What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

RB Damien Williams, ATL (1 Viewer)

I must be fortunate, I got for 26%. I didn’t go overboard because he might have only 5 weeks or less as starting material. I doubt he starts for me, but is good depth and kept him of a opponents roster at least. 

 
dmac37 said:
Monty owner, after watching the Bears week 4 offense implosion I dropped D. Williams thinking it will be a RBBC with little offensive production if Monty goes down. Obvious regret now, but I still have A. Jones and Hunt to start but will still bid higher than I want to try and get D Will back.........
Click to expand...


This is exactly what I did, I dropped Williams after week 2. Now I had to bid $65 to get him last night. Luckily landed him as a desperate Monty owner. 

 
BradtheAg said:
Have not spent any FAAB yet due to having a very deep/good team.  Think I'm probably going to blow it all on Williams just to keep him off other rosters
Click to expand...
He went for $65 and my bid was second at $37. I'm the Montgomery owner and the manager who got him thinks a stud WR could be worth it, or hold and play as a bye, and just admitted to me he wanted to keep Williams off my roster to play defense, as our team sits in first place. Add gamesmanship to the mix. So, I added Michael Carter as his stock is rising for free.

 
Timmay said:
This is exactly what I did, I dropped Williams after week 2. Now I had to bid $65 to get him last night. Luckily landed him as a desperate Monty owner. 
Click to expand...
Dropped him on Saturday to make room for Samuel coming off of IR  :sadbanana:  - went for 50% FAAB yesterday.

 
Bears' Damien Williams: Puts in full practice

(9 mins ago) Williams (quadriceps) practiced in full Wednesday.

In the same contest in which No. 1 running back David Montgomery sprained his knee this past Sunday, Williams emerged with a bruised thigh, but it didn't hinder his ability to handle every drill to begin Week 5 prep. With Montgomery slated to be sidelined up to 4-to-5 weeks, Williams is in the driver's seat for plenty of touches for the foreseeable future. On the season, Williams has averaged 4.6 yards on his 16 carries, hauled in eight of 10 passes for 41 yards and scored one rushing touchdown in four outings. Williams' primary competition for touches will be rookie sixth-rounder Khalil Herbert.

 
I just couldn't go all in on Williams knowing he only has the job for four, maybe five weeks. Also, he's dealing with a rookie QB who has looked terrible, a pretty tough schedule over that five week period and T.Cohen will be back in two weeks.

I think he will be a mid range RB 2 over that period, but I wouldn't break the bank for a temporary fix.

 
Saboo said:
I just couldn't go all in on Williams knowing he only has the job for four, maybe five weeks. Also, he's dealing with a rookie QB who has looked terrible, a pretty tough schedule over that five week period and T.Cohen will be back in two weeks.

I think he will be a mid range RB 2 over that period, but I wouldn't break the bank for a temporary fix.
Click to expand...
I saw somewhere that it's possible Cohen isn't close to being ready to come back. 

 
Buck Bradcanon said:
Its about winning weeks. If he wins you a week or 2 over the next 4 or 5, money well spent.  
Click to expand...
I like this outlook. A pretty good rb2 for 4 weeks is worth a fair bit of faab to me. Especially if you're sitting on some upside stashes at RB that aren't really useable, like Javonte, Carter, or the SF backs. Buy those guys another month to break out while not taking the hit in your lineup. 

 
Saboo said:
I just couldn't go all in on Williams knowing he only has the job for four, maybe five weeks. Also, he's dealing with a rookie QB who has looked terrible, a pretty tough schedule over that five week period and T.Cohen will be back in two weeks.

I think he will be a mid range RB 2 over that period, but I wouldn't break the bank for a temporary fix.
Click to expand...
So you think having a extra startable RB through the thick of bi-weeks isn’t worth it? 
 

 
I get the impression a lot of people are way too optimistic on what their Faab can get them later in the year. But then mine is always 95% gone by week 6, so how would I know what it can get later in the year 😂. 

