Explain to me the philosophy behind... (1 Viewer)

[sanders2021]

What's the philosophy behind handcuffing a player with their backup? In my case, I'm now a proud new Thomas Jones owner and I'm being told that I should get Benson as a handcuff. What's the strategy behind this?

 

[Sabertooth]

What's the philosophy behind handcuffing a player with their backup? In my case, I'm now a proud new Thomas Jones owner and I'm being told that I should get Benson as a handcuff. What's the strategy behind this?

If Jones gets hurt or something else happens where Benson is getting the bulk of the carries, your season isn't in the toilet. It's basically a security measure to ensure that you have a healthy back to stick into the starting lineup should something happen to your primary ballcarrier.

 

[sanders2021]

What's the philosophy behind handcuffing a player with their backup?  In my case, I'm now a proud new Thomas Jones owner and I'm being told that I should get Benson as a handcuff.  What's the strategy behind this?

If Jones gets hurt or something else happens where Benson is getting the bulk of the carries, your season isn't in the toilet. It's basically a security measure to ensure that you have a healthy back to stick into the starting lineup should something happen to your primary ballcarrier.

But for this specific situation, since it might be a RBBC, it seems like a bad idea. Wouldn't I just have to guess which guy would have a good game on any given day?

 

[Sabertooth]

What's the philosophy behind handcuffing a player with their backup?  In my case, I'm now a proud new Thomas Jones owner and I'm being told that I should get Benson as a handcuff.  What's the strategy behind this?

If Jones gets hurt or something else happens where Benson is getting the bulk of the carries, your season isn't in the toilet. It's basically a security measure to ensure that you have a healthy back to stick into the starting lineup should something happen to your primary ballcarrier.

But for this specific situation, since it might be a RBBC, it seems like a bad idea. Wouldn't I just have to guess which guy would have a good game on any given day?

Perhaps, but if an injury were to happen to one or the other, your situation could potentially improve.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Benson has value to your fantasy team when he starts for your fantasy team. When is Benson likely to start for your fantasy team? When both of the following occur: (a) one of your starting RBs is injured or is performing poorly, and (b) Benson starts playing a lot for the Bears.

Situations (a) and (b) are more likely to coincide for the Thomas Jones owner than they are for a non-Thomas Jones owner. (Do you see why?) Therefore, Benson is more likely to have value for the Thomas Jones owner than for a non-Thomas Jones owner.

 

[Doug Drinen]

What's the philosophy behind handcuffing a player with their backup? In my case, I'm now a proud new Thomas Jones owner and I'm being told that I should get Benson as a handcuff. What's the strategy behind this?

Think about lottery tickets and insurance policies. If you think about it, they are very similar. In both cases, you pay a little money and probably don't get anything in return. But in both cases you might get a big payoff. The difference is that, with an insurance policy, you get the money exactly when you need it most. If you have Rudi Johnson, then Chris Perry is an insurance policy. If you don't have Rudi Johnson, then Chris Perry is a lottery ticket.

An insurance policy is, of course, a tried-and-true risk minimization strategy. So if you're the kind of person who likes to minimize risk, handcuffing makes sense. If not, it doesn't.

But keep in mind that it never makes sense to pay much for an insurance policy that pays you 10% of the value of your house if it burns down. Such policies have gone by the names Justin Watson and Byron Hanspard in the past. No reason to buy those when you can get a nice double-wide trailer named Frank Gore or Fred Taylor. It'll keep you dry until your house heals from its high ankle sprain.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

hit me

 

[LHUCKS]

Benson has value to your fantasy team when he starts for your fantasy team. When is Benson likely to start for your fantasy team? When both of the following occur: (a) one of your starting RBs is injured or is performing poorly, and (b) Benson starts playing a lot for the Bears.

Situations (a) and (b) are more likely to coincide for the Thomas Jones owner than they are for a non-Thomas Jones owner. (Do you see why?) Therefore, Benson is more likely to have value for the Thomas Jones owner than for a non-Thomas Jones owner.

 

[MLBrandow]

What's the philosophy behind handcuffing a player with their backup? In my case, I'm now a proud new Thomas Jones owner and I'm being told that I should get Benson as a handcuff. What's the strategy behind this?

