Note: Don't miss CBSSports' one-week Fantasy Football championship on FanDuel -- double your cash each week, compete against CBSSports experts and play in a FREE $100K final! Enter now

OMG, Devonta Freeman is the greatest of all tiiiiiiiime!

That's the response I thought I would get when I posed the question on Twitter, because I've seen the way these Twitter conversations so often go.

(Or -- I'm sorry -- Devonta Freeman is the GOAT, because apparently that's a good thing now.)

Bottom line is I expected nothing short of effusive praise for far and away the No. 1 Fantasy running back to date -- and not just the best, but a surprise entrant to the discussion, meaning for those who paid next to nothing for him owe their season to him.

player headshot
Devonta Freeman
BAL • RB • #34
2015 ATT66
RUSH YDS252
RUSH TD7
REC17
REC YDS196
FPTS83
View Profile

We all love that guy, right? The one who none of us wanted but who makes us all think we should have known better? And it's not like he's some kind of mirage, the product one or two big plays. We could probably count on one hand the number of times all the other running backs combined will be as good as Freeman has the last two weeks.

So what I expected was a need to douse the flames of passion with a sobering reminder that he can't score three touchdowns every week. Easy, breezy, done. What I got, though, was surprisingly rational, level-headed and dispassionate.

And if I may be so bold, incorrect.

So how much is Devonta Freeman worth?

You want to know what that question was, don't you? Well, I'll tell you:

Is Freeman just as valuable as Jamaal Charles?

So quiet you could hear a pin drop.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that if someone offered me Charles straight-up for Freeman today, I wouldn't take it, because I would. It took colleague Heath Cummings a good 15 minutes to talk me off the ledge, but I'm there. I get it.

I get the argument that Charles' flaws are too subtle and greatness too established for me to presume I could possibly upgrade, and when the suspected upgrade is some fly-by-night who I could have had two weeks ago for free, man, the reward doesn't justify the risk. So I'd rather not make this about Charles. Any indictment of him would be nitpicking, and the only reason I brought him up is because a follower asked about that specific trade scenario.

The broader question is this:

But it was too late. By simply broaching the idea that Freeman might be on the same level as Charles, I had kicked the ant bed, sending all the Statley Do-Rights scurrying to the surface

I had set fire to Santa Claus, their red-and-white-clad bringer of joy, and I wasn't going to live it down.

Let the gripes begin!

Well, OK. I can't in good conscience say a two-game period isn't too soon, but I also don't know when exactly that changes.

Now, hear me out: In the scope of a 16-game season, two games, especially consecutively and especially coinciding with a role change, are pretty meaningful. One game could happen to anyone if he catches the opposition by surprise or takes advantage of a defensive breakdown, but to do it again, with the opposition having seen the tape and been made aware of the ability, is revealing.

Ah, Heath. Ever the analyst. That's kind of what you have to say in that role, and if I myself kept "official" rankings, that's probably where I'd put him because I'm expected to be the voice of reason, the keeper of the Statocratic Oath. "First do no harm" is my guiding edict, and selling out for a potential monster after only two weeks of evidence risks doing harm.

But what if you have to take that risk? You're 0-4 or 1-3 and can't afford to lose again, and the only way to ensure it is to inject you lineup with a statistical monster who wasn't there before. Charles would cost you everything else you have. Freeman wouldn't, but is showing signs, however premature, of being just as productive. You're forced to act now. Which way do you go?

Again, we're not talking Charles straight up for Freeman, but as a comparable to Freeman. They're two every-down backs who play a big role in the passing game, and whatever Freeman lacks in big-play potential, he makes up for with scoring potential in a superior offense.

That's a popular argument because he did score three touchdowns in each of those two games, further bloating his score, and obviously can't sustain that pace. But no, he had 149 total yards in the Week 4 blowout ... and then sat out the second half (most of it, anyway).

Except he had 193 total yards in the first game, not to mention 35 total touches -- the most for any Falcons running back since Warrick Dunn in 2002. Michael Turner didn't have a game like that when he was leading the league in carries two of his five years in Atlanta. Neither did Jamal Anderson at his dirty birding best.

We've officially reached the point where we're holding Freeman's touchdowns against him. If Charles put up those same numbers with no touchdowns, you'd consider it a good game for him.

But ... isn't that what's happening, exactly?

OK, but in the two games in his current role as lead back, he has averaged 4.8 yards per carry.

I don't know why we're stuck on past performance anyway. Maybe I'm just used to analyzing baseball, where players so clearly have control over their own numbers that I'm overcompensating for the difference between the two sports, but the fact is everything is so contextual in football. For instance, Freeman's longest run last year was 31 yards, but it's not like the defense stopped him at 31. He just reached the end of the field, scoring a touchdown. The Falcons run that same play from the opposite side of the field, and it's a 61-yard run or maybe even a 91-yard run. What kind of impact would that have on his yards per carry?

