Week 15 waivers

Post Reply  
Megalodon
Posts: 19726
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009
Sand$: 21,571.40
Oh I'm starting Washington all day if Jacobs is out. Jags have given up so many rushing yards and points, he's a borderline RB1 if he's getting 15+ touches. Look what Ekeler did.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 5422
Joined: Wed Sep 7, 2011
Sand$: 9,709.49
Markulous wrote:Oh I'm starting Washington all day if Jacobs is out. Jags have given up so many rushing yards and points, he's a borderline RB1 if he's getting 15+ touches. Look what Ekeler did.

I don't think i'd start him over my current RBs (Chubb and Carson)
Megalodon
Posts: 19726
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009
Sand$: 21,571.40
NautArch wrote:
Markulous wrote:Oh I'm starting Washington all day if Jacobs is out. Jags have given up so many rushing yards and points, he's a borderline RB1 if he's getting 15+ touches. Look what Ekeler did.

I don't think i'd start him over my current RBs (Chubb and Carson)

No, I wouldn't over those guys, but like I'm starting him over Sanders. I'd start him over Fournette, Gurley, Kamara, etc. though.
HammerHead Shark
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008
Sand$: 2,027.40
Renegade wrote:
agree. I've got 'em ranked Mostert, D.Wash, AP for week 15. If Jacobs sits, i could easily see justifying D.Wash over Mostert


I agree on that order. I went ahead and picked up AP for blocking purposes from the opponent. Now, I'm going to be questioning all week who is better as the flex: Mostert or Washington. I'm pretty sure I'll stick with Mostert unless something wild happens. Last week was a best-case scenario for Washington in terms of productivity. I think it swung in his favor more last week because he took away receptions from Richard. If that flips the other way, that hurts his numbers a bit. Then again, take away the pass from Sanders to Mostert, his day is different haha.

Hot hand theory points to Mostert.

Markulous wrote:
NautArch wrote:
Markulous wrote:Oh I'm starting Washington all day if Jacobs is out. Jags have given up so many rushing yards and points, he's a borderline RB1 if he's getting 15+ touches. Look what Ekeler did.

I don't think i'd start him over my current RBs (Chubb and Carson)

No, I wouldn't over those guys, but like I'm starting him over Sanders. I'd start him over Fournette, Gurley, Kamara, etc. though.


You'd really start Washington over Kamara? I actually have this as a backdoor option I could do to avoid deciding on Mostert/Washington but that feels like a super bold pick.
Supreme Megalodon
Posts: 57611
Joined: Fri Jul 7, 2006
Sand$: 116,835.40
Might this be the Christmas miracle a la 2016? Sure, maybe. And that was his only game as a pro with > 100 yards. rooster block a desperate opponent with Washington? Sure. If the injury bug bit you last week? He's a fine risk. If you get cute then you reap what you sow though.
Megalodon
Posts: 19726
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009
Sand$: 21,571.40
Kamara hasn't really been having big games or anything and Indy defense is good. If it's bold/OOAL, then I'll take it, but the way the Jags have been playing it seems crazy not to start him.

I don't have Kamara though. I have Miles Sanders and Chubb as my only other 2 RBs. Obviously not benching Chubb, but Sanders is going to my bench.
Great White Shark
Posts: 8682
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010
Sand$: 18,659.84
Renegade wrote:
BG3eb wrote:
garsh wrote:Guice has been placed on IR.
If Peterson is available in your league, snatch him up. He's going to get volume.

He appears to be rostered in less than 50% of leagues in ESPN.


I'm not sure if I like him more than Mostert. D. Washington in Oakland is more of a tougher sell than Peterson, but I think I'd want him more than Peterson.


agree. I've got 'em ranked Mostert, D.Wash, AP for week 15. If Jacobs sits, i could easily see justifying D.Wash over Mostert


I'd start D.Wash over Mostert obviously if and only if Josh Jacobs gets shut down again.

Mostert is the hot commodity but not guaranteed goal line carries. Also, he's not the trusted passing down back if it turns into a shoot-out since SF Defense has some injuries.


Meanwhile the Jags have pretty much quit on their team.


This is the time of year when, yes, sometimes you do play matchups. But I'll probably eat my words next week.
HammerHead Shark
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008
Sand$: 2,027.40
Markulous wrote:Kamara hasn't really been having big games or anything and Indy defense is good. If it's bold/OOAL, then I'll take it, but the way the Jags have been playing it seems crazy not to start him.

I don't have Kamara though. I have Miles Sanders and Chubb as my only other 2 RBs. Obviously not benching Chubb, but Sanders is going to my bench.


