Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Handcuff vs. No Handcuff (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter GroveDiesel
- Start date
This right here. If the handcuff isn't going to be startable given the opportunity then no reason to take up a roster spot.
pinkstapler
Footballguy
While I agree it kind of depends, I voted for no and still maintain no, because the situations where I would handcuff a RB are few and far between. It would really only ever be in dynasty, with deep rosters, and the handcuff mentality for me would be more looking towards the future of that teams backfield than the typical "oh now I have this guy in case my starter goes down". I'm typically handcuffing there because I like the offensive situation and I like the rookie they just added, so I want to maintain ownership of that backfield over the next few years even if my starter ages out/gets traded/hits FA.
It's pretty much an all out avoid handcuffing my RB in redraft formats. When the draft is down to those kinds of RBs, I'll always try to avoid a guy who is the backup to someone I already own. I look at these picks as lottery picks anyway, so I want as many shots at starters as possible. Taking a handcuff to a starter you own does not give you an extra ticket, it's a 1 for 1 transaction where you first need to lose a player to gain a player. And there is a good chance (for all handcuff RBs tbf) they still don't work out. Don't get enough touches, coaches change offensive philosphy, they just aren't that good, etc.
IME, from a value standpoint it also tends to be a bad strategy, as high value RB handcuffs tend to be overpriced in drafts. (Eg. Will Shipley's price has slowly been increasing, going up nearly two rounds the past month in bestball drafts). This is why I mostly target ambiguous backfields, where we might have a named starter because something needs to go on the depth chart, but really it could be a split backfield or a hot hand approach. You have multiple paths to a backup taking over in these situations other than just through an injury, PLUS they are all normally cheaper because of the stereotypical consensus "I don't want ANYONE in that backfield" mentality. I'm happy to jump in on those backfields at the discount, especially if there's a guy in there I have profiled better than consensus.
It's pretty much an all out avoid handcuffing my RB in redraft formats. When the draft is down to those kinds of RBs, I'll always try to avoid a guy who is the backup to someone I already own. I look at these picks as lottery picks anyway, so I want as many shots at starters as possible. Taking a handcuff to a starter you own does not give you an extra ticket, it's a 1 for 1 transaction where you first need to lose a player to gain a player. And there is a good chance (for all handcuff RBs tbf) they still don't work out. Don't get enough touches, coaches change offensive philosphy, they just aren't that good, etc.
IME, from a value standpoint it also tends to be a bad strategy, as high value RB handcuffs tend to be overpriced in drafts. (Eg. Will Shipley's price has slowly been increasing, going up nearly two rounds the past month in bestball drafts). This is why I mostly target ambiguous backfields, where we might have a named starter because something needs to go on the depth chart, but really it could be a split backfield or a hot hand approach. You have multiple paths to a backup taking over in these situations other than just through an injury, PLUS they are all normally cheaper because of the stereotypical consensus "I don't want ANYONE in that backfield" mentality. I'm happy to jump in on those backfields at the discount, especially if there's a guy in there I have profiled better than consensus.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Exactly. The one caveat is volume. Even scrubby RB can and have put up solid FF numbers when they get 20-25 touches a game.
So either the backup’s talent level has to be inspiring, or the team’s offensive ethos does. Backup RB in BAL, LAC, LAR, SF? Gimme whoever gets the next opportunity regardless of talent level.
But if it’s a high volume passing team, the RB better have ability or they’re not worth rostering for the 15-ish touches a game.
I agree with this approach as well. I will get a handcuff to one of my RB's only in the situation where the offense is good and the handcuff can maintain the output if the starter goes down. My prime example this year is SF and CMC. If I am late in the first round and CMC is still available I will take him and then commit to getting Guerendo a round or two early to ensure I have that above average backfield locked in.
For me the lottery pick percentage of hitting goes up on Guerendo because I have CMC. I know that RB will produce and CMC is such a difference maker (albeit with high injury risk) that locking in the handcuff makes sense to me.
