RB De’Von Achane, MIA (2 Viewers)

[jm192]

I think a lot of the handcuffing argument comes down to league and roster size.

If it's a smaller league or the benches are short--it's harder to justify holding handcuffs.

In bigger/deeper leagues, most of the backup RB's are rostered. Heck, in medium sized leagues, a fair amount of backups are rostered.

I feel like some people are talking with this "either/or" tone. Someone said I can take 4 RB's I like or 2 RB's I like and 2 handcuffs. In a lot of leagues, I'm taking the RB's I like, and then I'm filling out the bench with backup RB's that have really high upside in the event of an injury.

I don't necessarily prioritize my own RB's backup over someone else's. How good is the backup? What has the backup done in previous opportunities? How often does the starter get hurt?

People have mentioned Charbonnet: I would argue whether you do or do not have Walker--Charbonnet is a great handcuff target. Arguably the best one.

 

[bluemanfoo]

Sorry, but I can’t see a world where Wright is usable without an injury. Even if the same is true about Charbs, there is no indication of Wright being better than Charbs.

Charbs has proven to have production when Walker was out, so I would say most would value him more than Wright.

I just believe handcuffing is a bad use of roster spots and in Charbs case, bad use of draft capital on top of it.

In most cases, it can be. In the case of Walker / Charbonnet, it is not. First of all, you can get Walker later than he should go due to injury concerns.
Second, Charbonnet is worth his ADP. He is an instant RB1 if Walker were to miss time.

I LOVE handcuffing RB's when there is a clear RB1 and a backup who has the ability to produce RB1 numbers if needed.

Outside of Seattle, the only team that comes close is Atlanta in my opinion.

I'd much rather draft three or four RBs I love rather than draft two RBs I love and their handcuffs. In the former build, I've often had three good to great RBs. If one gets hurts or one just flat out disappoints, usually I've been ok to still firing on all cylinders. In the latter strategy, I'll have at most two starting RBs in any given week. And if one of those rushing offenses stinks, I've doubled my pain, and have no "outs". Handcuffing is a terrible strategy IMO.

Who said two? If you draft four total RB's and one happens to be Walker, Charbonnet is a must. Then you draft an RB2 and RB3 like you normally would.

Drafting two RB's and two handcuffs is not at all what I suggested.

Charbs a must? Not even close to a must in my mind. I'd much much much rather roster a third option that has weekly upside, and I 'd rather use that ninth round pick on my first QB or TE.

If you own Walker, Charbonnet is a must.

Nope. I'd much rather shoot for guys with weekly upside. In my first league, sizable chance Walker or Achane get hurt, yet I'd still rather pin my chances on RJ Harvey stepping up by then. Because if RJ Harvey emerges, he not just steps in when one of my primary RBs gets hurt, I can also start him in flex. I don't shy away from talented RBs with the injury prone label and, it's odd to many, but I don't handcuff. For example, in 2019, I took Saquon, Aaron Jones, Fournette with my first three picks. All talented but all considered injury prone. Saquon battled a high ankle sprain most of the season and was a bust. Aaron Jones had the best season his career, finishing RB2 overall. Fournette was great at his 3rd round ADP and finished around RB7 overall. Despite Saquon busting at #1 overall, that was my most dominant team ever. Yeah, my Lamar/Andrews stack had a lot to do with the dominance, but I was fully committed in 2019 to swinging for upside (totally reaching for Lamar in round 7 and Andrews in round 10), and not burning any picks nor roster spots on low upside options nor handcuffs. I've only ever won by being aggressive, and when I make a conservative pick, I usually regret it later.

 

[candian fantasy guy]

I feel like I started this handcuff strategy, conversation, but it was from a dynasty angle and not redraft. I rarely try to get handcuffs in redraft, only if it lines up that way. I won’t overdraft someone due to a guy being a handcuff of my starting RB’s.

 

[TVT 0 N S T A]

Sorry, but I can’t see a world where Wright is usable without an injury. Even if the same is true about Charbs, there is no indication of Wright being better than Charbs.

Charbs has proven to have production when Walker was out, so I would say most would value him more than Wright.

I just believe handcuffing is a bad use of roster spots and in Charbs case, bad use of draft capital on top of it.

In most cases, it can be. In the case of Walker / Charbonnet, it is not. First of all, you can get Walker later than he should go due to injury concerns.
Second, Charbonnet is worth his ADP. He is an instant RB1 if Walker were to miss time.