And that's just one of a billion examples of external factors influencing Freeman's production. A lot of his carries last year came in garbage time or some other scenario where the Falcons telegraphed the run. And all of them came with a different coaching staff in an offensive system where no running back had any success. I just don't see how you reconcile that Freeman with this one. It's apples to oranges.

So I guess Santa Claus wasn't the right comparison for Charles.

It's true Freeman only got a chance to start because the Falcons didn't address the position in free agency and because intended starter Tevin Coleman went down with an injury. So yeah, the situation is largely a product of luck. But however he got in the situation, he's there now and making the most of it. That's the way it goes for most running backs who aren't, like, Adrian Peterson coming out of college (Charles himself was only a third-round pick) so I don't know why we're holding it against Freeman.

Well, he didn't really get the chance. Antone Smith averaged 6.3 yards per carry for the Falcons last year, and he couldn't beat out the other running backs either. And again, different coaching staff, different offense.

The Week 2 performance is a solid point since Freeman initially replaced Coleman in the middle of that one, and at the time, it gave a pretty strong indication that he wouldn't be an impact player in Fantasy. But in retrospect, it looks like just one of those games all good running backs have from time to time. Thanks to Freeman's receiving ability, it still ended up being a productive one in Fantasy, and it came against a Giants defense that ranks No. 1 against the run.

Plus, it's not so clear Freeman was fully recovered at the time.

Preseason hate? Hyped running back? As I remember it, the Falcons went into the preseason undecided at running back, and since Freeman and Coleman were both hurt, they couldn't have a real competition. Of the two, Coleman played more recently, so he won the job by default and then wasn't bad enough to replace until a broken rib forced the Falcons' hand.

Coleman was only a third-round pick. Let's not make him out to be Todd Gurley. The Falcons went out of their way to declare Freeman their lead back after the first of those two awesome performances, so they clearly weren't married to Coleman.

Still, it's a fair point. It'll be easier to buy into Freeman when we know how exactly how Coleman fits into the mix.

OK. You got me there. Brown was a revelation for a two-game stretch ...

RushingReceiving
DateTmOppResultAttYdsY/ATDTgtRecYdsY/RTD
2012-11-26PHICARL 22-30191789.37254112.750
2012-12-02PHI@DALL 33-38241697.04254143.500
2012-12-09PHI@TAMW 23-211260.5004263.000
Provided by Pro-Football-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 10/8/2015.

... and then never heard from again. It's a sobering reminder that two games, while far more revealing than one, still aren't enough to develop an accurate assessment of a player.

But my point is that if you wait until we're all 1,000 percent sure Freeman is the real deal, you'll have missed your opportunity to get him. Because one thing this exercise taught me is that he's not untouchable. Charles may be. Le'Veon Bell may be. Matt Forte may be. But Freeman isn't. And right now, the sell-high narrative is so deafening that you may not even have to pay as much as you think for him. Jordan Matthews and Doug Martin may be enough even though it should be more like A.J. Green and Dion Lewis.

And it may be the move that wins you the league, because for every running back who amounts to something in Fantasy, it begins with a two-game stretch like this one. By Week 11 or 12, we're all on board with it, but those who arrive sooner are the ones who actually benefit from it.

Freeman could be as valuable as Charles this year -- like C.J. Anderson was down the stretch last year or Knowshon Moreno in 2013 or Alfred Morris in 2012 and on and on -- and if you don't calculate for that possibility, you're crazy. And silly. And weird. Which I think was the title of a TLC album, but I can't be completely sure.

Anyway, something else must be going on in the Fantasy Football world.

The quarterback nightmare continues

OK, so you got burned by Tony Romo or Ben Roethlisberger but have settled on Andy Dalton or Derek Carr as your replacement and can finally breathe a sigh of relief.

Except that they're facing the top two defenses against the pass this week.

To be accurate, the Seahawks, Dalton's opponent, technically rank fifth against the pass, but they and the No. 1 Broncos have allowed the fewest touchdowns through the air this season. And I don't think you need to be convinced the Seahawks are a bad matchup anyway.

Come on, commish! Haven't these poor people suffered enough? Pick on the Tom Brady owners for once in your life!

OK, so he already tried that, and the truth is Brady is probably immune to matchups anyway. These others, while adequate starters more often than not, aren't.

There comes a point where the alternatives are just too crummy to justify a roster spot. It's not that you wouldn't start them over Dalton or, more likely, Carr. It's just that you can't afford to drop a player for a one-week fix that may not be an actual fix anyway. I'm thinking of one particular instance where my choice comes down to Josh McCown or Kirk Cousins, who both have decent matchups but aren't anything close to reliable. That's when you just steer the ship into the storm and hope something weird happens.

