Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
zed2283

Jeremy Hill, RB (NEP)

Recommended Posts

I'd love to know which one to bench. Not sure if a guy like Lamar Miller is a better option because he's underutilized as well, and Dan Herron sure fumbles a lot. Despite the split both backs seem likely to get nearly as much work as the other two, especially if Dalton is average. Pittsburgh has looked like crap at times defensively.

Edited by Houston turmOiler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a Bengals fan who follows them closely I find that some people are taking this Hill over Gio thing a little too far... Evan Silva seems to be getting more and more agitated over them not using Hill more. In his matchups column this past week he wrote:

"Hill is outplaying Bernard in every facet of football, but is still only an RB2 because of the Bengals' insistence on using Gio. Hill does offer RB1 upside against a mediocre Bucs run defense that's yielded 305 yards and three TDs on 74 carries (4.11 YPC) to Falcons, Redskins, and Bears running backs the past three weeks. Hill is currently the No. 13 overall running back in non-PPR leagues, and No. 16 overall in PPR"

Yes, Hill is generally a more effective in between the tackle runner than Gio. He hits the hole faster and with more power. He breaks arm tackles. But he's nowhere as elusive or as good in the open field as Gio is. On the other side Gio needs the OL to block for him in order to succeed. Joe Goodberry had a great breakdown on this on Twitter the other day. "

"The OL struggles to sustain blocks and Gio usually sets his blocks up and Hill usually hits it 100 mph. Hill often gets stopped when he doesn't see the hole or tries creating his own too. Gio just thrives off of the creation runs. Gio is more likely to stutter step and get a LB out of the hole rather than try running through him. Not wrong, just doesn't fit the OL because they're built for power and not zone. When Gio can hide behind OL and press the hole, he can manipulate LBs and he can stay untouched. Needs help from OL to do so."

It's not that Hill is such a drastically better RB than Gio, they're just different. As for their production I think it is crucial to put their production in context. For much of this season Gio has been getting the carries that BJGE usually had; early downs to start the drive, third and short, goalline carries. The type of carries where they can only use an RB they absolutely trust to not make a mistake or fumble the ball. But these are obvious run situations where it's difficult to get plus yards per carry, and it's not really Gio's game. He is much better suited in open situations around midfield or in enemy territory where they can get him in space or where it's open enough where he can use his creativity. As Hill starts to get more of the BJGE carries I'm pretty sure his efficiency as measured by yards per carry will go down. Can both of them be good fantasy assets? I would only really want Gio in PPR and I wouldn't rely on either of them as my RB1 unless I've built my team around other positions, but yes I could see them both as productive as long as the CIN offense is moving well offensively but I think that is a question mark with the fluctuations in performance from Dalton. And they would also need to keep building that o-line. RT has been weak all season and Newhouse is certainly not the answer. They moved Boling out to RT towards the end of the TBB game, using Pollak at LG. For their run game that should be a big plus if they stick to it.

why would Gio be better in a PPR? they seem to catch the same amount of passes. it seems to be some weird idea floating around that Gio is a better receiving back than Hill, I guess because he is smaller? Hill looks much more powerful to me, but I agree some of the Silva stuff goes overboard. Bernard is a good back, and while I think Hill should certainly lead the backfield (as he has gotten plenty of the BJGE carries as well and wound up with 150+ yards in those games) they shouldn't wear Hill down

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why would Gio be better in a PPR? they seem to catch the same amount of passes. it seems to be some weird idea floating around that Gio is a better receiving back than Hill, I guess because he is smaller? Hill looks much more powerful to me, but I agree some of the Silva stuff goes overboard. Bernard is a good back, and while I think Hill should certainly lead the backfield (as he has gotten plenty of the BJGE carries as well and wound up with 150+ yards in those games) they shouldn't wear Hill down

I can see why you would interpret it that way, but what I meant was rather that I wouldn't want Gio in non-PPR. All is relative of course, so what I'm saying is that I wouldn't want Gio in non-PPR at his current price. If I got him at a good price I would want him in any league.

Although my point was not that I don't want Hill in PPR, I strongly believe that Gio is a better receiving back. Not because Hill can't catch passes, he has pretty good hands, but because Gio is quicker to get his eyes upfield and make defenders miss. Gio is more elusive, creative and has a terrific spin move. If Hill has time to establish himself and attack a defensive back he can run him over and win that way, and it's not like Hill has no elusiveness at all, but as could be seen in the TBB game he takes a little too long to set his feet and turn downhill. To me, as a Bengals fan, there is no question who I'd rather have receiving those passes. There is no question who I'd rather have in open space with the ball. The reason why it's so successful at times with Hill is primarily that defenses don't key in on him yet in the passing game whereas they are all over Gio. Their passing game numbers are quite similar, even when looking at yards after catch, but if you look at the tape you'll see that the numbers don't tell the whole story. From a fantasy standpoint that might not matter. You don't care if Hill gets his passing yards by catching defenses off guard with a check wide route when the defense is defending the deep ball, or if he gets them by running screens and making defenders miss. But there is a difference.

