Starting Gibbs AND Montgomery? (1 Viewer)

[thegreatr1]

12-team, Non-PPR, Redraft, No-Flex.

I nabbed Gibbs in the draft, jumped out to a 6-1 start, and traded for Monty on the cheap while he was out hurt thinking I had a top-5 guy upon return. Now I'm staring down Gibbs, Monty, and Mixon for my two RB slots. Dare I start BOTH Lions RBs this week/each week? I feel like that limits upside...but if they're 50/50 and both popping off for 15+ a game, I'm not entirely sure that's even true. Worth noting, I have both Mixon and Chase, so starting the two of them is a round-about upside limitation as well.

 

[eighsse2]

12-team, Non-PPR, Redraft, No-Flex.

I nabbed Gibbs in the draft, jumped out to a 6-1 start, and traded for Monty on the cheap while he was out hurt thinking I had a top-5 guy upon return. Now I'm staring down Gibbs, Monty, and Mixon for my two RB slots. Dare I start BOTH Lions RBs this week/each week? I feel like that limits upside...but if they're 50/50 and both popping off for 15+ a game, I'm not entirely sure that's even true. Worth noting, I have both Mixon and Chase, so starting the two of them is a round-about upside limitation as well.

I would not feel bad at all starting Montgomery and Gibbs. But I might go with Mixon and Gibbs instead. I don't see a wrong answer.

 

[thegreatr1]

Apologies, thought I was in the Assistance Coach thread!

 

[foxco]

If you can work Craig Reynolds in at flex then I'd be super impressed.

 

[eighsse2]

If you can work Craig Reynolds in at flex then I'd be super impressed.

I'd be beyond impressed seeing as it's a no-flex league.

 

[kyoun1e]

12-team, Non-PPR, Redraft, No-Flex.

I nabbed Gibbs in the draft, jumped out to a 6-1 start, and traded for Monty on the cheap while he was out hurt thinking I had a top-5 guy upon return. Now I'm staring down Gibbs, Monty, and Mixon for my two RB slots. Dare I start BOTH Lions RBs this week/each week? I feel like that limits upside...but if they're 50/50 and both popping off for 15+ a game, I'm not entirely sure that's even true. Worth noting, I have both Mixon and Chase, so starting the two of them is a round-about upside limitation as well.

Drafted Monty late. Traded for Gibbs just before he got hurt so I could secure this backfield.

Started both last week.

Starting both again this week.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

As long as those are your two best options.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Monty 12/116/TD including a 75 yd gallop into the end zone, no receptions and Monty's game is usually more grind than it is explosive
Monty produced 17 plus any 100 yd bonuses

Gibbs 14/77/2TDs and 3/35 receiving to add to it. Should we expect 2 TDs every week from Gibbs? And the Chargers Defense seems pretty soft right now
Gibbs produced 25 in PPR

I expect this to roll back and forth some but Monty expectations should not be what we saw vs the Chargers every week.
I still see Monty more as 18/80/TD, he exceeded that last week with far fewer touches

 

[eighsse2]

As long as those are your two best options.

This is probably the best answer.

Are they the best two options?
If yes, why even consider not starting them?
If no, why even consider starting them?

 

[gucci little piggy]

I have both in my lineup. Great schedule coming up...keeping Kenneth Walker and Jaylen Warren on the bench in favor of them, at least for this week

 

[Deamon]

As long as those are your two best options.

This is probably the best answer.

Are they the best two options?
If yes, why even consider not starting them?
If no, why even consider starting them?

This. People worry way too much about players on the same team. Sure it limits upside, but also limits downside. The whole "upside is more important than downside" argument is awful. Play your best two players that you project to score the most points that week.

 

[FairWarning]

As long as those are your two best options.

This is probably the best answer.

Are they the best two options?
If yes, why even consider not starting them?
If no, why even consider starting them?

This. People worry way too much about players on the same team. Sure it limits upside, but also limits downside. The whole "upside is more important than downside" argument is awful. Play your best two players that you project to score the most points that week.

If one needs upside as an underdog, I get it. The Lions (Pitt also) looks pretty consistent and are pretty safe starts now.

 

[Deamon]

As long as those are your two best options.

This is probably the best answer.

Are they the best two options?
If yes, why even consider not starting them?
If no, why even consider starting them?

This. People worry way too much about players on the same team. Sure it limits upside, but also limits downside. The whole "upside is more important than downside" argument is awful. Play your best two players that you project to score the most points that week.

If one needs upside as an underdog, I get it. The Lions (Pitt also) looks pretty consistent and are pretty safe starts now.

"Underdog" is pretty relative. I've seen 50 point underdogs win easily. Let's say you're an underdog and want upside, so you start Mixon over Montgom. What if your QB has a monster game, and you lose because Mixon puts up a 0 and Gibson gave you that safe game that would have won you the week? There's so many outcomes, possibilities, etc in fantasy, that you just gotta play the two highest ranked guys every time.

 

[FairWarning]

As long as those are your two best options.

This is probably the best answer.

Are they the best two options?
If yes, why even consider not starting them?
If no, why even consider starting them?

This. People worry way too much about players on the same team. Sure it limits upside, but also limits downside. The whole "upside is more important than downside" argument is awful. Play your best two players that you project to score the most points that week.

If one needs upside as an underdog, I get it. The Lions (Pitt also) looks pretty consistent and are pretty safe starts now.

"Underdog" is pretty relative. I've seen 50 point underdogs win easily. Let's say you're an underdog and want upside, so you start Mixon over Montgom. What if your QB has a monster game, and you lose because Mixon puts up a 0 and Gibson gave you that safe game that would have won you the week? There's so many outcomes, possibilities, etc in fantasy, that you just gotta play the two highest ranked guys every time.

Playing upside for me would be something like you having someone out of nowhere( Irwin or Boyd) go off tonight. I would take the player with higher upside if choosing between similar rankings. I do agree as many of these work out like you say.

 

[ShamrockPride]

Leave Mixon on the bench. Short of complete studs (Mixon is not one), avoid playing Thursday guys. Those games are always a mess on the short week.