AFC South & AFC West Breakdowns
8/5/09
AFC South: HOU
| IND | JAX | TEN
AFC West: DEN
| KC | OAK | SD
Every owner wants to hit on the next big thing; that is no secret.
But it infuriates me how so-called expert after so-called expert
doesn't even mention the word "schedule" when it comes
to projecting player performance. Somewhere along with player talent
and age, team offensive philosophy and supporting cast, I believe
schedule analysis – when used correctly – provides a
huge advantage over the competition. Any veteran fantasy football
owner knows it is nearly pointless to use last season's numbers
as an indicator of how a defense will fare this season, which is
a big reason I go to the trouble of analyzing
defense like I did two weeks ago. It stands to reason that if
teams like Kansas City and Denver will once again struggle on defense
- even after all the changes both teams made - that I want to see
them more often on my fantasy players' schedule than I do on someone
else's. Likewise, why do I want any of my players facing Pittsburgh
in the fantasy playoffs?
Last week in this space,
I tried to lobby each of you to consider the schedule for fantasy
purposes and presented some pretty daunting evidence as to why
owners should be thrilled to see teams from the AFC and NFC West
on their fantasy players' schedule. I mention this again for two
very important reasons: 1) it is pertinent considering that each
of the teams that I am spotlighting this week will be playing
against one or the other and 2) each top-place fantasy RB finisher
since the NFL moved to its current eight-division format prior
to the 2002 season has seen his team play at least four games
vs. the teams from the West. For the purposes of this article,
that would seem to be good news for the likes of Steve Slaton,
Chris Johnson, Maurice Jones-Drew and LaDainian Tomlinson, who
has obviously made his living in part by feasting on his own division,
scoring 53 of his 141 total TDs against the likes of Denver, Kansas
City and Oakland.
But any fantasy owner worth his/her salt needs more than just
a strong case for RBs as to why he/she should subscribe to my
line of thinking. All I can say is this: in the passing game,
fantasy owners have to trust that offensive coordinators will
earn their paycheck by getting their players in the most advantageous
positions to score points for us. (However, not all of them do,
which is one reason why I spend so much of the offseason talking
about coordinators and their philosophies
in this space.) Conversely, we also have to believe most defensive
coordinators will do their best to shut down said weapons, but
due to any number of factors - including but not limited to lack
of personnel, ineffective schemes or general breakdown in coverage
- a top WR or TE may get his numbers anyway. Because very few
teams subscribe to the thinking of "our best corner vs. your
best WR" and even fewer teams have one specific safety or
linebacker who shadows an opponent's TE, sometimes all we have
is history to look back on to see how a player produced against
a similar defensive approach.
But think of it this way: I don't need any of my wideouts going
against the Raiders' Nnamdi Asomugha or the Jets' Darrelle Revis
in any fantasy playoff game. Similarly, I'd just as soon not count
on my QB or TE - no matter how good he is - to put up his new
career-high total against Pittsburgh or Baltimore.
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 my PSA:
RB article a read for an introductory course in Preseason
Schedule Analysis. By now, I'm hoping that each of you have a
pretty good understanding of my methodology, so let's see how
I think the AFC South and AFC West shake down in 2009.
Note: The grey
highlight in each team’s schedule reflects a road game.
AFC SOUTH
Houston Texans |
|
Totals |
NYJ |
TEN |
JAX |
OAK |
ARI |
CIN |
SF |
BUF |
IND |
bye |
TEN |
IND |
JAX |
SEA |
STL |
MIA |
(Run) |
|
3.8 |
4.1 |
4 |
4.9 |
4.4 |
4 |
4 |
4.5 |
4.1 |
|
4.1 |
4.1 |
4 |
4.2 |
4.6 |
4.3 |
(Pass) |
|
6.5 |
6.5 |
7.2 |
6.9 |
6.7 |
6.3 |
7 |
7.4 |
6.1 |
|
6.5 |
6.1 |
7.2 |
7 |
7.6 |
7.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Schaub |
3785 |
215 |
260 |
260 |
190 |
270 |
280 |
305 |
240 |
195 |
|
220 |
265 |
325 |
230 |
265 |
265 |
TD |
23 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
|
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
INT |
13 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
S Slaton |
1300 |
65 |
70 |
90 |
130 |
80 |
75 |
35 |
125 |
120 |
|
55 |
85 |
65 |
100 |
125 |
80 |
Ru
TD |
7 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
Re Yards |
380 |
15 |
10 |
20 |
10 |
40 |
25 |
65 |
25 |
0 |
|
25 |
10 |
75 |
20 |
0 |
40 |
Re
TD |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
43 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
6 |
4 |
6 |
4 |
0 |
|
2 |
1 |
7 |
3 |
0 |
4 |
C Brown/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Foster |
310 |
20 |
15 |
10 |
30 |
40 |
25 |
10 |
30 |
10 |
|
20 |
15 |
30 |
15 |
25 |
15 |
Ru
TD |
8 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Re
Yards |
35 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
|
0 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
0 |
Re TD |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
7 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Johnson |
1350 |
70 |
135 |
85 |
55 |
90 |
105 |
85 |
115 |
75 |
|
65 |
120 |
60 |
80 |
130 |
80 |
Re
TD |
8 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
Rec |
105 |
6 |
11 |
5 |
4 |
8 |
6 |
7 |
9 |
7 |
|
5 |
10 |
4 |
6 |
11 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K Walter |
945 |
55 |
35 |
70 |
100 |
60 |
50 |
75 |
50 |
65 |
|
80 |
55 |
80 |
75 |
40 |
55 |
Re
TD |
6 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
73 |
5 |
3 |
6 |
7 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
4 |
7 |
|
8 |
4 |
6 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Davis |
390 |
25 |
15 |
40 |
0 |
25 |
50 |
20 |
15 |
0 |
|
25 |
10 |
75 |
20 |
40 |
30 |
Re
TD |
3 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
25 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
3 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
O Daniels |
685 |
50 |
65 |
40 |
25 |
55 |
40 |
60 |
30 |
55 |
|
25 |
65 |
35 |
25 |
55 |
60 |
Re
TD |
4 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
61 |
4 |
6 |
3 |
1 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
2 |
6 |
|
1 |
8 |
3 |
2 |
5 |
7 |
|
While it may not be good for their actual playoff hopes, the
Texans figure to help any fantasy owner investing in their passing
game breathe a sigh of relief considering that Houston faces the
Jets in Week 1 and New England in Week 17. If any defenses on
the Texans' 2009 schedule have the scheme and talent in place
to silence their offensive attack, those would be the two, so
any owner heavily invested in Matt Schaub or Andre Johnson should
consider themselves pretty lucky. As it stands, only division
rivals Indianapolis and Tennessee stand out as defenses on Houston's
schedule that should challenge them in the passing game, although
I do expect strong defensive showings from Cincinnati and Seattle
this season. Even with that, I can only identify four matchups
that Johnson will be severely tested and just five games in which
Schaub may struggle - and that's assuming both the Colts and Titans
pick right up where they left off with new defensive coordinators!