Your problem in understanding stems from your phrasing of the question.It's not "why should I waste this space all year"

it's "why would I not keep his backup on my roster?"

LT goes down, Turner's a stud.

LT stays healthy, you don't need a sub RB anyway....

He has great value when you need it, and none when you don't.

Also, in your situation, you might want to recconsider who's backing up who. Last I checked the reason TJ has been demanding a trade is because CHI made Benson the starter.

 

[radballs]

There's no doubt that handcuffing is preferable to owners who want to hedge or use some form of risk management. But, it really depends on so many variables like roster sizes, league size, starting requirements etc. If you're league is only 14-15 roster spots and you start 9 spots, it's really difficult to carry a handcuff and have enough room for actual contributors to your team on a weekly basis. As you get into leagues with 18 or more spots, the value of the strategy generally increases.

 

[gman8343]

See Priest Holmes, 2004/2005.

 

[The Jerk]

What's the philosophy behind handcuffing a player with their backup?  In my case, I'm now a proud new Thomas Jones owner and I'm being told that I should get Benson as a handcuff.  What's the strategy behind this?

Think about lottery tickets and insurance policies. If you think about it, they are very similar. In both cases, you pay a little money and probably don't get anything in return. But in both cases you might get a big payoff. The difference is that, with an insurance policy, you get the money exactly when you need it most. If you have Rudi Johnson, then Chris Perry is an insurance policy. If you don't have Rudi Johnson, then Chris Perry is a lottery ticket.

An insurance policy is, of course, a tried-and-true risk minimization strategy. So if you're the kind of person who likes to minimize risk, handcuffing makes sense. If not, it doesn't.

But keep in mind that it never makes sense to pay much for an insurance policy that pays you 10% of the value of your house if it burns down. Such policies have gone by the names Justin Watson and Byron Hanspard in the past. No reason to buy those when you can get a nice double-wide trailer named Frank Gore or Fred Taylor. It'll keep you dry until your house heals from its high ankle sprain.

Nice analogy, Doug. I'll add a few tidbits here:1. The odds of a player getting hurt are much higher than winning a typical lottery. Certain players are expected to get hurt (Fred Taylor, recently Priest Holmes).

2. There can be utility in the handcuffs even if the starter remains healthy, especially in deeper leagues. For example, Chris Perry could be a bye-week starter in very large leagues or if you are desperate because he sees the field every week. Other 2nd team RBs barely see the field unless there is an injury. You need to know the difference. The most famous example is the famous thread from last season regarding starting both Priest Holmes and Larry Johnson before Holmes was injured.

3. The exact round in which to take a handcuff to a player you own is sometimes hard to determine. You don't want to draft him three rounds before anyone else does, but you don't want to wait too long either. You may need to set the expected handcuff round into your draft and see if it makes sense. Otherwise, you need to hope for good fortune or consider drafting another player.

4. Like any strategy, handcuffing has its advocates and detractors. Don't feel bad if you think it's overrated, but be open to the fact that there is some merit to the approach.

 

[SSOG]

What's the philosophy behind handcuffing a player with their backup? In my case, I'm now a proud new Thomas Jones owner and I'm being told that I should get Benson as a handcuff. What's the strategy behind this?

If Jones gets hurt or something else happens where Benson is getting the bulk of the carries, your season isn't in the toilet. It's basically a security measure to ensure that you have a healthy back to stick into the starting lineup should something happen to your primary ballcarrier.

But for this specific situation, since it might be a RBBC, it seems like a bad idea. Wouldn't I just have to guess which guy would have a good game on any given day?

Handcuffing and RBBC are two drastically different things. Handcuffing generally refers to a situation where there is one clear-cut RB who is going to get the lion's share of the workload, and where that RB has one clear-cut backup who is definitely going to be the man if the Stud RB goes down. An example is LT and Michael Turner. Everyone knows that LT is going to get 70+% of SD's RB touches as long as he's healthy, and that LT will be an uberstud as long as he's healthy. Everyone also knows that if LT goes down, Michael Turner will be the guy in San Diego. There has also been evidence that, if given the job, Turner would be a relatively productive RB. This makes Michael Turner the ideal handcuff. He has everything you're looking for in a handcuff- no competition for the #2 job, enough talent to produce if thrust into the starting role, and relatively little value if the stud stays healthy.

