AFC
South: HOU | IND | JAX
| TEN AFC West: DEN
| KC | OAK | SD
By now, each of the regular readers of this column knows why I believe
the PSA method is a good way to go about projecting fantasy stats.
Each of you already understands why the schedule plays an important
role in determining the success or failure of a given player each
season.
On the other hand, I know there are plenty of first-time readers
out there who are searching for any insight or advantage they
can get over the competition. Many “experts” are satisfied
with using last year’s stats or defensive rankings as a
way to predict this year’s fantasy numbers. While it’s
a good thought, it’s a somewhat misguided approach in that
NFL rosters pretty much experience a 20-25% turnover rate on average
each season, so expecting a player/defense to repeat what he/it
did last year is difficult simply because so much has changed.
That is why I feel it is important to not only project the players,
but also project the defensive
effectiveness of each team as well.
Before I continue, let’s do an abbreviated – but
updated – Q&A from
a column that I wrote about this time last year:
Q: How often has a RB from the current
AFC or NFC West finished among the top five since 2000?
A: Twenty-two times! Taken one
step further, 39 of the 50 top-five RB spots since 2000 have gone
to backs whose teams went up against the AFC and/or the NFC West
that season. Even more impressive, the top-scoring RB in fantasy
football each season played at least four games against the AFC
and/or NFC West.
For those of you who believe that I should just refer to PSAs
as “taking advantage of the AFC and NFC West”…if
it were only that simple. Granted, the AFC and NFC West has had
its share of standout three-down RBs over the years, but common
sense should tell us that it is going to be difficult for a RB
to post stellar numbers when a quarter of its games each year
are against Pittsburgh and Baltimore (or more recently, Green
Bay and Minnesota). While the aforementioned AFC and NFC North
teams have been solid against the run recently, the last time
a West team (AFC or NFC) finished in the top five against the
run was 2005. In fact, it’s hard to remember the last time
teams like the Chiefs, Rams or Raiders had good run-stopping defenses.
With any luck, I have opened your mind to my way of thinking.
Along those same lines, allow me to clear up a couple of misconceptions
about my schedule analysis approach right away:
- this is not a strength of schedule article that uses 2009
results to predict 2010 and
- the schedule contributes to the projection of a player in
this system, but it is far from the only determining factor
I use.
This is the second of four straight articles in which I will be
posting my game-by-game predictions, two divisions at a time. Bear
in mind that while the final numbers are important, they are 15-game
totals because most fantasy seasons have a Week 16 title game. For
those unfamiliar with the way I project player stats and individual
week-to-week consistency (or for those who need a refresher), please
give this article a read for an introductory
course in Preseason Schedule Analysis.
Much like any system that projects future performance, each year
gives me the opportunity to tweak and hopefully improve the product.
After making the ability to personalize each matchup my focus last
season, I hope to add volatility to the mix in 2010. By "volatility",
I mean: 1) accessing whether my projection represents the ceiling
or floor for a given player to operate in this season and 2) understanding
that at least one-third of the teams will make a QB change at some
point and about the same percentage of NFL starting RBs will not
make it through the 16-game schedule (only 19 RBs with more than
100 carries played all 16 games last season). As such, I will judiciously
add injury layoffs to players who I feel are significant injury
risks. I also feel it necessary to state that my projections are
subject to change. Fear not, however, as I will release my final
projections and rankings in late August. However, the next few weeks
should give all interested parties a pretty good idea of just how
strongly I feel about a player's prospects for the upcoming season.
Perhaps more important than the final numbers for each player, though,
are the highlighted matchups. Note that I have applied the green
highlights (good matchups) to the players who I feel should take
advantage of that matchup and the red highlights (bad matchups)
to the ones that will be difficult - but not impossible - for that
player. Only a handful of defenses merit bad matchups all over the
board (the Steelers, Packers, Jets and Bengals all qualify for the
most part this year), however, just because a player’s box
is "red" one week doesn't mean the player won't put up
his usual numbers just as a "green" doesn't necessarily
mean he will. Furthermore, one WR can have a "red" matchup
but the rest of his team could be neutral or green. For instance,
when the Jets put CB Darrelle Revis on the opponent's #1 WR, it
will qualify as a bad matchup only for the #1 WR, not necessarily
for the rest of the passing game. Therefore, a QB, WR or TE will
only be considered positive/negative if I don't think he can win
his individual matchup.
Before we dive into the projections, let me revisit the volatility
I spoke of earlier. In the blue vertical column to the right of
my projection, I will place a sign (explained below) as to how much
upside or downside a player has this season. Here is the key I will
be using over the next four weeks, with no sign by a player’s
name suggesting I feel I am projecting the player accurately:
(^) - Projection represents
the player’s floor; he has significant upside.
(+) - Projection may be selling
the player short; he has some upside.
(-) - Projection may be overselling
the player; he is a slight risk.
(!) – Projection represents
the player’s ceiling; he is a significant risk.
Note: The grey
highlight in each team’s schedule reflects a road game.
AFC South
Houston Texans |
|
Totals |
|
IND |
WAS |
DAL |
OAK |
NYG |
KC |
bye |
IND |
SD |
JAX |
NYJ |
TEN |
PHI |
BAL |
TEN |
DEN |
(Run) |
|
|
7.6 |
8.2 |
8.8 |
8.2 |
8.3 |
6.5 |
|
7.6 |
7.2 |
6.7 |
9.1 |
7.8 |
8 |
9.4 |
7.8 |
7.1 |
(Pass) |
|
|
8.8 |
7.4 |
7.8 |
8.2 |
8.9 |
7.2 |
|
8.8 |
7.7 |
7.6 |
9.7 |
7.5 |
8.2 |
7.2 |
7.5 |
8.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Schaub |
4015 |
|
275 |
230 |
270 |
225 |
280 |
245 |
|
280 |
345 |
320 |
200 |
275 |
270 |
340 |
255 |
205 |
TD |
24 |
|
3 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
|
2 |
4 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
INT |
12 |
|
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arian Foster |
895 |
+ |
60 |
80 |
75 |
90 |
50 |
120 |
|
25 |
90 |
100 |
30 |
INJ |
65 |
20 |
35 |
55 |
Ru TD |
7 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
INJ |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
190 |
|
10 |
20 |
10 |
35 |
5 |
20 |
|
20 |
0 |
10 |
15 |
INJ |
15 |
5 |
10 |
15 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
27 |
|
2 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
|
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
INJ |
2 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Slaton |
350 |
|
20 |
25 |
10 |
20 |
25 |
35 |
|
5 |
25 |
20 |
40 |
35 |
20 |
15 |
15 |
40 |
Ru TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
340 |
|
15 |
35 |
20 |
10 |
35 |
0 |
|
20 |
55 |
20 |
30 |
15 |
15 |
40 |
20 |
10 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
46 |
|
3 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
5 |
0 |
|
3 |
6 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ben Tate |
575 |
+ |
25 |
15 |
25 |
25 |
40 |
30 |
|
60 |
15 |
30 |
15 |
75 |
40 |
55 |
70 |
55 |
Ru TD |
5 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
Re Yards |
130 |
|
0 |
0 |
5 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
|
10 |
0 |
20 |
5 |
25 |
10 |
15 |
20 |
5 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
17 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Andre Johnson |
1385 |
|
120 |
75 |
90 |
70 |
115 |
100 |
|
125 |
150 |
80 |
30 |
80 |
90 |
130 |
60 |
70 |
Re TD |
10 |
|
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
101 |
|
8 |
6 |
6 |
4 |
10 |
8 |
|
11 |
9 |
4 |
3 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
5 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jacoby Jones |
745 |
^ |
65 |
30 |
75 |
70 |
50 |
60 |
|
25 |
70 |
40 |
45 |
65 |
25 |
60 |
20 |
45 |
Re TD |
5 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
41 |
|
4 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
|
1 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin Walter |
520 |
|
30 |
50 |
25 |
15 |
50 |
20 |
|
45 |
15 |
50 |
35 |
20 |
40 |
50 |
45 |
30 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
45 |
|
3 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
2 |
|
4 |
1 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Owen Daniels |
705 |
! |
35 |
20 |
45 |
15 |
25 |
40 |
|
35 |
55 |
100 |
40 |
70 |
75 |
40 |
80 |
30 |
Re TD |
5 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
58 |
|
3 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
3 |
4 |
6 |
3 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
6 |
3 |
|
Run: While father (Mike) and son
(Kyle) Shanahan – Houston’s OC last season –
trying to build something in Washington, former Broncos OL coach
Rick Dennison takes another shot at calling the plays in Houston,
with much emphasis being put on improving the league’s 30th-ranked
running game from a season ago. Thankfully, the Texans get 10
total games, six against their division and four against the poor
defenses of the AFC West. Houston kicks it all off against the
Colts and Redskins, two teams I expect to be near league-average
at stopping the run. The Texans then face a three-game stretch
of teams with some upper-level capability at defending the rushing
attack in the Cowboys, Raiders and Giants. The Week 6 matchup
vs. the Chiefs should allow the running game to gain some confidence
heading into the bye, but it is interesting to note the Texans
will have played as many 4-3 defenses before the bye as 3-4 defenses.
