RADIO
Rob takes an in-depth look at six ambiguous fantasy football backfields in a three-part series looking at the ADP of each running back to determine the best targets.
Ambiguous means uncertain or unclear. These backfields do not have a true No. 1 running back. Sometimes, this could mean a wide-open competition from the top to the bottom of the depth chart. Other times, it may mean that there is likely a committee approach with no defined leader. The final possibility is that we have a No. 1 running back, but it's someone who is either older, struggled with efficiency, or is coming off an injury. Because of any of those factors, their hold on the No. 1 job is far from secure.
These backfields can often seem unappealing, and much of that comes with uncertainty and fear of the unknown. However, these backfields can often offer fantasy managers a lot of value. Due to the unknown outcome, the prices of each running back associated with the ambiguous backfield are discounted, often so much that the reward far exceeds the risk. Sometimes, the price is so cheap they might as well be free. At that point, there's no good reason not to roll the dice on someone with the chance to be the lead back, even in a committee. In this three-part series, we will evaluate six ambiguous backfields, the likely distribution of touches, and which running back is the best target at cost.
With the wealth of knowledge, statistics, and data, winning fantasy sports leagues is becoming more difficult. If you want to get an edge on your competition, check out the premium tools that RotoBaller has to offer. Should you want to pay for a subscription, use promo code "BOOM" at checkout to receive a 10% discount.
Be sure to check all of our fantasy football rankings for 2025:- 2025 fantasy football rankings
- Running back (RB) fantasy football rankings
- Wide receiver (WR) fantasy football rankings
- Tight end (TE) fantasy football rankings
- Quarterback (QB) fantasy football rankings
- FLEX fantasy football rankings
- Defense (D/ST) fantasy football rankings
- Kicker (K) fantasy football rankings
- Dynasty fantasy football rankings
Denver Broncos
Javonte Williams: RB31, ADP 105 vs. Jaleel McLaughlin: RB51, ADP 165 vs. Audric Estime: RB60, ADP 200
Most fantasy managers are likely preparing to avoid the Denver Broncos offense like the plague. That's understandable, considering they finished 19th in points and 26th in yards last year and are now set to start a rookie quarterback. Their group of skill players -- running backs, wide receivers, and tight ends -- is one of the worst collective groups in the NFL.
Their best receiver is Courtland Sutton, who had just 772 yards. Javonte Williams, their leading rusher, had just 774 rushing yards. Their leading tight end had 204 yards. This is a baaaaaaad group. Incredibly bad. There's no way around it. Investing in this backfield is a scary proposition for many fantasy managers.
However, there's no denying a running back's upside in a Sean Payton-led offense. Last year, the Williams, McLaughlin, and Samaje Perine trio combined for 150 targets, 128 receptions, and 843 receiving yards. That kind of passing volume for a team's backfield is absurd.
One of the craziest stats I've found this offseason: Of the top-20 team RB target share seasons since 2011, Sean Payton's teams own 8 of them.
— JJ Zachariason (@LateRoundQB) May 21, 2024
Williams is expected to get the first crack at leading this backfield, but this will be a committee approach. Williams had 217 carries last season, which easily led the team. McLaughlin was second with 76 rushing attempts. However, the receiving workload was distributed more evenly. Perine had 56 targets and 50 receptions, and Williams had 58 targets and 47 receptions. McLaughlin chipped in with another 36 targets and 31 receptions. Looking forward to 2024, fantasy managers should expect a more evenly dispersed workload because Williams was inefficient last season.
49 running backs had at least 100 carries last year. Williams was 36th in yards per carry, 43rd in rush success rate, 33rd in yards after contact per attempt, and 33rd in broken tackle rate. Williams finished with the fifth-worst differential between his actual half-PPR fantasy points and his expected half-PPR fantasy points. That level of play will not keep Williams on the field very long, especially considering Sean Payton has no allegiance to Williams. He wasn't in Denver when he was drafted, but he did have a hand in drafting both McLaughlin and 2024 rookie, Estime. McLaughlin, unlike Williams, was incredibly efficient last year.
78 running backs had at least 70 carries last year. McLaughlin was second in yards per carry, 11th in rush success rate, and eighth in yards after contact per attempt. Compare those numbers to what Williams did last season and ask yourself how confident you are that Williams maintains his hold on lead-back duties.
Estime had 2,261 yards and 30 touchdowns on 366 rushing attempts the past two seasons. Among running backs with at least 150 carries, Estime was third in yards per carry, second in PFF rushing grade, and third in yards after contact per attempt. He was also 16th in most broken tackles and carries, gaining 10 or more yards despite being just 26th in rush attempts.
Sean Payton Coached Teams
+ Rank by Team Running Back (PPR) FPG2023: 6th
2022: N/A
2021: 21st
2020: 1st
2019: 8th
2018: 2nd
2017: 1st
2016: 1st
2015: 2nd
2014: 1st
2013: 2nd
2012: 1st
2011: 1sttop-6 finishes in 10 of 12 seasons
— Scott Barrett (@ScottBarrettDFB) May 21, 2024
There's value to be had in this backfield. Payton has a long history of producing highly relevant fantasy backfields, including last season. The problem last year was that the workload was far too dispersed. It should be noted that while Williams struggled last year, it was his first season after tearing his ACL, LCL, and PCL in 2022. Now two years removed from that injury, Williams could regain some of his strong efficiency from a productive and encouraging season when he had over 1,200 scrimmage yards and seven touchdowns while splitting work with Melvin Gordon.
