Fantasy Roundtable - Week 14
Posted 12/7 by Maurile Tremblay, Exclusive to Footballguys.com
Various staff members will share their views on a range of topics each week in discussion format. Feel free to eavesdrop.
Quick Links to Topics:
Other RBs who could finish strong
Studs who may lose playing time
WR combos for 2006
First pick in a dynasty rookie draft
DeShaun Foster had a breakout game against the Falcons in his first start this
year. Does he suddenly become an every-week fantasy starter, or would you have
to see at least one more excellent week from him before you'd start him over a
Willis McGahee/Willie Parker/Julius Jones/Carnell Williams-type player regardless
Marc Levin: Half
those guys I'd start over Foster. McGahee and Cadillac probably go into my
lineup over him. I believe the Panthers will be starting Foster the rest of
this year, though Stephen Davis will probably always have a Jerome Bettis role.
Foster is a true double threat: getting 15-18 carries each game plus 5-6
targets per game from here on out.
Jason Wood: It's a
great question and, having bashed Foster for much of his career, I find myself
surprised by my answer...it's his job to lose. Stephen Davis has been slowly
but surely phased out despite being masterful at the goal line. As long as
Foster can stay healthy from here on out, I don't see how he doesn't get a lot
of touches. Which means fantasy owners shouldn’t hesitate to start him, either.
DeShaun Foster has always had the talent to be successful in the NFL. When he
came out of UCLA I had him rated as the best college prospect at RB (yes even
over Clinton Portis). There are two things that will determine whether Foster
can have continued success. (1) Can he hold onto the ball? He had a reputation
as a fumbler in college, but so far hasn't done a bad job in the NFL. (2) Can
he stay healthy? He missed his rookie year with a leg injury and has been
banged up throughout his NFL career. More than likely the injury bug will
strike again. But for a late season push all Foster needs to do is put three
games together for your fantasy team and you're gold. I believe that Foster is
a good start the rest of the year because of his skill set and his team's run-first
(even when it's not working) philosophy.
Foster is a great plug and play replacement if your team had a stud go down and
needs to scrape by. I wouldn't start him over my regular RBs, however. He's in
a good situation in that he should get 20 touches a game (the sure-fire road to
fantasy success). His YPC is now up to 4.0 for the year, but I still feel he is
not that special a talent and is an average NFL RB. But he is now getting an
opportunity to play, and that's all that matters for fantasy purposes. Bottom
line, he is a borderline RB2 from here on out.
Other RBs who could finish strong
In addition to DeShaun Foster, there may be a few more candidates to finish the
season strong as well. Which of the following running backs, if any, do you
think have a reasonable chance to become solid fantasy starters for the rest of
this season: Michael Bennett, JJ Arrington, Artose Pinner, Greg Jones, Samkon
Gado, Chester Taylor?
Marc Levin: In
1. Samkon Gado. The team has signaled quite clearly that he is the guy
for the rest of the year, and he has risen to the occasion. Excluding a horrid
game against Minnesota, Gado is averaging 24 carries, 88 yards rushing, and
1.25 TDs per game. That's borderline RB stud numbers.
2. Greg Jones. Why has
Fred Taylor been listed as probable each week, yet Greg Jones is still
starting? Is it because he is averaging 80 yards a game and has two rushing TDs
since he was named starter? Fred Taylor's end zone woes are, at this point,
legendary. Taylor has only two TDs on the year; Greg Jones has four. Most
likely it is a combination of Taylor wanting to be 100% ready before stepping on the field
and the team being perfectly content with Greg Jones' performance. Yet, this is
still a team that will start Fred Taylor at RB when he is healthy and ready to
play. Greg Jones is a nice battering ram/Bettis-like running back in a
fullback's body, but Fred Taylor is still the RB on that team who can change
the course of the game and who can take a short gainer for 40+ yards.
3. Chester Taylor. Jamal Lewis is
not the same running back as he was a couple years ago. Chester Taylor has
given the team more of a spark this season. That said, he can't seem to stay
healthy, and Lewis will not just roll over and allow Taylor to assume the starting role. Especially in point-per-reception
leagues, however, Taylor looks like a better starting option than Jamal Lewis.
4. No one. The rest are part time players who I
do not see having much success in a starting role, and I see their teams
relying on the guys ahead of them on the depth chart if those guys are healthy.
As an addendum, with the injury
to Brian Westbrook, we might as well add Lamar Gordon and Ryan Moats into the discussion.