In short, Schaub and Johnson are both set up to enjoy career years
if both can stay healthy, a notion that is no small concern. (Johnson
hasn't put together consecutive 16-game seasons since his first
two years in the league back in 2003-04 while Schaub has played
just 11 games in each of his first two seasons with Houston.)
Much like the passing game, big things should also be in store
for the Texans' running game. There doesn't seem to be any consensus
yet on what will happen to Steve Slaton's goal-line carries. Slaton
added nearly 10 pounds in the offseason in order to hopefully
address the team's woes in red zone scoring (30th in the league
in 2008) and red zone touchdowns (26th). Conversely, HC Gary Kubiak
made several mentions during the offseason about his desire to
pair Slaton up with a bigger back. The head coach usually wins
these types of battles, but counting on Chris Brown for a full
season would be foolish and, while the team likes undrafted rookie
Arian Foster, one has to question whether the Texans will honestly
feel better taking the ball out of Slaton's hands inside the five-yard
line. Why does it matter? For a RB corps that accounted for over
2,200 total yards and 15 scores last season against the likes
of Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Tennessee (twice), the potential
is there for even more with only one negative matchup and the
NFC West on the schedule. For now, I'll believe that HC Gary Kubiak
lets Brown and Foster take the goal-line work, but the fact is
that if Slaton beats them both out, he could easily be the No.
1 overall fantasy draft pick in 2010.
Indianapolis Colts |
|
Totals |
JAX |
MIA |
ARI |
SEA |
TEN |
bye |
STL |
SF |
HOU |
NE |
BAL |
HOU |
TEN |
DEN |
JAX |
NYJ |
(Run) |
|
4 |
4.3 |
4.4 |
4.2 |
4.1 |
|
4.6 |
4 |
4.3 |
3.9 |
3.8 |
4.3 |
4.1 |
5 |
4 |
3.8 |
(Pass) |
|
7.2 |
7.2 |
6.7 |
7 |
6.5 |
|
7.6 |
7 |
7.2 |
6.2 |
6.2 |
7.2 |
6.5 |
6.8 |
7.2 |
6.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P Manning |
3780 |
260 |
220 |
250 |
275 |
205 |
|
310 |
280 |
300 |
230 |
205 |
260 |
220 |
280 |
230 |
255 |
TD |
27 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
|
3 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
INT |
11 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J Addai |
860 |
55 |
30 |
75 |
55 |
40 |
|
90 |
45 |
60 |
40 |
35 |
80 |
60 |
105 |
35 |
55 |
Ru TD |
6 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
335 |
25 |
15 |
35 |
15 |
5 |
|
35 |
15 |
30 |
20 |
35 |
10 |
40 |
5 |
30 |
20 |
Re TD |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
45 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
|
5 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
1 |
6 |
1 |
4 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D Brown |
680 |
35 |
45 |
35 |
50 |
25 |
|
55 |
85 |
55 |
45 |
50 |
30 |
30 |
65 |
45 |
30 |
Ru TD |
5 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
105 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
10 |
5 |
|
0 |
10 |
0 |
20 |
0 |
15 |
5 |
10 |
5 |
10 |
Re TD |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
19 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R Wayne |
1045 |
80 |
40 |
65 |
75 |
30 |
|
110 |
85 |
90 |
55 |
45 |
100 |
45 |
55 |
85 |
85 |
Re TD |
9 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
83 |
7 |
3 |
5 |
6 |
2 |
|
7 |
6 |
8 |
4 |
5 |
8 |
5 |
6 |
6 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Gonzalez |
995 |
55 |
75 |
85 |
90 |
50 |
|
60 |
70 |
65 |
50 |
75 |
50 |
60 |
115 |
40 |
55 |
Re TD |
8 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
72 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
7 |
4 |
|
5 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
9 |
3 |
4 |
P Garcon/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Collie |
520 |
35 |
45 |
20 |
30 |
45 |
|
55 |
35 |
40 |
45 |
30 |
40 |
35 |
15 |
30 |
20 |
Re TD |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
40 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
|
3 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D Clark |
780 |
60 |
45 |
35 |
55 |
70 |
|
50 |
65 |
75 |
40 |
20 |
45 |
35 |
80 |
40 |
65 |
Re TD |
7 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
67 |
6 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
7 |
|
4 |
5 |
6 |
5 |
3 |
6 |
2 |
6 |
3 |
3 |
|
Now that the most talked-about consultant role in the history
of the league has been clarified, the Colts should retain their
place among the elite offenses in the league. Late last month,
the league informed its teams that consultants such as former
OC Tom Moore and ex-OL coach Howard Mudd would be allowed to take
on as much of a role as the team wanted, meaning Moore and Mudd
will be able to assume their old roles with the team, in a matter
of speaking. Unlike the Texans' slate, the Colts' schedule is
much more heavily backloaded with potential negative matchups.
