Connect with us


Week 9 Studs and Duds

This article will be a weekly series where I talk about five guys I’m looking to put into my lineup and five guys that I’m taking out, if possible. This week will only be 3 studs and 3 duds on account of all the teams on bye. These recommendations will primarily be matchup-based and will vary greatly from week to week. They could be deep plays with amazing matchups, studs with awful matchups, or anything in between. Let’s dig into Week 9 Studs and Duds and find out!  All of these recommendations assume a PPR format but would not change much, if at all, in standard scoring.


Mark Ingram (NO) vs TB – Since Adrian Peterson left, Ingram has led all running backs in PPR scoring. I don’t want to attribute it all to Peterson leaving because he wasn’t stealing many snaps or carries anyways. But, Ingram is on fire. The Saints played better defense of late and ran the ball more often. Now they get a Tampa Bay defense in week 9 that is playing very poorly. Ingram should take full advantage of this weak defense and may see a touchdown opportunity or two. He should be easily locked in as one of the studs in your lineup.

 Image result for tyreek hill

Tyreek Hill (KC) @ DAL – Hill has been pretty up and down this season and last week was definitely a down week. However, now he gets a very weak Dallas defense and could easily break off a home run play or two. With Alex Smith still playing well, Tyreek will benefit again the coming weeks. Week 9 is as good a spot as any. Dallas doesn’t have a corner that shadows or any player that can run with Hill. You still need to account for Hill’s floor with your lineup construction but Hill could be one of your week winning studs.


Larry Fitzgerald (ARI) @ SF – This more of a dig on the San Francisco defense than it is confidence in Drew Stanton. Stanton is bad, but the 49ers defense may be worse. He will likely lean heavily on Fitzgerald any time he plays, which is good news for fantasy owners. Fitzgerald accounts for 40% of Drew Stanton’s total yards and that’s not going to change. He will be peppered with targets and should have no problem getting open and giving Stanton windows to throw into. Play Larry as one of your studs this week, but you may not want to actually watch the game.


Image result for alshon jeffery eagles

Alshon Jeffery (PHI) vs DEN – Jeffrey draws both the Denver corners this week. That should be all the explanation you need. Even without them, Jeffrey has struggled to produce. He had a decent week last week but hasn’t given you the production you expected this season. Wentz also won’t be forced to target Jeffrey since he can force feed his tight-end Zach Ertz. This is even more relevant this week since tight ends have torn apart the Broncos. Fade Jeffrey in all formats.


A.J. Green (CIN) @ JAX – This one is tricky and likely my hardest decision all week. I’m not necessarily telling you to sit Green but I really would weigh all your options. The Jags have shut down opposing pass defenses this year. They are allowing the least amount of fantasy points to quarterbacks that we’ve seen in 15 years, and that, of course, affects the wide receivers. The Jags have only allowed one touchdown to wideouts this season and only Hopkins and Brown have posted top 36 weeks against them. They are lights out and I’m not against sitting Green.


Devonta Freeman (ATL) @ CAR – The Panthers defense has continued to be stout against the run and the Falcons offense looks to be a mess. That severely cuts down on Freemans’ touchdown opportunities. It will be hard for him to rack up yardage against the Carolina run defense and, unless the Falcons offense magically comes together, I’m feeling wary about almost any offensive player there. Count me out for this one but you may be forced to start him.


As always, thank you for joining me and The Fantasy Authority for Week 9 Studs and Duds! Be sure to read all the great content released every day as well as come back for my studs and duds every week!

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More in Redraft