 

[-OZ-]

Good post SSOG. San Diego is probably the ideal handcuffing situation. Turner generally doesn't cost much in redrafts. KC should be next. I would put Cincy up there, but Perry might cost too much.

Aside from those 3, are the any other teams where it makes a lot more sense to draft the handcuff than others? Given the production and relative value of the handcuff?

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Good post SSOG. San Diego is probably the ideal handcuffing situation. Turner generally doesn't cost much in redrafts. KC should be next. I would put Cincy up there, but Perry might cost too much.

Aside from those 3, are the any other teams where it makes a lot more sense to draft the handcuff than others? Given the production and relative value of the handcuff?

I disagree with you about KC, unless you're thinking of Holmes. But he's done, IMO. So who is the backup?

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Here's what I've learned about handcuffing in a nutshell:

Factors in order of importance

1) Backup Talent

2) Knowing the Backup

3) Team Scheme

4) Starter Injury History

5) Backup Use with Starter

Explaination

1) The backup needs to be talented. Michael Turner is talented. Larry Johnson from last year was talented. Shaud Williams? Not so much.

2) I can't stress this enough. If you aren't sure who the real backup is, stay away. I don't see how anyone can say without blindly guessing who the KC backup will be this year, assuming that Holmes is retired.

3) Draft a handcuff from a good offensive team. Drafting Arrington to backup Edge on a ARI team that has a questionable OLine and 2 great WRs is probably not a great idea.

4) Fred Taylor and DeShaun Foster, come on down!

5) IMO, you are better off with a backup that does see some time on 3rd downs even when the starter is healthy because if you get slammed by injuries to your RBs, you could start both in the same week, like the Jerk discusses above. However, sometimes you need to be careful to determine whether that backup is really just the 3rd down back in the eyes of the coaching staff. Two years ago, many people drafted Musa Smith over Chester Taylor to backup Lewis because they viewed Taylor as just a 3rd down back. That was a mistake.

My top 6 this year:

1) LT2 and Turner

2) Rudi and Perry

3) Westbrook and Moats

4) Alexander and Morris

5) Portis and Betts

6) Jones and Barber

 

[-OZ-]

Good post SSOG. San Diego is probably the ideal handcuffing situation. Turner generally doesn't cost much in redrafts. KC should be next. I would put Cincy up there, but Perry might cost too much.

Aside from those 3, are the any other teams where it makes a lot more sense to draft the handcuff than others? Given the production and relative value of the handcuff?

I disagree with you about KC, unless you're thinking of Holmes. But he's done, IMO. So who is the backup?

Herm is more optimistic. Considering Blaylock looked pretty decent when he played, Q or maybe Howard would be a viable option in that offense. Anyone would be really.

 

[There it is]

Here's what I've learned about handcuffing in a nutshell:

Factors in order of importance

1) Backup Talent

2) Knowing the Backup

3) Team Scheme

4) Starter Injury History

5) Backup Use with Starter

Explaination

1) The backup needs to be talented. Michael Turner is talented. Larry Johnson from last year was talented. Shaud Williams? Not so much.

2) I can't stress this enough. If you aren't sure who the real backup is, stay away. I don't see how anyone can say without blindly guessing who the KC backup will be this year, assuming that Holmes is retired.

3) Draft a handcuff from a good offensive team. Drafting Arrington to backup Edge on a ARI team that has a questionable OLine and 2 great WRs is probably not a great idea.

4) Fred Taylor and DeShaun Foster, come on down!

5) IMO, you are better off with a backup that does see some time on 3rd downs even when the starter is healthy because if you get slammed by injuries to your RBs, you could start both in the same week, like the Jerk discusses above. However, sometimes you need to be careful to determine whether that backup is really just the 3rd down back in the eyes of the coaching staff. Two years ago, many people drafted Musa Smith over Chester Taylor to backup Lewis because they viewed Taylor as just a 3rd down back. That was a mistake.

