Week 10 QB streaming options

[zftcg 84]

Tons of teams -- and top QBs -- on bye this week. Who are people picking up to replace them?

In one (14-team) league, I've been using Minshew. Goff was dropped last week during his bye, so I stashed him. Not a wonderful match-up vs. Pittsburgh, but good enough, especially in a 14-teamer where most teams carry two QBs.

In another league, I have Wentz on bye. I had actually benched him last week for Carr (which worked out), and could have kept him around, but I decided to swap in Jimmy G instead. I like the Seattle match-up, and it also means I can stick with him next week vs Arizona while Wentz faces the Pats.

Other options I considered:

• Carr -- I was nervous because LAC's D has really been coming on as of late. Still, he's been pretty consistent all year. Oh, and he faces Cinci the following week, so you can stick with him if you need to
• Tannehill -- he seems to be the consensus "one-week streamer" option among fantasy analysts, and he's put up decent numbers since being named starter. But I just don't trust the guy
• DJones -- speaking of guys I don't trust ...
• Darnold  -- speaking of guys I really don't trust ...
• Hoyer -- looking like Brissett is going to play, but even if he doesn't, there are too many red flags despite the match-up. Hoyer's never been a great QB, he hasn't really played since 2016, and Colts are down a ton of weapons

Any others I missed?

[Utilit99 4,099]

10 minutes ago, zftcg said:

Tons of teams -- and top QBs -- on bye this week. Who are people picking up to replace them?

In one (14-team) league, I've been using Minshew. Goff was dropped last week during his bye, so I stashed him. Not a wonderful match-up vs. Pittsburgh, but good enough, especially in a 14-teamer where most teams carry two QBs.

In another league, I have Wentz on bye. I had actually benched him last week for Carr (which worked out), and could have kept him around, but I decided to swap in Jimmy G instead. I like the Seattle match-up, and it also means I can stick with him next week vs Arizona while Wentz faces the Pats.

Other options I considered:

• Carr -- I was nervous because LAC's D has really been coming on as of late. Still, he's been pretty consistent all year. Oh, and he faces Cinci the following week, so you can stick with him if you need to
• Tannehill -- he seems to be the consensus "one-week streamer" option among fantasy analysts, and he's put up decent numbers since being named starter. But I just don't trust the guy
• DJones -- speaking of guys I don't trust ...
• Darnold  -- speaking of guys I really don't trust ...
• Hoyer -- looking like Brissett is going to play, but even if he doesn't, there are too many red flags despite the match-up. Hoyer's never been a great QB, he hasn't really played since 2016, and Colts are down a ton of weapons

Any others I missed?

Carr has really been coming on of late. Coin flip between the two but I'm probably going with Tannehill of the 2 and just cross my fingers.

[Phil Simms 11 127]

League  with Watson, went with Rivers but did consider Jones in the battle for NY. Engram May be out for NY, if Shepard is still out forget it. 
 

Another league have Goff and played Jimmy G last week. Right now have Jimmy G in again over Goff but it’s 50/50
 

 

[zftcg 84]

59 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Carr has really been coming on of late. Coin flip between the two but I'm probably going with Tannehill of the 2 and just cross my fingers.

I get it. It's really a matter of personal preference. I tend to put more emphasis on talent over match-up, but there's no right answer. At a certain point, we're all monkeys throwing darts.

[Showboat 144]

Mason Rudolph?  He hasn't put up big fantasy numbers, but also has not put up a total dud performance, yet.  Maybe a home date against the Rams is a blow-up spot.  The Rams often seem to end up playing in shoot-outs.   

[weepaws 2,459]

D Jones Vs the Jets at the Jets , well kind of. 

 

[LoOnAtIk 75]

I had choice between tannehill, Jimmy G, and Danny Dimes and I think I’m rolling with Jimmy in a potential shootout.

 

Seahawks D has been giving up a lot thru the air.

[rrmcguire 36]

Had Jimmy G but gonna take my shot with Jameis 

[zftcg 84]

8 minutes ago, rrmcguire said:

Had Jimmy G but gonna take my shot with Jameis 

Between those two, I agree. Only reason I would hesitate would be if I were a huge favorite. Jameis has a great matchup vs AZ, but he's also far more capable of putting up 220/0/5. Jimmy is a little safer.

[zftcg 84]

23 minutes ago, weepaws said:

D Jones Vs the Jets at the Jets , well kind of. 

Just FYI, Engram was just announced out for the Giants. Sounds like Shepherd won't be back either.

[zftcg 84]

40 minutes ago, Showboat said:

Mason Rudolph?  He hasn't put up big fantasy numbers, but also has not put up a total dud performance, yet.  Maybe a home date against the Rams is a blow-up spot.  The Rams often seem to end up playing in shoot-outs.   

I guess if you have no other alternatives, but he has not looked good this year.

[AxeElf 787]

10 minutes ago, zftcg said:

Jameis has a great matchup vs AZ, but he's also far more capable of putting up 220/0/5.

