Pierre Garcon: Redskins WR Should Be Worst-Case Scenario for Fantasy Owners
As it turns out, short weeks aren't necessarily the best medicine for players returning from season-long injuries.
Sorry, Pierre Garcon.
The dangerous Washington Redskins wide receiver finally returned last week from a foot injury, playing in his first game since Week 5.
He only recorded three catches for five yards on Sunday, and he's being given the dreaded questionable tag for Thanksgiving against the Dallas Cowboys (via the Washington Redskins' official Twitter account):
If you're considering Garcon in the wide world of fantasy, it would probably be smart to explore other options first.
The health concern is the biggest issue.
Yes, Garcon's foot held up to its biggest test in over a month, and yes, there's an outside shot he'll on Turkey Day. But most of his worth depends on his speed.
The home run hitter is first and foremost a deep threat, and with Robert Griffin III under center, that makes him a reliable fantasy option. Just take a look at his Week 1 performance (four catches, 109 yards, one score) for proof:
But Garcon will be playing on just three days rest. Who knows how his foot is going to hold up this time around or how much he'll even play if he does suit up?
How many yards will Garcon record on Thursday?
Throw in the amount of turkey that will probably be in his belly slowing him down, and the speedster is a shaky option at best.
This one's pretty simple. Garcon brings with him solid reward potential, but the risk is just way too high, especially against a Cowboys defense that is giving up just 211 passing yards per game (sixth lowest in the NFL).
Considering the amount of fill-in wide receivers suddenly popping up (oh, hello, Justin Blackmon, Danario Alexander, T.Y. Hilton, Cecil Shorts, Julian Edelman and Ryan Boyles), Garcon, at least during this shortened week, should only be a last-ditch option.
But if we're talking about playoffs (uh, playoffs!?!), the quick wideout is definitely worth stashing on your bench.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?