There are 10 weeks left in the regular season. Getting a 3 down back for 4-5 of those weeks for all or most of my remaining faab was an easy call for me. 

 
TLDR - I can sorta understand, the underappreciation of Damien Williams, I got him for 51/100 in a Chicago based homer league.

My 2 cents on FAAB usage:

My League tends to hold onto FAAB and wait for the 'out for the season bellcow RB' scenario to fall to them.

I don't wait and spend the FAAB the first 5-6 weeks these days. I typically get more value, based on having the player for longer since I get them on my team sooner and have less competition for these chunk play guys when you aren't stuck waiting for the 'all in FAAB guy'.

Also realize, we typically see a committee now come in for the bellcow going down scenario, except for a couple of key situations. That's what made me bid for Damien Williams, I don't see a lot of competition for touches. 

If my league tendency was to just spend all the time like I am, I might zig when they zag and be the wait for 'all in FAAB guy'. while my league mates drain their FAAB. Both strats are rationalized and can make sense. There is a real situational variable with how 'best' to spend FAAB IMO. 

 
People were putting FAAB requests in for players like KJ Osburn and Kadarious Toney, why wouldn't you risk most of your FAAB money for a starting RB for the next 4-5 weeks (hopefully at least), especially because the WW for RB's are very slim. 

 
Buck Bradcanon said:
Its about winning weeks. If he wins you a week or 2 over the next 4 or 5, money well spent.  
Click to expand...
Exactly. As your record improves and other teams start dropping out you dont need as much $$ to get FAs later in the year either.

 
Hartliner said:
TLDR - I can sorta understand, the underappreciation of Damien Williams, I got him for 51/100 in a Chicago based homer league.

My 2 cents on FAAB usage:

My League tends to hold onto FAAB and wait for the 'out for the season bellcow RB' scenario to fall to them.

I don't wait and spend the FAAB the first 5-6 weeks these days. I typically get more value, based on having the player for longer since I get them on my team sooner and have less competition for these chunk play guys when you aren't stuck waiting for the 'all in FAAB guy'.

Also realize, we typically see a committee now come in for the bellcow going down scenario, except for a couple of key situations. That's what made me bid for Damien Williams, I don't see a lot of competition for touches. 

If my league tendency was to just spend all the time like I am, I might zig when they zag and be the wait for 'all in FAAB guy'. while my league mates drain their FAAB. Both strats are rationalized and can make sense. There is a real situational variable with how 'best' to spend FAAB IMO. 
Click to expand...
The other problem with this is there is always one team that doesnt bid on anyone all year so even if we are wise with your money, IF a bellcow RB comes out of nowhere late in the season, that team will go all in and get them anyway. I typically spend most of my money by mid-season. I like have some left over for defenses and late injuries to RBs during the playoffs when you are only competing with 4-5 other teams for free agents have a little money left over is wise. 

 
In dynasty leagues now is a good time to add Williams to another piece and trade to upgrade your team long term, not sell him for a cheap future draft pick.

 
Saboo said:
I just couldn't go all in on Williams knowing he only has the job for four, maybe five weeks. Also, he's dealing with a rookie QB who has looked terrible, a pretty tough schedule over that five week period and T.Cohen will be back in two weeks.

I think he will be a mid range RB 2 over that period, but I wouldn't break the bank for a temporary fix.
Click to expand...
Having a 3 down back for 4-5 weeks can make a big impact on your final record.  There are plenty of times at the end of the season that I would pay 100% of my FAAB to get one more win.

 
skinsrule05 said:
Having a 3 down back for 4-5 weeks can make a big impact on your final record.  There are plenty of times at the end of the season that I would pay 100% of my FAAB to get one more win.
Click to expand...


Fully with you. Even in small leagues, getting a fresh-legged workhorse for 4-5 weeks can be a difference maker.

 
djjosee said:
Dropped him on Saturday to make room for Samuel coming off of IR  :sadbanana:  - went for 50% FAAB yesterday.
Click to expand...