My top 6 this year:

1) LT2 and Turner

2) Rudi and Perry

3) Westbrook and Moats

4) Alexander and Morris

5) Portis and Betts

6) Jones and Barber

I like your list. I am really getting excited about the Alexander and Morris posibility. SA is 3rd in most polls and I have him 1st, plus Morris is almost an afterthought. DD has him 215 in his adp from June 30 poll.A bargain on both accounts.

 

[Reaper]

Here's what I've learned about handcuffing in a nutshell:

Factors in order of importance

1) Backup Talent

2) Knowing the Backup

3) Team Scheme

4) Starter Injury History

5) Backup Use with Starter

My top 6 this year:

1) LT2 and Turner

2) Rudi and Perry

3) Westbrook and Moats

4) Alexander and Morris

5) Portis and Betts

6) Jones and Barber

Hmmm, nice list. I look at it a little differently.Last year the obvious one was Larry Johnson. But, there was a price to pay - My #1 Handcuff target last year instead was Najeh Davenport - Turns out, he gets injured the same day he gets the starting gig... But, to me Value wise, he was my guy while everyone else chased LJ.... Turns out, the LJ people were rewarded handsomely, that was just a roll of the dice though, If LJ is the one who gets injured on day 1 and Najeh stays healthy - All LUCK, I would have been King of all the land ; ).

As for your examples - You give good insurance policies, as stated above...

What I look for in a handcuff is to lock up a running game on the cheap.... OF COURSE I Also lock up insurance policies... If I have LT on my team I'll have Turner as well but, that's all a product of having a top 3 draft pick or like most of your examples, a shot at a top RB.

Take Chicago for example... Benson/Jones would cost you maybe a 5th and a 6th -To me THAT could be better than lets say Tiki Barber or any other late 1st round RB pick where his backup is unproven... One reason it's better is that it comes with insurance (2 Talented RB's)... But, also now in the late 1st I can lock up the WR I think it the best... How about Carolina - Foster / Williams might cost a 4 and a 7. Somewhere in your draft, that combo is a Better value than grabbing a late 1st round / 2nd round questionable RB.

Handcuffing 2 Cheaper Rb's later affords a RB Theorist to sit back on RB's and lock up some decent talent at WR and maybe QB and/or TE.....

The Top Handcuffs looking at it this way might be:

1) Jones / Benson

2) Foster / Williams

3) Dillon / Maroney

4) Brown / White

5) Rhodes / Addai

6) Taylor / Moore

7) Dayne / Bell

Handcuff or not, once I have my starters I like to lock up the 2nd tier RB's even without Handcuffing them to the potential starter which gives you possble value later in the season as a starter or as trade bait.

 

[-OZ-]

My top 6 this year:

1) LT2 and Turner

2) Rudi and Perry

3) Westbrook and Moats

4) Alexander and Morris

5) Portis and Betts

6) Jones and Barber

The only problem I have with this is where you'll have to draft Perry. While the rest, except Barber, can probably be had after you've locked in a starting lineup, you'll probably have to take Perry instead of another starter. According to the MFL draft tracker, he goes around the same spot as Kennison and Mark Clayton, while the others can be had later.

 

[Dolfan]

I think a lot of it depends on the crime...

Non-violent offense and if the perp is being cooperative, then I don't think you need the cuffs.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Good post SSOG. San Diego is probably the ideal handcuffing situation. Turner generally doesn't cost much in redrafts. KC should be next. I would put Cincy up there, but Perry might cost too much.

Aside from those 3, are the any other teams where it makes a lot more sense to draft the handcuff than others? Given the production and relative value of the handcuff?

I disagree with you about KC, unless you're thinking of Holmes. But he's done, IMO. So who is the backup?

Herm is more optimistic. Considering Blaylock looked pretty decent when he played, Q or maybe Howard would be a viable option in that offense. Anyone would be really.

I don't disagree that most of them would be good in that offense, I just think that if you are drafting right now, you don't know who the backup will be.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

My top 6 this year:

1) LT2 and Turner

2) Rudi and Perry

3) Westbrook and Moats

4) Alexander and Morris

5) Portis and Betts

6) Jones and Barber

The only problem I have with this is where you'll have to draft Perry. While the rest, except Barber, can probably be had after you've locked in a starting lineup, you'll probably have to take Perry instead of another starter. According to the MFL draft tracker, he goes around the same spot as Kennison and Mark Clayton, while the others can be had later.

