Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Bayhawks

Members
  • Content Count

    7,519
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,172 Excellent

About Bayhawks

  • Rank
    Footballguy

Previous Fields

  • Favorite NFL Team
    Washington Redskins

Recent Profile Visitors

9,981 profile views
  1. I was just speculating that the absence of a video isn’t proof of a conspiracy. You’re probably right that a hit after he’s tackled wouldn’t be likely to cause this type of injury.
  2. You don’t think a 300 lb D-linemen smashing into your thigh in a pile could cause an injury?
  3. Maybe it occurred at the bottom of a pile & there’s not a good video of it?
  4. I’m not saying I agree there’s a “grand conspiracy,” but I understand the skepticism with which people view the Rams and the info they release about Gurley. Last year, there were reports of Gurley being fine at the end of the season/playoffs, but he continued to split carries with CJ Anderson. I think those experiences may be causing people to doubt whether they are being completely honest about his health.
  5. OK, but it's really hard to throw an INT if you're running the ball. Run more (especially when you have one of the best RBs in the league & it's working), and there's a lot smaller chance you'll throw an INT.
  6. IDK. Maybe you're right, but it seemed like last night, the reason that game got out of hand was because of the "new" offense. Seemed like they were throwing it a lot more than they ran, and Dak kept throwing it to the wrong team.
  7. New OC; new philosophy? Wasn't a big deal first 3 games, because they were winning & the new offense was effective & exciting. Have to imagine that someone (Jerruh) will have something to say about that if the trends of the last 2 games continue.
  8. It does matter, if you could have had 34 points, is the point. It’s also a bit disingenuous to say “the worst week they had last year was still over 18 points;” when that was largely due to Gordon. In 2017, there were also 2 RBs who averaged 29 ff ppg. The worst week they had together was 10.2 ff points, but every other week was at least 18 ff points. If you’d have asked 2018 Gurley owners if pairing him with Orleans Darkwa was the shark move, I don’t think you’d have gotten anyone to say yes. But that’s what you’re saying; “doesn’t matter how you get the points.” The truth is, if one RB gives you great numbers, it doesn’t make sense to settle for below par numbers from your RB2. Discounting week 17, because it’s an irrelevant week for most ff leagues, Gordon & Ekeler played 8 games together in 2018. Gordon was a RB1 in 6 of those (standard FBG scoring), and was RB13 & RB14 the other two weeks. Ekeler was NEVER a RB1 during those weeks, and was only a RB2 3 times. His average finish was RB 31. Why settle for a middle of the pack RB3 as your second RB? Makes no sense.
  9. And what I said was, if one of them puts up 24 points & 1 puts up 5, while you leave points on your bench with a different (better) RB, it’s not a smart move. Kinda like starting the McCaffrey (RB1-21.7 ff ppg), and Devontae Freeman (RB33-7.25 ff ppg), while you leave Josh Jacobs (RB12-12.1 ff ppg) on your bench. Maybe that sounds pretty good to you, but I don’t think most people would agree.
  10. Nope. You brought up their end of year totals, which is also irrelevant to the “buzzsaw” notion. My most recent post was response to your end of year total comment, not the buzzsaw post.
  11. Except when one guy got 24 points, and the 2nd guy got 5, while your bench RB scored 10 & you’ve cost yourself 5 points & lost by 4, it does matter.
  12. “Buzzsaw?” My main league is pretty standard scoring (non-PPR), and to be a top-30 RB, you had to average 9.96 points in 2018. There were only 4 weeks in 2018 where both backs hit at least 9.96 points. Two of those 4 weeks were Ekeler barely hitting that mark (11.4 & 11.6 points). I’d hardly call that a buzzsaw. Mote often than not, if both RBs played, one (Gordon) was good to great, and the other was a RB3, at best.
  13. You didn’t say “his yards and TDS haven’t changed since the injury,” you said his usage hasn’t changed. He’s being used more early in games, and less in the 4th quarter. That’s a change. As far as your assumption about Reid/Chiefs usage level goals; you’re ignoring context. One game was after being in KC for just over a week & likely not 100% on the playbook. That would have artificially declined his snaps/touches. In two of those games, he injured his ankle/tweaked his ankle in the 3rd/4th quarter & didn’t finish the game. It’s logical to assume that he’d have gotten more usage if he hadn’t been dinged. It’s entirely reasonable to assume if the context of those 3 games were different, he’d have gotten more snaps/touches. Then your theory about Reid wanting him to get 40% of snaps & 10-15 touches would look like what it likely is: correlation without causation.
  14. You’re not sure what the significance of the 4th quarter is? Since the ankle injury, his usage in the 4th quarter has drastically changed. This series of posts is a response to your claim that his usage hasn’t changed since the injury. Again, it could be purely coincidence; but it could also be that he’s getting shot up & the shot is wearing off late in the game, or it could be that Reid is worried about aggravating the ankle & doesn’t want to over-use him, so he’s pulling him late in games, or it could be that Reid is completely enamored with Darrell & is phasing him in. We aren’t privy to enough info to make that determination, but his usage has very clearly changed since the injury. Those snap %’s, touches/targets, etc are pretty similar, except before the injury, they were compiled over 4 quarters. Since the injury, they’ve been largely compiled in just the 1st 3. Possibly (probably?) coincidence, but we can’t say his usage hasn’t changed, because it has.