Assuming Foster still has the starting job after Week 7, he could
solidify his hold on the job in the three games following the
bye (Colts, Chargers and Jags), none of which should be all that
impressive vs. the run. However, after the Week 10 game in Jacksonville,
Houston closes out the fantasy season with a difficult stretch,
with each opponent (outside of Denver in Week 16) a team I have
projected as a defense that is in the top half of the league stopping
the run.
Note: It’s important to note that while I believe Foster
could easily hold onto the job all season long, I am projecting
here that Tate will bypass him on the depth chart at some point
– in this projection, that point was Week 14. Whether or
not Foster maintains some regular role in the offense in that
scenario certainly remains to be seen. However, I am basing my
projection of Tate overtaking Foster mostly on Kubiak’s
history of late-season RB changes. It should be obvious by looking
at my total numbers for Foster and Tate that I believe the Texans
will be able to run the ball, so if Foster turns Tate into a five-carry-per-game
player, Foster is set to have a huge season.
Pass: HC Gary Kubiak may be saying
all the right things regarding the run game and his efforts to
step up the team's production in that area. But when his team
has the game's best WR and a QB who posted just four games of
less than 268 yards passing, it’s a safe bet the passing
game will determine the Texans' fate once again this year. The
early season slate certainly does not lend itself to huge passing
game numbers with three-fourths of the NFC East opponents coming
in the first five games. Indianapolis (Week 1) and Oakland (Week
4) each feature above-average pass defenses, meaning Johnson is
the only sure bet to produce early on. After that, the rest of
the Texans' schedule opens up, particularly for Schaub and Johnson
with Jones and Daniels also benefiting.
Following a second showdown in Week 8 vs. the Colts, the only
CBs that should be able to reasonably control Johnson are the
Jets’ Darrelle Revis (Week 11) and the Broncos’ Champ
Bailey (Week 16), with the latter only qualifying if Denver's
new DC Don Martindale opts to have Bailey shadow Johnson like
Revis will. Just about every other team during the second half
of the season suffers from questionable safety play, which should
allow Jones to have his breakout season.
Note: I am projecting a slow start for Daniels because he
is recovering from another ACL injury. Midseason will represent
the one-year mark since the surgery.
Indianapolis Colts |
|
Totals |
|
HOU |
NYG |
DEN |
JAX |
KC |
WAS |
bye |
HOU |
PHI |
CIN |
NE |
SD |
DAL |
TEN |
JAX |
OAK |
(Run) |
|
|
7.8 |
8.3 |
7.1 |
6.7 |
6.5 |
8.2 |
|
7.8 |
8 |
8.8 |
7.4 |
7.2 |
8.8 |
7.8 |
6.7 |
8.2 |
(Pass) |
|
|
7.5 |
8.9 |
8.1 |
7.6 |
7.2 |
7.4 |
|
7.5 |
8.2 |
9.1 |
7.5 |
7.7 |
7.8 |
7.5 |
7.6 |
8.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peyton Manning |
4360 |
|
265 |
295 |
300 |
290 |
350 |
310 |
|
315 |
275 |
260 |
310 |
325 |
250 |
285 |
295 |
235 |
TD |
29 |
|
3 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
3 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
INT |
13 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
|
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Joseph Addai |
795 |
- |
45 |
35 |
60 |
50 |
45 |
50 |
|
55 |
70 |
40 |
70 |
80 |
40 |
50 |
40 |
65 |
Ru TD |
9 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
Re Yards |
345 |
|
20 |
25 |
15 |
20 |
15 |
45 |
|
20 |
25 |
30 |
25 |
10 |
30 |
15 |
20 |
30 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
48 |
|
3 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
|
3 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Donald Brown |
760 |
+ |
55 |
50 |
40 |
65 |
75 |
30 |
|
35 |
55 |
55 |
40 |
35 |
70 |
35 |
75 |
45 |
Ru TD |
6 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
Re Yards |
105 |
|
5 |
15 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
|
10 |
0 |
5 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
25 |
5 |
10 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
15 |
|
1 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reggie Wayne |
1170 |
|
80 |
75 |
55 |
120 |
70 |
85 |
|
110 |
70 |
90 |
110 |
65 |
45 |
60 |
100 |
35 |
Re TD |
8 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
83 |
|
7 |
5 |
4 |
10 |
5 |
5 |
|
6 |
5 |
7 |
7 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
7 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pierre Garcon |
715 |
- |
55 |
45 |
75 |
35 |
105 |
40 |
|
35 |
20 |
45 |
80 |
70 |
25 |
40 |
20 |
25 |
Re TD |
4 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
42 |
|
3 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
5 |
2 |
|
2 |
1 |
3 |
5 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Austin Collie |
695 |
- |
30 |
55 |
65 |
50 |
35 |
65 |
|
40 |
55 |
20 |
25 |
35 |
60 |
40 |
55 |
65 |
Re TD |
5 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
59 |
|
3 |
3 |
6 |
4 |
3 |
6 |
|
4 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
5 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthony Gonzalez |
355 |
^ |
15 |
30 |
INJ |
INJ |
20 |
25 |
|
15 |
35 |
20 |
15 |
30 |
30 |
60 |
25 |
35 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
INJ |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
27 |
|
1 |
3 |
INJ |
INJ |
2 |
2 |
|
1 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dallas Clark |
975 |
|
60 |
50 |
90 |
55 |
105 |
45 |
|
85 |
70 |
50 |
50 |
115 |
50 |
45 |
70 |
35 |
Re TD |
8 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
83 |
|
5 |
5 |
10 |
4 |
7 |
4 |
|
7 |
6 |
4 |
6 |
7 |
5 |
4 |
6 |
3 |
|
Run: Addai’s 2009 numbers
are almost laughable. Despite sporting an ugly yards/touch average
(4.3), Addai cracked the top 10 in both PPR and non-PPR leagues
because of his 51 catches and 13 total TDs. He’ll face another
season of fending Brown off for touches and it is not a good bet
he’ll be as successful this time around, meaning this could
be a split backfield by the time the season ends. And what the
schedule lacks in terms of stellar pass defenses (see below),
it makes up for in teams that will likely be able to halt the
Colts’ rushing attack, even though the Giants are the only
team that fits that description over the first five weeks.