Even though Indianapolis has mostly neutral matchups in the first
eight games, that fact is somewhat negated by the notion that
four of the Colts' next seven games are against some fairly tough
projected defenses. Note that I have the Jaguars listed as a neutral
matchup as well, so Indy could easily slide a bit offensively
in the second half of the season. It should come as some relief,
though, that only the Jets are a team Indy is not intimately familiar
with, but even then, the Colts are no stranger to Rex Ryan's pressure
defense either. Fantasy owners shouldn't expect much more output
from Peyton Manning, Dallas Clark or Reggie Wayne than they gave
us a season ago, but a serious upgrade needs to be considered
for Anthony Gonzalez, as the absence of Marvin Harrison should
allow him to double the 57 targets he saw a season ago. The most
likely player to step into Gonzalez's old role will be Pierre
Garcon, who carries a fair amount of super-sleeper potential.
It wasn't long ago that Joseph Addai was the next big thing,
but after an injury-plagued season for him and his offensive line,
the former LSU standout goes from sure-fire first-round fantasy
pick to a committee back. While the workload split should still
be 60-40 in Addai's favor, it may not take a lot of persuasion
from first-round pick Donald Brown to make this backfield a true
RBBC. With that said, the schedule (and the Colts' health up front)
lines up nicely for an early-season bounceback from Addai. For
right now, Addai is the more complete back of the two and is certainly
the most trusted option of the two in the passing game. However,
while the passing game has the strength to survive the second
half of the Colts' schedule, fantasy owners should be advised
that a committee backfield vs. the likes of the Patriots, Ravens
and Jets during the most important weeks of the season is not
the ideal way to wrap up a fantasy league championship. If Addai
cannot complete a full season once again, Brown has more than
enough skill to step up and carry his owners, so he certainly
qualifies as a fairly low-risk, potential high-reward RB.
Jacksonville Jaguars |
|
Totals |
IND |
ARI |
HOU |
TEN |
SEA |
STL |
bye |
TEN |
KC |
NYJ |
BUF |
SF |
HOU |
MIA |
IND |
NE |
(Run) |
|
4.1 |
4.4 |
4.3 |
4.1 |
4.2 |
4.6 |
|
4.1 |
4.9 |
3.8 |
4.5 |
4 |
4.3 |
4.3 |
4.1 |
3.9 |
(Pass) |
|
6.1 |
6.7 |
7.2 |
6.5 |
7 |
7.6 |
|
6.5 |
7.5 |
6.5 |
7.4 |
7 |
7.2 |
7.2 |
6.1 |
6.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D Garrard |
2815 |
210 |
170 |
185 |
150 |
185 |
165 |
|
230 |
150 |
160 |
245 |
190 |
200 |
215 |
200 |
160 |
TD |
14 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
INT |
9 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
Ru
Yards |
250 |
15 |
30 |
25 |
10 |
0 |
15 |
|
15 |
35 |
10 |
25 |
0 |
30 |
15 |
10 |
15 |
Ru TD |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Jones-Drew |
1335 |
90 |
115 |
85 |
60 |
85 |
130 |
|
40 |
105 |
60 |
115 |
70 |
95 |
80 |
120 |
85 |
Ru TD |
14 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
0 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
Re Yards |
505 |
45 |
30 |
20 |
45 |
15 |
10 |
|
55 |
25 |
25 |
65 |
25 |
20 |
50 |
45 |
30 |
Re TD |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
59 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
6 |
2 |
1 |
|
7 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
6 |
4 |
4 |
R Jennings/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
G Jones |
315 |
25 |
15 |
25 |
10 |
25 |
20 |
|
15 |
35 |
10 |
30 |
15 |
20 |
10 |
25 |
35 |
Ru TD |
4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
35 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
0 |
|
5 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
10 |
Re TD |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T Holt |
875 |
50 |
65 |
55 |
35 |
80 |
90 |
|
50 |
40 |
25 |
105 |
60 |
75 |
60 |
40 |
45 |
Re TD |
5 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
66 |
4 |
6 |
4 |
2 |
7 |
6 |
|
3 |
3 |
2 |
6 |
5 |
7 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Walker |
610 |
50 |
30 |
40 |
30 |
35 |
20 |
|
65 |
50 |
45 |
25 |
45 |
30 |
60 |
50 |
35 |
Re TD |
3 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
44 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
|
4 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Thomas |
485 |
45 |
30 |
45 |
25 |
35 |
45 |
|
35 |
0 |
50 |
35 |
20 |
55 |
20 |
25 |
20 |
Re TD |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
38 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
|
2 |
0 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Lewis |
305 |
20 |
15 |
25 |
5 |
20 |
0 |
|
20 |
35 |
10 |
15 |
40 |
15 |
25 |
40 |
20 |
Re TD |
3 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
36 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
|
3 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
|
It would come as a surprise to no one if Maurice
Jones-Drew emerged as fantasy's best RB this season. He is
a complete back with no viable threat pushing him for touches
in the Jags' backfield. In three seasons, he has scored 38 rushing
or receiving TDs, so he obviously has a nose for the end zone.
Moreover, Jacksonville should start this season with a much better
and healthier offensive line after adding rookies Eugene Monroe
and Eben Britton along with free agent Tra Thomas. Last but not
least, there is not a lot of red on MJD's schedule and he has
the benefit of padding his numbers against the likes of the Rams
and Chiefs. In fact, only the Jets and Patriots qualify as defenses
on the 2009 schedule who strike me as teams who could bottle up
Jones-Drew. But as we have seen already, "Pocket Hercules" is
one of the few RBs in the league who can consistently produce
no matter the opponent, much like a young Brian Westbrook. The
biggest question will be whether or not the Jags elect to take
some of MJD's red zone touches from him in order to preserve him
(the team has some pounders behind him), but it would seem ridiculous
to remove him from the goal line when he has established himself
as one of the best in the league in that role and is compact enough
to handle the punishment.
Assuming the Jags will return to their run-heavy ways and with
the lack of an elite receiving threat, it's hard to hand out many
favorable matchups to any of the members of Jacksonville's passing
game. What this team does have is receiving talent, so it is conceivable
that David Garrard takes advantage and puts up some surprising
passing yards (like he did last year) while also posting a stellar
TD:INT ratio (like he did in 2007). In all honesty, the six red
matchups could end up being as few as two if the Jags open things
up and teams like the Colts and Titans fail to react favorably
to their new defensive coordinators. Despite being on the downside
of his career, Torry Holt is undoubtedly the most dependable target
(on and off the field) Garrard has enjoyed since becoming the
team's #1 QB midway through the 2006 season. Pairing him up for
16 games with a healthy Mike Walker (always a question mark) would
make Garrard a viable mix-and-match fantasy starter and give the
running game even more opportunity to pound opponents.