I think Hue planned to use Eifert as an integral part of the offense. When he went down halfway through the first game of the season I think a big part of how Hue wanted to play had to be thrown out the window. And I think it has hurt Gio in several ways; in part because the injury to Eifert has slowed down the offense and in part because Gio became the only real threat in the short passing game. All signs in the offseason pointed to Hue wanting to run a fast no huddle offense, but when Eifert went down it all had to be slowed down. And I think Eifert's injury hurt Gio since he has been the only real threat in the short passing game and consequently it has been easy for defenses to beat up on him and limit his involvement in the passing game. I'm excited to see how they play next season, hopefully with everyone back healthy. They have the pieces to have a multi-dimensional and very potent offense but when Eifert and Marvin go down and AJ is injured or limited for half the season it's a different situation.

Edited by Louche

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Week 1 mostly not started

Week 2 spot started

Week 3 consistently started

Week 4 bye

Week 5 consistently started

Week 6 spot started

Week 7 mostly not started

Week 8 spot started

Week 9 gio hurt, consistently started

Week 10 gio hurt, consistently started

Week 11 gio hurt, consistently started

Week 12 gio returns, consistently started

Week 13 consistently started

Week 14 ?

Hill probably helped a lot of teams with big games while gio was out, but yesterday's stinker could have derailed your team. Do you start him in a playoff game after a crappy game like this? Or do you bench him for almost any reasonable option?

"He probably helped a lot of teams for several weeks, but one stinker could have derailed your team", lol.

This week obviously wasn't good for fantasy, but I'll point out that in ppr, it was still better than guys like Gio, Denard, Crowell, Gore, Vereen, Blount, Richardson, etc. He was within 3 points of Forte, Morris, Mathews, Lynch, FJax, etc. Hardly a season killer.

The "game plan" is the same as it ever was- while Gio is playing, he's a low end ~RB 2. Whether you should start him depends on your other options and league settings, but he certainly isn't automatic.

This whole exercise was biased in nature form the start and designed to support a very silly premise in the first place - that Hill was "roster poison" in a dynasty league. In this day and age most RBs are going to have a few "stinkers" now and then. Hill has been very productive as a rookie and the writing is already on the wall that his role, even with Gio healthy, is growing. I'm not sure why we are even keeping this up.

Hill was a very talented back and he was worth whatever dynasty rookie pick that one was comfortable using on him. If some one preferred Freeman based on his talent, than by all means pick him first - but if some one chose Freeman because the head coach (who may not even be there next year) in a fluff piece said that he "could be a feature back" and passed on Hill because they already had a young RB on the roster than that was a far bigger mistake than taking Hill. Situations change quickly in the NFL and thus in dynasty leagues - taking a lesser talent in a "better" situation usually backfires.

Would anyone be shocked if idiot Mike Smith wasn't back in Atlanta next season or if Atlanta drafted a RB in the first three rounds or signed a free agent RB? Would anyone be shocked if Hill surpassed Gio forcing Gio into a Sproles type role?

Personally I actually like Devonte Freeman and think it is possible for him to potentially be a feature back, so I wouldn't blame anyone for picking him over Hill, it's just that the logic behind it should be sound (i.e. I think Freeman is the better back). Personally I had Hill ranked higher so I would have taken him over Freeman and let the chips fall where they may on the "situations".

Edited by Dr. Octopus
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see the writing on the wall. I just dropped Gio. Sealed the deal for me when they are keeping Hill in on 3rd downs and he's getting more receptions than Gio.

Gio is nothing more than a COP back at this point in time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see the writing on the wall. I just dropped Gio. Sealed the deal for me when they are keeping Hill in on 3rd downs and he's getting more receptions than Gio.

Gio is nothing more than a COP back at this point in time.

Hill is in every third down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see the writing on the wall. I just dropped Gio. Sealed the deal for me when they are keeping Hill in on 3rd downs and he's getting more receptions than Gio.

Gio is nothing more than a COP back at this point in time.

They rotated series pretty evenly. Not every series will last the same amount of plays.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The situation is completely ####ed this season... IDK how anyone can see it any different.

Awful QB and a cloud of uncertainty in a full blown timeshare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The situation is completely ####ed this season... IDK how anyone can see it any different.

