Ray_T

I'm not sure fields is the answer either. Fields is an adequate starting QB. but not a championship calibre starting QB. if the goal is to win a championship, the move to Caleb seemed logical. kid had considerable upside andI do think there is still considerable upside. and more than Fields had. fields first season 7 TD 10 INT playing 12 games his second season 17 TD 11 INT playing 15 games. and the pass yardage in both years wasnt great. as a rookie Caleb had 20 TD and 6 INT and 3500 yards passing This year he has 12 TD and 4 INT and so far 1900 yards passing in 8 games which pro rates to a 4000 yard season. (roughly) Fields has never thrown for 3000 yards in his career. though likely would have hit 3000 (barely) in the 2023 season if he had played all the games I know Fields gets more yards on the ground, but still, thats not elite play. The big difference is Caleb actually seems to do a better job of looking after the ball and still puts up a decent amount of yardage. dont get me wrong, he still has things to work on, but I do think he has the ability to be a good starting QB at some point in the future. I'm not sure he will ever be elite, but he looks like he may eventually be good enough that if they can draft and upgrade the defense to a point where it is elite or close to it, they may have a chance to contend. of course the Jury is still out on that. but the numbers are better already and Caleb is younger. for the record, I'm not a fan of either player. but based on the numbers and metrics I'm looking at, Caleb is further along at this point in his career than Fields was. and hes a fair bit younger. as such, I'd have to conclude this was likely the right move. Was it the best move Chicago could have made? likely not. but it was a better move than keeping Fields would have been.

yeah it looks like the Zonovan knight experiment is done. 9 carries for 27 yards doesnt scare anyone. Demarcardo may be the guy going forward

well, you can run against this squad if your RB is good enough.. and I think thats where the Giants scorched them (in part) though honestly it seemed like an anomaly. I never saw the game but a buddy of mine said when Skattebo was on the field it looked like their D sold out to stop the run and it opened things up in the pass game. his analysis seems to make sense as Their run game had been pretty good the previous game or two. however you are a New York Homie, you can likely give us a better analysis of what happened there. if so.... do share. not many know more about the Giants than you do and if you know something I dont, then I wanna know what you know.

Denver D has been very good most of the year. you pretty much need to be an elite offense to move the ball against this squad

you sure that is wise? Hock is a good enough player that he should be rostered if your league is deep enough to have 2 TE on your roster. I'll admit I was expecting more, but the soft schedule coming up likely will make up for any shortcomings

in one chat room they were blaming him. my response was.... if the offense put up 30+ points, they have done their job. it is the job of the defense to not give up a pile of points at that point and the defense couldnt answer the bell. Flaccos INT came late in trying to get the team caught up. while the INT isnt good, you kinda know that as an offense you need to take chances if time is running out and you need points, so the odds of an INT happening are greater because the team that is losing needs at that point to take some chances. either way, the Defense was as poor as I've seen in a long time. This team needs to look in the mirror and figure out a way to get that defense playing to a reasonable level. I honestly dont know that you can expect much more from an offense that already has been putting up 35+ points in each of the last 2 games and averaged 40 points a game. and not come away with a win in either game. its pathetic. To be clear, I lay no fault on the offense. (though the line could be better) It is the Defense that really needs to be looked at.

yeah, but throwing a kid into the fire behind a bad o line rarely works out. sometimes a running QB can make up for that some. but thats the exception and not the rule. I still stand by my comments. and the season isnt over yet. there is lots of time for this to turn sour. once teams get some tape on him thats when we will really figure out if hes got what it takes.

good one. he should never have lasted to you, but sometimes people just arent thinking. at the end of the day, with Scatteboo gone, this guy has the whole offense to himself like last year. I expect similar numbers to last season (for the most part) and that likely puts him squarely in RB2 territory. its possible he slips into RB3 territory but without a doubt he should be rostered.