I traded brilliantly over the year in a 12-team league with radical churn to get CMC and Kamara and it was pretty good, even when Kamara was just coming back from injury, but it's been dicey the last two weeks. I barely survived in round one, mainly because of him. The data says if this is a run of the mill player, he's sitting (maybe like a tweaked version of Tyler Boyd or Joe Mixon against New England), but he's not that type of run of the mill player. I could sit him and play Mostert and Washington but then I'd have to look at myself as the finals played out and I wasn't in there for the fact I sat Kamara and he rounded back into form.

jnadke wrote:
I'd start D.Wash over Mostert obviously if and only if Josh Jacobs gets shut down again.

Mostert is the hot commodity but not guaranteed goal line carries. Also, he's not the trusted passing down back if it turns into a shoot-out since SF Defense has some injuries.


Meanwhile the Jags have pretty much quit on their team.


This is the time of year when, yes, sometimes you do play matchups. But I'll probably eat my words next week.


Jags have definitely done that, and the fact the Raiders signed a RB indicates they're pretty close to shutting down Jacobs. It'd be a really tough toss-up between the hot hand and the presumed volume in a favorable matchup.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 1837
Joined: Tue Mar 30, 2010
Sand$: 3,857.60
If the Raiders fall behind, wouldn't be surprised to see Richard in there more which is certainly a risk for Washington. Hard to predict. He seems like a top 20 option either way
Great White Shark
Posts: 8682
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2010
Sand$: 18,659.84
Tacks652 wrote:If the Raiders fall behind, wouldn't be surprised to see Richard in there more which is certainly a risk for Washington. Hard to predict. He seems like a top 20 option either way

I think the Jalen Richard / DeAndre Washington split died with Jon Gruden. Separate last year from this year.

Washington posted catches and got 66% of the snaps to Jalen's 33%.

Jalen seems to be more change-of-pace than threat. Jalen got 33% snaps even with Josh Jacobs. DeAndre takes the Josh Jacobs role.
Megalodon
Posts: 19726
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009
Sand$: 21,571.40
Tacks652 wrote:If the Raiders fall behind, wouldn't be surprised to see Richard in there more which is certainly a risk for Washington. Hard to predict. He seems like a top 20 option either way

Jags are going to be without their WR1 and the only guy who has been reliable. They have a bad O-line, the worst TEs in the league, and a coaching staff with one foot out of the door. Only scenario where Raiders fall behind is if they start turning over the ball like crazy and giving up defensive TDs. I don't think people realize how bad this Jags team is.
HammerHead Shark
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008
Sand$: 2,027.40
jnadke wrote:
Tacks652 wrote:If the Raiders fall behind, wouldn't be surprised to see Richard in there more which is certainly a risk for Washington. Hard to predict. He seems like a top 20 option either way

I think the Jalen Richard / DeAndre Washington split died with Jon Gruden. Separate last year from this year.

Washington posted catches and got 66% of the snaps to Jalen's 33%.

Jalen seems to be more change-of-pace than threat. Jalen got 33% snaps even with Josh Jacobs. DeAndre takes the Josh Jacobs role.


The surprise was the fact that Richard did seem to be phased out last week in comparison to when Jacobs was in. To me, that screams volume management with Jacobs. He's a rookie but he's more than capable of catching passes out of the backfield. Problem with that is then he's a three-down back and he's going to get killed over time. He wasn't doing that and is already hurt. So if that was the thought, then Richard was clearly going to be in on third downs or when the game was out of hand...and Oakland really suffered or became predictable at that point. I give Oakland credit for that foresight if that was actually the thought process.

Turn it around to now. Sure, I'm sure they like Washington but he's nowhere near a franchise piece compared to Jacobs and the volume/window of time required is far shorter than what they needed from Jacobs. So if he can handle the three-down responsibilities, roll him our and then use Richard when Washington needs a rest.
Megalodon
Posts: 19726
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009
Sand$: 21,571.40
Richard might not be a bad play either for those in need of a flex. Seriously, anyone can run on the Jags.
User avatar
Great White Shark
Posts: 4319
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003
Sand$: 10,354.96
Renegade wrote:
Madden Curse wrote:Scored the combo of Tannehill/AJBrown off waivers in my KDEF league, which I think is a great all-or-nothing playoff option.


I got AJB, but Tannehill is still out there. Debating whether to grab him and start him over Kyler...


Abso-frickin-lutely!

*says the owner starting the Tanny/AJ duo*
_______________________________________

SCS Wolfpack
2016 RFFL Champion

Tannehill, Darnold
CMC, Cook, Singletary, Mostert
AJ Brown, Golloday, Gallup, Slayton, Evans (I/R)
Doyle, Rudolph
Badgley, Slye
Vikings, Eagles

12-team / .5PPR / 1QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 Flex, 1 K, 1 DST
HammerHead Shark
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Sep 29, 2008
Sand$: 2,027.40
NFL Network reported that Jacobs got the MRI on his shoulder and it came back negative so he's hoping to be back this weekend.