This may be the only situation this year like this. I haven't started diving in yet to be sure but this is the one that springs to mind.
zamboni
Footballguy
Totally agree that league size will be a major determinant. Assuming roster size was big enough, the only handcuffs I would actively search out are probably Charbonnet or Allgeier, but only if Walker or Bijan, respectively, was my RB1. But even then it would have to be the right cost, which for those guys, it won't come cheap in terms of draft picks.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
It’s a good strategy - I love targeting “next man up” but not necessarily for my own RB’s teams.
If I’m a CMC shareholder I’ll grab Guerendo/James if my roster is large enough. But if I have a small roster I might prefer to roster Ray Davis, in case Cook goes down. That way if my starter stays healthy I have another RB to plug in.
The only way Guerendo really helps me in the above hypothetical is if CMC gets hurt. That’s a subtraction, whereas if Cook gets hurt, Davis gives me an addition.
jm192
Footballguy
Losing CMC is definitely a negative. No way around it.
But it can mitigate the impact. And sometimes that's enough to win you a week.
The approach you use definitely can put you further ahead when it works than handcuffing your own guys. But if you lose CMC and Cook stays healthy, you'd probably still rather have Guerendo those weeks than Ray Davis.
FWIW, I typically follow the same strategy as you--for the same reasons as you. I just can see the argument for the other side.
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
Agreed - then it comes down to “which backup is more talented”, and “what are their respective ADPs”.
steelcityman
Footballguy
I have Bijan, tried to get Allgeier, but the other guy wanted way too much. Allgeier has shown he can go over 100 yards and score TDs. I am not gonna sweat not having him, but wouldnt mind him either.
I do have Guerendo and Dowdle, so who knows, maybe one of them end up the RB1 on their teams.
I do have Guerendo and Dowdle, so who knows, maybe one of them end up the RB1 on their teams.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
My thoughts are not to handcuff in two situations. First, if the handcuff is a bum. Second, if it's a shallow league, but with one exception. That is that my RB room is very questionable and the handcuff has high upside.
Edit: Another thought about handcuffs, not necessarily handcuffs to my players, are what I perceive as high upside rookie RBs.
Edit: Another thought about handcuffs, not necessarily handcuffs to my players, are what I perceive as high upside rookie RBs.
jm192
Footballguy
I don't feel any urge to handcuff. Honestly, if the league is deep enough, I don't even consider it "handcuffing." You draft the best available players when your turn comes up. At a point in the draft, the RB lotto ticket is the best person to draft. I think we all have a continuum of RB rankings that includes the backups.
There's been a handful of RB's over the year that I've felt like I had to handcuff if I owned them. And the problem becomes--everyone else wants to own that particular handcuff. Either because of the near certainty the starter gets hurt or they just want to trade them to you and charge you a premium.
There's been a handful of RB's over the year that I've felt like I had to handcuff if I owned them. And the problem becomes--everyone else wants to own that particular handcuff. Either because of the near certainty the starter gets hurt or they just want to trade them to you and charge you a premium.
darksideofoz
Footballguy
I don't handcuff during the draft.
I will randomly grab a backup RB for a week or two during the season if I have an open roster spot. Though, this is more of a dart throw at any backup RB that might have an injury ahead of them happen that week, and not necessarily a handcuff for my RBs.
In my oldest league, since there are no pick ups during the playoffs, everyone has rights to their players' backups if they get hurt. If I happen to have any of my own backups on my team, I will drop them just before the cutoff, and sign some backups for the teams I might play in the 2nd or 3rd weeks of the playoffs.
I will randomly grab a backup RB for a week or two during the season if I have an open roster spot. Though, this is more of a dart throw at any backup RB that might have an injury ahead of them happen that week, and not necessarily a handcuff for my RBs.
In my oldest league, since there are no pick ups during the playoffs, everyone has rights to their players' backups if they get hurt. If I happen to have any of my own backups on my team, I will drop them just before the cutoff, and sign some backups for the teams I might play in the 2nd or 3rd weeks of the playoffs.