I don't know if you're kidding or just unaware, but Jameis is the only QB in the NFL who has thrown for more than 300 yards in fully HALF of his starts over the past 3 seasons, including 5 of 8 games so far this season.  Barring injury, there is zero chance that Jameis doesn't throw for 300 against the Cardinals.  Garoppolo threw for 317 against them last week, and it was his first 300 yard game of the season (axually of the last TWO seasons).  Garoppolo has thrown for LESS than 200 yards in fully half of his starts this season--so he is FAR more likely to be the one posting 220 than is Winston.  Garoppolo has 2 games with 0 TDs this season, Winston has 0 games with 0 TDs (and Winston leads in total TDs, 16-13)--so again, Garoppolo is more likely to throw 0 TDs than Winston.

Winston does lead in INTs, largely due to that one ugly 5-INT game, and it's true that Garoppolo has 0 games with 5 INTs.  But Garoppolo does have an INT in every game this season except for 2 (Winston has 3 INT-free games), and both of them have a 2-INT game this year.

[zftcg 84]

22 minutes ago, AxeElf said:

I don't know if you're kidding or just unaware, but Jameis is the only QB in the NFL who has thrown for more than 300 yards in fully HALF of his starts over the past 3 seasons, including 5 of 8 games so far this season.  Barring injury, there is zero chance that Jameis doesn't throw for 300 against the Cardinals.  Garoppolo threw for 317 against them last week, and it was his first 300 yard game of the season (axually of the last TWO seasons).  Garoppolo has thrown for LESS than 200 yards in fully half of his starts this season--so he is FAR more likely to be the one posting 220 than is Winston.  Garoppolo has 2 games with 0 TDs this season, Winston has 0 games with 0 TDs (and Winston leads in total TDs, 16-13)--so again, Garoppolo is more likely to throw 0 TDs than Winston.

Winston does lead in INTs, largely due to that one ugly 5-INT game, and it's true that Garoppolo has 0 games with 5 INTs.  But Garoppolo does have an INT in every game this season except for 2 (Winston has 3 INT-free games), and both of them have a 2-INT game this year.

I don't know if you're kidding or just unaware, but Jameis is not a rookie. He has been in the league for multiple years and is definitely capable of putting up an absolute stinker. Not saying he will, particularly this week, but it is always on the table.

Feel free to cite all the stats you want. I've watched him play football.

[AxeElf 787]

14 minutes ago, zftcg said:

I don't know if you're kidding or just unaware, but Jameis is not a rookie. He has been in the league for multiple years and is definitely capable of putting up an absolute stinker. Not saying he will, particularly this week, but it is always on the table.

Feel free to cite all the stats you want. I've watched him play football.

So ignorance it is!  Thank you for settling that question...

[weepaws 2,459]

2 hours ago, zftcg said:

Just FYI, Engram was just announced out for the Giants. Sounds like Shepherd won't be back either.

And? 

[zftcg 84]

1 hour ago, weepaws said:

And? 

Presumably hurts Jones’ value

[weepaws 2,459]

Presumably, but what does that mean?  

I know those others aren’t playing, well sounds like Shepherd might not, but he’s still my pick. 

So if I am wrong, so what ain’t I always wrong. 

Just another Qb stream pick. 

Thanks for the return once again. 

[qrkid 0]

5 hours ago, zftcg said:

Just FYI, Engram was just announced out for the Giants. Sounds like Shepherd won't be back either.

So me going with Tate because Hopkins is on bye might not be the worst idea?

[Beyond Chaos 75]

7 hours ago, Showboat said:

Mason Rudolph?  He hasn't put up big fantasy numbers, but also has not put up a total dud performance, yet.  Maybe a home date against the Rams is a blow-up spot.  The Rams often seem to end up playing in shoot-outs.   

Before Ramsey. 

[zftcg 84]

20 hours ago, AxeElf said:

So ignorance it is!  Thank you for settling that question...

I love it when people pull a few stats out of a boxscore and pretend that they have uncovered the Received Truth.

Maybe -- just maybe -- the "ignorant" one here is the guy who has seemingly never heard of concepts like "small sample size" and "past performance is no guarantee of future results". The fact that Jameis hasn't put up a complete stinker in eight games this year does not "prove" that he won't do it in the next eight. The fact that he's a mediocre QB who has consistently underachieved throughout his career doesn't prove anything either, but it certainly suggests that such a performance is on the table. (Also, a reminder that this whole discussion started with me recommending him as a better play than Jimmy G this week. The only question in dispute is what his floor is.)

But hey, as long as we're using statistics to spin our preferred narrative, how about this: Marcus Mariota had not thrown a single interception all year ... until the game where he threw two and was benched.

Or how about this blind comparison? Player A has one game where he failed to either score a TD or reach 100 receiving yards. Player B has zero TDs and only two games with more than 56 yards. A is Davante Adams in 2018. B is Adams this year.

[AxeElf 787]

3 hours ago, zftcg said:

I love it when people pull a few stats out of a boxscore and pretend that they have uncovered the Received Truth.

Axe Elf is the Truth for those worthy of receiving it.

3 hours ago, zftcg said:

"small sample size"

The past three seasons out of a five year career isn't a small sample size.  An n of 30 is large enough for reasonable confidence in most statistical analyses; Winston has 32 games in the past three seasons.

3 hours ago, zftcg said:

"past performance is no guarantee of future results"

Past performance is no guarantee of future results; but past performance is the best predictor of future performance that we have.

The statistical fact remains that between Garoppolo and Winston, the QB more likely to post 220 yards and 0 TDs in any given game is Garoppolo, not Winston (as you incorrectly stated).

[polecatt 402]

This is exactly why I keep 2 worthy QBs