Awful QB and a cloud of uncertainty in a full blown timeshare.

Dalton has been very sporadic this year. Either hot or cold. When he plays well, they will benefit. When he plays like poo, they will suffer. Both can be effective fantasy contributors if Dalton is playing at least decently and drives are sustained. That seems to be a real gamble right now, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The situation is completely ####ed this season... IDK how anyone can see it any different.

Awful QB and a cloud of uncertainty in a full blown timeshare.

Well said. I would love for them to trade Gio this year and go with Hill. Maybe they will see an opportunity to move up in the draft and dangle Gio.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The situation is completely ####ed this season... IDK how anyone can see it any different.

Awful QB and a cloud of uncertainty in a full blown timeshare.

Well said. I would love for them to trade Gio this year and go with Hill. Maybe they will see an opportunity to move up in the draft and dangle Gio.

Sorry, but you're just allowing your fantasy desires to crowd out your real-world judgment. Fantasy owners love to have every-down workhorses like DeMarco or Bell, but the fungibility of RBs is increasingly causing NFL teams to rely on committees. Spread the risk, keep guys fresh, etc. From the Bengals' perspective, the fact that they have two talented RBs with different strengths is a good thing. I'd expect to see a lot more situations like CIN and NE, and fewer like DAL and PIT, in the coming years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that's just silly. First of all NFL teams don't make trades. Second, why would they weaken their position at RB when they have issues at QB and are playing in one of the toughest divisions? I've hardly heard a single negative word from Bengals coaches on Gio. To me it seems that they love him and I see no way that they would trade him at this point. I'm pretty sure they want an RB timeshare where they can play to each RB's strengths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting words from Jackson. Wonder how to read into this?

Against the Buccaneers, Hill had the majority of touches, finishing with 17 (13 rushes, four catches). Bernard had 11 (10 rushes, one catch).

Don't read too far into the division of labor between the running backs, though. Offensive coordinator Hue Jackson didn't think this switch to favoring Hill would become a pattern. This game was simply about continuing to ease Bernard back into the flow of the offense after he missed three games.

"You guys kind of know my mode when we get a guy back," Jackson said Monday. "Try not to put too much on him right away, but we'll slowly work him back. Hopefully you can win games and get guys acclimated back in games and then you kind of let them be who they are. He's got a couple games under his belt now, and we'll keep expanding for him as we move forward."

Anyone think Gio slowly starts to take back his role prior to the injury? If a near 50/50 split is limiting Gio's touches, it feels like the load may swing back into his favor soon. (please keep the favoritism out of the discussion).

Edited by Squintz82

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting words from Jackson. Wonder how to read into this?

Against the Buccaneers, Hill had the majority of touches, finishing with 17 (13 rushes, four catches). Bernard had 11 (10 rushes, one catch).

Don't read too far into the division of labor between the running backs, though. Offensive coordinator Hue Jackson didn't think this switch to favoring Hill would become a pattern. This game was simply about continuing to ease Bernard back into the flow of the offense after he missed three games.

"You guys kind of know my mode when we get a guy back," Jackson said Monday. "Try not to put too much on him right away, but we'll slowly work him back. Hopefully you can win games and get guys acclimated back in games and then you kind of let them be who they are. He's got a couple games under his belt now, and we'll keep expanding for him as we move forward."

Anyone think Gio slowly starts to take back his role prior to the injury? If a near 50/50 split is limiting Gio's touches, it feels like the load may swing back into his favor soon. (please keep the favoritism out of the discussion).

I own Gio without Hill in dynasty so I like to hear that there. But I also own Gio and Hill in the playoffs in a redraft league and now I'm not sure what to do. I was going to go with Hill this week before the coach badmouthed him to the media and now saying that Gio will get more touches. I barely sneaked into the playoffs in this league so I'm a long shot anyways. I think I have to go with my 1st round pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting words from Jackson. Wonder how to read into this?

Against the Buccaneers, Hill had the majority of touches, finishing with 17 (13 rushes, four catches). Bernard had 11 (10 rushes, one catch).

Don't read too far into the division of labor between the running backs, though. Offensive coordinator Hue Jackson didn't think this switch to favoring Hill would become a pattern. This game was simply about continuing to ease Bernard back into the flow of the offense after he missed three games.

"You guys kind of know my mode when we get a guy back," Jackson said Monday. "Try not to put too much on him right away, but we'll slowly work him back. Hopefully you can win games and get guys acclimated back in games and then you kind of let them be who they are. He's got a couple games under his belt now, and we'll keep expanding for him as we move forward."