I really have mixed feelings. I do think McLauren earned a good contract. but I have often found there is a letdown after a contract year. there are 2 main reasons (in my opinion) why this happens: 1) the player was all about the money and now that they got paid, they no longer care. this happens sometimes. 2) The player feels the weight (and pressure) of the big money and can sometimes try to do too much and actually sabotage themselves in the process. (most common) on occasion it will also play out differently if the player had to hold out to get a contract....... they dont get to participate in the 2 a days and really dont get all that much work with their teammates. This is especially the case with offensive players. your QB needs to work with their top WR and get on the same page. the RB needs to work with the Line so they know what to expect, how to read their blocks etc. but the QB-WR connection cannot be understated. if they are not on the same page, the productivity just wont be there. in the case of McLauren I think it was a little bit of this and a little bit of #2. he got paid, and when he didnt start strong the weight of the contract put extra pressure on the guy. I think at some point he will put it together. but its hard to say if it will be this year. The holdout also hindered him and may actually be at least 50% of the problem here.

in yardage leagues or standard leagues.... yes for sure. but the sheer volume of pass catching keeeps him as a RB2 in PPR leagues. but the bottom line... if trading Flowers for Kamara, you really REALLY need to be desperate for a RB. I am not actually endorsing this as you can probably get a better RB if trading away Flowers.

agreed. only way this deal works for you is if you have a serious need at RB and a passable RB puts you in a position to win your league. Flowers will be productive for years to come. Kamara.... this may actually be his last or second last year as a productive RB. Dude is 30.

this is especially valid in PPR rules. Standard league its a far harder decision to make

well, I said this earlier. the tools are in the toolbox. but when it comes to playing in the NFL its all about whats in the kids head. you gotta make good decisions, and you need to make them quickly. Not everyone can do that at the NFL level. you have about a second less time to make those decisions than you have at the college level. while that doesnt seem like much, its actually a lot. and the Defenses are more sophisticated and skilled and will throw different looks at you. its a much harder job at the pro level.

well thats the thing. we wont truly know what hes about for another year. teams are gonna find ways to negate him and he as a QB will need to adapt. Every rookie goes through this. and the ones who can adapt to the way the league defends him will inevitably become starters. the ones who cant become backups. we wont truly know the results for a while

just ask Buffalo

Well they did lose. so the Fantasy gods made them pay. (though they were against the pack.... likely they were gonna lose anyway)

well, the tools are in the toolbox. but at the NFL level its more processing speed than it is about skill because everybody (for the most part) in the NFL has skill. I guess we will see. this is the first dud of the year. it could be a sign of things to come, or it could just be a bad game. The eagles are a pretty good defense. so I think it is too early to establish this as a trend, but you can bet on one thing...... whatever the defense was doing against him..... whoever plays him over the next week or two will try to do the same things that gave him a problem. that said, some weaker defenses likely dont have the talent to be able to execute the game plan in the same way. so its not a guarantee that hes headed for harder times. I remember watching a very good defense execute a very good game plan against Lamar a couple of years back and people said a lot of the same. but I saw the game and I felt that only one or two defenses in the NFL had the talent and ability to execute such a game plan. so I did not see that as a sign of things to come. so you kind of need to put it into context. other teams did try to execute that same gameplan vs Lamar with minimal success. but I saw those games and clearly they didnt have the talent to be able to execute in the same way and Lamar was good enough to overcome that with only occasional issues. so I think the bottom line is.... it is likely too early to say for sure one way or another. but I do agree. next game or two, the defense will try to emulate what Philly did against him. it will be interesting to see how that turns out.

I'm in a league where you play multiple teams each week. I would have run the table if Baker put up 15-18 fantasy points instead I get 7.5 points. what was going to be a fantastic week turned into just a good week. I suppose I shouldnt complain but this stiff only seems to have good weeks when he is on my bench.

well, he keeps the defense honest. if they crowd the line, he gets the ball. if they play to stop the pass, Sequon gets the ball. for a game (maybe two) you can get by without him. but teams will quickly adapt to the more run heavy offense. Like it or not.... He is an important part of that.

This is my fault. I started Baker this week. and he only seems to perform well on my bench.

This always happens. Now he as a QB will need to adapt to how teams are defending him. If he can adapt, hes a legit starting QB.... if not.... he becomes a backup QB.

I'm thinking hideous

flacco has played for enough teams that literally half the league could be a revenge game. its to the point where this means nothing anymore.

I had herbert on the bench in my one league. Minny is supposed to have a pretty good Defense. But the chargers sliced through them like a hot knife through butter.

well, for him to disappear there needs to be someone on the roster that can force that to happen. I dont actually think that anyone on the roster is better than him right now. so barring injury or a sudden loss in effectiveness I think he holds steady. for fantasy hes RB2 on most teams depending on the depth you have at the position.