Good point. I wasn't factoring in any value in terms of where you could get them when I wrote the post.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Here's what I've learned about handcuffing in a nutshell:

Factors in order of importance

1) Backup Talent

2) Knowing the Backup

3) Team Scheme

4) Starter Injury History

5) Backup Use with Starter

My top 6 this year:

1) LT2 and Turner

2) Rudi and Perry

3) Westbrook and Moats

4) Alexander and Morris

5) Portis and Betts

6) Jones and Barber

Hmmm, nice list. I look at it a little differently.Last year the obvious one was Larry Johnson. But, there was a price to pay - My #1 Handcuff target last year instead was Najeh Davenport - Turns out, he gets injured the same day he gets the starting gig... But, to me Value wise, he was my guy while everyone else chased LJ.... Turns out, the LJ people were rewarded handsomely, that was just a roll of the dice though, If LJ is the one who gets injured on day 1 and Najeh stays healthy - All LUCK, I would have been King of all the land ; ).

As for your examples - You give good insurance policies, as stated above...

What I look for in a handcuff is to lock up a running game on the cheap.... OF COURSE I Also lock up insurance policies... If I have LT on my team I'll have Turner as well but, that's all a product of having a top 3 draft pick or like most of your examples, a shot at a top RB.

Take Chicago for example... Benson/Jones would cost you maybe a 5th and a 6th -To me THAT could be better than lets say Tiki Barber or any other late 1st round RB pick where his backup is unproven... One reason it's better is that it comes with insurance (2 Talented RB's)... But, also now in the late 1st I can lock up the WR I think it the best... How about Carolina - Foster / Williams might cost a 4 and a 7. Somewhere in your draft, that combo is a Better value than grabbing a late 1st round / 2nd round questionable RB.

Handcuffing 2 Cheaper Rb's later affords a RB Theorist to sit back on RB's and lock up some decent talent at WR and maybe QB and/or TE.....

The Top Handcuffs looking at it this way might be:

1) Jones / Benson

2) Foster / Williams

3) Dillon / Maroney

4) Brown / White

5) Rhodes / Addai

6) Taylor / Moore

7) Dayne / Bell

Handcuff or not, once I have my starters I like to lock up the 2nd tier RB's even without Handcuffing them to the potential starter which gives you possble value later in the season as a starter or as trade bait.

I understand that approach, but there are two possible problems. One is that you may not get the second RB. Passing on a 1st round RB because you hope to get Jones/Benson in the middle rounds is pretty risky. Secondly, in a league in which you submit a starting lineup, it's harder to know which RB to start from week to week. IMO, this strategy is more of a RBBC strategy than a handcuff strategy.

 

[Reaper]

Here's what I've learned about handcuffing in a nutshell:

Factors in order of importance

1) Backup Talent

2) Knowing the Backup

3) Team Scheme

4) Starter Injury History

5) Backup Use with Starter

My top 6 this year:

1) LT2 and Turner

2) Rudi and Perry

3) Westbrook and Moats

4) Alexander and Morris

5) Portis and Betts

6) Jones and Barber

Hmmm, nice list. I look at it a little differently.Last year the obvious one was Larry Johnson. But, there was a price to pay - My #1 Handcuff target last year instead was Najeh Davenport - Turns out, he gets injured the same day he gets the starting gig... But, to me Value wise, he was my guy while everyone else chased LJ.... Turns out, the LJ people were rewarded handsomely, that was just a roll of the dice though, If LJ is the one who gets injured on day 1 and Najeh stays healthy - All LUCK, I would have been King of all the land ; ).

As for your examples - You give good insurance policies, as stated above...

What I look for in a handcuff is to lock up a running game on the cheap.... OF COURSE I Also lock up insurance policies... If I have LT on my team I'll have Turner as well but, that's all a product of having a top 3 draft pick or like most of your examples, a shot at a top RB.

