1) Blake Bortles ($8100) is actually more expensive than Drew Brees ($7900) now that we know about the latter’s foot injury.
If Brees plays, is he going to be effective? On the other side, Bortles looks tempting as quarterbacks are largely putting up points against New Orleans, but $8100 seems high for him. Are either of these guys worth a start?
Chad Parsons: Bortles is in my top-5 quarterback values for the week and will have a decent chunk of cash game action, plus a couple variations of tournament stacks with Allen Robinson and Julius Thomas. The Saints are bad enough on defense to warrant Bortles' exposure even at his elevated price.
Maurile Tremblay: Brees was too risky for me to start in any Thursday contests, but by the time Sunday rolls around, if Brees is announced as the starter, yes, I think he'll be effective and he's a good value for his salary. That game will not be a defensive struggle. I like both quarterbacks in it as GPP plays.
Andrew Garda: I like the Bortles play for the reasons stated above - I think with his weapons Bortles has become a decent GPP player and not a bad cash guy. I am worried about Brees — he's one of the few players I am concerned about getting extra rest. Worse if he is a late inactive, you're screwed and stuck with him. Add to all that he could go down in mid-game - his foot injury is a very painful one and if the game gets out of hand, I could see a change.
I'll likely avoid him this weekend and hunt for better value.
Alex Miglio: Bortles is a cash game option for me this week just about anywhere. That Saints defense is awful, and Bortles can score points with his legs to boot. I like the idea of Drew Brees having a big game in a shootout -- something Vegas is predicting, it seems -- but his foot injury is scaring me off any Saints players this week. There is too much risk there.
2) What are some of the value plays at running back that you like this week?
Parsons: David Johnson at $6,100 stands out of the higher-priced options. He is the top-scoring running back in the entire NFL since taking over the lead role in Arizona. On the cheap, give me Karlos Williams at $3,000 with LeSean McCoy out.
Tremblay: The top values this week are all backups whose salaries haven't caught up with their status as starters. David Johnson, Karlos Williams, and Denard Robinson are all good plays in both cash games and GPPs. Kendall Gaskins is an intriguing GPP play. He's dirt cheap at just $2,000 and has nice upside potential against the Lions.
Garda: I'm still trying to figure out how David Johnson continues to be under-valued from a price standpoint. As Chad points out, he's the most productive guy since taking over and I would add Green Bay's run defense isn't tremendous. Denard Robinson and Kendall Gaskins are two more - I especially like Gaskins because I think people will avoid him due to a lack of name recognition and a bad San Francisco team.
Miglio: I agree with Andrew, Kendall Gaskins is a great under-the-radar play this week. The Lions aren't great on defense, and he could find himself with double-digit targets from Blaine "Checkdown" Gabbert. Karlos Williams is another great choice, though he will be much more obvious.
3) At $8200, is Doug Baldwin priced to the point where he’s lost too much value or do you expect his hot streak to continue against St. Louis this week?
Tremblay: He's no longer a value, but he's still okay to stick in a few GPP lineups because of his upside potential.
Garda: He's now questionable and in a late game on Sundfay - I think that's no bueno. Like Maurile said, he's not a value much but could be worth a play if you feel confiendent he'll be around in the late start. I will probably look elsewhere in tourneys and be careful otherwise.
Miglio: I was off Doug Baldwin this week, and that was before Pete Carroll said he could be a game-time decision. The Rams haven't given up a ton of fantasy points to receivers this year, including just 35 yards to Baldwin earlier in the year. I realize that's before Baldwin's mid-year apotheosis, but the Seahawks are going to score points elsewhere this week.
4) Jameis Winston ($6600) and Matt Stafford ($6400) all have nice matchups. Which do you have the most faith in and which do you have the biggest doubts about?
Parsons: I will go Jameis Winston, at home against Chicago, with Mike Evans and Austin Seferian-Jenkins. Plus Winston has a knack for being hyper-efficient with his rushing near the goal line and on third downs. If Calvin Johnson were his healthy and productive self, Stafford would be more appealing. Plus Detroit will not need much to maintain a lead against the overmatched 49ers.
Tremblay: I like Stafford substantially better than Winston. He's got better (and healthier) weapons in the passing game, and the Lions offense usually produces a significantly higher pass-run ratio than the Buccaneers.
Garda: I'm split between the two - Stafford has the higher name recognition and perhaps a higher ownership while Winston has a slightly tougher matchup. Add to it the fact that, for Stafford, Calvin Johnson is not looking right nor effective. In the end, while Stafford might be a more reliable option overall, I don't like his offensive weapons like I do Winston's - if Megatron was effective I'd feel different but he's not so I don't.
Miglio: I'm on the other side of the fence from Maurile -- I like Winston a bit more if only because he is second in the league in rushing touchdowns. Matthew Stafford has a history of bitter fantasy disappointment -- yes, that is a fancy advanced statistic -- and the 49ers haven't been totally awful on defense as of late.