Tennessee Titans |
|
Totals |
PIT |
HOU |
NYJ |
JAX |
IND |
NE |
bye |
JAX |
SF |
BUF |
HOU |
ARI |
IND |
STL |
MIA |
SD |
(Run) |
|
3.4 |
4.3 |
3.8 |
4 |
4.1 |
3.9 |
|
4 |
4 |
4.5 |
4.3 |
4.4 |
4.1 |
4.6 |
4.3 |
4.1 |
(Pass) |
|
5.6 |
7.2 |
6.5 |
7.2 |
6.1 |
6.2 |
|
7.2 |
7 |
7.4 |
7.2 |
6.7 |
6.1 |
7.6 |
7.2 |
6.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K Collins |
3125 |
185 |
205 |
220 |
215 |
180 |
235 |
|
195 |
225 |
190 |
255 |
230 |
150 |
215 |
225 |
200 |
TD |
15 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
|
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
INT |
8 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C Johnson |
1335 |
70 |
90 |
55 |
85 |
110 |
40 |
|
115 |
70 |
135 |
65 |
120 |
80 |
140 |
75 |
85 |
Ru TD |
10 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
330 |
5 |
15 |
25 |
35 |
20 |
50 |
|
25 |
5 |
20 |
25 |
20 |
5 |
15 |
25 |
40 |
Re TD |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
39 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
5 |
|
3 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L White |
590 |
25 |
35 |
25 |
45 |
30 |
35 |
|
55 |
40 |
45 |
50 |
30 |
25 |
55 |
80 |
15 |
Ru TD |
7 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
Re Yards |
55 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
|
5 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
Re TD |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
8 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N Washington |
795 |
55 |
55 |
30 |
45 |
60 |
35 |
|
40 |
55 |
70 |
50 |
55 |
50 |
100 |
35 |
60 |
Re TD |
4 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
51 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
|
4 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J Gage |
815 |
50 |
75 |
50 |
70 |
55 |
45 |
|
40 |
85 |
55 |
65 |
40 |
45 |
35 |
75 |
30 |
Re TD |
3 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
65 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
7 |
5 |
4 |
|
4 |
7 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K Britt |
415 |
20 |
15 |
40 |
20 |
0 |
25 |
|
55 |
25 |
30 |
25 |
35 |
0 |
45 |
55 |
25 |
Re TD |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
28 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B Scaife |
625 |
35 |
45 |
60 |
45 |
35 |
65 |
|
30 |
45 |
15 |
55 |
70 |
45 |
10 |
30 |
40 |
Re TD |
4 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
67 |
3 |
4 |
7 |
5 |
3 |
8 |
|
3 |
5 |
3 |
8 |
4 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Crumpler |
90 |
10 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
0 |
15 |
|
0 |
5 |
0 |
25 |
10 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
Re TD |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
11 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
As is usually the case with HC Jeff Fisher's teams, the offense
begins and ends with the running game, all the while hoping the
passing game does just enough to get by. The same could be said
for the Titans' first-half slate, which presents the team with
the stiffest challenges it figures to face all season. The Steelers,
Jets and Pats are three of Tennessee's first four road games,
all of which come prior to the team's Week 7 bye. As a result,
a slow start by Chris
Johnson and LenDale
White (to a lesser degree) should not be ruled out. With that
said, the post-bye slate opens up quite nicely for Johnson as
only the Dolphins and Chargers (during the fantasy playoffs) project
as defenses that should be expected to mount any kind of resistance
against the Titans' running game, although the Jags and Niners
could stand up to them more than expected. Johnson has as strong
of a case as Jones-Drew or Slaton for becoming not only the division’s
best fantasy player, but also the league's most valuable fantasy
property at RB. He is an adept receiver while his offensive line
– which returns in full after a dominant showing from last season
– is the most established of the three.
Just like the running game, the Titans should be forgiven if
the Steelers, Jets, Colts and Pats stymie their passing game before
the bye. Nate Washington and Justin Gage will go up against some
solid CBs after that, but it could be argued the Cardinals and
Chargers have the most talent in the defensive backfield of any
team Tennessee faces in the second half. While I expect a return
to form from San Diego, Arizona seriously downgraded in my opinion
when it fired former DC Clancy Pendergast and hired Bill Davis
as his replacement. Thus, only two teams strike me as opponents
who will serve as a serious deterrent when the Titans want to
go play-action and hit Washington (and possibly rookie Kenny Britt)
down the field. It should be noted that while I expect Bo Scaife
and Gage to lead the team in receptions, it would not be a bit
surprising to me if Washington scores 6-7 times and becomes the
receiver opponents start game-planning for late in the season.
Given the nature of the offense and the likelihood that Kerry
Collins makes it through another full season at his age, he shouldn't
be counted on for much in fantasy circles. However, with better
weapons and a full training camp as the starter under his belt,
his per-game numbers should markedly improve in 2009.