Anyone think Gio slowly starts to take back his role prior to the injury? If a near 50/50 split is limiting Gio's touches, it feels like the load may swing back into his favor soon. (please keep the favoritism out of the discussion).

I own Gio without Hill in dynasty so I like to hear that there. But I also own Gio and Hill in the playoffs in a redraft league and now I'm not sure what to do. I was going to go with Hill this week before the coach badmouthed him to the media and now saying that Gio will get more touches. I barely sneaked into the playoffs in this league so I'm a long shot anyways. I think I have to go with my 1st round pick.

Sort of in the same situation. Felt comfortable riding hill the last few weeks (even with Gio back). But in the back of my mind, I worried about continuing this and having Gio return to his pre-injury workload. Might have to start Gio in 0.5 PPR in the first round of the playoffs since he was my early pick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(KFFL)Cincinnati Bengals RB Jeremy Hill criticized the team's game plan against the Tampa Bay Buccaneers in Week 13, and offensive coordinator Hue Jackson responded by saying Hill needs to block better and break more tackles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how anyone could have much confidence in figuring it out. They are both going to get some touches, but how many and what they do with them is going to come down to game flow, performance, match ups, etc. Just no way of knowing which (if either) is the "play" right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting words from Jackson. Wonder how to read into this?

Against the Buccaneers, Hill had the majority of touches, finishing with 17 (13 rushes, four catches). Bernard had 11 (10 rushes, one catch).

Don't read too far into the division of labor between the running backs, though. Offensive coordinator Hue Jackson didn't think this switch to favoring Hill would become a pattern. This game was simply about continuing to ease Bernard back into the flow of the offense after he missed three games.

"You guys kind of know my mode when we get a guy back," Jackson said Monday. "Try not to put too much on him right away, but we'll slowly work him back. Hopefully you can win games and get guys acclimated back in games and then you kind of let them be who they are. He's got a couple games under his belt now, and we'll keep expanding for him as we move forward."

Anyone think Gio slowly starts to take back his role prior to the injury? If a near 50/50 split is limiting Gio's touches, it feels like the load may swing back into his favor soon. (please keep the favoritism out of the discussion).

I own Gio without Hill in dynasty so I like to hear that there. But I also own Gio and Hill in the playoffs in a redraft league and now I'm not sure what to do. I was going to go with Hill this week before the coach badmouthed him to the media and now saying that Gio will get more touches. I barely sneaked into the playoffs in this league so I'm a long shot anyways. I think I have to go with my 1st round pick.

Please don't tell me you believe coach speak? If a coach said it, I'd go with the polar opposite of what they said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting words from Jackson. Wonder how to read into this?

Against the Buccaneers, Hill had the majority of touches, finishing with 17 (13 rushes, four catches). Bernard had 11 (10 rushes, one catch).

Don't read too far into the division of labor between the running backs, though. Offensive coordinator Hue Jackson didn't think this switch to favoring Hill would become a pattern. This game was simply about continuing to ease Bernard back into the flow of the offense after he missed three games.

"You guys kind of know my mode when we get a guy back," Jackson said Monday. "Try not to put too much on him right away, but we'll slowly work him back. Hopefully you can win games and get guys acclimated back in games and then you kind of let them be who they are. He's got a couple games under his belt now, and we'll keep expanding for him as we move forward."

Anyone think Gio slowly starts to take back his role prior to the injury? If a near 50/50 split is limiting Gio's touches, it feels like the load may swing back into his favor soon. (please keep the favoritism out of the discussion).

I own Gio without Hill in dynasty so I like to hear that there. But I also own Gio and Hill in the playoffs in a redraft league and now I'm not sure what to do. I was going to go with Hill this week before the coach badmouthed him to the media and now saying that Gio will get more touches. I barely sneaked into the playoffs in this league so I'm a long shot anyways. I think I have to go with my 1st round pick.

Please don't tell me you believe coach speak? If a coach said it, I'd go with the polar opposite of what they said.

I understand taking coach speak with a grain of salt, but it's pretty clear that he is not happy with Hill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting words from Jackson. Wonder how to read into this?

Against the Buccaneers, Hill had the majority of touches, finishing with 17 (13 rushes, four catches). Bernard had 11 (10 rushes, one catch).

Don't read too far into the division of labor between the running backs, though. Offensive coordinator Hue Jackson didn't think this switch to favoring Hill would become a pattern. This game was simply about continuing to ease Bernard back into the flow of the offense after he missed three games.

"You guys kind of know my mode when we get a guy back," Jackson said Monday. "Try not to put too much on him right away, but we'll slowly work him back. Hopefully you can win games and get guys acclimated back in games and then you kind of let them be who they are. He's got a couple games under his belt now, and we'll keep expanding for him as we move forward."

