, Randall Cobb and Martellus Bennett to come up big when needed than the 49ers crew of Pierre Garcon, Marquise Goodwin, Trent Taylor and George Kittle

Both are going to be decent streaming options from week to week. I actually like Beathard against Dallas slightly more than Hundley this week vs New Orleans. The Dallas defense can be passed on, especially if their defensive front is held in check. Going forward I don't see either being an every week starter, but if I had to choose one, I'd side with Hundley. 

Wimer: Hundley is the guy I prefer. He has been coached by Mike McCarthy for three years and has looked solid in his preseason opportunities. As Haseley mentioned above, the starting job is definitely Hundley's for the foreseeable future as Rodgers' collar-bone injury is not something that heals quickly. Beathard could be swapped out for Hoyer after a few quarters of bad play, in my estimation. 

Obviously, Hundley (or almost anybody) is a step down from Aaron Rodgers. So the loss of Rodgers hurts Green Bay's entire supporting cast more than the switch to Beathard affects Santa Clara. However, the prospect of a QB carousel for the remainder of the season isn't a huge plus for the 49ers, either. I don't foresee a benefit for any particular member of either offense.

For Green Bay, I'd say that the running backs will be impacted the most as teams are going to load the line and dare Hundley to beat them throwing the ball, and I expect the same for Beathard. Until they can back the 8th man in the box back out into coverage, the running lanes will be constricted for both teams' running backs. I wouldn't expect many 100+ yards rushing efforts going forward, for those who play in yardage-bonus leagues.  
Holloway: It is doubtful that either of these two options is a strong quarterback for the rest of the season, but Beathard seems the best option. He was drafted this year to potentially start and with the 49ers poor start, now is that time. The offense has been fairly productive and he should be under no mental pressure as no one expects them to win. He looked good in his first game and performed equal or a little better than Hoyer. Hundley, on the other hand, is leading a team that many expected to easily make the playoffs and that stress in addition to replacing Rodgers may be too difficult to handle.
It’s very difficult to project how the 49ers offense will differ, but given the target load that Garçon has had, that should continue and if Beathard is an improvement over Hoyer, then Garçon should benefit.

Matt Breida earned more playing time during the past few weeks but has not had much success and his role may diminish as the team places more trust in the veteran Carlos Hyde when paired with a rookie passer. 

For the Packers, all the receivers will likely have reduced opportunities as the passing game production falters. 

Simpkins: I want Brett Hundley, simply because I have more confidence in his experience and surrounding talent. Remember, Hundley has been sitting behind Rodgers for two years. As Matt did a fantastic job breaking down here, Hundley has been a quick study. He showed a great deal of poise after being thrust into a difficult situation this past Sunday. With more practice repetitions and the return of some of the banged-up offensive line going forward, I think you’ll see Hundley put together weeks that make him worthy of streamer consideration. From a dynasty perspective, I think this is nothing but good for Hundley, who gets to audition to be the starter for another team. There’s an outside shot that he could be the future in Green Bay.
For the 49ers, I think the quarterback change is most positive for Pierre Garcon. On Sunday, Hoyer couldn’t seem to get the ball to Garcon. It was Beathard who was able to get Garcon involved—all 55 of his yards came when Beathard was in the game. We should see Garcon graduate from a fringe wide receiver three to more what some expected from him at the season’s beginning, a low-end wide receiver two.
For the Packers, I am thinking this might do the most good for a previously underutilized Martellus Bennett. Quarterbacks who haven’t experienced game action often will find a trusted target in their tight end. Bennett may be older and perhaps not the athlete he once was, but he’s savvy enough to get open and identify soft spots in coverage. If I’m right, Bennett will go from being unstartable to being a tight end two for fantasy squads.

I imagine this hurts their running backs the most. Defenses will be more willing to stack the box and dare Hundley to pass, which is the very opposite of what these runners have faced with Aaron Rodgers quarterbacking.Whether Ty Montgomery, Aaron Jones, Jamaal Williams, I think they go from being potential low-end running back ones to flex options at best.

For San Francisco, I really don’t see much downside for anyone. Hoyer was holding this offense down and we’ve seen that bringing Beathard in helped to invigorate the unit, almost to the point that they were able to upset Washington. Beathard will make his fair share of mistakes, as he did this past Sunday. Yet, I also think he provides some dimensions that Hoyer lacks, namely the ability to throw on the run and off-schedule playmaking ability.

[return to top]


More articles from FBG Staff

See all

More articles on: Strategy

See all