AFC WEST
Denver Broncos |
|
Totals |
CIN |
CLE |
OAK |
DAL |
NE |
SD |
bye |
BAL |
PIT |
WAS |
SD |
NYG |
KC |
IND |
OAK |
PHI |
(Run) |
|
4 |
4.3 |
4.9 |
4 |
3.9 |
4.1 |
|
3.8 |
3.4 |
3.7 |
4.1 |
3.8 |
4.9 |
4.1 |
4.9 |
3.8 |
(Pass) |
|
6.3 |
7.2 |
6.9 |
6.1 |
6.2 |
6.6 |
|
6.2 |
5.6 |
6 |
6.6 |
6.6 |
7.5 |
6.1 |
6.9 |
6.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K Orton |
3520 |
245 |
270 |
225 |
225 |
320 |
265 |
|
200 |
195 |
225 |
230 |
220 |
240 |
190 |
240 |
230 |
TD |
20 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
|
0 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
INT |
16 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
|
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
K Moreno |
1075 |
60 |
100 |
110 |
50 |
60 |
40 |
|
30 |
55 |
75 |
85 |
65 |
110 |
55 |
115 |
65 |
Ru TD |
7 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
Re Yards |
350 |
20 |
15 |
15 |
40 |
50 |
20 |
|
35 |
0 |
15 |
25 |
15 |
40 |
15 |
5 |
40 |
Re TD |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
46 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
5 |
5 |
3 |
|
4 |
0 |
2 |
5 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L Jordan |
245 |
15 |
15 |
25 |
10 |
40 |
15 |
|
10 |
0 |
10 |
20 |
15 |
35 |
10 |
0 |
25 |
Ru TD |
4 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
35 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
10 |
|
0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
Re TD |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
6 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C Buckhalter |
265 |
25 |
15 |
30 |
10 |
0 |
30 |
|
10 |
15 |
10 |
15 |
20 |
10 |
20 |
30 |
25 |
Ru TD |
3 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
50 |
5 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
|
5 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
15 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
Re TD |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
10 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B Marshall |
1010 |
75 |
100 |
45 |
70 |
90 |
65 |
|
55 |
110 |
80 |
35 |
85 |
70 |
45 |
30 |
55 |
Re TD |
5 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
80 |
6 |
9 |
4 |
7 |
5 |
7 |
|
6 |
8 |
5 |
4 |
7 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
E Royal |
955 |
65 |
55 |
100 |
65 |
85 |
75 |
|
35 |
65 |
60 |
65 |
40 |
45 |
55 |
75 |
70 |
Re TD |
6 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
73 |
6 |
4 |
7 |
5 |
6 |
5 |
|
3 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
5 |
4 |
6 |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B Stokley |
315 |
40 |
20 |
15 |
20 |
25 |
15 |
|
15 |
0 |
25 |
45 |
15 |
0 |
25 |
40 |
15 |
Re TD |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
29 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
|
1 |
0 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J Gaffney |
265 |
15 |
25 |
10 |
15 |
40 |
15 |
|
15 |
0 |
20 |
20 |
15 |
10 |
15 |
35 |
15 |
Re TD |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
26 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
|
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T Scheffler |
500 |
25 |
40 |
40 |
15 |
15 |
55 |
|
40 |
15 |
15 |
40 |
25 |
70 |
30 |
55 |
20 |
Re TD |
4 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
44 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
|
3 |
2 |
1 |
5 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
|
Earlier in the offseason, I made a bold statement when I proclaimed
that Kyle Orton would outproduce Jay Cutler. I may need to reverse
course on that one (right now I have them finishing in the same
neighborhood), but not because I believe Cutler is that much better.
As with just about every judgment I make in fantasy football,
I base my opinion on the schedule and current events. As schedules
go, this entire division will have it rough in 2009, especially
the Broncos. The Bengals got a neutral ranking, but could easily
finish as a top 10 defense this season. Cleveland and Oakland
should give Denver a bit of a break, but after that, the Broncos
embark on an unforgiving nine-week stretch that any offense would
find difficult, let alone one trying to find its way with a new
offensive system. During the run, the Broncos face three of the
four teams from the NFC East, Baltimore, Pittsburgh, New England
and San Diego (twice). To top things off, they have two more challenging
road contests vs. the Colts and Eagles during many owners' fantasy
playoffs. Regarding the current events I mentioned above, Brandon
Marshall's recovery from offseason hip surgery further complicates
matters as he is having trouble making it through a full practice
so far in camp. A full recovery from his surgery is supposed to
take between 6-12 months and September only gets him to most optimistic
outlook (no wonder he wanted a new deal done over the summer).
Because Denver has such a deep and talented offensive supporting
cast, Orton could actually see his way through and put up some
decent fantasy performances, but I no longer am entertaining any
thoughts of him emerging as a top-10 QB option this season. If
Marshall is only a shell of himself for 2009, Eddie Royal stands
to benefit the most although Jabar Gaffney would likely become
a starter if the man-child WR needed to miss time. In the off
chance Marshall completely overcomes his injury woes and contract
squabbles, he and Royal should maintain some semblance of fantasy
relevance but the schedule could potentially squash the value
of the rest of the passing game. The one saving grace for Orton,
Marshall and Royal is that since the Broncos defense figures to
finish among the league’s worst again this season, the trio
may be able to pad their passing and receiving totals while attempting
a late comeback or during garbage time.
Thankfully, the running game doesn't have it quite as tough as
the passing game, but I am also not quite as high (as I was earlier
this summer) on this part of the Broncos' offense. Because the
Broncos have such a proficient run-blocking line, they should
be able to get Knowshon Moreno near the 1,000-yard mark despite
six poor matchups, although he needs to report to camp soon and
assert his rightful place as the unquestioned lead back for that
to happen. While I don't believe it would be in the team's best
interests to pull the rookie out and insert LaMont Jordan for
short-yardage work, apparently the team does, so Moreno could
disappoint in the scoring department. If his fantasy owners can
deal with a rollercoaster ride during the heart of Denver's schedule,
he could reward his owners over the final four weeks when he should
have a couple of opportunities to shine against division rivals
Kansas City and Oakland. Indy may also struggle against the run
and it would come as no surprise to me if the passing of DC Jim
Johnson leaves the Eagles as an unpredictable defense week in
and week out in 2009. Given his abilities as a receiver, I expect
Moreno to be much more consistent in PPR leagues for the simple
fact that: 1) he will be the team's third-down back and 2) considering
the number of aggressive defenses on the schedule, Denver will
probably run its fair share of screens and swing passes on the
early downs to slow down the pass rush.
