Ian Allan's Mailbag
Posted Sep. 17 at 04:53 PM
Publisher Ian Allan fields your questions on strategy, how to run your league, player ratings -- and whatever else you think of. Updated every Friday during the season; Tuesdays and Fridays during the last two months of the preseason. You must be registered and signed-in to submit a mailbag question. After you sign in at the top of the page, the link to submit a mailbag question will become visible.
Question 1:
Just wondering if you are concerned with the way that Carolina used DeAngelo Williams in Week 1? I realize that it was pretty much a blowout from early in the game, but there was a point that Jonathan Stewart actually had more carries than Williams, which was baffling to say the least. I'm not sure what else Williams needed to do to get more of the workload. He was arguably the best RB in the league last year, fantasy or otherwise. Then to make it even more confusing, Stewart couldn't even get on the practice field, yet they reward him with just as much of a workload as Williams. Another reason that I found it troubling, is that they seemed to pull Williams at the goal-line early in the game, even though it was "his drive." I know that Williams received a few goal-line carries later in the game, but that was after the game was well out of reach. Please tell me this is some kind of aberration.
BRAD MARTINEZ [MARRERO, LA]
A:
I was surprised how much Stewart played. After he didn’t practice at all in August, I thought it would be more like a 3-to-1 or 4-to-1 split in playing time in this game. Now, I’m thinking it will be more of a 55-45 split in playing time between those backs. I saw the start of the Philadelphia game, and it looked they were alternating series. Williams started the game and played the first series, then Stewart came in for the second. At this point, I don’t believe that the Panthers will use Stewart as their primary goal-line runner. He had a couple of carries from inside the 3 against the Eagles, including a fourth-and-one carry. But on that same series (just after those plays), the Panthers had first-and-goal at the 1-yard line. They brought Williams into the game at that point. He likely would have scored a 1-yard TD, but they had back-to-back penalties pushing the ball back to the 6 and then the 11 (then Williams scored). I believe it will be like last year, with the goal-line carries probably spread fairly evenly between those backs. On the plus side (for those who drafted Williams), it looks like he’ll be used more as a pass catcher this year. He caught 4 passes in the opener, something he didn’t do all of last year (he had 3 catches, in fact, in only two games last year). That enhances Williams’ value in performance and PPR leagues.
Question 2:
Great job on Anthony Gonzalez.
Michael Stanco [Dania Beach, FL]
A:
I’ve been waiting for this e-mail. Frankly, I’m surprised I haven’t received more of them yet. It’s fantasy football. There is an element of luck involved. Was Tom Brady a poor draft pick last year? I don’t think so. It just worked out that way. Once Gonzalez gets healthy and has a chance to play the second half of the season, let’s see what he does. I still think he could catch 40-plus passes and 4-plus TDs in the second half of the year. And don’t forget that Indianapolis has a favorable closing schedule. If he comes up with 120 yards and 2 TDs in your championship week, maybe you won’t mind so much that he missed the first half of the season.
Question 3:
First, thanks for the heads up on Brent Celek. I picked him up in the 14th round of our draft. He lead the Eagles in receptions against the Panthers. My question concerns the Ravens running backs. I started Ray Rice this week, thinking he was going to break out. He had a good game, but Willis McGahee got the TDs and 6 more fantasy points. Is McGahee the better start moving forward?
Daniel Burks [BALTIMORE, MD]
A:
Late in the game, Rice had a 22-yard run and got knocked out at the 1-yard line. Then McGahee came in and punched in the touchdown. Had Rice finished off that run (and he really should have), you wouldn’t be writing in. And in future weeks, there will be some games – many games – that Rice scores and McGahee does not. I wouldn’t worry about it too much. Rice definitely will finish with more yards. McGahee is just a goal-line back, punching in some touchdowns from the 1- and 2-yard line. The breakdown for Baltimore’s next 10 rushing touchdowns, I think, will go something like this: Rice 4, McGahee 3, McClain 2, Flacco 1. And during that stretch, Rice might catch 1-2 TDs as well. I suggest you just hang with him.
Question 4:
Your Cheat Sheet recommended DeAngelo Williams as the No. 1 overall pick before the start of the season. I feel bad for those that actually took the advice and selected DeAngelo and actually passed on Peterson per your recommendations. Your week one redrafter is now out. Adrian Peterson is now your No. 1 overall player. Did you see the light? At what point in time did you realize your rankings needed a major adjustment. Wow. What a debacle. I realize there may have been a chance that Jonathan Stewart would not see playing time. However, Peterson's strength of schedule and just plain common sense makes you realize that he was the No. 1 player before the season started.