Streetduck
Footballguy
Well in my Zealots leagues with 53 man rosters you bet I handcuff if the handcuff is worth having. In my 12x9 with a roster of 20 ofcourse not.
The one exception would be Gibbs/Montgomery.
The one exception would be Gibbs/Montgomery.
Well, that is just smart management. I am shocked everyone doesn't do this.
Pickle Rody
IBL Representative
Apologies, did not read thread yet.....
Voted NO as I generally never draft a handcuff. I will though, consider certain handcuff backs prior to and during a draft. I usually find a more useful (for my team) RB that is not a handcuff for a starter before I need to draft one.
Voted NO as I generally never draft a handcuff. I will though, consider certain handcuff backs prior to and during a draft. I usually find a more useful (for my team) RB that is not a handcuff for a starter before I need to draft one.
darksideofoz
Footballguy
I am surprised too. I don't remember any other owner doing it even once, and I do it every year. Granted, adds cost $2 each, but that is a paltry fee compared to the possible glory felt beating someone with their player's backup.
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
I used to know a woman that loved handcuffs. Not sure if she ever played fantasy football though.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
In best ball, never handcuff. You drafted the starter and already made that bet that they will be good so drafting the backup is a waste of a roster spot.
In managed leagues, handcuff only if the backup has talent and would get 18 or more touches if he were the starter or has league winning ability.
In managed leagues, handcuff only if the backup has talent and would get 18 or more touches if he were the starter or has league winning ability.
Helaire-ious
Footballguy
I've tried the handcuff thing and it always just ended up a wasted roster spot. No more. YMMV
JohnnyU
Footballguy
That's the downside for sure. My thoughts are to limit handcuffing and don't handcuff with mediocre backup RBs.
Last edited:
JohnnyU
Footballguy
For a recent example off the top of my head was Jordan Mason when McCaffrey got hurt. He had several games he looked great until he also got hurt.
Edit: Ford when Chubb got hurt. I'm sure there are several I can't remember. Perhaps others can help with that.
Pickle Rody
IBL Representative
I cannot think of any. I have been much more successful drafting somebody else's handcuff. That is not saying much.
FarFromHome
Footballguy
I've just always tried to handcuff. I just feel better when I do. To answer your question at first thought my mind goes to Michael Turner years ago. I drafted CJ Spiller because I thought he was gonna hit, but also took Fred Jackson super late. That worked. Was a Dalvin Cook owner that made sure I had Mattison. That worked out. Cuffed Darren McFadden with Michael Bush. That worked really well. I've cuffed Jonathan Taylor for years and although it wasn't a home run I at least got a few singles out of it. If I spent more time I could keep citing decent examples of good and bad examples of when it has worked. Cuffing isn't for everyone. I get it. Its just my bag baby
So what is the difference? A handcuff working requires the lead guy to get hurt. If you handcuff your own guy and he doesn't get hurt does that mean that the handcuff didn't work out? I would say that it kind of worked out for the situation you were trying to cover.
Of course you will be more successful with someone elses handcuff because if that works out that means your guy stayed healthy and that your other handcuff got a shot because the other guy got hurt.
How many times have you picked somebody else's handcuff and your main guy got hurt while the "somebody" didn't? That would be a big failure. I am guessing that doesn't come to mind.
I also think when you take other people's handcuffs they are way easier to drop and move on because you don't have the inherent value built in of protection for your starter. Much easier to rotate off a guy not playing to someone that is in those cases. That can skew the feel of success rate for this situation.
Every time my first round RB survived the season and didn't get hurt I would count that as my handcuff working out. The point of that slot is to protect you from injury in case you needed it. When you don't need it does that necessarily mean it didn't work out? You got what you wanted out of those two picks.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
I found your last paragraph interesting. Knowing I'm eating a roster spot for someone elses handcuff can be aggravating if you have smaller rosters. I suppose it boils down to what you really think of their long term success vs you wanting to compete now. In shallow leagues you can't roster everyone you want. Sometimes you drop guys that you regret later. But if you want to compete, sometimes you have to make those hard choices. Obviously with larger rosters you have more flexibility and can be more patient.