Kansas City Chiefs |
|
Totals |
BAL |
OAK |
PHI |
NYG |
DAL |
WAS |
SD |
bye |
JAX |
OAK |
PIT |
SD |
DEN |
BUF |
CLE |
CIN |
(Run) |
|
3.8 |
4.9 |
3.8 |
3.8 |
4 |
3.7 |
4.1 |
|
4 |
4.9 |
3.4 |
4.1 |
5 |
4.5 |
4.3 |
4 |
(Pass) |
|
6.2 |
6.9 |
6.4 |
6.6 |
6.1 |
6 |
6.6 |
|
7.2 |
6.9 |
5.6 |
6.6 |
6.8 |
7.4 |
7.2 |
6.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Cassel |
3015 |
175 |
215 |
160 |
170 |
165 |
225 |
230 |
|
175 |
210 |
120 |
185 |
220 |
295 |
235 |
235 |
TD |
16 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
|
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
INT |
16 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
Ru Yards |
285 |
20 |
30 |
15 |
0 |
20 |
10 |
20 |
|
35 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
35 |
15 |
40 |
30 |
Ru TD |
4 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L Johnson |
895 |
25 |
80 |
50 |
60 |
70 |
45 |
75 |
|
55 |
45 |
35 |
45 |
110 |
65 |
80 |
55 |
Ru TD |
5 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Re Yards |
90 |
10 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
15 |
0 |
10 |
|
5 |
15 |
0 |
20 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
5 |
Re TD |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
14 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
3 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J Charles |
330 |
15 |
25 |
35 |
20 |
10 |
20 |
10 |
|
30 |
25 |
15 |
50 |
15 |
25 |
10 |
25 |
Ru TD |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
325 |
25 |
15 |
25 |
10 |
30 |
45 |
20 |
|
15 |
0 |
10 |
10 |
40 |
25 |
30 |
25 |
Re TD |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
43 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
6 |
4 |
|
3 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
5 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D Bowe |
1130 |
65 |
85 |
50 |
85 |
60 |
85 |
75 |
|
90 |
50 |
40 |
55 |
80 |
120 |
105 |
85 |
Re TD |
6 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
97 |
7 |
6 |
4 |
7 |
5 |
8 |
6 |
|
7 |
5 |
3 |
6 |
5 |
11 |
9 |
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Bradley |
775 |
45 |
55 |
60 |
40 |
25 |
70 |
50 |
|
35 |
75 |
25 |
55 |
65 |
70 |
45 |
60 |
Re TD |
3 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
61 |
4 |
3 |
6 |
3 |
2 |
7 |
3 |
|
3 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B Engram |
400 |
20 |
40 |
25 |
15 |
35 |
10 |
45 |
|
25 |
40 |
20 |
0 |
20 |
45 |
20 |
40 |
Re TD |
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
42 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
5 |
|
3 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B Cottam |
285 |
10 |
15 |
0 |
20 |
0 |
15 |
30 |
|
5 |
30 |
15 |
45 |
15 |
30 |
35 |
20 |
Re TD |
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Rec |
29 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
|
1 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
|
As I mentioned in earlier columns, the Chiefs cleaned house at
the top. But, as we know with any project worth doing right, it's
going to take some time to get Arrowhead Stadium rocking again
eight or more times a season. And as far as the schedule, new
HC Todd Haley couldn't timed his first head coaching job any worse
as far as walking into a situation in which he was able to build
his team's confidence early on with a few hard-fought wins against
some weak opponents. By the time Kansas City hits its Week 8 bye,
it will have faced five of last season's top eight defenses (Baltimore
and the entire NFC East). As a result, it is really hard to find
much to love about the running game. It appears that Haley will
let holdover OC Chan Gailey make the play calls with the team
operating out of the spread more often than not. While Larry Johnson
was able to enjoy moderate success out of the spread, he isn't
a good fit for the scheme and his schedule doesn't figure to help
him out any in that regard. Depending how healthy (physically
and emotionally) they are after the break, the Chiefs do get a
bit of a reprieve in the second half of the season as four of
the worst run defenses (according to my projections) make up half
of the remaining slate of games. But because I know of no fantasy
owner who can afford to sit his RB2 for 50% of the season in any
year, draft LJ as a RB3 if you decide to take him. The fact he
is turning 30 during the season, is unpredictable off the field
and runs behind a below-average line should only convince you
further that he isn't worth the trouble in 2009.
Things weren't going to be easy for the Chiefs this season even
with Tony
Gonzalez, but trading away the most complete TE of his time
will only put more burden on the passing game. While the trade
was the right thing to do to help a team icon play for a contender
and a good move for the Chiefs’ future, the team has put an inordinate
amount of pressure on Matt
Cassel - who is already learning a new offense, along with
the rest of the team - but also Dwayne
Bowe, who should now be mercilessly double-teamed. When healthy,
Mark Bradley
is a more-than-capable real-life WR2 for this team while free
agent pickup Bobby
Engram is only a season removed from a 94-catch campaign in
Seattle. Unfortunately, the former can't seem to consistently
stay on the field and the latter is a 36-year-old who played hurt
last season but also looked nothing he did in 2007. If that wasn't
enough, Kansas City gets even fewer breaks from its schedule.
When they aren't facing the likes of stellar team defenses like
Baltimore, Philly, Pittsburgh or the Giants, Bowe gets the pleasure
of facing Asomugha and Antonio Cromartie twice as well as Rashean
Mathis and Champ Bailey. Because he is such a talent and KC has
few other attractive options, Bowe may very well set career highs
all across the board despite all the attention he will receive.
My biggest fear for this offense, however, is the likelihood that
Cassel will miss some games. While there is something to be said
about a new QB having a full offseason and training camp knowing
that he is the starter, Cassel took 47 sacks behind a pretty good
Patriots line. Therefore, it is conceivable that if he doesn't
speed up his reads for this season, he could give David Carr's
record-breaking 76-sack season in 2002 a run for the money. While
the left side of KC's line is strong, the right side will be where
opponents attack and neither LJ nor Jamaal
Charles will be mistaken as great pass blockers in blitz pickup.
The point to all this is that while I have Cassel projected for
15 games above, I highly doubt he will make it that far.