In Weeks 6-9, Indy may get one break against the Texans, but
even that is a stretch as OLB Brian Cushing – a key run
defender for Houston – will have returned by then. Otherwise,
the Redskins, Eagles and Bengals all should have enough talent,
size and depth up front to bottle up the Colts’ run game.
The Pats and Chargers are teams in transition, but it would come
as little surprise if both defenses had enough to contain Addai
and Brown as well. Three of the final four games of the fantasy
season (Dallas, Tennessee and Oakland) figure to test the ground
game’s mettle as well, which is a big reason why the Colts
may call on Brown, as last season showed the 2009 first-rounder
has a little more burst than his backfield teammate.
Pass: While several very good pass
defenses appear on the schedule, none of the 15 games above feature
a team (outside of maybe the Bengals) that can go at least three-deep
at CB and say they have a fighting chance at stifling the Colts’
WRs. Nevertheless, Indy faces a pair of underrated secondaries
in the season’s first two weeks, although Houston is set
to struggle early on as it will be breaking in rookie CB Kareem
Jackson. In theory, the Giants (Week 2) have a very capable secondary,
but it is anyone’s guess how healthy SS Kenny Phillips will
stay and FS Antrel Rolle will be in just his second game with
the team at that point. Champ Bailey could give Wayne some problems
in Week 3 if Denver asks its top CB to shadow the Colts WR1, otherwise,
the next four games pre-bye set up very nicely for Manning &
Co.
A home date vs. Houston follows the Week 7 bye, which leads into
the most difficult portion of a rather weak pass defense schedule.
The Eagles and, in particular, the Bengals may keep the Colts
in check for stretches of the game, but neither has a great answer
for Clark, so typical Colts’ numbers should be expected.
If Cincinnati can milk the clock with its running game, it has
a chance to keep Manning on the sidelines. However, both games
could just as easily be shootouts if the Colts come out firing
on all cylinders. Dallas presents another decent challenge in
Week 13 with its stout pass rush and 3-4 defense, but only Terence
Newman would strike any kind of fear into the Colts’ offense.
If Indy has the division wrapped up – as it has recently
– by Week 16, Oakland will likely toy with backup QB Curtis
Painter. If the Colts are still playing for something, though,
it may be one of the few games where Manning and Wayne’s
final numbers may be rather ordinary.
Jacksonville Jaguars |
|
Totals |
|
DEN |
SD |
PHI |
IND |
BUF |
TEN |
KC |
DAL |
bye |
HOU |
CLE |
NYG |
TEN |
OAK |
IND |
WAS |
(Run) |
|
|
7.1 |
7.2 |
8 |
7.6 |
6.1 |
7.8 |
6.5 |
8.8 |
|
7.8 |
7.4 |
8.3 |
7.8 |
8.2 |
7.6 |
8.2 |
(Pass) |
|
|
8.1 |
7.7 |
8.2 |
8.8 |
6.7 |
7.5 |
7.2 |
7.8 |
|
7.5 |
6.7 |
8.9 |
7.5 |
8.2 |
8.8 |
7.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Garrard |
3630 |
|
200 |
265 |
255 |
230 |
215 |
275 |
260 |
225 |
|
285 |
215 |
255 |
245 |
210 |
235 |
260 |
TD |
17 |
|
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
INT |
12 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
Ru Yards |
260 |
|
15 |
20 |
15 |
5 |
25 |
15 |
10 |
20 |
|
15 |
20 |
25 |
10 |
25 |
10 |
30 |
Ru TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maurice Jones-Drew |
1465 |
|
80 |
115 |
70 |
95 |
135 |
55 |
125 |
85 |
|
110 |
130 |
60 |
100 |
115 |
120 |
70 |
Ru TD |
16 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
Re Yards |
515 |
|
25 |
35 |
50 |
25 |
25 |
55 |
30 |
40 |
|
40 |
25 |
50 |
20 |
30 |
20 |
45 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
64 |
|
3 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
3 |
7 |
3 |
4 |
|
5 |
3 |
6 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
Rashad Jennings/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deji Karim |
285 |
|
10 |
15 |
25 |
10 |
35 |
15 |
20 |
10 |
|
10 |
25 |
35 |
15 |
15 |
10 |
35 |
Ru TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
60 |
|
0 |
0 |
5 |
5 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
|
5 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
10 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
10 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Sims-Walker |
1105 |
- |
65 |
75 |
80 |
60 |
80 |
45 |
125 |
65 |
|
85 |
110 |
55 |
35 |
20 |
90 |
115 |
Re TD |
7 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
Rec |
74 |
|
5 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
7 |
5 |
|
4 |
6 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
7 |
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Thomas |
695 |
^ |
45 |
55 |
45 |
30 |
40 |
70 |
30 |
50 |
|
70 |
30 |
40 |
80 |
40 |
30 |
40 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
58 |
|
4 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
5 |
|
6 |
3 |
4 |
6 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jarrett Dillard |
575 |
|
30 |
20 |
45 |
50 |
20 |
40 |
45 |
20 |
|
40 |
30 |
65 |
40 |
65 |
45 |
20 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
44 |
|
3 |
1 |
4 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
|
3 |
2 |
5 |
3 |
6 |
2 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marcedes Lewis |
385 |
|
25 |
45 |
20 |
25 |
25 |
15 |
25 |
30 |
|
30 |
10 |
5 |
50 |
35 |
30 |
15 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
38 |
|
3 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
|
3 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zach Miller |
295 |
+ |
10 |
35 |
10 |
35 |
15 |
50 |
0 |
20 |
|
15 |
5 |
40 |
10 |
20 |
15 |
15 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
26 |
|
1 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
|
Run: Jones-Drew faces only two
red matchups prior to the Jags’ Week 9, with three games
in that time against weaker 3-4 run defenses (San Diego, Buffalo,
Kansas City) and with an improved offensive line. Denver starts
off Jacksonville’s pre-bye stretch of 3-4 defenses (five
of their first eight opponents use the defense), but one has to
think the Broncos’ defense will fall off considerably with
the departure of DC Mike Nolan. San Diego will be plugging in
a new Opening Day NT in its 3-4 for the first time in years and
figures to have issues stopping the run as well, particularly
if its offense misses its holdouts like I believe it will. Philly
checks in as one of the three NFC East teams that warrant a red
box on the Jags’ slate, but that leads into four consecutive
matchups vs. average or poor run defenses before a road date in
Dallas, which should represent MJD’s toughest competition
of the season.