I LOVE handcuffing RB's when there is a clear RB1 and a backup who has the ability to produce RB1 numbers if needed.

Outside of Seattle, the only team that comes close is Atlanta in my opinion.

I'd much rather draft three or four RBs I love rather than draft two RBs I love and their handcuffs. In the former build, I've often had three good to great RBs. If one gets hurts or one just flat out disappoints, usually I've been ok to still firing on all cylinders. In the latter strategy, I'll have at most two starting RBs in any given week. And if one of those rushing offenses stinks, I've doubled my pain, and have no "outs". Handcuffing is a terrible strategy IMO.

Who said two? If you draft four total RB's and one happens to be Walker, Charbonnet is a must. Then you draft an RB2 and RB3 like you normally would.

Drafting two RB's and two handcuffs is not at all what I suggested.

Charbs a must? Not even close to a must in my mind. I'd much much much rather roster a third option that has weekly upside, and I 'd rather use that ninth round pick on my first QB or TE.

If you own Walker, Charbonnet is a must.

Nope. I'd much rather shoot for guys with weekly upside. In my first league, sizable chance Walker or Achane get hurt, yet I'd still rather pin my chances on RJ Harvey stepping up by then. Because if RJ Harvey emerges, he not just steps in when one of my primary RBs gets hurt, I can also start him in flex. I don't shy away from talented RBs with the injury prone label and, it's odd to many, but I don't handcuff. For example, in 2019, I took Saquon, Aaron Jones, Fournette with my first three picks. All talented but all considered injury prone. Saquon battled a high ankle sprain most of the season and was a bust. Aaron Jones had the best season his career, finishing RB2 overall. Fournette was great at his 3rd round ADP and finished around RB7 overall. Despite Saquon busting at #1 overall, that was my most dominant team ever. Yeah, my Lamar/Andrews stack had a lot to do with the dominance, but I was fully committed in 2019 to swinging for upside (totally reaching for Lamar in round 7 and Andrews in round 10), and not burning any picks nor roster spots on low upside options nor handcuffs. I've only ever won by being aggressive, and when I make a conservative pick, I usually regret it later.

I don't believe in handcuffing in the natural sense of drafting the next man up for an RB I own. This post is everything though. I prefer not to be married to an entire position for one team.

 

[Big Nate]

Sorry, but I can’t see a world where Wright is usable without an injury. Even if the same is true about Charbs, there is no indication of Wright being better than Charbs.

Charbs has proven to have production when Walker was out, so I would say most would value him more than Wright.

I just believe handcuffing is a bad use of roster spots and in Charbs case, bad use of draft capital on top of it.

In most cases, it can be. In the case of Walker / Charbonnet, it is not. First of all, you can get Walker later than he should go due to injury concerns.
Second, Charbonnet is worth his ADP. He is an instant RB1 if Walker were to miss time.

I LOVE handcuffing RB's when there is a clear RB1 and a backup who has the ability to produce RB1 numbers if needed.

Outside of Seattle, the only team that comes close is Atlanta in my opinion.

I'd much rather draft three or four RBs I love rather than draft two RBs I love and their handcuffs. In the former build, I've often had three good to great RBs. If one gets hurts or one just flat out disappoints, usually I've been ok to still firing on all cylinders. In the latter strategy, I'll have at most two starting RBs in any given week. And if one of those rushing offenses stinks, I've doubled my pain, and have no "outs". Handcuffing is a terrible strategy IMO.

Who said two? If you draft four total RB's and one happens to be Walker, Charbonnet is a must. Then you draft an RB2 and RB3 like you normally would.

Drafting two RB's and two handcuffs is not at all what I suggested.

Charbs a must? Not even close to a must in my mind. I'd much much much rather roster a third option that has weekly upside, and I 'd rather use that ninth round pick on my first QB or TE.

If you own Walker, Charbonnet is a must.

Nope. I'd much rather shoot for guys with weekly upside. In my first league, sizable chance Walker or Achane get hurt, yet I'd still rather pin my chances on RJ Harvey stepping up by then. Because if RJ Harvey emerges, he not just steps in when one of my primary RBs gets hurt, I can also start him in flex. I don't shy away from talented RBs with the injury prone label and, it's odd to many, but I don't handcuff. For example, in 2019, I took Saquon, Aaron Jones, Fournette with my first three picks. All talented but all considered injury prone. Saquon battled a high ankle sprain most of the season and was a bust. Aaron Jones had the best season his career, finishing RB2 overall. Fournette was great at his 3rd round ADP and finished around RB7 overall. Despite Saquon busting at #1 overall, that was my most dominant team ever. Yeah, my Lamar/Andrews stack had a lot to do with the dominance, but I was fully committed in 2019 to swinging for upside (totally reaching for Lamar in round 7 and Andrews in round 10), and not burning any picks nor roster spots on low upside options nor handcuffs. I've only ever won by being aggressive, and when I make a conservative pick, I usually regret it later.