5-ish Finkle
Footballguy
I've never really went out of my way to 'cuff. If it works out value-wise, fine. If not? Whateverrrr.
I've certainly hit a couple of homeruns "Chasing Coach X's Running Game" (Olandis Gary and Mike Anderson most memorably), but overall it's been a pretty mixed bag.
This also ties into choosing to roster your own handcuff. When you are making that decision you know you are using it as insurance only (talking true handcuff instead of a Monty/Gibbs type situation). You have built it the idea of using two roster spots to cover one starting spot. Once you make that decision and are fine with it then having your 1st round pick never get hurt kind of makes that handcuff a success, right? I don't think many people perceive it that way in the confines of the discussion for this thread.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
At the end of the day it comes down to roster size vs upside vs risk tolerance.
Absolutely. This year I think the only handcuff situation I would be willing to reach on (taking the cuff a round or two early) is CMC/Guerrendo. The upside is so high having the main cog in that run game it seems worth it to me. This is based on CMC falling to late 1st round or early 2nd round though. I wouldn't do it at the top of the first round but at the end or early second the upside of CMC and subsequent drop off to Guerrendo makes sense in my mind to use that draft capital on that RB1 spot in my lineup.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
Depends on how you feel about the backups and who your RB1 is. I can see Tyler Allgeier worth it if you have Bijan. Is Will Shipley worth a roster spot if you have Saquon Barkley? Would he get the Saquon workload?
goose_egged
Footballguy
Also season stage. With special exceptions like CMC/Guerendo, I don't worry about handcuffs in normal bench size 10 and 12 team leagues but I'm always looking for the right moment to pick up any half-decent cuff for my own backs as the season rolls on and general wire opportunities become less lucrative.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
These two came into play for me and I agree about Algeier. I gave up on Shipley as a handcuff because of roster construction. Was that a mistake? I don't know, but it's something I can live with.
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
Agreed. I am writing up my redraft tiers and some draft construction thoughts and hoping to post them by tonight. Allgeier and Shipley are both part of that in different tiers.
Of course that plays into it. The reason for a handcuff is if he is going to indeed be a true replacement. That is the reason for it. Not all backups are worthy handcuffs. Kind of like the square/rectangle thing. All handcuffs (squares) are backups (rectangles) but not all backups are (should be) handcuffs.
ETA: Allgeier, Charbs, and Monty and guys like that aren't true handcuffs either because they have some standalone value. They will be startable in certain matchups and get enough work even if the starter stays healthy. Not really a "handcuff".
zamboni
Footballguy
As mentioned way upthread, there are only a few instances (e.g., Allgeier, Charb) where I'll bother paying up for, with the assumption that the backup will be in line to assume a similar workload and production. That number of individuals is quite low.
At the end of the day, handcuffing is just another type of insurance. You hope you don't need it, but if it you do, it will cover your exposure for the most part. But handcuffing also comes at a cost - in FF terms, the opportunity cost of not using your capital for other, perhaps more glaring, needs.
At the end of the day, handcuffing is just another type of insurance. You hope you don't need it, but if it you do, it will cover your exposure for the most part. But handcuffing also comes at a cost - in FF terms, the opportunity cost of not using your capital for other, perhaps more glaring, needs.
Helaire-ious
Footballguy
I did pick up Mason and he helped me win some games
bluemanfoo
Footballguy
So my posts in the Achane thread prompted this thread to be bumped.
The reality for me is, when I've suffered injuries, the handcuff wouldn't have made a difference. That is, when faced with injuries, my team either still won the Championship, or the handcuff wouldn't have pushed me over the top. Yeah, I might have squeaked out some more wins with the handcuff, but my goal is to win the trophy. Yes, I'm sure Charbonnet helped teams win a trophy last year with Walker's injuries during the Fantasy playoffs. But how often does that happen? How often was handcuffing or not handcuffing your starter the difference between winning or losing your league. For me, never, and I suspect, very rarely for others. And once I realized those subtle probabilities, I don't think about handcuffing.