Care to explain your reasoning?  Even if guys like him cost you a roster spot all year, it's cheap insurance to maintain a RB2.  Samuel will be a guy clogging the WDIS threads all year.

 
Damien Williams rushed 16 times for 64 yards and one score, catching 2-of-3 targets for 20 yards in Chicago's Week 5 win against the Raiders.

In Chicago's first game without David Montgomery (knee), Williams got the start and handled 16 carries to rookie Khalil Herbert's team-high 18. Even so, Williams encouragingly saw all three of the Bears' backfield targets and out-touched Herbert 3-1 inside the 10-yard line. With 20 passes or fewer in three consecutive games (and 24 or fewer in four straight), OC Bill Lazor's offense clearly entails methodically running the ball to protect Justin Fields under center. That approach at least lends Williams confidence as a low-end RB2/3 alongside Herbert for as long as Montgomery remains sidelined, including in Week 6 against the Packers.

- NBC SportsEDGE
Click to expand...

 
Buck Bradcanon said:
Pretty good day overall but Herbert getting more carries certainly cant be ignored.
Click to expand...
I was very surprised by Herbert's usage to be sure. But Herbert didn't see a target or see any red zone action (iirc) so I think it is okay to remain bullish on Damien Williams.

Then again they don't play the Raiders every week so I wouldn't expect 37 combined opportunities every week either.

 
Chaka said:
I was very surprised by Herbert's usage to be sure. But Herbert didn't see a target or see any red zone action (iirc) so I think it is okay to remain bullish on Damien Williams.

Then again they don't play the Raiders every week so I wouldn't expect 37 combined opportunities every week either.
Click to expand...
Herbert got a few carries before William's TD

 
Chaka said:
Well, there's that too.  I still think Williams got exactly as much action as I thought he would.  I wouldn't lower expectations og Williams so much as raise expectations of Herbert.
Click to expand...
Yeah considering they had 37 total carriers the usage for both makes sense. What happens when they only have 25 carries in a game? Is it Williams 18, Herbert 7? Or Williams 13, Herbert 12? Thats what we have to wait and see.

 
Herbert looked pretty effective. Seemed like they preferred him when salting the game away but maybe that was just the rotation at the time. Williams got the TD but Herbert easily could have had it as well since he got a few carries in close too. 

 
Wonder if Williams was a little dinged from that quad so he was spelled more than normal.  Guess we'll see in a critical one for the Bears this Sunday.

 
Ilov80s said:
Yes, he did. Fire Khalil Herbert. 
Click to expand...


fired up x2

(one league I’m missing CEH & Kamara on a bye; in another I might Flex him over Cooks or Sutton)

Underwhelming pedigree and I haven’t seen him play. Besides the obvious opportunity (which means a lot), anything to see here? They haven’t been utilizing him in the passing game, right?

 
So the blurbs about him being added to the Covid list appear to contain two points and then an extrapolation that I don’t know if necessarily follows, so I’d love clarification if someone understands better:

1. we don’t know if he has a positive test or it’s a “close contact” thing

2. he would need to be asymptomatic and have two negative tests at least 24 hours apart to return

3. Two negative tests is deemed unlikely (by the blurb writers) given the timeline

I assume if it’s close contact, and not a positive test, they’d test him around right when they find out about it and add him to the list, right? So if that was negative a second test 24 hours away could be as soon as tomorrow, right? Or is there a waiting period from close contact to that first test? The commentary seems to think this means he’s doubtful but my read on the first two facts would be more “we have no idea either way yet” than jumping to the third point without anything in between (but again I may be missing something?).

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

greenmountaingoat
Ainias Smith-WR- Draft eligible Texas A&M
Replies
9
Views
341
Drunken Cowboy
D
rockaction
College RB Tiyon Evans, LAR
Replies
7
Views
934
Hot Sauce Guy
Hot Sauce Guy
T
Travdogg's 3 round mock draft
2
Replies
84
Views
3K
travdogg
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top