David Yudkin: I'm
not sure I would want to rely on any of these guys. From what I've seen, Mewelde
Moore is good to go and will force Bennett
back to the bench. Tice has been quoted that Moore should be fine. Arrington
looks like he will be the guy the rest of the way in 'Zona. But is that really
worth all that much? I'm leery of any Lions RB at this point. For the most
part, their offense is not fooling anyone. I see RBBC as an option or Kevin Jones
getting more of the workload than Pinner.
I would feel comfortable starting Greg Jones
provided Fred Taylor keeps sitting. He's at least shown he can get some yardage
and get in the end zone. Chester Taylor
still has Lewis to contend with, and I wouldn't want to start any RB playing Denver (the Ravens are at the Broncos this week). Gado is the one guy most likely worth
starting, as he's had 20 or more carries 4 of the last 5 weeks and has been
pretty successful. Moats probably
will get the most carries in Philly, but the Eagles have not shown that they
will run much. They looked pathetic on Monday Night Football. For leagues that
still let owners scour the waiver wire, Moats may be one of the only players
discussed here that might be available.
Cecil Lammey: As
usual David's right on the money. Ryan
Moats is a tremendously talented runner, and should be the only player
available of the ones listed. On Monday night, Al Michaels said that Andy Reid
told him that Moats was the best pure runner on the team. Well, the Eagles don't
run very much but with that pathetic passing game perhaps now they will. Moats is a guy who has a great skill set and is a very
interesting prospect. I have him in my dynasty league because of Westbrook's
propensity to get injured. The Broncos were very high on Moats and were looking
at taking him in the 2005 draft. Ryan has a great chance to make some late
season noise and play himself into more PT for the '06 season.
Jason Wood: In
order, I like the following three guys. 1. Gado
has had three good weeks out of four and most impressively, he gave owners 75
yards and a TD against the league's stingiest defense. 2. Greg Jones has come through, more or less, every week he's been the
main guy this year. As long as Taylor remains gimpy, Jones is a great option particularly
because of the Jags’ conservative ball control offense. 3. Ryan Moats --Westbrook may have gotten a long-term deal this season
but a Lisfranc injury is no small thing and I'm quite sure the Eagles will want
a long, hard look at Moats the rest of the way in order to see if he can be
their bell cow in 2006.
Studs who may lose playing time
Every year a few teams that lock up their division before the end of the season
decide to rest some of their starters in the last couple weeks. Tony Dungy, for
example, has hinted that Colts may hold some of its starters out once they
clinch home field advantage (although the signals have been mixed).
For this reason, some leagues hold their championship in week 16 instead of
For leagues with week 17 championships, though, which fantasy studs are in the
most danger of being rested late in the season -- and what can owners do at
this point to work around it if it happens?
Jason Wood: At QB,
the obvious one is Peyton Manning, as you alluded to. We also have heard
rumblings about Kerry Collins being subjected to benching, and Aaron Brooks is
getting tough press (including from ESPN's Len Pasquarelli), hinting that he
may be sent to the bench at some point. Most of the guys should be playing for
their playoff lives and positioning all the way through Week 17. At other
positions, I don't think there's much to worry about frankly.
Maurice Morris may be available in your league. Shaun Alexander took a very heavy workload this year. He will
be sitting in week 17 if the NFC continues on the course it is continuing (Seattle almost has home field locked up with its
intra-conference victory over the Eagles). Meanwhile, Morris should be
perfectly fine in relief of Alexander.
Hopefully after this many weeks, you already have your Darrel Jackson backup
plan. While I believe DJax will want as many reps as possible to get his rhythm
back, if Hasselbeck is sitting, there is no reason to run DJax out there. So,
hang onto Engram/Hackett for that week 17 game.
Chicago is a team that may have things sewn up, so Adrian
Peterson is someone to look at; but the team's fantasy worth is really on
defense - and you are not going to see the entire Chicago defense collapse in week 17 without the starters in the
game. (Plus there is no reason to carry a second defense behind Chicago into the FF playoffs.)
A seamless transition from Edge to Rhodes should take place in Indy in week 17, but don't be so
sure that Manning and Co. are going to be sitting. Against Arizona, if they have a 15-0 record, I would not be surprised to
see the starters out there until midway through the third quarter to try and
get to 16-0. And, against AZ, that may be enough time to get you some nice
numbers. If the team is not battling for 16-0, the Colt starters should not be
in the game at all.
In Cincinnati, Chris Perry and Chris Henry could be huge as starters
in week 17. In Denver, you should be starting Tatum Bell in week 17 if you
have him and Shanahan has already shown he is willing to give (gasp!) Ron Dayne
Finally, the Patriots are highly likely to have their position as division
winner and #3 or #4 seed sewn up in the next two weeks with no hope of moving
up or down. Plan on sitting Branch, Brady, and Dillon in week
17, and possibly as early as week 16. That means players like Ben
Watson, Dan Graham, and Patrick
Pass become potential starters the last two weeks of the
Peyton Manning is obvious and already mentioned. Of all the offensive stars the
Colts have though, I expect the two most likely to sit out an entire game are
Edgerrin James and Marvin Harrison. Manning is a smart quarterback who rarely
gets hit and he could be fine as the starter, although it makes no sense to use
him during the final week of the season if they’ve clinched home field
James is a workhorse and he could use an extra week to recharge his batteries.
I would be stunned if he saw any action in the final week of the season, and if
the top seed is clinched earlier than that he should see limited action as
well. Harrison is also an older player who should get a week to rest
heading into the playoffs.
Everything else will depend on
how things shake out over the next few weeks. It is too early to tell whether a
team will have something to play for or not (home field, bye)
David Yudkin: I
think a lot depends on whether the Colts are chasing a perfect season or not.
Dungy has been flooded by requests to leave his regulars in as long as they are
winning, and he has since back-peddled from his initial remarks and indicated
he that will play his studs. Again, how long he leaves them in or rotates them
is still in question, but I doubt we see Manning and company riding the pine from
the opening kickoff.
I am not so sure the Seahawks will sit their guys against the Colts if Indy is
going to play to win. As for Week 17, the Seahawks may not have anything to
play for save Alexander's run at the TD scoring record. If he's close, I think
As for the Patriots, they have not benched their starters in the past, and I
suspect that they will play their healthy starters regardless (both of them).
They have had some problems getting untracked and in sync, and they may want to
work on getting everyone on the same page.
Surprisingly, there are a lot of QBs this year with the chance of sitting or
getting benched (Collins, Brooks, Manning, McNair if
he gets any more banged up). With fantasy teams already reeling from other
losses (McNabb, Culpepper, Bulger, Pennington), there are a lot of teams that
will enter the playoffs with some less than stellar options at QB.
Overall, other than the Colts and Pats, there are too many teams in a pack to
shake out who will have little to play for in the last few weeks.
Cecil Lammey: The
only teams that have to worry about this are Seattle, Indianapolis, and Cincinnati.
Owners that have players from these teams should have already been making
A player like Chris Henry has tremendous value in the late season push. Even if
Carson Palmer is benched, or plays a reduced role, Jon Kitna is a quality
backup that can make good decisions with the football. Chris Henry's production
should increase significantly if Chad and TJ are benched. Henry is a big time playmaker and gives
the Bengals a deadly trio of WRs. That being said, he is talented enough to be
a starting WR all by himself and is capable of putting up great numbers.
Indy has some great depth and you could see Brandon Stokley have a bigger
impact as the season comes to a close. (I am biased, though, because I am a
Stokley owner and he has been buried on my bench this year.) I would look for
Dominic Rhodes to get some more playing time as well.
Seattle could see Morris get some extended playing time. Sure,
Alexander wants the rushing title but I'm sure he would like a Super Bowl ring
more. I see DJ Hackett making a late season push as a WR you could start in
I was very high on Nate Burleson coming into this season, but he appears to be
playing third fiddle in the Vikings' passing game. Koren Robinson and Marcus
Robinson have both made a number of big plays in the last couple weeks while
Burleson has yet to make any kind of impact.
Will things stay that way for the rest of this season? What about next season?
Will Koren Robinson be the featured WR if he can keep his head on straight?
Marc Levin: The WR
position in Minnesota is a real cluster . . . , well, it’s a mess. The
Vikings’ WR situation is as muddy as the Vikings' RB situation typically is.
Chris Smith: I
think Marc Levin is bang on here. To call the receiver position for the Vikings
'murky' is an understatement. WR Nate Burleson had an injury-plagued season and
should rebound but he is no more talented than Koren Robinson. If these two
players can get their act together, it could be one heck of a nice combo for
the Vikings but at this time that is a huge if.
Then factor in questions such as: 'Will Culpepper be
the same quarterback?' 'Will he even be on the roster in 2006?' 'If he isn't,
who will be the starting quarterback?' 'Will Troy Williamson develop?'
I would have to say it is impossible to predict what will happen with this
offense in 2006.
Marc Levin: Adding
to Chris' questions: ‘Who will be the coach?’ A coaching change could easily
see a more steady hand at weekly playing time and starter decisions. If Tice
returns, we can count on continued use of his infamous Magic 8-Ball Strategy
for deciding who gets playing time.
Cecil Lammey: I
was like you MT, the Burleson kool-aid was flowing and I was drinking from the
tap. It looks as though the Robinson duo can make a strong run here at the end
of the season. I like Koren Robinson and I sure hope he does get his head on
straight. KRob has everything that scouts look for in an elite WR. He broke all
of Torry Holt's records at NC State and there has never been a question about
his talent. If he keeps his head on straight he could be a pro bowl caliber
receiver and that would be a great comeback story. Marcus Robinson seems to
have success wherever he goes. He even made Anthony Wright look good in his
stint with Baltimore. Marcus has never been able to stay healthy, but when
he's in the game he can put up some great numbers. I believe that Marcus and
Koren could be the future of the Vikings’ passing game, but they will have to
have a strong plan B, whether it’s a resurgence from
Burleson, or an emergence of Troy Williamson. Both Robinsons have too many
questions to be relied on heavily for the future.
David Yudkin: It’s
hard to figure out what’s going on with the Vikings. From early reports,
Culpepper may not even be able to play next year (initially doctors were saying
he might need 18 months to play again). Moreover, who will be coaching? Tice
was written off for dead, but I have seen reports indicating that a run for the
playoffs might save him and a 5-game winning streak hasn’t hurt.
We all know the RB situation is unsettled . . . who will even be on the roster
(Michael Bennett? Onterrio Smith?). Moe Williams' contract is up (as is
Burleson seems to have evaporated this year (I had him as a lock for the Top 10
WR). His contract is up after this year. Koren Robinson will be a free agent,
so who knows if he will be back. Marcus Robinson gets $2 million a year, which
seems pretty high to me. Taylor also is due $1.5 million, which again is a lot for
someone that doesn't play much. And of course the team invested a ton in Troy
For this year, either Robinson might be worth a flyer as a WR3 or a flex player
if you are in need of taking a gamble due to other injuries or frozen rosters.
Jason Wood: As the
other guys have said, it’s way too up in the air to
Burleson was effective last year when he was a healthy second option to Randy
Moss, but what's been at play this year? Is it health? Struggling to adapt to
his new role? I haven't seen the Vikings play enough to know, but the fact the
Vikings are getting Koren Robinson more involved tells me there are no
certified roles in the WR corps at this point. Assuming the Vikes have a new
coaching staff (and possibly a more powerful GM) in place next year, we can't
be sure of anything about the constitution of this team beyond the next few
As Jason mentioned earlier in our discussion, it looks like Kerry Collins may
be shown the bench. Is there a realistic hope that they can get better play out
of either of their younger guys – Marques Tuiasosopo or Andrew Walter?
Marc Levin: Not
really. The Tuiasosopo experiment didn't work well when Gannon was injured, I
have little confidence the second go-around would be much better.
Moss and Porter, and probably Jordan, will all suffer tremendously if Collins is benched.
If you have any of the Raiders skill position players on your fantasy team,
even though Collins hasn't looked very good the last few weeks, you should hope
there is no QB change. At this point, why bother? I'd allow Collins to try to
work through this latest slump since the season is shot anyway.
In typical Randy Moss fashion, expect him to give up on the field if they make
a QB change.
David Yudkin: From
what I've seen, it was looking pretty likely that Collins is going to take a
seat (or clipboard) and Tui is going to get under center this week. Hard to say
how this shakes out by the weekend.
Cecil Lammey: I
believe that the Raiders need to switch to see what Andrew Walter can do. Tui
has a decent skill set, but he's a known talent. There's only so much he can
do. We've recently seen rookie QBs thrust into the starting lineup and they've
performed admirably. I don't think that Walter can have a Ben Roethlisberger
type end to his rookie season, but he needs to get some reps and get out there.
He's not going to get experience holding a clipboard. Walter is an extremely
talented QB that dropped in the draft because of a late season shoulder injury.