NEAL BHARDWAJ [LOMBARD, IL]
A:
Hindsight is 20-20. Where was this letter last week? You make it sound as if Peterson over Williams (and everyone else) was an obvious choice that everyone should have seen. And you make it sound as if anybody who simply follows strength of schedule will cakewalk to the championship in their fantasy league. That didn’t work with Tom Brady and LaDainian Tomlinson last year. After week 1, I am moving Williams down on my board. I did not envision Jake Delhomme imploding so quickly. Nor did I think Jonathan Stewart would play nearly as much, particularly this early in the season. So there’s the double-edged sword of Carolina appearing to be just a 7-9 or 8-8 type team (decreased overall rushing production) and Williams accounting for only 55-60 percent of that production. So he falls. Only positive I saw out of him in his opener is that I think they’ll use him more as a pass catcher (he will catch more passes than Peterson and Michael Turner). As for Peterson, I’m moving him up just a little on my board. He has the ability to score long runs, of course, but he’ll be spelled by Chester Taylor. I think Taylor will score 20 percent of the rushing touchdowns there, and he’ll hold down Peterson’s receiving production. Also keep in mind that while Peterson ran for 180 yards and 3 TDs against the Browns, they held him to 25 yards on 9 carries in the first half of that game. I don’t want to trash Peterson too much right now (particularly since he should post good numbers on Sunday at Detroit), but there will be defenses that contain him. And he also comes with more injury risk than most other backs. Long season; we’ll see.
Question 5:
With LaDainian Tomlinson hurt again is there any chance that Jacob Hester could be moved to running back? Sproles is too small to start every game, so what is your take on the San Diego running back situation?
JOHN SHELBROCK [FRANKENMUTH, MI]
A:
Sproles isn’t big enough to handle a large workload. He would breakdown. And Hester potentially could fill some of that role. He’s a good inside runner, so he could handle some of their goal-line work. Hester was a good short-yardage pack at Louisiana State. And he played both tailback and fullback as a rookie (I remember him running over a linebacker in a preseason game against the Cowboys – he looked real good). But the Chargers want to make Michael Bennett their No. 2 back. He hasn’t done much the last six years and is the wrong side of 30, but he’s still got very good speed. He turned a short pass into a 48-yard touchdown in a preseason game at Atlanta. I’m not promising he’ll be any good (he also averaged under 4 yards per carry in every preseason game), but I think the Chargers will give him first crack at being their No. 2 back. Maybe all three of those guys will play. Hester’s only value, I think, would be as a deep reserve in a TD-only format. Like Sproles, Bennett isn’t much of an inside banger.
Question 6:
I don't know why I waited so long before coming to you for this question, but here it goes: Did the NFL recently change the way QB kneel downs are handled in terms of team vs. individual stats? I ask because in our league, we combine rushing, receiving and passing yardage under 1 umbrella. In week 1, Peyton Manning threw for 301 yards. However, CBS Sportsline listed his total yardage as 297. I checked his stats on NFL.com, and sure enough, the difference was his rushing stats, which were 3 attempts for -4 yards. I looked at the play-by-play game log, and sure enough, Manning knelt down 3 times for -4 yards. Has it always been like this? If yes, then I'm embarrassed that I never noticed until this week, and I've been playing fantasy football for years. What are your thoughts? I appreciate your help.
ED HAYES [LISLE, IL]
A:
It’s stupid. It’s totally bogus. Those should just be non-plays – kept out of the stats. Instead, they’re logged in there, so they corrupt the actual numbers. In the case of the Colts, instead of their running game finishing with 75 yards on 28 carries (they’re actual result), it shows as 71 yards on 31 attempts. So their yards-per-carry average drops from an awful 2.7 to an even-worst 2.3. But that’s the way they’ve always done it.
Question 7:
In my 10-team PPR league we bid on free agents. Everyone in the league started off with $100 to use. Earlier today, one of the owners felt it was in their best interest to drop Marshawn Lynch. I'm not sure if you're familiar with this kind of waiver format, but would have to bid $50 or more on a player like Lynch. My current bid is only $26, but I don’t usually make any moves throughout the year, and my depth is pretty solid.