Harvey's ADP is 60 while Charbs is 110. Not even close. What are we actually comparing here.

It comes down to if you like the player or not and what you are willing to pay. 110 is reasonable for Charbs if you want to go that route. Also sorry if this is derailing. We should really take this to a separate thread.

Achane and Wright are good options to pair.

 

[bluemanfoo]

Sorry, but I can’t see a world where Wright is usable without an injury. Even if the same is true about Charbs, there is no indication of Wright being better than Charbs.

Charbs has proven to have production when Walker was out, so I would say most would value him more than Wright.

I just believe handcuffing is a bad use of roster spots and in Charbs case, bad use of draft capital on top of it.

In most cases, it can be. In the case of Walker / Charbonnet, it is not. First of all, you can get Walker later than he should go due to injury concerns.
Second, Charbonnet is worth his ADP. He is an instant RB1 if Walker were to miss time.

I LOVE handcuffing RB's when there is a clear RB1 and a backup who has the ability to produce RB1 numbers if needed.

Outside of Seattle, the only team that comes close is Atlanta in my opinion.

I'd much rather draft three or four RBs I love rather than draft two RBs I love and their handcuffs. In the former build, I've often had three good to great RBs. If one gets hurts or one just flat out disappoints, usually I've been ok to still firing on all cylinders. In the latter strategy, I'll have at most two starting RBs in any given week. And if one of those rushing offenses stinks, I've doubled my pain, and have no "outs". Handcuffing is a terrible strategy IMO.

Who said two? If you draft four total RB's and one happens to be Walker, Charbonnet is a must. Then you draft an RB2 and RB3 like you normally would.

Drafting two RB's and two handcuffs is not at all what I suggested.

Charbs a must? Not even close to a must in my mind. I'd much much much rather roster a third option that has weekly upside, and I 'd rather use that ninth round pick on my first QB or TE.

If you own Walker, Charbonnet is a must.

Nope. I'd much rather shoot for guys with weekly upside. In my first league, sizable chance Walker or Achane get hurt, yet I'd still rather pin my chances on RJ Harvey stepping up by then. Because if RJ Harvey emerges, he not just steps in when one of my primary RBs gets hurt, I can also start him in flex. I don't shy away from talented RBs with the injury prone label and, it's odd to many, but I don't handcuff. For example, in 2019, I took Saquon, Aaron Jones, Fournette with my first three picks. All talented but all considered injury prone. Saquon battled a high ankle sprain most of the season and was a bust. Aaron Jones had the best season his career, finishing RB2 overall. Fournette was great at his 3rd round ADP and finished around RB7 overall. Despite Saquon busting at #1 overall, that was my most dominant team ever. Yeah, my Lamar/Andrews stack had a lot to do with the dominance, but I was fully committed in 2019 to swinging for upside (totally reaching for Lamar in round 7 and Andrews in round 10), and not burning any picks nor roster spots on low upside options nor handcuffs. I've only ever won by being aggressive, and when I make a conservative pick, I usually regret it later.

I don't believe in handcuffing in the natural sense of drafting the next man up for an RB I own. This post is everything though. I prefer not to be married to an entire position for one team.

Yeah, my personal experience has flat out told me handcuffing is a terrible strategy. Despite that innately learned intuition, it's not very easy to communicate why it's so bad, but your wording helped me clarify the reasoning in my head. People think by handcuffing they are minimizing risk, but they are often doing the opposite. If you devote two draft picks and two rosters spots to one starting backfield, it better damn be worth it, because you are "married" to one team's backfield at that point. After devoting all those resources to one backfield, you are crippled if that team's rushing game sucks.

Note that I play redraft for the most part. If you have a ton of roster spots in dynasty, it's a different "equation."

 

[3nOut]

Let’s get this thread bc ack on topic.

I think the Waller acquisition helps Achane even more. He is good enough to take some attention away from Achane but not enough to make a significant fantasy impact.