Fantasy sports podcast: How RB holdouts affect drafts; Pirates free fall |
Breakfast With Benz

Fantasy sports podcast: How RB holdouts affect drafts; Pirates free fall

Tim Benz
Dallas Cowboys running back Ezekiel Elliott (21) winds up to throw the ball at the wall after reaching the end zone during workouts at the team’s NFL football training facility in Frisco, Texas, Thursday, June 13, 2019.

In this week’s fantasy sports podcast, Jeff Erickson of Rotowire helps guide us through draft advice.

The most pressing question this year is similar to one at this time a season ago: Do I draft a holdout running back in the first round?

Last year, it was Le’Veon Bell. This year, it’s Ezekiel Elliott and Melvin Gordon.

Erickson is starting to get concerned about the situations in Dallas and Los Angeles. He’ll give you advice on different options to take if you are uncertain about getting burned in the same way owners were by Bell a year ago.

The two of us dive into what we’ll be able to glean from the Steelers in the preseason and how that should influence your drafts.

This week, Bell compared himself to a forgotten star returning after a long absence as if LeBron James had vanished and come back. Is he right? Erickson seems optimistic about what he will be able to produce with the Jets.

There are offensive line concerns in Cleveland. Should fantasy drafters be wary to the degree that they stay away from skill-position guys.

Then we wrap up by talking baseball, specifically how the Pirates appear to be the cure for what ails any struggling baseball player … or opposing team.

And we marvel at the consistency of Christian Yelich.

LISTEN: How running back holdouts impact fantasy drafts

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 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.