Jared Cravy [Vallejo, CA]
A:
As Lynch serves his suspension, Fred Jackson is showing that he’s a viable player. Jackson played very well against the Patriots, and I expect him to lead the Bills to a win at home against Tampa Bay on Sunday. I do not expect, therefore, that Buffalo will just kick him to curb when Lynch returns. I expect Jackson will continue to get something like 30-40 percent of the work all season. So when late September rolls around, I expect Lynch at that time at best will be a top-15 running back on your board. So whatever you think a top 15-20 running back is worth, I suggest you bid that amount. There will be some other good players who come along during the season.
Question 8:
What do you think of Pierre Garcon's potential for the next 2-15 weeks? Should I consider starting him in PPR over Justin Gage, Ted Ginn, Kevin Walter depending on matchups?
Jered Ottenwess [NEWBERRY, FL]
A:
Maybe he develops into somebody good enough to toss into a lineup a couple of times, but I doubt it. Hardly even worth putting on a roster in most fantasy formats, I think.
Question 9:
You are on record (with good reason) saying that great running backs tend to show their talent right away. We saw that to some extent last year with Forte, Chris Johnson and Slaton (when he played). Based upon this assumption, which running back's performance (Moreno, Donald Brown, LeSean McCoy, Beanie Wells) caught your eye?
Farhan Hassan [SAINT PAUL, MN]
A:
Wells definitely passes the eyeball test. Every time they put him out there, he breaks tackles and gains yards. He will not, however, catch many passes. Donald Brown, I think, will prove to be a better back than Joseph Addai. It would not surprise me if Brown finishes with better numbers this year. Moreno looked pretty good on his first few carries of the preseason, so I’m not writing him off yet. (But I think he’s stuck in a committee situation in Denver for the foreseeable future). I believe McCoy is a cut below those backs; he’s more of a lesser back who’s an injury away from being a full-time player. There is no mention in this letter, by the way, of Bernard Scott. I want the record to show that I believe Scott is the real deal and will make an impact in this league at some point.
Question 10:
If you had to draft second-string QBs, who would be your top 5 choices? In other words, if the starter got injured which QBs would be as good or better and post good fantasy stats?
Randall Weiss [MERRITT ISLAND, FL]
A:
You have to be careful how you rank them. Do you want the guys most likely to get on the field? Certainly Josh Freeman (Tampa Bay) and Kyle Boller (St. Louis) will start games this year. Or are you looking for players who’ll great stats? Mark Brunell might post the best numbers of any No. 2 – since he’s in that great system – but I don’t think he’ll play. I think you’re looking for a balance of the two. Guys on my list include Matt Leinart, Daunte Culpepper, Rex Grossman, Matt Flynn and Charlie Batch. Those are the five I would consider.
Question 11:
Your Projected Win Totals For Each Team is an excellent predicting tool. Please publish the list sorted by week rather than team. Also, do you plan to update the model at any point during the season? Thank you for nearly twenty years of superior products and services.
DOUGLAS EISEMANN [SPRINGFIELD, VA]
A:
It’s something I keep around. I’ll update it again soon, now that we’re learning more about the different teams. After the openers, I think I’m too low on Tennessee – they looked really good at Pittsburgh. And I may be too high on the Patriots, Chargers and Colts; they didn’t really look like Super Bowl material in their first games.
Question 12:
I did an abysmal job with my draft, and now I have Anthony Gonzalez dinged up. So my in-season management will be even more crucial if I am to defend my league championship. My admittedly weak RBs are Rice, Sproles and Washington (start 2, basic TD league with bonuses for kick/punt return TDs). Yeah I know that overreacting to Week 1 results is a no-no. I also know from experience that sometimes you need to jump quickly on the waiver wire for guys potentially poised for a bigger year than expected, else miss the opportunity altogether. Michael Bush and Mike Bell are on waivers. I hate to give up on ole' Leon so quickly, but also would hate to see either Bush or Bell go on to score 10 TDs and have missed out on the opportunity. What say you? Do I make the switch for either?
