Christopher Harris' Fantasy Football Mailbag Week 9

Join Christopher Harris live on VICE Sports' Facebook page on Sunday at noon ET to ask him your game day fantasy questions, and for fantasy football advice based on film review every single weekday from now until 2017, listen to the Harris Football Podcast at www.HarrisFootball.com.

Paul: What are your thoughts on LeGarrette Blount with Dion Lewis getting healthy?

First off, there's no guarantee Dion Lewis is actually getting healthy. I think Lewis is probably worth owning in most leagues, but let's be clear that this frenzy over him is stemming from a Boston Herald column proclaiming that the Patriots are "holding out hope" he can play in Week 10. And I am holding out hope that Jessica Chastain will see me across a crowded room and be smitten. Neither is a sure thing.

However, I grant the premise: If Lewis is healthy, what does it do to Blount's value? There could be some small negative effect, but these guys play the same position in name only. Lewis had 49 carries last year, and 17 of those were classified as "up the middle." "Up the middle" is Blount's bailiwick. Lewis caught 36 balls in six starts; Blount has caught six balls in seven starts so far in 2016. In other words, there's room for both guys. (James White's value, on the other hand, would be crushed if Lewis were ready to reassume a major role.)

Blount's problem isn't Dion Lewis or James White stealing his production. His problem is that there will be games where New England won't smash him repeatedly into a brick wall, and just won't just him much. In two of Tom Brady's four games this year, Blount has been terrible (he saved himself last week with a touchdown), and that's because when he's not the clock-killer, he's really just another guy. Dude has nine rushing TDs on pace for 18, and we can't take that away from him, but he's still a scary player to count on some weeks.

Travis: How much less fluid is the Bears' backfield situation after that Jordan Howard blowup game? Does he have a long leash now?

In a word: no. Sure, Howard's coaches gushed about his 202 scrimmage yards Monday night against a rugged Vikings defense, and they should: there might not have been a less expected outcome all year. But the performance was predicated on a 69-yard run on the Bears' third offensive play on which the secondary made huge mistakes, and a 49-yard reception on a funky shovel pass—and great play by Jay Cutler—that feels unlikely to recur. Otherwise it was 84 yards on 28 touches, which is still fine, and I thought Howard looked rugged and powerful and good, but I also have seen Chicago's offense operate all year and I don't believe they have many repeats of this performance ahead of them. My guess is they'll probably struggle again as soon as Week 10 against Tampa Bay; Howard will be one whipping boy and we'll head right back to a rotation of sorts with Ka'Deem Carey and Jeremy Langford.

If I'm a Howard owner, I'm cool with using him next time out because he should get first crack and if he performs well again, maybe the leash does get legitimately long. But I also would think about trading Howard away now, because it's hard to sell him as a truly elite talent and it's hard to sell his offensive as being likely to support a fantasy star at running back.

Sean: Is James Starks only a deep-league stash, or does he belong in the class of players who should be stashed in most leagues right now?

I'm stashing Starks wherever I can, and it feels dirty. I've always thought he should be a better player, but he's been the NFL seven years. This is probably what he is. A big, strong athlete with good feet and decent quickness, Starks just makes mistakes. He can look awesome for a quarter or a half, but a fumble is coming, a dropped pass is coming—it never fails.

That said, the Packers need a running game. I get it, Ty Montgomery is practicing as a running back, and maybe he can handle some of the small-back work in Green Bay. But eventually someone needs to do some banging. Starks is 6'2" and 218 pounds. If he becomes Aaron Rodgers's goal-line caddie, he's gonna work his way into the RB2 conversation. It's worth taking a look. I'm not saying his knee will be right, and I'm not saying every fantasy team should own him. But at least one team in every fantasy league can own James Starks.

Jim: What do you make of the 49ers' running back mess this week?

I can make a hat, a brooch, a pterodactyl…

At this point, as of Thursday night, I did remove Carlos Hyde from my Week 9 ranks. His shoulder injury apparently hasn't healed enough yet for him to take contact in practice and it won't be a surprise if he's ruled out for a sweet-looking matchup against the Saints. If he's in there, you use him. But if not, Jim, I agree: what's left behind is a mess.

You can almost guarantee that the 49ers will employ some kind of rotation in their backfield, and you won't know who to use. There's DuJuan Harris, who's small and quick but even in a best case could lose short touchdowns. There's Mike Davis, a bruiser who banged in a short score in Week 7 but has nothing resembling quickness. There's Shaun Draughn who's somewhere in between but barely played in Week 7. My first choice might be Harris because he's the guy I consider likeliest to break longer plays, but there's also a chance he's third string. For as nice a matchup as the New Orleans rush defense should be, it would be tough to trust any of these fellows.

Scott: I think owners should be able to sub a rostered player for an injured one early in a game. You?

NOOOOOOOOOO! Scott! C'mon! You can't mean this!

Maybe this should be a moment when I offer a hot take about how this is the thinking that comes from a generation raised where everybody gets a trophy, but hell, everyone got a trophy when I was a kid, too. Trophies are nice for kids. Still, I hate the mindset that goes, "No fair! The vagaries of life have infringed upon my best-laid plans! I want a do-over!" The awful truth, though, is that NFL.com has already thought of this. They've introduced something called Roster Options: in exchange for paying more money for your fantasy team, you can swap out a starter for a bench guy and get more points. This is just horrendous.

I remember reading a story during the poker boom about a subset of online players who wouldn't award a pot based on how a full hand actually played out. They'd all make their bets and bluffs and stuff, and then the cards would come out, and they'd give the money to the player who made the highest-percentage play, foregoing "bad beats" and "sucking out." The player with the best mathematical odds of winning the hand won the hand. Argh! Not quite as bad, but still awful, are fantasy football leagues who have rules where every team plays every other team every week, and you get a win or a loss against every other team. So now you don't have to worry about being the second-highest-scoring squad who's unlucky enough to face the highest-scoring team. And then also somebody pre-chews your food and puts it into your mouth with a glass pipette.

No! Poker without luck is Legos! Fantasy without luck is boring! You need the life lesson of having Mark Ingram fumble on his first carry and getting benched. It makes you tougher! I agree, some things in fantasy are too random, which is why I advocate eliminating kickers in every league. (No joke, I really do.) But letting people undo decisions they slaved away on all week? Sad!

Want to read more stories like this from VICE Sports? Subscribe to our daily newsletter.