I think you see everyone in camp first, but barring injury I think Den RB room is
1. J Williams
2. Estime
3. Jaleel
4. Watson— Benjamin Allbright (@AllbrightNFL) May 23, 2024
The Winner: Jaleel McLaughlin
Fantasy managers should target McLaughlin over Williams and Estime at their current prices. The ADP differences between them are extreme, considering how poorly Williams played last season. While McLaughlin will not be a workhorse back, given his size, his pass-catching chops could be put on full display this season. Perine is a cut candidate; a move that would save the team $3 million. If that ends up happening, it's wheels up for McLaughlin.
Given how frequently Sean Payton's offenses have targeted the running-back position, McLaughlin is the player to target in this ambiguous backfield. If McLaughlin gets 60 or more targets, which would be almost guaranteed if Perine is cut, he will provide a strong positive return at his current price. Williams is being drafted close to his ceiling, given the state of Denver's offense, lack of scoring opportunities, and likely an expanding role for McLaughlin.
Cincinnati Bengals
Zack Moss: RB26, ADP 93 vs. Chase Brown: RB38, ADP 120
Joe Mixon was traded to the Houston Texans this past offseason. Cincinnati signed Zack Moss, formerly of the Indianapolis Colts, to offset that loss. From 2017-2023, Mixon's per-game averages equated to 275 carries, 61 targets, and 50 receptions. Last year, Bengals running backs combined for 318 carries, 89 targets, and 74 receptions. They combined for 311 carries, 133 targets, and 103 receptions the year before. In 2021, Bengals running backs had 379 carries, 98 targets, and 85 receptions. During Joe Burrow's rookie season in 2020, their running backs had 353 carries, 108 targets, and 89 receptions. Those four-year averages equate to 340 total carries, 107 targets, and 88 receptions. We can reasonably expect those numbers to decrease due to the state of the backfield, but as you can see, there will still be plenty of touches to go around.
Given Moss's size and experience, he should be expected to be the lead back; however, fantasy managers shouldn't expect a Mixon-like workload. In nine games last season with the Colts where he had 12 or more touches, he had 825 scrimmage yards or just under 92 yards per game.
Brown didn't play more than 30% of the team's offensive snaps in any one game this past season. The most likely outcome for this backfield is that Moss handles the early-down and short-yardage work while Brown handles the passing work and third-down situations.
Small sample size BUT ...
... Chase Brown among 67 RBs with 15-plus targets last season:
PFF receiving grade: 81.1 (No. 4)
Yards per route run: 4.46 (No. 1)
Targets per route run: 42.9% (No. 1)
Passer rating when targeted: 132.2 (No. 2)
Yards per reception: 11.1 (No. 1)— Ian Hartitz (@Ihartitz) March 12, 2024
Brown's rushing success rate was just 34.1%, dead last among 77 running backs with at least 40 carries. Moss's success rate was 49.2%, 27th best, one of the reasons fantasy managers should expect Moss to handle more of the rushing work. Brown showed he can be an electric playmaker by averaging 5.8 yards per touch. He also averaged a breakaway run rate of 9.1% and a very impressive 2.9 yards after contact per attempt. However, it should be noted that due to his 44 carries, we have a very small sample size. Brown is 215 pounds and could handle a bigger workload.
Based on the running back touch totals during Burrow's stint in Cincinnati, we can reasonably expect the running backs to have 310-330 total carries and 80-95 targets. A reasonable expectation of the workload distribution is for Moss to handle 55% of the carries and 35% of the targets. Conversely, Brown would handle 35% of the carries and 55% of the targets. That would leave 10% for both carries and targets to the RB3 and RB4. This would leave Moss finishing with between 171-182 carries and 28-33 targets. Brown would have roughly 109-116 carries and 44-52 targets.
Given those projections, Moss would finish with roughly 882-958 total yards and 21-25 receptions. Brown would finish with roughly 738-823 total yards and 35-42 receptions. Moss is the better bet for having 7-9 touchdowns, while Brown is likelier to have 4-6. Moss is a four-year player with only one season and over 130 touches or 600 scrimmage yards. Brown, on the other hand, was drafted by Cincinnati and will be entering his second season. Based on these projections, unless you expect Moss to be the clear lead back, he's likely being drafted close to his ceiling, which is always a dangerous proposition for fantasy managers.
The Winner: It Depends...
If you're playing in a standard-scoring league, fantasy managers should target Moss. If it's full-PPR scoring, the clear answer is Brown. In half-PPR scoring, fantasy managers should still lean to Brown. Out of 49 running backs with 100 carries, Moss finished 22nd in yards after contact per attempt and 48th in broken tackle rate.
According to PlayerProfiler, with different qualifications, Moss finished 48th in yards created per touch, 32nd in breakaway run rate, and 30th in yards per route run. While Moss played well in relief of Jonathan Taylor, he didn't become a great talent overnight. Most numbers still show him as a league-average runner and a below-average pass-catcher.
Given Brown's youth and the explosiveness he showed, albeit in a small sample, he looks like the more exciting player and he's the one with a cheaper price tag. Their current ADPs are both reasonably priced, but when we look at ambiguous backfields, the best option is usually cheaper. In this case, the cheaper one also coincides with the more explosive and younger players.
As a reminder, if you're interested in purchasing any of our premium packages for the upcoming fantasy football season, use promo code "BOOM" to receive a 10% discount.
Download Our Free News & Alerts Mobile App
Like what you see? Download our updated fantasy football app for iPhone and Android with 24x7 player news, injury alerts, rankings, starts/sits & more. All free!
More Fantasy Football Analysis