The second half of the Jags’ schedule rates about the same
as the first half, with the major difference being the presence
of five 4-3 defenses and only two 3-4 defenses. In fact, the final
five fantasy weeks (Weeks 12-16) could actually be very difficult
if the Raiders and Redskins each live up to the high grades I
gave their respective run defenses. With that said, MJD is a good
bet for at least 100 total yards, 3-5 catches and a TD each week,
regardless of the opponent. With an improved passing attack Jones-Drew
has a very good chance of improving on last season’s stellar
numbers.
Pass: OC Dirk Koetter said earlier
in the offseason that he wants his offense to throw the ball more
often in 2010. It’s hard to say that is the method of attack
they should be using after taking a closer look at the schedule,
because while an improved passing game opens things up for their
best player (Jones-Drew), Sims-Walker will need to take another
huge step up and stay healthy if the Jags have any chance of following
through on their OC’s wishes. Sims-Walker only faces a tough
matchup in Week 1 if Champ Bailey ends up shadowing him, but even
if he gets a break there, Weeks 3-4 represent hard times for the
entire passing game with the Eagles and Colts. The next four games
for the Jags alternate between above-average and below-average
competition, with MSW likely seeing a heavy dose of Titans CB
Cortland Finnegan and Cowboys CBs Mike Jenkins and/or Terence
Newman in Weeks 6 and 8, respectively.
After somewhat relatively less difficult matchups vs. Houston
and Cleveland, it doesn’t get much better after the bye
with four consecutive difficult pass defenses (at least in Sims-Walker’s
case). Even Washington could have a top-notch pass defense if
the entire defense has bought into the 3-4 by that point. However,
it should be noted that the schedule really is only as difficult
as Garrard makes it. If he can bottle up his play at home (90.9
passer rating) and eliminate some of his ridiculously bad play
on the road (75.1 passer rating) from 2009, Jacksonville could
easily make the noise in the passing game (and in the standings)
that its coaches expect. Two names to store away for possible
early-season waiver-wire pickups: WR Mike Thomas and TE Zach Miller
(the latter only in very deep leagues).
Tennessee Titans |
|
Totals |
|
OAK |
PIT |
NYG |
DEN |
DAL |
JAX |
PHI |
SD |
bye |
MIA |
WAS |
HOU |
JAX |
IND |
HOU |
KC |
(Run) |
|
|
8.2 |
9.3 |
8.3 |
7.1 |
8.8 |
6.7 |
8 |
7.2 |
|
7.2 |
8.2 |
7.8 |
6.7 |
7.6 |
7.8 |
6.5 |
(Pass) |
|
|
8.2 |
8.5 |
8.9 |
8.1 |
7.8 |
7.6 |
8.2 |
7.7 |
|
8 |
7.4 |
7.5 |
7.6 |
8.8 |
7.5 |
7.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vince Young |
3045 |
|
190 |
200 |
250 |
155 |
220 |
160 |
190 |
220 |
|
240 |
170 |
175 |
240 |
195 |
230 |
210 |
TD |
16 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
INT |
12 |
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
Ru Yards |
320 |
|
25 |
0 |
20 |
30 |
15 |
20 |
15 |
40 |
|
20 |
15 |
45 |
25 |
15 |
20 |
15 |
Ru TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Johnson |
1645 |
- |
100 |
65 |
85 |
125 |
100 |
150 |
80 |
125 |
|
90 |
110 |
125 |
115 |
100 |
110 |
165 |
Ru TD |
11 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
Re Yards |
470 |
|
20 |
15 |
60 |
25 |
45 |
15 |
55 |
40 |
|
65 |
20 |
10 |
15 |
25 |
35 |
25 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
55 |
|
3 |
3 |
6 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
6 |
4 |
|
7 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
Javon Ringer/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L Blount/St Johnson |
235 |
|
10 |
5 |
20 |
15 |
15 |
10 |
15 |
10 |
|
20 |
10 |
15 |
15 |
20 |
15 |
40 |
Ru TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
75 |
|
0 |
5 |
10 |
5 |
0 |
5 |
10 |
5 |
|
0 |
5 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
5 |
10 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
13 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nate Washington |
610 |
|
40 |
45 |
55 |
30 |
65 |
30 |
20 |
45 |
|
20 |
55 |
25 |
70 |
25 |
55 |
30 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
38 |
|
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
|
1 |
3 |
1 |
5 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Justin Gage |
475 |
|
35 |
25 |
35 |
60 |
20 |
50 |
INJ |
INJ |
|
45 |
35 |
60 |
30 |
15 |
40 |
25 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
INJ |
INJ |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
40 |
|
3 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
4 |
INJ |
INJ |
|
4 |
3 |
6 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kenny Britt |
655 |
+ |
50 |
40 |
55 |
15 |
35 |
30 |
45 |
70 |
|
40 |
20 |
35 |
60 |
40 |
75 |
45 |
Re TD |
4 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
46 |
|
3 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
|
3 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bo Scaife |
540 |
|
35 |
50 |
35 |
20 |
40 |
30 |
45 |
35 |
|
50 |
35 |
25 |
40 |
45 |
20 |
35 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
53 |
|
3 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
3 |
6 |
4 |
|
5 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
1 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jared Cook |
220 |
^ |
10 |
20 |
0 |
0 |
15 |
0 |
15 |
25 |
|
20 |
0 |
15 |
25 |
35 |
0 |
40 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
19 |
|
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
|
2 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
|
Run: If Chris Johnson owners are
willing to put up with a bumpy first half of the season, they
may get to collect the fruits of their (or his) labor in the second
half. And I’ll reiterate (as I have at various points throughout
the offseason already), the loss of C Kevin Mawae and TE Alge
Crumpler hurts Johnson’s value more than people realize.
Certainly, the team has been grooming C Eugene Amano for years,
but Mawae was still one of the best players at his position in
the league last season even at 38 years of age. Nevertheless,
the Titans start out with what could be three above-average run-stopping
units right out of the gate. In Week 4, there’s every chance
Denver will be a good first-half defense again – although
I don’t see it happening – so we’ll give him
the benefit of doubt in that matchup.
A showdown in Dallas could be CJ’s fifth straight mediocre
game, but he should be able to start living up to his reputation
in Week 6 at Jacksonville. Philadelphia’s blitzing defense
will likely make life hard again on any outside runs in Week 7
before Johnson has another opportunity to light it up in Week
8 in San Diego. Two more potential stout 3-4 defenses await on
the other side of the bye in Weeks 10 and 11 before the schedule
starts providing a bit of relief. It helps that Weeks 13-15 are
all at home and Week 16 is a road date in KC, which doesn’t
figure to do much to stop Johnson in what is the fantasy championship
week for most leagues.
