Article 3: Stacy, Can't You See You're Just Not The One For Me (til later)

Article 3: Stacy, Can't You See You're Just Not The One For Me (til later)

Why will Zac Stacy be a fantasy bust this year? First off, let me thank Lucio for sparking this debate for my latest article. In our league, he's keeping Zac Stacy in the 12th round (obviously totally acceptable for a player who's ranked 13th overall in ESPN's top 300). But in this article I'll be pointing out why Stacy will be a bust for people taking him in the second (or third, or fourth, or fifth...) round. Fortunately for the timing of this article, Jim McCormick of ESPN.com published an article on why Stacy is worth a high pick. So I have a lot of material to disagree with.

Recently, I've gotten a lot of backlash from Lucio for ranking Stacy lower than a lot of other running backs including Ryan Mathews, Joique Bell, and Chris Johnson. But I have many reasons for this.

The main reason being that I don't trust any St. Louis Rams player to be on my fantasy team. There's not much to prove here, that offense just isn't that good. They were ranked 30th in terms of team offense in 2013, and that includes Zac Stacy's solid season. Even with additions like the number two overall pick of the 2014 draft, Greg Robinson, and Kenny Britt from the Titans, I just don't see this offense coming together this year.

Another reason for the poor season I think the Rams will have is their schedule. Of course they're in the NFC West, so they have to play the Seahawks, 49ers, and Cardinals (all top 10 defenses). But their schedule is tougher this season compared to last. Last year the Rams got to play teams like the Cowboys (ha, Lucio), the Falcons (spoke too soon...), the Jaguars, the Texans, the Titans, and the Buccaneers. When we look at this season, of course they have some easy games against the Vikings, the Cowboys defense, and the Raiders, but overall the schedule is tougher. Games against the Eagles, the Broncos, the Chargers, the Redskins, the Chiefs, and possibly even the Giants (you're welcome Jesse) will only hurt the Rams. Zac Stacy's best games came when the Rams were either ahead or at least not far behind in games. I don't see the Rams doing that this year and traditionally, when behind in a game coaches don't like to rush the ball. That leads us to my next point.

Zac Stacy is definitely a volume-dependent running back (Yes Jim McCormick, that can be a bad thing). Stacy needs to get a lot of work in a game before he catches his stride and breaks out. When we look at Week 5 against the Jaguars last season, where Stacy was still splitting carries with Daryl Richardson and Benny Cunningham, he didn't break out until the fourth quarter (starting with his 11th carry). For another example, we can look at a monster game from Stacy. In my conversation with Lucio, Week 15 against New Orleans was brought up (23 carries, 133 yards, 1 touchdown). I'll still use this game as my example even though it was against New Orleans, one of the better teams in the league, so it somewhat goes against my argument. But these stats from Stacy came from a game where the Rams were winning 14-0 after the first quarter, 24-3 after halftime, and 27-3 after the third quarter. It's a classic example where the Rams ran the ball more after being ahead in the game and Stacy didn't break out until the Rams were already winning 17-0 in the second quarter. Once again, I don't see the Rams being able to duplicate those results on a consistent basis with a tougher schedule.

Another potential problem for Stacy's workload is the addition of Auburn running back, Tre Mason. Mason is faster than Stacy, was a higher draft pick than Stacy, and overall a more talented back than Stacy. Now I don't think Mason makes a huge impact in his first season so it sounds like it shouldn't be much of a problem. But I also don't see the Rams taking away carries from Cunningham, who the Rams love. So losing a couple touches to Mason only hurts a volume-dependent runner like Stacy. Especially a player like Stacy who doesn't get many looks in the passing game and misses a quarter or a half due to injury here and there.

So do I want Zac Stacy on my fantasy team? Unless I can get him in the sixth round or lower, I'm saying no. I wouldn't spend my second round pick on a player who averages less than 4.0 YPC, doesn't get many looks in the passing game, is volume-dependent, somewhat touchdown-dependent, has a tough schedule, and is in competition for getting carries with about three other running backs who the Rams also like. If I do draft Stacy, I can't confidently start him in 8 of the 16 games (possibly more). So after all the evidence, you tell me if Stacy is worth that 13th overall projection (18.6 ESPN ADP) ESPN gives him. It should be an easy answer.


About the Author

Alex Sappe
Co-creator and co-editor-in-chief of Three By Five Sports Network
Co-host of the Third and Long Podcast
Co-host of the Footballistically Speaking Podcast

Follow me on Twitter @AlexSappe