Matt Tinker [ORLEANS, VT]
A:
I wouldn’t go for Bush. I think McFadden will get some of the short-yardage rushing touchdowns there. And how many rushing touchdowns are the Raiders going to score, anyway? Bell has plenty of upside. It would be nice to work him onto your roster. If Pierre Thomas or Reggie Bush has some kind of physical setback (and neither guy has been durable), than Bell could be the steal/sleeper of the year. But Washington is solid player; he’ll play a bigger role this year, and I expect he’ll return a couple of kicks for touchdowns. I would like to see you add Bell without sacrificing Washington – maybe ride without a backup tight end or kicker if that is an option, or release one of your backup wide receivers.
Question 13:
I'm in a 12-team PPR league that must start a rookie at the flex position. I drafted both Jeremy Maclin and James Davis. Maclin didn't even touch the field last Sunday, do you know what the Eagles have inn store for this soon to be stud? They still have him listed as the 3rd WR on the depth chart, but with McNabb injured, this player now has me worried. Should I drop Maclin in favor of, say, Louis Murphy, Mike Wallace, Sammy Stroughter or Johnny Knox? Maybe someone who gets a bit more playing time. I appreciate your thoughts on this matter.
JAMES FARES [NEW LENOX, IL]
A:
They’ll start mixing Maclin in. They’ll get the ball in his hands a few times per game and hope he can make some big plays. I expect he’ll return some kickoffs. But you said PPR. For that reason, I’d go with Louis Murphy. He might lead the Raiders in receptions in the next few games. Then Chaz Schilens will be back and we’ll take it from there. But I’m not so much worried about weeks 4-5; I suggest you stick Murphy in the lineup and get some production right now.
Question 14:
In a PPR league do you make this deal. I'm offered Boldin and Rice for Fitzgerald.
Bill Petilli [MOUNT VERNON, NY]
A:
A month from now, you may look back and regret taking this deal, but I would not want to give away Fitzgerald to take on the Boldin hamstring/contract headache.
Question 15:
This year was my first fantasy draft, and looking back on things I feel like I jumped the gun on quarterback in the third round with Kurt Warner. I'm quite concerned with his health, and am wondering if it would be worth the bench spot to keep Matt Leinart around (unless of course an opportunity presents itself). What do you think?
Duke Wintermaul [seattle, WA]
A:
Sounds like a good idea. That team looks like it might just be snake bit this year. If Warner gets hurt (which certainly looks possible), it definitely would be nice to have Leinart.
Question 16:
Team quarterback in a 20-team league. I've got Buffalo. Baltimore is available. Should I take Ravens?
KENDALL HAYES [WOODBRIDGE, VA]
A:
I’ll go Ravens over Bills. I expect the Ravens to throw a couple more TD passes, and I’ve got them averaging 15 more passing yards per game. Joe Flacco looks a lot better and more confident than last year. I also think he’s less likely to get hurt than Trent Edwards (and if Edwards gets injured, the Bills will be dead in the water with Ryan Fitzpatrick.
Readers' Comments
Add a Comment
Already a registered user? Please sign in to add comments.
To add comments, you must become a registered user of our site. To register, please click here.
Question 1: Just wondering if you are...
Posted by Jacob Wilson | Sep. 17 at 10:30 PM
I don't have the magazine in front of me, but seems like it warned us about overvaluing Williams given that Stewart might get more carries some weeks...
Question 2: Great job on Anthony Gonzalez....
Posted by Jacob Wilson | Sep. 17 at 10:32 PM
He's right Allen. For 7 bucks, I expect my Fantasy "experts" to be capable of sorcery, including (but not limited to) the divining injuries.
Question 2: Great job on Anthony Gonzalez....
Posted by Paul Owers | Sep. 18 at 05:20 AM
Yeah, Ian, what were you thinking ranking Gonzalez so high when it was obvious he'd get hurt in week 1?
Question 4: Your Cheat Sheet recommended DeAngelo...
