ShareThis Page
Fantasy sports podcast: Chris Archer frustrations, Josh Bell’s bombs, Mitch Keller call-up? | TribLIVE.com
Breakfast With Benz

Fantasy sports podcast: Chris Archer frustrations, Josh Bell’s bombs, Mitch Keller call-up?

Tim Benz
1203695_web1_GTR-Bucs01-052219
Christopher Horner | Tribune-Review
Pirates pitcher Chris Archer delivers against the Rockies Tuesday, May 21, 2019, at PNC Park.

It’s our weekly fantasy sports podcast with Jeff Erickson of Rotowire. There’s a ton of baseball to discuss.

I don’t like “the opener” concept. I’ll get Erickson’s opinion, and he’ll tell us the fantasy impact.

Significant call-ups across the league are taking place. Pirates farmhand Mitch Keller could be next.

We talk about why the Pirates may be interested in Clint Frazier and Josh Bell’s continued power surge. Bell almost may be playing too well. He could stop seeing good pitches. Perhaps Bell can offset some dip in power production with walks.

Then there is the Chris Archer disappointment. Well, that’s if you believed in him as a fantasy owner in the first place. Erickson didn’t. He tells us why.


LISTEN: Chris Archer frustration, Josh Bell, Mitch Keller

The Pirates are getting no help offensively at catcher. But no one else is, either. In fact, catcher has largely been a wasteland for fantasy owners across MLB.

Elsewhere, the Mets are dealing with a slew of injuries. And they aren’t alone. Check out some of the guys banged up in Boston and Chicago.

Plus, a little NFL talk with minicamps underway. Specifically, the Le’Veon Bell fallout in New York after that front-office shake up.

Tim Benz is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Tim at [email protected] or via Twitter. All tweets could be reposted. All emails are subject to publication unless specified otherwise.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.