Pass: It’s hard to write
off an entire passing game for the better part of the season,
but given the nature of the Titans’ passing game (a spread-the-wealth
WR corps on a running team where the RB and TE may be the leading
receivers) and the schedule, there just isn’t much to like
here. How bad is it? In the Titans’ eight pre-bye games,
six of them could be poor matchups. First, the Titans face off
against three NFC East defenses – each of which have enough
talent to stifle Tennessee’s passing game – along
with Oakland and Pittsburgh, two defenses which typically rate
among the top passing defenses each season. And let’s not
forget Denver, which may get another year of top-level play from
Andre Goodman, who starts opposite Champ Bailey.
Two more potentially good defenses – Miami and Washington
– await after the bye and each of those also feature 3-4
defenses that can rush the passer and have a pair of quality CBs
as well. However, if fantasy owners can wait out the first 11
weeks of the season, then Titans’ WRs may be worth having
on the roster at that point since only one more red matchup remains.
Of course, any Jeff Fisher-coached team will be happy to run the
ball all day, so as they have been over the last few years (and
especially with Young at QB), Titans’ WRs figure to be a
mixed bag again in 2010.
AFC West
Denver Broncos |
|
Totals |
|
JAX |
SEA |
IND |
TEN |
BAL |
NYJ |
OAK |
SF |
bye |
KC |
SD |
STL |
KC |
ARI |
OAK |
HOU |
(Run) |
|
|
6.7 |
7.5 |
7.6 |
7.8 |
9.4 |
9.1 |
8.2 |
8.9 |
|
6.5 |
7.2 |
6.2 |
6.5 |
8.5 |
8.2 |
7.8 |
(Pass) |
|
|
7.6 |
8 |
8.8 |
7.5 |
7.2 |
9.7 |
8.2 |
7.9 |
|
7.2 |
7.7 |
6.4 |
7.2 |
7.4 |
8.2 |
7.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kyle Orton |
3290 |
- |
205 |
240 |
200 |
210 |
230 |
185 |
200 |
155 |
|
185 |
260 |
320 |
245 |
250 |
150 |
255 |
TD |
17 |
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
INT |
14 |
|
0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tim Tebow |
180 |
|
10 |
0 |
0 |
15 |
30 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
40 |
30 |
0 |
20 |
0 |
0 |
35 |
TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
INT |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Ru Yards |
235 |
|
15 |
20 |
0 |
15 |
10 |
5 |
20 |
10 |
|
25 |
20 |
35 |
20 |
15 |
15 |
10 |
Ru TD |
4 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Knowshon Moreno |
1190 |
|
90 |
115 |
75 |
80 |
40 |
55 |
80 |
60 |
|
125 |
85 |
100 |
70 |
40 |
75 |
100 |
Ru TD |
9 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
445 |
|
30 |
20 |
15 |
45 |
35 |
15 |
30 |
10 |
|
35 |
20 |
75 |
30 |
25 |
15 |
45 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
56 |
|
4 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
|
5 |
3 |
7 |
4 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Correll Buckhalter |
505 |
|
30 |
35 |
45 |
20 |
40 |
25 |
30 |
40 |
|
35 |
45 |
25 |
15 |
55 |
35 |
30 |
Ru TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
125 |
|
5 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
5 |
0 |
|
10 |
15 |
10 |
5 |
25 |
15 |
10 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
17 |
|
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Demaryius Thomas |
620 |
|
45 |
15 |
55 |
25 |
70 |
0 |
20 |
25 |
|
40 |
80 |
110 |
55 |
35 |
0 |
45 |
Re TD |
5 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
32 |
|
2 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
|
3 |
3 |
5 |
4 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jabar Gaffney |
690 |
+ |
50 |
45 |
50 |
65 |
40 |
25 |
30 |
40 |
|
60 |
20 |
40 |
70 |
45 |
35 |
75 |
Re TD |
4 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
57 |
|
5 |
2 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
|
5 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brandon Stokley |
505 |
|
30 |
55 |
30 |
35 |
20 |
50 |
30 |
15 |
|
40 |
30 |
25 |
55 |
25 |
30 |
35 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
41 |
|
3 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
5 |
2 |
1 |
|
3 |
3 |
2 |
5 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eddie Royal |
660 |
+ |
40 |
65 |
30 |
35 |
55 |
70 |
40 |
35 |
|
25 |
75 |
20 |
20 |
85 |
25 |
40 |
Re TD |
4 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
48 |
|
3 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
6 |
3 |
2 |
|
2 |
6 |
2 |
1 |
6 |
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eric Decker |
410 |
|
15 |
30 |
20 |
0 |
40 |
15 |
45 |
30 |
|
15 |
50 |
40 |
30 |
10 |
30 |
40 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
34 |
|
1 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
|
1 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
|
Run: The arrival of Tebow makes
predicting this running game one of the more difficult projections
this season. How often will play early in the season? How often
will he line up in HC Josh McDaniels' “Wild Horses”
(Denver’s version of the “Wildcat”) formation?
Will McDaniels go Urban Meyer on us and use Tebow as a goal-line
specialist over Moreno? The last of these questions is my biggest
concern regarding the running game, as very few people care about
the 2010 fantasy value of Tebow, but the majority of us will be
somewhat invested in any value (in the form of short-yardage scores)
he might steal from Moreno. And there’s value to be had
from Denver’s schedule, especially after the Week 9 bye.
However, the Broncos must complete the first half of the schedule,
which gets considerably more difficult following the Opening Week
matchup in Jacksonville, even though they get a break by drawing
Seattle at Invesco Field and not at Qwest Field where the Seahawks
generally play very well. Weeks 3-8, however, offer much more
resistance. The Colts have a tendency to put a team down early
and make their opponents pass much more often than they want in
the second half, which obviously tends to bring the rushing attack
to a screeching halt. Then, it will be hard to find a more difficult
five-week stretch than the Titans, Ravens, Jets, Raiders and Niners,
all of which have run defenses that I project to be in the top
half of the league. Fortunately, the running game gets four opponents
right out of the break – Chiefs (twice), Rams and Chargers
– who do not offer near the challenge of the previous five
defenses. Two of those teams also play a 3-4 defense – like
the Broncos – but neither of which should be as good on
defense as the one it will practice against. The slate wraps up
with three opponents who could each easily exceed my defensive
projections (if they can all stay healthy) in Arizona, Oakland
and Houston. This threesome during the fantasy playoffs probably
makes Moreno more of a RB2 than potential RB1 in 2010.
Pass: As much concern as Tebow
causes for the short-term value of Moreno, he causes considerably
more long-term stress on Orton. It’s doubtful that “stress”
will manifest itself much this season in terms of getting Tebow
regular snaps on the field, but if the season spirals downward
quickly, it’s conceivable Tebow could be starting by Week
12 or 13, even though he has no business doing so. But without
Brandon Marshall, everyone’s job just got a lot harder in
Denver, although the team lucked out by drawing the AFC South
and NFC West in 2010.
Both the Jags and Seahawks should have improved pass defenses,
but just like it does in the run game, Weeks 3-8 will provide
more headaches than relief as only the injury-ravaged Ravens secondary
can be considered below-average. The slate lightens up post-bye
with four games vs. the Chiefs, Rams and Chargers with a fifth
contest in Week 14 at Arizona which could also be a slightly favorably
matchup. Oakland hosts Denver in Week 15, which should make just
about every Bronco passing game member bench-worthy at best; the
same could probably be said about Houston in Week 16.