Posted by NEAL BHARDWAJ | Sep. 18 at 02:11 AM
Ian, I do agree with you that it is a long season. Also, I appreciate your hard work and dedication to the game. I am a true believer in your rankings every year and appreciate your opinion. That is why I pay the $75 every year to be a super-fan subscriber (a long-time subscriber). However, it appears (from a paying subscriber perspective) that you have pushed the panic button based on one bad week by Carolina and revised your rankings on DeAngelo Williams. Actually, Jake Delhomme imploded last year in the playoffs as well. If you recall, he had a particularly bad performance against the Cardinals. If you had any doubt about the #1 player overall, which based on your response to my question below, it seems you did. For example, the Jonathan Stewart factor, and Jake Dellhomme's bad play. DeAngelo Williams should never have been considered as the #1 player overall on your board. Unless you intentionally wanted to take the unnecessary risk by ranking DeAngelo Williams your #1 player. I believe the draft is the most important foundation for every fantasy team. There is an uneasy feeling (again from a paying client's perspective) that you would change your model after only one week of play. Throughout the preseason, your opinion was that DeAngelo Williams "special" player and ended up ranking him as your #1 player overall starting in your 09/03/09 issue. By rolling the dice with DeAngelo Williams as your #1 player overall before season, and then deciding seven days later in your 09/15/09 re-drafter issue that Adrian Peterson is your #1 overall player is extremely unfair to subscribers. It would be safe to say that the vast majority of your subscribers had already held their drafts prior to you changing your mind and dropping DeAngelo Williams in your rankings. It almost appears as if you lost confidence in your rankings after only one week. As a serious fantasy football player, and most importantly a paying subscriber I find this extremely concerning. I would like to have confidence in your rankings every week. However my confidence seems to be diminishing after your condescending answer below. I personally would never speak to paying clients in that manner. Regards, Neal Bhardwaj
Question 4: Your Cheat Sheet recommended DeAngelo...
Posted by IAN ALLAN | Sep. 18 at 02:25 AM
You make it sound as I was trumpeting all along that Williams was light years ahead of the other running backs. If you go back and look at the August newsletters, I think you'll see many mentions of the top backs being almost interchangeable. I believe that Williams, Peterson, Michael Turner, Maurice Jones-Drew and Matt Forte all, at one point or another, were ranked No. 1 in at least one of three scoring systems we track. So a small development will quickly move the player inside that group.
Question 4: Your Cheat Sheet recommended DeAngelo...
Posted by ANDY RICHARDSON | Sep. 18 at 02:33 AM
Neal, I think you're being a little unfair. There are doubts about every player who could have been ranked No. 1. With Peterson, there was the question of how much work would Chester Taylor get, would he play on all passing downs, would/will Favre throw more short TD flips around the goal line than Peterson get carries, etc. There's also the injury risk associated with him, which is greater than some other backs. The thing the preseason updates said repeatedly was that there was little difference among the top handful of running backs -- they all had pluses and minuses, and the top guy wasn't head and shoulders above the next one. At the time Williams was ranked No. 1, Jonathan Stewart was sidelined with an Achilles injury that might have lingered into the season. Then the games come, and Stewart was fine, and he's alternating series with Williams. Shouldn't the rankings change? It's not "bailing on a pick," it's adjusting the stat projections -- in this case the amount of work Williams would get compared to Stewart -- based on new information. Time and developments change all the rankings; I think it would be worse for people if Ian ignored new developments as they came up and said, Williams was No. 1 in late August, he should be No. 1 until he gets hurt or something. Of course everyone has drafted now, but the ReDrafter is used in making trades over the course of the season -- relative values of players to each other. I don't know. I think the important thing is that rankings of certain players can be defended at the time they're ranked there. They'll continue to change based on unpredictable developments (Stewart going from not even practicing to playing as if he wasn't even hurt) each week. I think it'd be worse if they didn't.
Question 4: Your Cheat Sheet recommended DeAngelo...
Posted by Miguel Tames | Sep. 18 at 10:02 AM
I don't think that reply was condescending at all. He's just defending himself against your accusations. It would be even more of an insult to paying subscribers if Ian ignored new information and just trotted out the same rankings every week. I had quite a few conversations with fantasy football owners right before drafts about how Jonathan Stewart's injury and lack of practice time was moving Williams into top 3 in many regular and mock drafts. At the time the number 1 slow was justified. Now? Not so much and the rankings reflect that. What more do you want??
Question 4: Your Cheat Sheet recommended DeAngelo...
Posted by Farhan Hassan | Sep. 18 at 02:31 PM
About three (3) weeks ago, I traded for Jonathan Stewart in a keeper league, so perhaps I am a little biased, but I never thought that DeAngelo Williams should be ranked higher than AP. I know that Stewart hardly practiced in the last month; DeAngelo had an amazing run in the preseason game (I think Ian alluded to it in a newsletter); and of course, DeAngelo had 20 touchdown last year. However, I prefer analysts who go against the grain with some level of rational reasoning so I thought it was bold (and by the way, it could still prove to be right) that DeAngelo was ranked #1. Almost anyone can tell you that AP is special but I want to read someone's opinion on why someone else could be better. However, I am not sure that once such an opinion is given, that we blindly follow it, especially when we are talking about two top 5 running backs in pretty much any format.
