Fantasy Football: Is Week 16 the Time to Sit Reggie Wayne?
Indianapolis Colts wide receiver Reggie Wayne has averaged 43 yards over his past three games. He has just one touchdown in his past six games. Should you consider sitting him in the fantasy football championship game?
It has to be frustrating for Wayne owners. Even in points-per-reception (PPR) leagues, he has been disappointing of late, averaging 4.3 receptions in his past three games after averaging 7.6 receptions in his first 11.
There are a couple of factors at play.
For starters, rookie T.Y. Hilton has emerged. He is averaging 76 yards in his past three games. Hilton has five touchdowns in the past seven games, too. Wayne continues to be more heavily targeted, but Hilton is making more of his opportunities.
Running back Vick Ballard has also stepped up his game. He has averaged 104.5 total yards over the past two games while averaging 19 touches per contest.
Andrew Luck may have hit the wall a little. He has thrown for 240 or fewer yards in three of his past four and four of his past six games. During that six-game stretch, Luck has thrown 10 interceptions.
This week, the Colts take on the Kansas City Chiefs. Reggie Wayne won't have to deal with Brandon Flowers exclusively, but he will line up against him on occasion.
Whether or not you use Wayne this week will depend on your alternatives. Obviously, if you are stacked at wide receiver, you may want to go with a hotter hand.
You won't likely find an option that is getting more looks, though. Wayne has more targets than every receiver outside of Calvin Johnson and Brandon Marshall. Wayne still ranks fourth in the league with 1,234 yards and is tied for fourth with 97 receptions.
He's still an excellent PPR option and a solid standard-league choice. What's more, he's due for a big game. I wouldn't have any hesitations playing him. That said, if you have a good alternative, I wouldn't have any hesitations sitting him, either.
Also check out:
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?