Kansas City Chiefs |
|
Totals |
|
SD |
CLE |
SF |
bye |
IND |
HOU |
JAX |
BUF |
OAK |
DEN |
ARI |
SEA |
DEN |
SD |
STL |
TEN |
(Run) |
|
|
7.2 |
7.4 |
8.9 |
|
7.6 |
7.8 |
6.7 |
6.1 |
8.2 |
7.1 |
8.5 |
7.5 |
7.1 |
7.2 |
6.2 |
7.8 |
(Pass) |
|
|
7.7 |
6.7 |
7.9 |
|
8.8 |
7.5 |
7.6 |
6.7 |
8.2 |
8.1 |
7.4 |
8 |
8.1 |
7.7 |
6.4 |
7.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Matt Cassel |
3595 |
+ |
290 |
265 |
205 |
|
210 |
210 |
270 |
175 |
195 |
250 |
265 |
235 |
215 |
330 |
225 |
255 |
TD |
20 |
|
1 |
2 |
1 |
|
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
INT |
14 |
|
0 |
2 |
0 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
Ru Yards |
120 |
|
15 |
5 |
15 |
|
5 |
5 |
10 |
0 |
20 |
10 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
15 |
Ru TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jamaal Charles |
1475 |
|
100 |
130 |
55 |
|
110 |
100 |
130 |
145 |
80 |
75 |
110 |
70 |
110 |
55 |
135 |
70 |
Ru TD |
10 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
Re Yards |
420 |
|
45 |
20 |
25 |
|
15 |
15 |
35 |
15 |
50 |
10 |
40 |
20 |
15 |
30 |
60 |
25 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
53 |
|
4 |
3 |
3 |
|
2 |
2 |
5 |
3 |
6 |
1 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
7 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thomas Jones |
505 |
|
30 |
40 |
25 |
|
25 |
20 |
20 |
50 |
30 |
40 |
20 |
35 |
25 |
70 |
40 |
35 |
Ru TD |
7 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
100 |
|
10 |
5 |
10 |
|
5 |
10 |
10 |
0 |
10 |
10 |
5 |
10 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
17 |
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
|
1 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dwayne Bowe |
1180 |
+ |
110 |
85 |
70 |
|
55 |
75 |
115 |
85 |
60 |
45 |
125 |
60 |
80 |
100 |
65 |
50 |
Re TD |
8 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
85 |
|
8 |
7 |
6 |
|
5 |
6 |
7 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
10 |
5 |
6 |
6 |
4 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Chambers |
750 |
|
45 |
75 |
35 |
|
30 |
55 |
15 |
30 |
45 |
70 |
25 |
75 |
40 |
80 |
45 |
85 |
Re TD |
5 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
47 |
|
3 |
5 |
2 |
|
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
6 |
1 |
6 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jerheme Urban |
460 |
|
40 |
25 |
35 |
|
40 |
20 |
50 |
20 |
0 |
45 |
55 |
25 |
20 |
30 |
25 |
30 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
39 |
|
3 |
2 |
3 |
|
4 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
4 |
5 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dexter McCluster |
485 |
+ |
25 |
30 |
25 |
|
55 |
35 |
25 |
15 |
30 |
55 |
15 |
35 |
45 |
40 |
20 |
35 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
37 |
|
2 |
3 |
2 |
|
3 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tony Moeaki |
200 |
+ |
15 |
25 |
5 |
|
10 |
0 |
20 |
10 |
0 |
15 |
0 |
10 |
15 |
40 |
10 |
25 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
19 |
|
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
|
Run: Based off the “expert”
drafts I have participated in so far, there appears to be a great
deal of concern regarding: 1) Charles’ ability to carry
the load, 2) Jones’ presence as a potential goal-line vulture
or more and 3) both of the aforementioned choices. Of these concerns,
I would only be concerned with part of the second option–
a short-yardage thief. I believe it will become apparent early
in camp that Jones is no longer running behind the Jets’
offensive line and that the Chiefs need a slasher like Charles
to do damage on the ground more than a more physical back like
Jones. And with the schedule Kansas City has, Charles should be
able to carry over his success from last December over to this
season. Charles’ should have ample opportunity to run his
100-yard streak to six games after the Chiefs get done with the
3-4 defenses of the Chargers and Browns in Weeks 1-2. A home game
vs. San Francisco, another 3-4 defense, may halt the streak, but
also give fantasy owners a pretty good indication as to whether
Charles is the 2010 version of Chris Johnson.
After an early Week 4 bye, Kansas City will face only one more
red matchup the rest of the season, and that is only if Arizona
meets the expectations I have for its run defense. Indianapolis
and Houston in Weeks 5-6 should both be high-scoring, high-yardage
affairs while Jacksonville and Buffalo should offer plenty of
running lanes for Charles, even behind the Chiefs’ less-than-impressive
offensive line. Oakland (Week 9) may actually have one of the
better run defenses on the schedule, but it might be the Raiders’
pass defense that forces KC to run the ball more often in that
contest. Playing at Seattle (Week 12) will be no picnic, but after
that, it’s hard not to like the image of Charles putting
up fantasy points against the likes of the Broncos, Chargers and
Rams in Weeks 13-15. Week 16 gives us a game featuring Johnson
and Charles, so while the former has the advantage matchup, Tennessee’s
run defense showed last year it can be beat by backs such as Charles
– and it’s hard to say the Titans’ run defense
got any better in the offseason.
Pass: The key to the Chiefs’
passing attack this season is Dwayne Bowe. HC Todd Haley has been
effusive with his praise of his WR1 – a noteworthy achievement
for those who know the coach’s reputation. Though Bowe has
produced plenty already in his career already, he should be in
line for a career so long as he keeps his head on straight and
doesn’t challenge Haley’s authority again. His season
(and Cassel’s, for that matter) could start off with a bang
against the average secondaries of the Chargers and Browns, two
3-4 teams that I don’t believe will be top-notch pass-rushing
units. Those teams, however, should be a good warm-up for Week
3 and a home date against the Niners, the best 3-4 defense KC
will probably face all season long. The difficult Colts’
pass defense awaits after the Week 4 bye, but leads into another
softer stretch of games (Houston, Jacksonville and Buffalo) in
Weeks 6-8. Bowe and Cassel’s greatest challenge of the season
comes in the following two weeks when he will likely be shadowed
by Oakland’s Nnamdi Asomugha and (potentially) Denver’s
Champ Bailey, although he has produced against both CBs quite
well in the past. Arizona (at home) and Seattle (on the road)
also pose a bit of a threat as each has a CB that is capable of
athletically matching up to Bowe, although it is anybody’s
guess if Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie or Marcus Trufant will live
up to their reputations after they both turned in questionable
efforts last season.
