Sleeper Wide Receivers: Could Leonard Hankerson or Damaris Johnson Hold Value?

Injuries to Pierre Garcon and Jeremy Maclin have opened up potential playing time for a pair of young receivers.  Could either of them be worth gambling on in Week 3?  Let’s take a look:

Leonard Hankerson – Washington Redskins
Pierre Garçon is officially listed as doubtful for Sunday’s game, opening the door for someone else to step in against a Bengals defense that has allowed 308.5 passing adds per game over the first two weeks (fourth most in the league). They also have given up 4 passing touchdowns while failing to record an interception.

According to Zac Boyer (via Twitter):

“If #Redskins’ Pierre Garcon can’t play against #Bengals on Sunday, it seems very likely Leonard Hankerson will replace him at split end.”

Hankerson had two catches for 68 yards and a touchdown in Week 2 after failing to record a catch in the season opener. While he is still a risky play, in three receiver formats he definitely is worth considering. I would grab him now if you have a need and monitor the news over the next day or two before depending on him.

Damaris Johnson – Philadelphia Eagles
Jeremy Maclin has already been ruled out for Sunday’s game, leaving an opening for Johnson. Granted, Arizona has looked good against the pass this far, but do we really expect that to continue? Can we also expect Michael Vick to continue to make the many mistakes he has over two weeks?

Johnson went undrafted, though part of that may have been due to questions about his make-up.  According to Layna Dewell of (click here for the article):

“University of Tulsa wide receiver Damaris Johnson has been indefinitely suspended from the Golden Hurricane football team.  This comes after Johnson’s girlfriend Chamon Jones was arrested Thursday on a felony embezzlement complaint.”

However, that doesn’t mean that he doesn’t have talent.  With Jeremy Maclin & Riley Cooper already ruled out (as well as DeSean Jackson banged up), the Eagles are running low on options.

I wouldn’t expect Johnson to be a great option, but he definitely has potential.  He’s worth monitoring closely as he could eventually emerge as the team’s third receiver.  For now, however, I would anticipate Jackson and Brent Celek to play a bigger role.  I wouldn’t roll the dice here.

What are your opinion of these two players?  Would you gamble on either of them?  Why or why not?

Make sure to check out the rest of our Week 3 rankings:

2012 Week 17 Fantasy Football Sleepers
Week 1 Sleeper: Quarterback Jake Locker: Why He Could Post Big Numbers Against New England


  1. muddy cleats 18 says:

    Have you ever thought of doing a column on bench stashers? Maybe list the top 15 guys who have no chance this week but if given a chance through injury/suspensions ect…
    could be decent starters – trying to pick the next Andre Brown before waivers hit and the guy with a 0-2 record gets him anyways…
    a short list would be like
    Hunter/Blount/J. Rodgers/Richardson/Collie…
    could also do a negative list kind of like Start/Sit
    D. Wilson/Pead/D.Thomas…
    would be nice to know who to stash re:oak, cinn and den rbs and if det,kc wrs …
    just a thought…

  2. Lambda says:

    Would you take the gamble and not start another WR in place of Jennings? All my WR alternatives play the early game so I really have no time to decide on whether to pray Jennings is a go or take the possible zero? My bench fill in for him are thin so its not like I have great alternatives.

  3. muddy cleats – it’s definitely a good idea and let me see what I can do.

    Lambda – It really depends on who your other options are, though I never want to willingly take a zero. At this point, I’d go with an alternative.

  4. Randy says:

    How would you rank Hankerson right now in your rankings for standard league?

    • It would still be as a very low-end option. There is a lot of risk, because we don’t know exactly how many snaps he’ll get (Santana Moss & Aldrick Robinson will also be in the mix).

      It really depends on your other options, but I would consider him in the 35-45 range, most likely.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *