This week we discuss the following:
Superstacking
What do you think of stacking QB-REC-REC instead of just QB-REC? In what situations does it make sense, for example, to stack Carr-Cooper-Crabtree, or Bortles-Robinson-Hurns?
Chad Parsons: For the juice to be worth the squeeze, I reserve a superstack for a rare offense where the passing game funnels through two targets and a possible shootout game script. The Raiders-Steelers game in Week 9 qualified on either side of the ball. This week, I like the Jaguars-Ravens game matching up competent quarterbacks with beatable defenses. Allen Hurns' injury worries me from going hard towards Bortles-Robinson-Hurns. If Hurns is out, Bortles-Robinson-Thomas is an option.
Andrew Garda: Like Chad, I think it depends on situation, though I have to admit I generally avoid it. I don't like quite so many eggs in one basket and if something goes wrong, you're done. I like my backup plans to have backup plans.
That said, yes, we've seen some great stackable games from groups like Carr-Cooper-Crabs. I like the Bortles-Robinson-Hurns stack Chad mentioned but I'm not sure I would roll out the Thomas variation. I don't feel he is quite integrated enough in the offense for me to feel great about it. He could be fine but I just won't risk it.
Cutler-Jeffery-Bennett is one I am intrigued by but this week's game against the Rams seems like the wrong time to die on that hill. Brees-Cooks-Watson has merit as Washington isn't good and Brees has Watson well-integrated in the game plan—he has seen 20 targets in the last three weeks and is consistently seeing Red Zone looks as well.
We have both Emmanuel Sanders and Demaryius Thomas rated as high-end WRs this week—as much as I don't love Peyton Manning and this offense, it's got great potential. The downside of it is that it will cost you a lot and you will have to be careful with value elsewhere.
Maurile Tremblay: This would be a strategy for GPPs, not cash games. I think superstacking makes more sense with high-priced quarterbacks than with mid- or low-priced quarterbacks. For Tom Brady to hit value, for example, he's generally going to need 300+ yards and 3+ touchdowns. That's enough to feed multiple receivers good value, so a Brady-Gronkowski-Edelman stack, or a Brady-Edelman-LaFell stack could make sense.
This can also work with situations like the ones mentioned because the Raiders and Jaguars tend to throw more to just two main receivers than other teams do (though that could change with the Jaguars if Julius Thomas becomes a bigger part of the offense).
Mark Wimer: I have had some success with super-stacks this season, although sometimes it has been QB/WR/TE like Rodgers/Cobb/Rodgers (a super-stack I am playing this week against the dreadful Detroit team—a divisional opponent that I think the Packers will crush on the scoreboard before they call off the slaughter/or a divisional grudge match which could potentially be high scoring—either way I like the Packers' passing attack—I don't see a low-scoring effort from Green Bay being at all likely)—if I expect a shootout and there is an injury/suspension impacting the running game (which may be the case for Carr/Cooper/Crabtree this week with Latavius Murray having a concussion, and is definitely the case in Green Bay with Eddie Lacy limited by his ongoing, nagging ankle issue and also looking out of shape) or some matchup that would minimize the running game, then I might consider a super-stack.
Patriots
The Patriots were a severe disappointment from a fantasy perspective last week. Dion Lewis' unfortunate injury was a part of it, but nobody outside LeGarrette Blount hit value despite the Patriots beating the 14-point spread. Rob Gronkowski in particular was disappointing. Are the heavy hitters worth fading given their prices, or are their floors and ceilings too high to ignore regardless?
Chad Parsons: After a disappointing game, I typically go back to the well with players having dependable roles and strong offenses or matchups. Rob Gronkowski fits for Week 10, coming off a rare down game. Without Lewis, I like Blount more than most weeks with the Patriots as strong favorites.
Andrew Garda: I agree with Chad to an extent as I think Gronkowski and Blount are solid plays this week. I think there is better value in guys like Greg Olsen, but Gronkowski is like having another WR, so it's worth paying the price.