These particular alternatives aren't too bad, though. I still think the Eagles rely too much on the running game for Bradford to have a big year, but he showed last week he's capable when the Eagles need him. I suspect they will against the Saints this week. Meanwhile, Cutler, historically a boom-or-bust option, shouldn't have too much trouble with the Chiefs in a game where, like every time they play, the Bears will probably have to pass to keep up.

If you have a roster spot to play with, I'd take a shot on Cutler over Dalton and instead of Bradford. Given the matchups, I feel like he has the highest floor of the three.

Hey there, Gurley

All right ... so how much are we believing in the guy who piled up 146 yards in his first true NFL test? The Rams deemed Todd Gurley worthy of selecting 10th overall even while he was recovering from a torn ACL and have a coach in Jeff Fisher who subscribes to the old-school formula of defense and ball control.

So ... what's he worth?

A few of the wrinkles in this particular league make it not the purest assessment of Gurley's value, but I don't think you need to have experience with the format to understand that most everyone is going to start a quarterback in his flex spot. As long as passing touchdowns are worth the standard six points instead of four, quarterback is the highest-scoring position even in a PPR league.

But if they're worth four points instead of six, I think you'd at least hesitate to deal Gurley. Granted, it's only one game instead of two, which is what made all the difference for me with Freeman, but there's an obvious disparity in pure talent there. Plus, everything I saw in the second half Week 4 tells me Fisher wants Gurley to be the focal point of his offense. He has the build for it, the hands for it and the ability for some big gains with all those opportunities.

That's perfect. With the struggles of the Eagles' passing game, I rate Matthews as a low-end No. 2 wide receiver in Fantasy -- about the same as Moncrief, actually -- and Gurley would be a huge upgrade from that.

Right now, I'm willing to gamble he'll be a top-10 back the rest of the way, and depending how involved he is in the passing game, I could see better than that. One more game like he had in Week 4, and I'll start throwing around Charles comparisons for him, too.

Do we really know what's going on with the Cardinals' backfield?

If you're like me, you were operating under the assumption that the Cardinals were simply making do with Chris Johnson and company while Andre Ellington was sidelined with a sprained knee. But to hear coach Bruce Arians tell it -- and he is the one making the decisions -- Johnson sounds like at least a co-No. 1. Prior to Week 4, Arians said Johnson would continue to get 15-to-20 touches even after Ellington returns, and just Wednesday, while eliminating rookie David Johnson from the mix, he hinted at a rotation between the other two.

Maybe Ellington will overtake Johnson again at some point -- I do believe he's the better rusher of the two at this stage of their careers -- but you have to believe the Cardinals will ease him back into the mix after a three-game absence. Johnson is the preferred Fantasy option until Ellington shows otherwise.

And not just that; he's a desirable Fantasy option. Playing in a balanced offense for a team that's used to playing from ahead, he averaged 19.3 carries for 88.3 yards in Ellington's absence, and it's not like the Cardinals shied away from him at the goal line. I believe the combination of a diminishing role and a poor supporting cast led to his demise with the Titans and then the Jets, but he's clearly in a position to thrive now.

I don't think Dixon has it in him to thrive, and I don't know that it's as favorable of a situation for him anyway. LeSean McCoy struggled with his yards per carry before going down, and Karlos Williams was just as ineffective when he got a full workload last week. The matchup against the Titans is on the favorable end of the spectrum, but Dixon strikes me as no more than a desperation play.

Breaking down the Broncos running game, take four

I would hope you stopped playing Anderson weeks ago. It's been clear from the get-go he's not the same player we saw the final seven weeks of 2015.

I'll say this for him: He was better in Week 4. He averaged nearly 4.0 yards on his 11 carries, which would be respectable if he did it over an entire season. But of course, it wasn't a season-long average but a season high, which begs the question ...

Truth is they have been able to run the ball, just not with the player they keep giving the ball -- the one coach Gary Kubiak said just last week they need to keep on the field.

The tide may be turning though. After Ronnie Hillman also turned in his best game in Week 4, averaging nearly 10 yards on his 11 carries to crack the century mark, Kubiak declared him the hot hand and told Sirius XM NFL Radio he deserves more touches.

Now, 72 of Hillman's yards Sunday came on a single run, and he didn't set the world on fire in his first three games, averaging less than 4.0 yards per carry. But particularly in the first two, he was a clear improvement over Anderson, and if he can free himself from the time share, he's fully capable of making a useful Fantasy contribution this season. Remember, he was the big find off the waiver wire before an injury opened the door for Anderson last year.

I'm still not ready to start Hillman yet, but the situation is looking up. It goes without saying he needs to be owned, especially if you already have Anderson.