As an Achane owner, I did draft Wright because that offense has shown the capability to support two fantasy RBs in the past, so Wright potentially is more than a handcuff. Also, Wright's cost is small enough that I'll have no issues dropping him if the situation does not look good for him. As a Kenneth Walker owner, I had no thought of drafting Charbonnet. I already made a significant fourth round bet on that Seattle running game. Some people look at Charbonnet as insurance on that bet. I see it potentially as "throwing bad money after bad money". I'm hoping that Klint Kubiak can squeeze some running lanes out of that bad offensive line. But what if the Seattle offensive line and rushing attack suck? Then I've invested a ninth round pick and another roster spot, which are both very valuable to me, on top of that fourth rounder, on a bad rushing attack. To me, using a ninth round pick on a handcuff "increases exposure" rather than decreases risk.
Note that I play redraft, and the probabilities are different in dynasty with a ton of roster spots.
The reality for me is, when I've suffered injuries, the handcuff wouldn't have made a difference. That is, when faced with injuries, my team either still won the Championship, or the handcuff wouldn't have pushed me over the top. Yeah, I might have squeaked out some more wins with the handcuff, but my goal is to win the trophy. Yes, I'm sure Charbonnet helped teams win a trophy last year with Walker's injuries during the Fantasy playoffs. But how often does that happen? How often was handcuffing or not handcuffing your starter the difference between winning or losing your league. For me, never, and I suspect, very rarely for others. And once I realized those subtle probabilities, I don't think about handcuffing.
As an Achane owner, I did draft Wright because that offense has shown the capability to support two fantasy RBs in the past, so Wright potentially is more than a handcuff. Also, Wright's cost is small enough that I'll have no issues dropping him if the situation does not look good for him. As a Kenneth Walker owner, I had no thought of drafting Charbonnet. I already made a significant fourth round bet on that Seattle running game. Some people look at Charbonnet as insurance on that bet. I see it potentially as "throwing bad money after bad money". I'm hoping that Klint Kubiak can squeeze some running lanes out of that bad offensive line. But what if the Seattle offensive line and rushing attack suck? Then I've invested a ninth round pick and another roster spot, which are both very valuable to me, on top of that fourth rounder, on a bad rushing attack. To me, using a ninth round pick on a handcuff "increases exposure" rather than decreases risk.
Note that I play redraft, and the probabilities are different in dynasty with a ton of roster spots.
Last edited:
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Wright as a handcuff last didn’t provide anything when he did play. He was basically useless. That’s not to say that will be the case this year, but it could. I’m not sold on him yet.
bluemanfoo
Footballguy
Ramblin Wreck
Footballguy
Wright isn't on my league winners list as a backup but he's right below those guys. I wonder if Gordon would get goalline work if Achane were not playing while Wright plays between the 20's.
Ray Barboni
Footballguy
I ‘cuffed Quinshon with Dylan Sampson during my rookie draft. Didn’t think he was going to have so much relevance this early.
I didn’t read throughout the entire thread. But to add to it, there’s obvious handcuffs, and then there’s the other guys.
More often than not, your “handcuff” isn’t going to be that valuable. Sure, he will get you maybe 50-60% of your starter - but is that worth the roster spot?
I’ll handcuff CMC of course. But there’s not many more backups that I would chase. Maybe Wright if I had Achane.
I didn’t read throughout the entire thread. But to add to it, there’s obvious handcuffs, and then there’s the other guys.
More often than not, your “handcuff” isn’t going to be that valuable. Sure, he will get you maybe 50-60% of your starter - but is that worth the roster spot?
I’ll handcuff CMC of course. But there’s not many more backups that I would chase. Maybe Wright if I had Achane.
BLOCKED_PUNT
Footballguy
I'm mostly no. Myself, and most people just draft other teams starters.
bluemanfoo
Footballguy
I don't know. I have no idea how good Gordon is. But I like that Wright apparently is working hard to get better. And that offensive line was so bad last year, I feel like it's bound to better. But perhaps that is too much blind faith.