Question 4: Your Cheat Sheet recommended DeAngelo...
Posted by NEAL BHARDWAJ | Sep. 19 at 03:05 AM
Andy and Ian, The point I am trying to make is that the #1 player overall in rankings dropped to #8 after only one week. There are 16 weeks left in the season (15 in most fantasy formats). It's only one week! I am not saying that the rankings should not change over the course of the season. Of course they should. I also understand that the redrafter is used to make trades. I am simply stating that it appears that the Fantasy Index team pushed the panic button after only one week and changed your #1 player to the obvious (Adrian Peterson). If you truly believed DeAngelo was the best player on the board, then he should still be your #1 player after only one week. How can you overreact to one week? I also understand you are defensive regarding your rankings, but how hard is it to say, "We made a mistake and overvalued DeAngelo Williams in our preseason rankings"?. You went against the grain and took a risk, it just didn't work out. If I selected DeAngelo Williams with the #1 overall pick in my fantasy draft (based on your rankings) and subsequently offered you DeAngelo Williams for Adrian Peterson, you would not make the trade. So, now according to your redrafter rankings, I made a major gaff and selected DeAngelo Williams with my #1 pick.
Question 4: Your Cheat Sheet recommended DeAngelo...
Posted by ANDY RICHARDSON | Sep. 20 at 12:06 AM
Neal, I know it doesn't solve anything, but the rankings are generated from statistical projections. At the time DeAngelo was No. 1, the statistical projections had him getting a much larger share of the offense than the gimpy Jonathan Stewart. Once week 1 occurs, and it looks like more of a 60-40 split, Williams' projections change and so does his spot in the rankings. Stewart wasn't even able to practice a week before the season; giving him almost half the workload then wouldn't have made sense. Doing so after week 1, unfortunately, did make sense, because that's what happened. Leaving Williams at No. 1 when new information made it fairly clear it would be more a timeshare than it seemed just before the season would have been a greater disservice, I think.
Question 6: I don't know why I...
Posted by MARTIN DONNELLY | Sep. 17 at 10:32 PM
It's 3 carries for -4 yards. It's NOT stupid or inaccurate. Just stop with your rotissorie baseball, fractional, standard scoring sensibilities and man up.
Question 6: I don't know why I...
Posted by ANDY RICHARDSON | Sep. 17 at 11:47 PM
It is kind of stupid. It's not really a "carry," anymore than a spike to stop the clock is really a pass attempt. I think it comes down to what statistics are for. I think rushing statistics are to tell us how the Colts' running game performed. Adding in those three kneel downs for -4 yards doesn't do that.
Question 6: I don't know why I...
Posted by MICHAEL MURILLO | Sep. 19 at 09:36 PM
I think kneel-downs are fair "runs." The team uses it as a carry and purposely ends it early and keeps the clock running. They do it on purpose, just like a spike. They want it to be an incomplete pass and gain the benefit of the clock stopping. It's lame for us but to not count it in official stats would be wrong imo. The team intentionally "carries" or "passes" the ball in that manner and wants them to be counted that way, gaining the benefits that go along with it. And to the guy who has Warner and is concerned, I totally agree that having Leinart on the roster would provide some serious peace of mind. I don't put too much stock in backup QBs if I have a big name starter, but if I had Warner I'd make room for Leinart.
Question 8: What do you think of...
Posted by Jered Ottenwess | Sep. 18 at 12:12 AM
I asked the question because I value the opinion I'll receive. But how do you reconcile the fact that Gonzalez was supposed to be a top-10 WR and now that he's out possible until November, someone has to take over his coveted position? Why won't Garcon at least put up top-30 numbers if he's the guy starting at the Z position?
Question 14: In a PPR league do...
Posted by Scot Woods | Sep. 17 at 11:16 PM
I think Ian missed the part about Ray Rice being in that deal... Fitz. is the best player of the three in that deal, obviously, but it's also true that in games where Boldin and Fitz are both playing, their stats are nearly equal. Personally, I'd do it in a heartbeat, but the dynamics of each league are very different.