He has a great skill set and the buzz is that the Raiders are very high on him.
With that being the case I believe they need to put him in now and get him used
to the speed of the NFL. Tuiasosopo is a career backup. Putting him in will do
nothing but get the Raiders some more marks in the "L" column.
David Yudkin: The
media reports I’ve seen all indicate that Tuiasosopo would probably get the
first shot ahead of Walter.
I think Tui would probably get the first shot, but I know a lot of people who
are much more intrigued by Walter’s potential than by Tui’s.
Jason Wood: Walter
was an interesting pick for the Raiders because he's very reminiscent of Kerry
Collins. He's a really big drop-back passer with a strong arm, but has question
marks in terms of reading defenses and is absolutely stationary in the pocket.
I would think a rookie with limited mobility would be problematic given the
Raiders’ offensive line struggles, but then again, I can't imagine they really
gain much from having Tui play either since I don't think he's a viable
long-term option for them.
WR combos for 2006
Marc Levin: If you
like same-team WR combos, there appear to be some decent options for next year.
Some combinations featuring an early round pick with a middle round pick might
Marvin Harrison/Reggie Wayne
Chad Johnson/T.J. Houshmandzadeh
Randy Moss/Jerry Porter
Darrel Jackson/Joe Jurevicius
Torry Holt/Isaac Bruce
on trying to lock down any of these combos?
Good topic. I see two main issues here:
1. Is there any particular advantage or disadvantage to drafting multiple WRs
from the same NFL team?
2. If somebody wanted to target a WR combo from the same NFL team, which combos
look most attractive (considering where you'd have to take them)?
Chris Smith: The
biggest deterrent to drafting more than one receiver from the same team is that
when one receiver tends to have a big week, more often than not the other
receiver will struggle to put up numbers. It eliminates many of the ‘big’ weeks
you can have when you start 3 receivers and all go off with huge numbers and it
can be a nightmare if you have to decide which player to start in a given week.
Also, if the team struggles in the passing game one week, you are saddled with
two low-scoring receivers.
A possible positive, however, is that having a pair of receivers from a
prolific offensive attack (Colts, Rams, Cardinals this season) can result in
consistent scoring week to week. For example, if you have and start both Reggie
Wayne and Marvin Harrison you have a great shot of putting up 12+ receptions
for 160 yards and 2 touchdowns no matter how you divvy up the production. In a
point per reception league, the two players would share 40 fantasy points,
which is pretty good.
In a nutshell, I would only look to do this for two reasons…
1) To cement fantasy points from a productive passing
team such as the Colts (i.e., Harrison and Wayne) where I would plug both into
the starting lineup.
2) Drafting two receivers of which you expect one to break out with a big
season. You have no intentions of starting both but expect the winner of the
battle to put up very good numbers.
Jason Wood: There
is too much history to discount WR tandems. I wrote about this at length in my
column a few weeks ago. Of note, there have been 17 tandems in the last 10
years who BOTH finished in the top 12 from the same team. That's almost 30% of
the sample size.
That's all the evidence I need to completely discount the notion of avoiding
the selection of teammates on draft day. If I draft Chad Johnson next year and
Housh is the highest rated player on my board, I'm jumping at the
chance...history has told me that's a decent bet to make. (Note: Jason’s
article can be found here.)
Maurile Tremblay: In a
survivor-style league, I try not to have multiple players at the same position
with the same bye week. So I'd generally avoid taking two WRs from the same
team. But in a normal league, I don't care much about byes. I just try to get
the best players I can get. Taking two from the same team can increase risk in
the sense that, if that offense falls flat on its face, both WRs will likely do
worse than their preseason projections. But I don't see that kind of risk as a
bad thing. If I take two WRs from the same team, it's probably because I'm
higher on that team's passing prospects than a lot of others are. If I am
right, I'll get two players on a good offense. If I'm wrong, I'll get two
players on a bad offense. But since I expect to be right more often than I'm
wrong, I don't mind taking that chance.
As for particular WR combos, the Bengals and the Colts are attractive if Reggie
Wayne stays in Indy. Boldin and Fitzgerald in Arizona
would be great, but they're going to be too hard to get. (If you have the first
pick in the draft, you might be able to get them at the 2/3 turn, but I think
that would be overpaying.) Holt and Bruce are a fine
combo but I wonder whether Bruce's role in the offense will be reduced next
year. Plaxico Burress and Amani Toomer might be a nice combo since Toomer will
probably be relatively cheap. I wonder how much hype Roy & Mike Williams
will generate next year.