After another game vs. Denver in Week 13, Weeks 14-15 offer a
great deal of hope for the passing game with road games in San
Diego and St. Louis, the former which will give Chambers an opportunity
to show up his old team for the second time. However, the fantasy
season could end on a sour note for Bowe and Cassel if Tennessee
follows through with using Cortland Finnegan as a shadow to opposing
WR1s. Finnegan is physical enough to get into Bowe’s head;
in that scenario, the passing game would only succeed if Charles
and/or Chambers saved the day.
Oakland Raiders |
|
Totals |
|
TEN |
STL |
ARI |
HOU |
SD |
SF |
DEN |
SEA |
KC |
bye |
PIT |
MIA |
SD |
JAX |
DEN |
IND |
(Run) |
|
|
7.8 |
6.2 |
8.5 |
7.8 |
7.2 |
8.9 |
7.1 |
7.5 |
6.5 |
|
9.3 |
7.2 |
7.2 |
6.7 |
7.1 |
7.6 |
(Pass) |
|
|
7.5 |
6.4 |
7.4 |
7.5 |
7.7 |
7.9 |
8.1 |
8 |
7.2 |
|
8.5 |
8 |
7.7 |
7.6 |
8.1 |
8.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jason Campbell |
3330 |
|
210 |
280 |
235 |
230 |
250 |
155 |
135 |
265 |
280 |
|
205 |
235 |
255 |
255 |
170 |
170 |
TD |
17 |
|
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
INT |
14 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Bush |
1195 |
^ |
70 |
130 |
50 |
105 |
90 |
70 |
60 |
105 |
115 |
|
55 |
100 |
INJ |
70 |
105 |
70 |
Ru TD |
9 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
INJ |
1 |
2 |
0 |
Re Yards |
190 |
|
5 |
15 |
10 |
15 |
0 |
35 |
20 |
10 |
10 |
|
0 |
20 |
INJ |
10 |
40 |
0 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
23 |
|
1 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
2 |
INJ |
2 |
4 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Darren McFadden |
460 |
- |
45 |
20 |
65 |
25 |
35 |
INJ |
INJ |
15 |
40 |
|
30 |
25 |
75 |
45 |
20 |
20 |
Ru TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
INJ |
INJ |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
295 |
|
20 |
40 |
15 |
20 |
35 |
INJ |
INJ |
20 |
15 |
|
15 |
10 |
45 |
30 |
15 |
15 |
Re TD |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
INJ |
INJ |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
36 |
|
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
INJ |
INJ |
3 |
2 |
|
2 |
2 |
5 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chaz Schilens |
510 |
- |
15 |
75 |
40 |
40 |
20 |
INJ |
INJ |
INJ |
75 |
|
55 |
20 |
75 |
40 |
15 |
40 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
INJ |
INJ |
INJ |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
38 |
|
1 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
INJ |
INJ |
INJ |
6 |
|
5 |
2 |
6 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Darius Heyward-Bey |
495 |
+ |
25 |
55 |
50 |
15 |
INJ |
INJ |
45 |
110 |
25 |
|
35 |
0 |
40 |
55 |
25 |
15 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
INJ |
INJ |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
25 |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
INJ |
INJ |
3 |
5 |
2 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Louis Murphy |
710 |
+ |
50 |
40 |
55 |
80 |
65 |
50 |
15 |
45 |
70 |
|
35 |
65 |
20 |
50 |
40 |
30 |
Re TD |
4 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
53 |
|
4 |
2 |
4 |
6 |
5 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
|
3 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Johnnie Lee Higgins |
210 |
|
15 |
10 |
0 |
15 |
25 |
30 |
20 |
5 |
0 |
|
10 |
40 |
0 |
10 |
10 |
20 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
22 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
4 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Zach Miller |
920 |
|
80 |
45 |
65 |
45 |
105 |
40 |
35 |
75 |
85 |
|
55 |
80 |
75 |
60 |
25 |
50 |
Re TD |
7 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
76 |
|
6 |
3 |
6 |
4 |
8 |
4 |
3 |
6 |
7 |
|
5 |
7 |
6 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
|
Run: After wasting a couple of
seasons trying to split touches between three backs in an offense
that could hardly support two RBs, Oakland let Justin Fargas go
and has finally moved on. What he leaves behind is the Michael
Turner-sized Bush and the supremely-talented McFadden, who has
yet to meet an injury that he didn’t like in his NFL career.
It seems almost criminal in a year where the rest of the team
rushed for a combined 3.8 YPC, Bush sported an YPC a full yard
better (4.8). This marked the second straight year Bush exceeded
4.4 YPC in an offense that gave opponents little to no reason
to fear the passing game. Since the passing game has a chance
this season (read below), it is well worth the price of fantasy
admission to buy into this running attack – specifically
Bush – in 2010 as only three potential top-notch run-stopping
units appear on the slate. Tennessee, the opponent in Week 1,
may be a fourth such team and may halt the breakout party I believe
Bush will have. However, St. Louis should be overmatched in Week
2 and if Arizona hasn’t adequately replaced Karlos Dansby
or is still waiting on ILB Gerald Hayes to return to 100% in Week
3, he may run over them too.
Houston will still be missing OLB Brian Cushing in Week 4 and
San Diego will be average at best vs. the run, meaning one green
and two red matchups in the first five games could easily turn
into three greens and one red. A road game at the Niners will
be difficult for all things Raiders, but Bush could easily coast
into the Week 10 bye with three straight strong performances.
Pittsburgh and Miami (Weeks 11-12) figure to bottle up the limited
Raiders’ offense, but the rest of the season could serve
as an exclamation point to Bush’s season, with the Colts’
defense possibly the best one of the bunch. Already an average
unit at best, Indy could easily not have anything to play for
that week, meaning a very capably Raiders’ rushing attack
could post some quality numbers against an Indy defense just trying
to stay healthy for another postseason run.
Pass: Even though Campbell may
not be the fantasy world’s idea of a savior, he walks into
a situation where his job status is no longer in question and
will have more talent to work with than most people realize. The
schedule will also give him a shot to succeed, particularly in
the early going, with the first red matchup not coming until Week
6. This should give Campbell plenty of time to bond with Miller
and potentially Heyward-Bey, if he can carry over his offseason
dominance into the regular season. Tennessee’s pass defense
may be a bit better than I projected two weeks ago, but the Rams
and Cardinals will struggle to match up to Miller or the Raiders’
speed on the outside.
The Texans have a shot to be a legit defense, but will still
be missing OLB Brian Cushing when Oakland hosts them in Week 4
while San Diego has been perpetually bad at defending the TE for
several years. The Niners and Broncos should have enough to keep
the Raiders in check in Weeks 6-7, but Oakland could field a solid
fantasy numbers in the passing game with home dates against Seattle
and KC before the bye. After Pittsburgh and Miami provide another
stiff test for the improved Raiders passing game in Weeks 11-12,
Oakland should be able to flex its muscles two more times in road
contests at San Diego and Jacksonville. The last two weeks of
the fantasy schedule are far from ideal, but at least the Raiders
are at home in difficult pass-defense matchups against Denver
and Indianapolis. With any luck, fantasy owners still carrying
a Raider on their team at that point are only counting on Miller.