Take Chicago for example... Benson/Jones would cost you maybe a 5th and a 6th -To me THAT could be better than lets say Tiki Barber or any other late 1st round RB pick where his backup is unproven... One reason it's better is that it comes with insurance (2 Talented RB's)... But, also now in the late 1st I can lock up the WR I think it the best... How about Carolina - Foster / Williams might cost a 4 and a 7. Somewhere in your draft, that combo is a Better value than grabbing a late 1st round / 2nd round questionable RB.

Handcuffing 2 Cheaper Rb's later affords a RB Theorist to sit back on RB's and lock up some decent talent at WR and maybe QB and/or TE.....

The Top Handcuffs looking at it this way might be:

1) Jones / Benson

2) Foster / Williams

3) Dillon / Maroney

4) Brown / White

5) Rhodes / Addai

6) Taylor / Moore

7) Dayne / Bell

Handcuff or not, once I have my starters I like to lock up the 2nd tier RB's even without Handcuffing them to the potential starter which gives you possble value later in the season as a starter or as trade bait.

I understand that approach, but there are two possible problems. One is that you may not get the second RB. Passing on a 1st round RB because you hope to get Jones/Benson in the middle rounds is pretty risky. Secondly, in a league in which you submit a starting lineup, it's harder to know which RB to start from week to week. IMO, this strategy is more of a RBBC strategy than a handcuff strategy.

True - Depends on who you target and the make up of your draft and how it unfolds...... I could see this being a better bet if you lock in your 1st round RB and then attack other positions for a few rounds - Then come back to RB's later so maybe you go RB - WR TE WR RB RB RBAnother situation you can have less risk using this would be if you draft on one of the ends.... This way come one of the turns, if you have a few of these combo's you're happy with, you can just pluck the ones that come to you maybe at the 4/5 5/6 or even 6/7 Turn. If you have the #1 pick and Get LT - Then go WR WR- At the 4/5 bend you would probably have a decent choice if you wanted to lock in one of these combos.

BUT - This is all just a scenario that should be in the back of your mind or in your bag of tricks - Of course, everything depends on how your draft unfolds and what Value is present.

 

[-OZ-]

Herm is more optimistic. Considering Blaylock looked pretty decent when he played, Q or maybe Howard would be a viable option in that offense. Anyone would be really.

I don't disagree that most of them would be good in that offense, I just think that if you are drafting right now, you don't know who the backup will be.

Fair enough. FWIW, I got LJ with the 1.02 in an autopick draft recently, and grabbed Priest off waivers, hoping. Every other KC RB is on the wire still, so I'm not too worried, as long as I don't miss an anouncement.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Herm is more optimistic. Considering Blaylock looked pretty decent when he played, Q or maybe Howard would be a viable option in that offense. Anyone would be really.

I don't disagree that most of them would be good in that offense, I just think that if you are drafting right now, you don't know who the backup will be.

Fair enough. FWIW, I got LJ with the 1.02 in an autopick draft recently, and grabbed Priest off waivers, hoping. Every other KC RB is on the wire still, so I'm not too worried, as long as I don't miss an anouncement.

That's a decent deal, although I really don't think that Holmes will see the field again. I'm talking more about using a pick in a draft on Dee Brown right now instead of someone else just because you have LJ and Brown is "supposed" to be the backup.

 

[coolnerd]

hit me

quoting myself from this previous thread on handcuffs from 2006

I always view handcuffing like I do buying insurance, you only regret not having it when you need it. Otherwise, it is a waste of assets that could be used for other things. Essentially, you are making a bet that your starter WILL get injured. Given that only a handful of RBs play all 16 games, the strategy is reasonable, but there are some problems when exectuing the strategy.

Problem 1(10)- RRBC teams (or teams with a battle for the top spot)

Here my guesstimation as to team where this is the case

Atlanta

Carolina

Chicago

Denver

Green Bay

Indy

Jaxville

New orleans

San Franciso

Tennessee

Problem 2 (11)- Unclear back-up

Buffalo

Cleveland

Detroit

Houston

Kansas City

Miami

Ny Giants

Ny Jets

Oakland

Pittsburgh

St. Louis (depending on Faulk not retirng)

Problem 3 (4 team)- Talented back-up, injury prone strater or a guy with production as a 3rd down back/goalline specialist. these are teams where there is a high chance that someone else drafts the handcuff early forcing to pay more for the insurance than you really want.