Oakland Raiders |
|
Totals |
SD |
KC |
DEN |
HOU |
NYG |
PHI |
NYJ |
SD |
bye |
KC |
CIN |
DAL |
PIT |
WAS |
DEN |
CLE |
(Run) |
|
4.1 |
4.9 |
5 |
4.3 |
3.8 |
3.8 |
3.8 |
4.1 |
|
4.9 |
4 |
4 |
3.4 |
3.7 |
5 |
4.3 |
(Pass) |
|
6.6 |
7.5 |
6.8 |
7.2 |
6.6 |
6.4 |
6.5 |
6.6 |
|
7.5 |
6.3 |
6.1 |
5.6 |
6 |
6.8 |
7.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J Russell |
2635 |
195 |
185 |
175 |
215 |
170 |
100 |
180 |
195 |
|
210 |
180 |
190 |
80 |
185 |
180 |
195 |
TD |
13 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
INT |
13 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
|
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
Ru Yards |
120 |
10 |
10 |
0 |
15 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
10 |
|
20 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
10 |
5 |
10 |
Ru TD |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D McFadden |
940 |
70 |
110 |
85 |
55 |
30 |
70 |
45 |
45 |
|
55 |
70 |
45 |
35 |
55 |
70 |
100 |
Ru TD |
5 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
Re Yards |
280 |
20 |
0 |
15 |
20 |
30 |
15 |
35 |
20 |
|
15 |
25 |
25 |
5 |
20 |
15 |
20 |
Re TD |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
33 |
3 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
|
2 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Bush |
785 |
45 |
55 |
65 |
70 |
45 |
30 |
60 |
55 |
|
90 |
20 |
50 |
20 |
35 |
100 |
45 |
Ru TD |
6 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
Re Yards |
115 |
10 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
15 |
10 |
0 |
10 |
|
10 |
10 |
5 |
0 |
10 |
15 |
5 |
Re TD |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
14 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J Fargas |
330 |
20 |
30 |
20 |
15 |
20 |
40 |
10 |
15 |
|
35 |
15 |
25 |
10 |
20 |
30 |
25 |
Ru TD |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
40 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
|
5 |
0 |
10 |
0 |
5 |
5 |
0 |
Re TD |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
7 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C Schilens |
360 |
35 |
40 |
15 |
50 |
20 |
0 |
10 |
15 |
|
55 |
30 |
10 |
15 |
50 |
0 |
15 |
Re TD |
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
26 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
|
4 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JL Higgins |
415 |
40 |
35 |
25 |
25 |
30 |
15 |
20 |
40 |
|
35 |
35 |
20 |
0 |
40 |
25 |
30 |
Re TD |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
36 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
|
4 |
3 |
2 |
0 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L Murphy |
515 |
25 |
40 |
55 |
35 |
20 |
10 |
55 |
30 |
|
35 |
45 |
25 |
35 |
15 |
55 |
35 |
Re TD |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
40 |
1 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
|
3 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
5 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D Heyward-Bey |
215 |
0 |
25 |
25 |
45 |
0 |
0 |
30 |
0 |
|
15 |
0 |
25 |
0 |
0 |
20 |
30 |
Re TD |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
10 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Z Miller |
695 |
65 |
30 |
40 |
30 |
55 |
50 |
25 |
80 |
|
40 |
35 |
70 |
25 |
45 |
45 |
60 |
Re TD |
4 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
Rec |
59 |
6 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
6 |
3 |
1 |
7 |
|
3 |
4 |
5 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
6 |
|
It’s hard to believe in this day and age that an NFL offense
could be inept at passing the football. Believe it or not, it
doesn't figure to get any better so long as JaMarcus
Russell continues to pretend he never left college. Until
football becomes important enough to the talented signal caller
so he shows up to camp in shape and spends his offseasons working
on routes with his receivers, all he will be is an enigma at best.
Russell shouldn't be handed all the blame; he has arguably the
least talented group of receivers in the league catching his passes
and an owner who believes that upgrading that position means finding
the fastest player. Russell does have TE Zach
Miller, however, who is a stud trapped in a running offense
with an inaccurate QB. Interestingly, the lack of receivers actually
works in Miller’s favor, though, so not all is lost. In the Raiders'
passing game, he is the one player opponents need to game plan
for each week. Since the AFC West was a pretty gracious division
when it came to defending the TE a season ago and Kansas City
and Denver should remain as shaky on defense, Miller should have
enough opportunity to repeat his 2008 numbers, at the very least.
Unfortunately, there are at least six teams that should have the
personnel necessary to keep him in check, so the onus falls back
on a receiving corps that is hoping for a dramatic increase of
production from young wideouts Chaz
Schilens and Johnnie
Lee Higgins. Help is one the way, but the most immediate impact
player may very well be rookie Louis Murphy, not 2009 No. 7 overall
pick Darius Heyward-Bey or 2008 prize free agent Javon
Walker. Fantasy owners should consider 2009 a redshirt season
for DHB because it is becoming fairly obvious he is every bit
as raw as his consistency in college suggested he was. As for
Walker, he is saying all the right things after undergoing a top-secret
offseason surgery, but it is anyone's guess what his future holds
in Oakland.
Any improvement the passing game makes over 2008 should only
benefit a healthy Darren McFadden. While he will contribute to
Russell's bottom line and could possibly be the team's second-leading
receiver this year, it would be a major upset if he doesn't see
something in the neighborhood of 225 carries. The second-year
speedster was hobbled by a toe injury for most of last season,
but HC Tom Cable saw enough in last season's game tape to convince
himself the Raiders were noticeably better when McFadden was in
the game. So assuming a similar injury doesn't befall him in 2009,
the former Razorback should start living up to his draft position
this year. If the Raiders have anything going for them on offense,
it is the fact they can run block and feature a zone-blocking
system that complements DMC's athletic ability well. His role
seems to be secure; he will get his touches. The great debate
appears to be who will share his workload more often: Justin Fargas
or Michael Bush. Bush impressed during a brief stint late last
season and is easily the more gifted of the two backs, but Cable
loves the lift that Fargas brings to the team with his hard-charging
style. How much it will matter again depends on the passing game,
because a repeat of 2008 won't allow any Oakland RB to score all
that much if Russell & Co. doesn't pick it up. Schedule-wise,
things get interesting during Weeks 15-16, when Oakland should
have ample opportunity to dominate on the ground in road games
vs. Denver and Cleveland. Just like the rest of their division,
the Raiders have to contend with some of the best defenses in
the league from the NFC East and AFC North, so a repeat of a top-10
finish in rushing appears unlikely.
