Ian Allan answers your fantasy football questions. In this edition: Adjusting your league to prepare for the COVID-19 pandemic. Is Laremy Tunsil an overrated left tackle? Best-ball roster configurations. Should the coronavirus change how we select backup running backs?
Question 1
I am a commissioner of two leagues and take the responsibility seriously. I am trying to figure out a fair way to tweak my leagues to keep them competitive if rosters become decimated due to players testing positive for the coronavirus. One idea I have is to add 4-5 more extra rounds to the draft. Another is having a scoring system that is a combo best-ball and head-to-head where you can make traditional weekly moves, but the scoring is strictly best-ball. Please let me know if you agree or have any better ideas.
Todd Faulds (Coral Springs, FL)
Well done. I think it makes a ton of sense to start considering these issues now, rather than after the season is underway. Adding roster spots could prove to be a good move. From what we’re seeing with these other sports, I think it’s a safe assumption that there will be many positive tests. When players test positive, I think they’ll be looking at missing at least two games. We’ve seen entire teams drop out of the men’s and women’s soccer leagues in recent weeks. But I’m not certain that adding roster spots will make your league better. Suppose, for example, that you’re in a 12-team league and every team is currently carrying two quarterbacks. If you add roster spots, everyone might move up to 3 or even 4 quarterbacks. That would mean there would be fewer quarterbacks available on the waiver wire. With smaller rosters, there will always be guys like Kyle Allen, Teddy Bridgewater and Tyrod Taylor on the waiver wire. As you expand rosters, those guys will disappear. You also mention best ball, and I think there could be a discussion there. My fear is the situation where a player shows up at the stadium on Sunday, has an elevated temperature, and isn’t allowed to play. One of the owners in your league perhaps works on Sundays or is at church; the credible lineup he submitted on Saturday lineup becomes obsolete, with him taking a zero that contributes to a league-altering loss. It’s the game we play, I suppose, and there have been unexpected game-day scratches for years. But I hope we don’t get a bunch of those this year. If so, it would seem reasonable to allow for some kind of mulligan starter. If a player is an unexpected game-day scratch, perhaps, you get the average of the unused players (on your roster) at his position.
Question 2
What does David Bakhtiari have to do to earn your respect? Last year, you completely missed the mark. This year, he’s at least above average, but somehow not an All Pro Candidate? Three time All Pro. Not a candidate. He IS an All Pro. Three times over. Maybe put him ahead of Laremy Tunsil who has NEVER been an All Pro. Or maybe just take down the dart board you use to rank offensive lineman and give up on the offensive line stuff altogether. It’s clearly not your strength.
Joshua Johnson (Mankato, MN)
The rankings aren’t a reflection of what the guys have done over the last three years. They indicate what they’re going to do in 2020. Bakhtiari vs. Tunsil can be debated. I give the edge to Tunsil, and I would guess that if you polled the league’s 32 teams, the majority would go with him over Bakhtiari. Houston gave up two first-round picks for Tunsil. Is there any NFL team that would be willing to give up two firsts for Bakhtiari? Coming out, Tunsil was viewed as a possible No. 1 overall pick until the bong/gasmask controversy sent him down into the middle of the first round (I wonder if he’s still got that gasmask – it might be getting some use during the coronavirus pandemic). Bakhtiari was a fourth-round pick. Tunsil last year signed a contract making him the game’s highest-paid offensive linemen. He’s averaging over $5 million more per year than any other left tackle. Bakhtiari will be signing a new contract (his current deal runs through 2020); I doubt that it will be as large as what Tunsil got, but we’ll see. Overall, I think there are 11 strong left tackles, and Tunsil and Bakhtiari are both above-average members of that group. (The other nine I like include Tyron Smith, Trent Williams, Taylor Lewan, Andrew Whitworth, Duane Brown, Terron Armstead, Anthony Castonzo, Ronnie Stanley and Eric Fisher.) For the article in the magazine, I tell Andy Richardson to separate the players into five tiers, with about three in the top group at each position. He identified Tyron Smith, Stanley and Tunsil as his top 3. If I were going after members of that group, I would be more inclined to pick at the other two. Smith has had injury issues, missing three games in each of the last four years. And with Stanley, I wonder if he would be as successful as a conventional left tackle in a regular offense – Baltimore’s unconventional system might make him appear to be better than he actually is.
Question 3
We're going to a best-ball (with transactions) format. We need to decide on roster requirements. 12 teams, 20-man rosters, with scoring lineups of QB, 2RB 2WR 2Flx TE K and D. Should we have a roster max for QB, TE, K and D? One side argues a couple teams hoarding one position could leave the wire bare for replacements; other side argues to stay on top of player pool during draft and don't get caught sleeping on a position, otherwise you'll have to make a one-sided trade to get a starter. I lean towards the second option (and I'm the commish) but I want to be fair.
Scott Anderson (Lakewood, CO)
I prefer the second option. Deciding on how to construct a roster is a big part of the game. Some owners might decide they might create a slight edge by carrying only one player at QB, TE, K or Def (perhaps having just Mahomes or Kelce, but nobody else behind them). Others might opt to not select any of the top 20 quarterbacks, instead selecting four lesser players at that position (think Darnold, Carr, Bridgewater and Lock). That’s part of the game. In Weeks 8 and 11, there are six teams on byes. Things might get a little tighter in those weeks. If somebody in your league recognizes this the previous week and uses a waiver claim on a quarterback who was going to be needed by an opponent or two, I would consider that to be a good thing.
Question 4
Since RBs attend the same team meetings and probably run practice plays together, would it be advisable to be somewhat skeptical regarding selecting their backups during this COVID-19 season? The assumption being that if one RB contracted the virus, his backup would have a higher probability of contracting it than a RB on a different team . I haven't seen this issue asked elsewhere and thought it would be both an interesting and perhaps significant question to ponder.
Ray Schmitt (Normal, IL)
Good thought. Bruce Arians spoke on this issue a month ago. He speculated that the Bucs might carry a third quarterback and keep him separate from their other players, giving them a better chance of not having to go into a game with a starter who hardly even knew the offense. “There’s so much to learn and still explore with this thing, but I’ve thought about keeping the third quarterback on the roster out of the room,” Arians said on a podcast. “We have two guys that have been in our system, really sharp. So, I might have to quarantine a quarterback just in case of a quarantine.” The same logic, I suppose would apply to the running back position. Teams might pay a little bit more attention to their tailbacks on the practice squad. There will be increased potential those guys might have to start a few games. For fantasy purposes, I still think it makes the most sense to pair like with like. That is, if you draft Dalvin Cook and Devin Singletary, you’re going to be more interested in Alexander Mattison and Zack Moss. Mattison and Moss don’t make as much sense to a fantasy GM holding Christian McCaffrey and Derrick Henry. They’re good backups, but you get into the unlikely timing issue of needing multiple tailback injuries to happen at the same time.