Maurile Tremblay: I like the matchup this week against the Giants. Brady is the quarterback I'm most likely to pay up for, and the same goes with Gronkowski at tight end. Starting with a Brady-Gronkowski stack is limiting at other positions because of their cost, but that connection can be the centerpiece of a winning lineup as well. So no, I'm definitely not fading the Patriots this week.
Mark Wimer: I have been fading the heavy hitters/high priced guys a good bit in recent weeks, instead relying on mid-priced options like Derek Carr and Mark Ingram—with mixed results. Two weeks ago was a tough week for me; last weekend I was ahead of the curve. So I think that when approaching ANY team, even the Patriots' juggernaut, you need to be rigorous with your analysis and not assume that someone is either too-high-priced or very-attractively-priced—look at the new reality the team faces each week (including situations on defense and the offensive line that may change due to injury/suspension) and go from there. Footballguys.com's Interactive Value Charts are very valuable, but they need to be one tool in your tool box and not the only one, for example.
DeAngelo Williams
DeAngelo Williams jumped in price by a hefty $1,100. Is he still one of the better values in Week 10, or does his new $7,600 price tag make him a candidate to fade?
Chad Parsons: Williams' price does not bother me as only injury or a complete blowout of the Browns to limit his usage, giving Jordan Todman additional time. Mid-level salary running backs of appeal are plentiful this week, so Williams will be in rotation with Darren McFadden, Mark Ingram, and Justin Forsett this week in my lineups.
Andrew Garda: Not yet. If he climbs a lot higher, maybe given the value plays Chad mentioned. That said, this isn't the week to get cute—he should eat against Cleveland so you should be comfortable playing him.
Maurile Tremblay: He's still a terrific value. He's essentially got that Steeler backfield all to himself, and he has a nice matchup against the Browns this week. With Roethlisberger likely out, the Steelers may rely on the run more than normal. It'd be nice if Williams were still $1,100 cheaper, but even at his current price, I plan to have him in most or all of my FanDuel lineups.
Mark Wimer: I think Williams still has significant upside considering the matchup (Cleveland's horrid rush D) and the game situation (Landry Jones likely starting which will limit the passing game).
Sleeper wide receivers
Who's your sleeper WR pick this week? (Someone who's not a household name that could have a particularly good week.)
Chad Parsons: Kamar Aiken makes a ton of sense (Chris Givens too) as a cheap punt play surrounded by studs in a lineup. The Ravens have a quality matchup and, without Steve Smith, Aiken saw a glut of targets late in the Ravens last game.
Andrew Garda: I feel like since everyone has tipped to the Allens in Jacksonville, sleeper WR picks are hard to come by. This week you should consider Carolina's Devin Funchess. Carolina is all about Greg Olsen and Cam Newton, but Cam was very intent on getting Funchess involved. Sure he had just four targets but he caught three of them for 71 yards and a touchdown. At $5200 I think he's a nice sleeper play this week.
Maurile Tremblay: It looks like Allen Hurns is probably going to play, but if he doesn't, keep your eye on Bryan Walters in Jacksonville. He could get a lot of targets that would otherwise go to Hurns, and he's got a knack for getting open on underneath routes, so he's got a chance for a decent number of receptions.
Another guy who could produce value for his minimum salary is Chris Givens for the Ravens. He seems to have passed Marlon Brown and Jeremy Ross on the depth chart and will start this week opposite Kamar Aiken. His floor is very low, but he doesn't have to do much to hit value at his $2,000 salary.
Mark Wimer: I like Tavon Austin, who has been forging a dual "slash" role for the Rams—look at his game log [http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/player-all-info.php?id=AustTa00&tab=2] and you'll see he has significant opportunities in the rushing game each week, mid-single-digits in targets most weeks, and is scoring TDs—five TDs over the last five games played—also, Stedman Bailey was suspended for four games, amplifying Austin's likely role as a receiver with one less competitor for the football in play for the next four weeks.
That will do it for this edition of the FanDuel Roundtable. Please join us again next week.