Cincinnati

Dallas

Minnesota

New England

This leaves seven (7) handcuff situations which are worth considering in 2006.

Arizona -JJ Arrington

Baltimore- Mike Anderson

Philadelphia- Ryan Moats

San Deigo- Michael Turner

Seattle-Mo Morris

Tampa Bay- Michael Pittman

Washinton-Ladell Betts

 

[SSOG]

6) Jones and Barber

Wow. I was looking at this one for a while thinking you meant Tiki Barber and Brandon Jones. It didn't even occur to me that you meant Julius Jones and Marion Barber until just now.With that said, I definitely view Marion/Julius as an RBBC (or rather, two RBs competing for the same job) instead of a starter/backup. Tiki Barber and Brandon Jones, though... now there's a great situation. Aging #1 coming off of a very heavy workload. #2 guy that the coach clearly loves, and who will have value even if the #1 doesn't go down because he'll be getting goal-line touches. Very nice situation.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

6) Jones and Barber

Wow. I was looking at this one for a while thinking you meant Tiki Barber and Brandon Jones. It didn't even occur to me that you meant Julius Jones and Marion Barber until just now.With that said, I definitely view Marion/Julius as an RBBC (or rather, two RBs competing for the same job) instead of a starter/backup. Tiki Barber and Brandon Jones, though... now there's a great situation. Aging #1 coming off of a very heavy workload. #2 guy that the coach clearly loves, and who will have value even if the #1 doesn't go down because he'll be getting goal-line touches. Very nice situation.

Sorry about the confusion, but it's really Brandon Jacobs. As for DAL, I think it's closer than to a RBBC than the others, but I am of the opinion that JJones is really a pretty good RB and Tuna will want to ride him. I think Barber only gets spot work unless he goes down. Lots of people don't agree with me however. As for the Giants, I have it pretty high on my list, but I personally am not sold on Jacobs as an everydown kind of back. I've always liked Derrick Ward and I could see him taking most of Barbers' carries if Tiki goes down with Jacobs staying in his TD vulture role.

 

[menobrown]

I admit I feel a real comfort level when I have my starting RB handcuffed with his backup but it can sometimes come at a cost which can be detrimental if you have to spend a high draft pick on him.

First let me relate my story of how not having my RB's handcuffed killed my team. 2 years ago in WCOFF I loaded up on RB's. I walked out of the draft with Deuce Mcallister, Thomas Jones, Warrick Dunn, Julius Jones and Tatum Bell. I spent 5 of my first 8 draft picks on RB's. By Friday waiver time heading into week 3 Deuce and Julius were out for several weeks, Tatum Bell had not cracked the starting lineup and Warrick Dunn was listed as doubtful on the injury report leaving me to think I was down to one RB-Thomas Jones. It turns out Dunn played that week but had already panicked and badly overspent on Justin Griffith in case Dunn was out. Later in the year Thomas Jones went down as well. Despite having a ton of RB's, not having them handcuffed killed any chance I had that year.

So last year I go into WCOFF determined to backup my starters. I took Lamont Jordan 9th and backed him up in the 14th round with Crockett. Result- I ended up wasting a draft pick and roster spot all year. I took Steven Jackson in the second round and felt if I did not take Faulk in the 6th he would be gone when I picked again. Result-Picking Marshall cost me TJ Housemansadeh. My other back was Larry Johnson and I scooped up Dee Brown the week after Priest went down.

So in summary I was screwed when I did not back up my RB's and I was screwed when I did.

 

[The Jerk]

So in summary I was screwed when I did not back up my RB's and I was screwed when I did.

I LOVE this game!

 

[Bri]

An insurance policy is, of course, a tried-and-true risk minimization strategy. So if you're the kind of person who likes to minimize risk, handcuffing makes sense. If not, it doesn't.

If the pick was not used on Benson and started several productive games at RB(like Gado for example) then that would also be insurance and quite possibly a better choice. Since it gives starting options whereas the choice of Benson or Jones isn't much of a choice but more like a "who's healthy and starting" decision.