San Diego Chargers |
|
Totals |
|
KC |
JAX |
SEA |
ARI |
OAK |
STL |
NE |
TEN |
HOU |
bye |
DEN |
IND |
OAK |
KC |
SF |
CIN |
(Run) |
|
|
6.5 |
6.7 |
7.5 |
8.5 |
8.2 |
6.2 |
7.4 |
7.8 |
7.8 |
|
7.1 |
7.6 |
8.2 |
6.5 |
8.9 |
8.8 |
(Pass) |
|
|
7.2 |
7.6 |
8 |
7.4 |
8.2 |
6.4 |
7.5 |
7.5 |
7.5 |
|
8.1 |
8.8 |
8.2 |
7.2 |
7.9 |
9.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Philip Rivers |
3875 |
- |
265 |
300 |
245 |
210 |
230 |
250 |
250 |
265 |
280 |
|
300 |
245 |
245 |
315 |
245 |
230 |
TD |
24 |
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
|
2 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
INT |
12 |
|
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ryan Mathews |
1080 |
- |
75 |
60 |
45 |
35 |
60 |
80 |
65 |
70 |
80 |
|
100 |
70 |
75 |
125 |
60 |
80 |
Ru TD |
8 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
130 |
|
10 |
5 |
20 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
20 |
|
5 |
5 |
20 |
0 |
10 |
15 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
19 |
|
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
|
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Darren Sproles |
360 |
|
35 |
40 |
25 |
55 |
10 |
20 |
15 |
30 |
20 |
|
20 |
20 |
10 |
10 |
25 |
25 |
Ru TD |
2 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
380 |
|
30 |
25 |
35 |
15 |
20 |
40 |
15 |
10 |
15 |
|
55 |
10 |
35 |
15 |
30 |
30 |
Re TD |
3 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
43 |
|
4 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
|
4 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vincent Jackson |
730 |
! |
SUS |
SUS |
SUS |
HLD |
HLD |
HLD |
65 |
90 |
105 |
|
40 |
110 |
55 |
125 |
70 |
70 |
Re TD |
6 |
|
SUS |
SUS |
SUS |
HLD |
HLD |
HLD |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
46 |
|
SUS |
SUS |
SUS |
HLD |
HLD |
HLD |
4 |
6 |
6 |
|
3 |
7 |
3 |
8 |
4 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Malcom Floyd |
750 |
|
75 |
100 |
40 |
50 |
25 |
70 |
45 |
60 |
40 |
|
60 |
35 |
25 |
55 |
45 |
25 |
Re TD |
4 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
47 |
|
4 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
|
4 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legedu Naanee |
425 |
|
40 |
60 |
70 |
20 |
55 |
45 |
15 |
0 |
30 |
|
55 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
10 |
15 |
Re TD |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
27 |
|
3 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
|
3 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Josh Reed |
405 |
|
25 |
40 |
30 |
45 |
20 |
20 |
35 |
20 |
15 |
|
25 |
15 |
25 |
55 |
15 |
20 |
Re TD |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
36 |
|
2 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
|
3 |
1 |
2 |
5 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Antonio Gates |
1055 |
|
85 |
70 |
50 |
80 |
100 |
75 |
65 |
85 |
55 |
|
60 |
70 |
75 |
65 |
65 |
55 |
Re TD |
9 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
Rec |
86 |
|
7 |
6 |
4 |
7 |
8 |
6 |
5 |
7 |
5 |
|
4 |
5 |
6 |
5 |
7 |
4 |
|
Note: The projections above reflect holdouts from LT Marcus
McNeill and Jackson. With the Chargers likely to get off to another
slow start because of the drop-off in talent, I believe management
will cave in to public outcry for the holdout players by Week
6, meaning the projections will reflect the team being at full
strength no later than Week 7.
Run: As optimistic as I am about Mathews’ future,
the present leaves me more pessimistic than most current or future
owners of the Fresno State standout. Even in this day and age,
far too often fantasy owners convince themselves a shift from
an aging RB to a rookie rusher is all that is needed to revitalize
a running game. The line Mathews will now run behind – which
did not improve talent-wise in the offseason – is the same
one that kept Sproles at 3.7 YPC in 2009, a humbling total for
a player who is so explosive. Setting that aside for the moment,
as far as easing into a situation, it doesn’t get much better
for a rookie RB like Mathews. First up on the schedule are two
rush defenses that project to be below average against the run
(Chiefs, Jags). The same could be probably be said about the opponent
in Week 3 (Seattle), but the Seahawks are typically world-beaters
at Qwest Field and should be much better against the run this
year anyway if they can get a full season from MLB Lofa Tatupu.
San Diego’s run game will need to step it up in Weeks 4-5
though as Arizona and Oakland should have two surprisingly good
rush defenses.
In Weeks 6-9, only one potential red matchup exists (Tennessee),
although New England and Houston could easily overwhelm the Chargers’
running game if the holdouts are still not playing at that point.
The post-bye slate (assuming Jackson and McNeill have returned)
looks easy enough in Weeks 11-14, but facing the Niners at home
and the Bengals on the road is an awful daunting task for any
running game. Thus, based on the potential holdouts and the fantasy
playoff schedule, it’s hard to like Mathews as any more
than a RB2 in fantasy this season.
Pass: Let this serve as yet another
warning: the Chargers and GM A.J. Smith are kidding themselves
if they honestly feel they can enter the season without the services
of McNeill and Jackson and win the division easily, much less
contend for a Super Bowl. Current LT Brandon Dombrowski and Naanee
are fine backups (I actually think San Diego has greatly underutilized
Naanee), but good defenses are going to swarm Gates and make Floyd
and Naanee beat them week after week. Although Floyd has showed
glimpses, he isn’t going to emerge as a WR1 in his sixth
season after years of mediocrity. And McNeill’s absence
is not good for the run or the pass game, but particularly the
latter, as Dombrowski is not that accomplished as a pass blocker.
San Diego established itself as a passing team last season and
if it hopes to make another playoff run, it is going to need Rivers
even more to overcome the absences of McNeill and Jackson. Getting
a chance to open the season against the pass-rush-deficient Chiefs
and Jags is a plus, but Seattle, Arizona and Oakland could all
shut the Chargers’ WRs (minus Jackson) down, so Gates will
need to earn his new contract if they have any hope of coming
out of the first five weeks with a winning record.
St. Louis should serve a slight confidence boost for the passing
game, but the Pats figure to make sure Gates is almost a non-factor
in Week 7 (assuming Jackson is still not back). Even though Tennessee
and Houston do not figure to be elite pass-rushing defenses, both
teams have the personnel to punish to repeatedly beat San Diego’s
offensive line leading up to the bye. Amazingly, if McNeill does
hold out until Week 10 (the Chargers’ bye week), he will
return just in time to face the likes of Elvis Dumervil, Dwight
Freeney, Richard Seymour and Antwan Odom – not exactly the
players the Chargers want Dombrowski blocking play in and play
out. As for San Diego’s fantasy-eligible players, the post-bye
schedule looks fairly imposing with four red matchups for the
receivers not named Gates and Jackson, with Denver a possible
fifth red matchup depending on whether Denver is able to maintain
the kind of play it showed during the first half of last season
under then-DC Mike Nolan.
Suggestions, comments, musings about the article or fantasy football
in general? E-mail me.
|