David Yudkin: To address
something MT said, I would almost be inclined to think that having a WR combo
from the same team might help a
Survivor team. While I concur that too many similar bye weeks could be
problematic, it seems that one receiver or the other might have a big week
fairly consistently – and in a survivor-style league, you don’t have to guess
which it will be.
This may be a viable strategy for lower-tiered WRs as well. If
you had taken Jurevicius and Engram from Seattle this year (for next to nothing), you
would have done very well.
Other attractive combos could include Walker/Driver and Fitzgerald/Boldin.
Overall, I'm not sure I would go out of my way to have tandem WR, but I don't
think it's a bad idea either.
First pick in a dynasty rookie draft
Jason Wood: With
most trade deadlines in the books and the playoffs coming up quickly, a lot of
dynasty owners are turning their attention to next year. Which USC Trojan,
Reggie Bush or Matt Leinart, would you recommend as the first pick in a rookie
draft, and why? Or would you instead recommend someone else?
I’d take Reggie Bush without thinking twice about it. For one thing, if they
both end up being studs, Bush will be worth more. A top RB is nearly always
worth more than a top QB. But the other thing is that RBs are generally a lot
easier to scout accurately than are QBs. How many RBs selected in the top five
have been non-injury-related busts? (I mean, RBs who didn't play at Penn
State.) Also, most top rookie RBs
will contribute right away. Many QBs, on the other hand, sit on the bench for a
few years, or play but are ineffective -- and many of them don't ever pan out
So this is a decision I wouldn't have to stay up all night before the draft to
think about. I'd take Bush.
Marc Levin: Bush. I
don't care what team he goes to.
Young QBs take a lot of time to develop (often sitting on the bench for a year
or two). Meanwhile, veteran QBs are fine and dandy for
your FF team for quite a while and they are consistent year to year. RBs are
volatile and have immediate fantasy impact. A guy of Reggie Bush's talent level
hasn't been seen as a fantasy dynasty pick since LT. For fantasy, RBs rule.
A third option for #1 overall? Doesn't
exist. Bush will be the #1 overall pick in as many dynasty fantasy
drafts as Marshal Faulk was the #1 overall pick in fantasy redrafts in 2000 --
in other words, just about all of them. This year, the #1 overall pick in
dynasty drafts is known as "the Reggie Bush sweepstakes."
Chris Smith: In a
heartbeat without thinking twice about it, Reggie Bush is your man. Heck in all
likelihood there will be several running backs I would look at before selecting
a rookie quarterback who will likely be going to a terrible team.
Bush is a special player, and he will have fantasy value as a rookie.
Running backs will forever be the most coveted rookies in fantasy football. Not
only do they have the best chance of contributing right away, but many go on to
stardom in the first two seasons and also offer the best trade value of the
three main positions (QB,RB,WR).
For fantasy players who drafted in the top three this year, how does Alex Smith
look right now? Take the stud RB and don't look back.
Given the lay of the land in fantasy football, the top pick should always be a
RB. There are so few RBs to go around while there are generally leftover
starting NFL QBs available on the waiver wire. Add in that it could take three
years for a QB to have any real fantasy value for that particular season.
Bush seems like the logical choice, but if he were to go to a dreadful team
while another RB were to go to a good team and be in position to be a clear NFL
starter from the get-go, I might think about taking that guy instead of Bush
Bush has shown a lot in college, but it's not the same game as the pro level.
There have been other can't miss guys that have missed, so I'd take him but
would temper my enthusiasm until he showed something as a pro.
Cecil Lammey: The
Reggie Bush hype machine is in full effect. People are crazy about this guy,
and with good reason. Bush should easily win the Heisman, and a good game in
the Rose Bowl will push the hype into the stratosphere. Reggie Bush should be
your first choice in a dynasty league and here's why. First off his talent is
all-world. Get the ball in Bush's hands and look out. He's exciting to watch
and certainly a player that defenses will have to game plan for. The second
reason is trade bait. Reggie Bush has to be first on the minds of every dynasty
league player. If you're fortunate enough to secure him on your team then you
could ask a king's ransom for him before he even takes a preseason handoff.
It looks like we found something we all agree on, which makes it a good note to
end on as well. Thanks, guys. See you back here next week.