San Diego Chargers |
|
Totals |
OAK |
BAL |
MIA |
PIT |
bye |
DEN |
KC |
OAK |
NYG |
PHI |
DEN |
KC |
CLE |
DAL |
CIN |
TEN |
(Run) |
|
4.9 |
3.8 |
4.3 |
3.4 |
|
5 |
4.9 |
4.9 |
3.8 |
3.8 |
5 |
4.9 |
4.3 |
4 |
4 |
4.1 |
(Pass) |
|
6.9 |
6.2 |
7.2 |
5.6 |
|
6.8 |
7.5 |
6.9 |
6.6 |
6.4 |
6.8 |
7.5 |
7.2 |
6.1 |
6.3 |
6.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P Rivers |
3715 |
265 |
175 |
285 |
200 |
|
305 |
245 |
265 |
300 |
200 |
235 |
255 |
260 |
275 |
250 |
200 |
TD |
28 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
0 |
|
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
INT |
10 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L Tomlinson |
1255 |
85 |
45 |
75 |
55 |
|
130 |
105 |
110 |
55 |
75 |
105 |
100 |
90 |
60 |
90 |
75 |
Ru TD |
12 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
|
2 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
Re Yards |
325 |
20 |
15 |
30 |
15 |
|
40 |
20 |
10 |
25 |
30 |
0 |
20 |
50 |
20 |
20 |
10 |
Re TD |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
46 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
|
5 |
3 |
1 |
4 |
2 |
0 |
4 |
6 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D Sproles |
365 |
25 |
5 |
45 |
10 |
|
35 |
20 |
15 |
25 |
10 |
40 |
65 |
15 |
20 |
15 |
20 |
Ru TD |
2 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Re Yards |
365 |
25 |
25 |
10 |
20 |
|
25 |
15 |
55 |
10 |
25 |
40 |
30 |
15 |
25 |
20 |
25 |
Re TD |
2 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
34 |
2 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
|
3 |
1 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
V Jackson |
960 |
60 |
40 |
100 |
35 |
|
70 |
100 |
40 |
70 |
35 |
50 |
110 |
75 |
55 |
75 |
45 |
Re TD |
8 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
60 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
|
6 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
6 |
7 |
4 |
6 |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C Chambers |
865 |
55 |
50 |
65 |
60 |
|
85 |
50 |
60 |
45 |
75 |
40 |
60 |
55 |
65 |
45 |
55 |
Re TD |
5 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
59 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
|
6 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M Floyd |
310 |
30 |
0 |
20 |
15 |
|
35 |
0 |
25 |
40 |
0 |
35 |
0 |
15 |
30 |
40 |
25 |
Re TD |
3 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Rec |
18 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
1 |
|
2 |
0 |
1 |
2 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Gates |
890 |
75 |
45 |
60 |
55 |
|
50 |
60 |
75 |
110 |
35 |
70 |
35 |
50 |
80 |
50 |
40 |
Re TD |
9 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
0 |
Rec |
74 |
6 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
|
3 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
4 |
6 |
2 |
5 |
7 |
4 |
3 |
|
Much to my amazement, I have the Chargers as having the easiest
"run schedule" this season in terms of YPC allowed, something
that was rather shocking to me considering the presence of the AFC
North and NFC East on the schedule. But they get a few breaks that
the other AFC West teams do not: 1) their "fantasy schedule"
(Weeks 1-16) does not include Washington (they play in Week 17)
– every other team in this division faces all four NFC West
teams during their fantasy schedule and 2) the Raiders, Chiefs and
Broncos all possess below-average defenses, giving the Chargers
six games in which they should be able to flex their muscles. As
a result, I have San Diego slated for only four difficult run matchups,
including none after Week 10. LaDainian Tomlinson typically takes
the first month to get going (as he sits out the preseason), so
it just as well his two toughest games come in that time vs. the
Steelers and Ravens. It isn't lost on me that LT has become something
of a health risk in recent seasons, but I don't mind putting my
chips on the table for a RB who has yet to miss a regular season
game because of an injury and is coming off a "down year"
in which he finished seventh among fantasy running backs in traditional,
non-PPR scoring formats. No one is counting on LT to turn back the
clock to 2006, but what he pulled off last season despite a nagging
turf toe and a serious groin injury speaks to his incredible ability,
not to the falloff many expect for a back that just turned 30. Age
will catch up to him eventually, but it would come as no surprise
to me if he makes a few owners upset at themselves for passing on
him at the top of the first round. The offensive line woes from
last season have been addressed, LT is reportedly in great shape
and has enjoyed an injury-free offseason and HC Norv Turner is committed
to getting him another 320 carries this season.
Over the years, San Diego has become more proficient in the passing
game, probably to the point now where it relies on Philip
Rivers just as much as it does on LT, if not more so. That
point has really been driven home over the past couple of seasons,
especially since Rivers has matured into one of the league's best
QBs, in part because any of his three main receivers could go
for 100+ yards, two TDs or both in any game. Turner has long been
able to get the best out of his QBs and another year with Rivers
should only mean more headaches for opponents. Last season could
have been a career year for Rivers - as a repeat of seven 3-TD
games seems unlikely against the aforementioned schedule - but
it could have just as well been a launching-off point for him,
too. For now, I've conservatively predicted a small dropoff in
the TD department for him (mostly because I expect the Chargers
to run more effectively), but an injury to LT or a repeat of the
run-blocking issues from a season ago could easily boost Rivers'
totals on the levels they reached last season. With the talent
and depth San Diego has, only the Steelers and Giants strike me
as teams that may hold this offense down for four quarters. Gates
is said to be healthy as well, so I have little reservation saying
he could reclaim his title as fantasy's best TE. With Vincent
Jackson and Chris
Chambers around, Gates will no longer monopolize all the receiving
scores from Rivers as he did earlier in his career. But, just
like LT, Gates is in good shape after an offseason to recover
from a lingering toe injury - I fully expect his end-of-the-year
numbers will reflect that.
|