Week 5 is here and I can’t remember a time when so many injuries have devastated the early season for fantasy owners everywhere – don’t panic, but start to consider it if you don’t win this week – lol – let the games begin!

Drop me your Fantasy Questions @ papaweimer50@hotmail.com

Papa Weimer-
So I have Westbrook, Rudi, and Fred Taylor on my roster and that’s it. I can start 2 RBs w/ the option of a 3rd in a WR/RB slot. Receiver-wise I am a bit light DJack, Reggie Wayne, Chambers and Isaac Bruce. I feel like I can get by with my receivers but I NEED RB help. I noticed Leon Washington, Kenny Watson and Earnest Graham are all available via the waiver wire in my league and I am in the number 1 waiver spot. What are your thoughts regarding the severity of the injuries to RJ and BW in relation to picking up 2 of those guys from waivers to fill in? Any sleeper waiver wire picks for WRs in your crystal ball? Thanks Papa – Mike Minninger in Bellingham, WA

I sure like Graham a lot more now that Cadillac is out for the season, but seeing recent reports of the Bucs doing everything in their power to get another running back doesn’t strike trust into Earnest Graham’s owners. Of the guys you listed, I like Graham’s upside the best, considering he’s young, has produced when given the chance, and the Bucs offensive line has looked good. (But remember, Luc Petitgot is out for the year as well, so it’ll be interesting to see if their back-up is worthy). I like Watson for you if Rudi doesn’t come back, and Leon Washington is a solid point producing option every single week, especially in PPR leagues – he’s a pass catching dynamo. However, this week, Westy and Johnson are on bye, so you need a runner to make 2, pairing with old man Fred Taylor. So, I’d go with Graham, because the Bucs will almost certainly rely on the run as much as possible considering the longer they have the ball, the less Peyton and company get to be on the field. That didn’t work too well for the Broncos last week, but the idea makes sense.

As for receivers, I like Jerry Porter, Mark Clayton (he’s getting dropped a lot, make yourself look good and pick him up if he’s out there), DJ Hackett (I still think that when he gets healthy, he produces well for the Hawks), and Bryant Johnson is a nice pickup this week if Boldin stays out – he’s always been good when given the chance to start. Thanks for the question Mike. And by the way, your receivers are just fine. Reggie and Chambers have been solid, and D-Jack will likely turn it around, even with Trent D heaving him the pig skin.

Papa,
In one of the leagues I play in I am the commissioner and our scoring gives -2 points to a QB if he is sacked. Last week D. McNabb scored -21 points. Three owners in my league have come to me and complained about that particular scoring. All urged me to adjust the scoring hence-forth and eliminate the -2 points for a sack to a QB. I am conflicted. I told everyone to check our scoring when signing up. Its always been rewarding for big plays but unforgiving if you suck. I want to be fair and I don’t think the owners collaborated together before speaking with me, but I also don’t think I should change my scoring system 1/4 through the season. What do you think? BK in Dallas

I think you should explain yourself on the message board just like you did to me. I think that your scoring is unique, and owners should have realized the chances they had to take with a quarterback that gets sacked a lot. I don’t think you should ever change the format of a league unless your league is being compromised because of a miscalculation in rules. For example, if your league didn’t have a waiver wire system, and it came up that waivers would make adding players more fair, than I can see a change. But in your example, the rules were the rules, and smart owners went about selecting their teams based on the rules you had. I think its very fair to keep them the way the are. Plus, its not like you are trying to screw any teams – you are just being fair. I’d try to stick to your guns, and explain that the rules have always been as such, and you think the ability to not kill your offensive drive by getting rid of the ball is an important aspect of quarterbacking. Thus, negative for sacks is a good idea. Its the same for every team, its not like any one team is getting an unfair deal.

I like your stat. Keep it how it is. But even if I didn’t like it, I think its only fair to keep things the way they have been since the beginning of the year.

I recently got a trade offer netting me Derek Ward and Shaun McDonald if I give up Caddy and Troy Williamson. I’m in a dynasty league where we keep everyone, and I can IR Caddy and pick someone else up. I’m 1-3, and it looks like I’m out of the running this year. I think Ward and McD are as high as they’ll get. I’ve already had Deuce go down for the year, but I still have Portis. Do you think this is worth the risk building for the future? – Arse in Ireland

I’m glad I can touch people in so many countries. Arse, I may be in the minority here, but I think that is a good deal for you. It kind of puts a few too many cards guys with serious knee problems, but I think the Caddy deal is worth the risk, plus you don’t lose much. Some stat-collectors may look at Shaun and Ward and see two starters, but with the foursome of receivers in Detroit, the smart money would be on McDonald leveling off. Also, Brandon Jacobs comes back this week, and if anything, he’ll get half the carries and all the goal-line looks, making Wards value about half what it is now. I still think Jacobs is going to be a beast this year, especially with the Giants playing better of late. Ward will get his carries, but Jacobs will eventually be a 20-25 carry a game guy, and that doesn’t leave much room for Mr. Ward. You don’t lose much, and while Caddy’s injury looks bad, (some have said career threatening) the best case scenario is worth the risk for a guy in your position.

Which of these “quality” quarterbacks would you start this week. Rank them from best option to worse if you can be so kind; Trent Green, Derek Anderson, Joey Harrington, Damon Huard, and Steve “Air” McNair. Let me know. – David Balog in Detroit

I’d go with Joey Harrington first, I believe. He’s been playing well over the past two games, and his confidence has never been higher. That doesn’t mean he won’t slip into an instant state of depression and start throwing outs to the defense this week, but it’s the best option you have. Next, I’d go with Damon Huard: he has Eddie Kennison back this week as a #2 receiver, which is exactly what Eddie should have been his whole career. He has Dwayne Bowe, who is everything I thought he would be. Plus he has Tony Gonzalez and a solid run-defense that will be spending most of their game preparation trying to stop Larry Johnson. That leaves room for a couple touchdown passes, and thus Damon might be a solid start. Next would probably be Trent Green, though I hate to admit it, because he throws no passes over 25 yards, and defenses are starting to realize that even the short passes come like marshmallows. Anderson gets the next nod, but I wouldn’t go there because New England is dirty. The only reason I like him at all is because the Browns will almost surely be getting curbed all day by the Patriots, leaving them with no option but to pass. That could get him some fantasy points. The reason I rank McNair last isn’t only because he’s looked bad, old, and slow, but because I think the Ravens will finally realize that if they want to win football games, they’ll ride their running backs to the point of downright exhaustion. Something needs to click with this team. But you can bet that the Ravens and 49ers will be part of a low scorer on Sunday, giving little chance for Steve to put up big passing numbers.

Last Weeks Questions

Papa Weimer – **52 y/o – two open Heart surgeries and a nasty attitude**