Anyone think Gio slowly starts to take back his role prior to the injury? If a near 50/50 split is limiting Gio's touches, it feels like the load may swing back into his favor soon. (please keep the favoritism out of the discussion).

I own Gio without Hill in dynasty so I like to hear that there. But I also own Gio and Hill in the playoffs in a redraft league and now I'm not sure what to do. I was going to go with Hill this week before the coach badmouthed him to the media and now saying that Gio will get more touches. I barely sneaked into the playoffs in this league so I'm a long shot anyways. I think I have to go with my 1st round pick.

Please don't tell me you believe coach speak? If a coach said it, I'd go with the polar opposite of what they said.

I understand taking coach speak with a grain of salt, but it's pretty clear that he is not happy with Hill.

I think they're clearly not happy with Hill shooting his mouth off after games. But I doubt that alone factors into usage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Week 1 mostly not started

Week 2 spot started

Week 3 consistently started

Week 4 bye

Week 5 consistently started

Week 6 spot started

Week 7 mostly not started

Week 8 spot started

Week 9 gio hurt, consistently started

Week 10 gio hurt, consistently started

Week 11 gio hurt, consistently started

Week 12 gio returns, consistently started

Week 13 consistently started

Week 14 ?

Hill probably helped a lot of teams with big games while gio was out, but yesterday's stinker could have derailed your team. Do you start him in a playoff game after a crappy game like this? Or do you bench him for almost any reasonable option?

"He probably helped a lot of teams for several weeks, but one stinker could have derailed your team", lol.

This week obviously wasn't good for fantasy, but I'll point out that in ppr, it was still better than guys like Gio, Denard, Crowell, Gore, Vereen, Blount, Richardson, etc. He was within 3 points of Forte, Morris, Mathews, Lynch, FJax, etc. Hardly a season killer.

The "game plan" is the same as it ever was- while Gio is playing, he's a low end ~RB 2. Whether you should start him depends on your other options and league settings, but he certainly isn't automatic.

This whole exercise was biased in nature form the start and designed to support a very silly premise in the first place - that Hill was "roster poison" in a dynasty league. In this day and age most RBs are going to have a few "stinkers" now and then. Hill has been very productive as a rookie and the writing is already on the wall that his role, even with Gio healthy, is growing. I'm not sure why we are even keeping this up.

If you're not interested in participating, that's fine, but how can this exercise be biased? All I'm doing is asking people when they start him and when they don't. The only way it could be biased is if people lie, which is why I ask before the games instead of afterwards. The only time I stopped was when Gio was hurt. This is a legitimate exercise where it should be impossible for me to have known the results before hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how anyone could have much confidence in figuring it out. They are both going to get some touches, but how many and what they do with them is going to come down to game flow, performance, match ups, etc. Just no way of knowing which (if either) is the "play" right now.

Yep, this situation blows. I own both, and almost feel like I have two dead roster spots. It's not at all comforting feeling this way headed into the fantasy playoffs. I was hoping Crowell would takeover in Cleveland so I could just flip a coin between Gio/Hill going forward, but w/ him having a gimpy hip, playing both Gio/Hill is again back on the table, and with that comes exposure to Bad Andy (like in the Tampa game). FML. Have no clue what I'm gonna do week 14.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some interesting words from Jackson. Wonder how to read into this?

Against the Buccaneers, Hill had the majority of touches, finishing with 17 (13 rushes, four catches). Bernard had 11 (10 rushes, one catch).

Don't read too far into the division of labor between the running backs, though. Offensive coordinator Hue Jackson didn't think this switch to favoring Hill would become a pattern. This game was simply about continuing to ease Bernard back into the flow of the offense after he missed three games.

"You guys kind of know my mode when we get a guy back," Jackson said Monday. "Try not to put too much on him right away, but we'll slowly work him back. Hopefully you can win games and get guys acclimated back in games and then you kind of let them be who they are. He's got a couple games under his belt now, and we'll keep expanding for him as we move forward."

Anyone think Gio slowly starts to take back his role prior to the injury? If a near 50/50 split is limiting Gio's touches, it feels like the load may swing back into his favor soon. (please keep the favoritism out of the discussion).

Well, I am very concerned about Hue's public rip job on Hill after Hill's stupid comments after the last game. Don't know if the Bengals will punish him or not...could be the opposite. Maybe Hill comes out and plays like a man possessed as he tries to run through tackles. But we won't know the answer until we see the game. Because I think the most likely scenario is that Hill gets punished at least somewhat, I am downgrading Hill for the week and he will sit for me behind Leveon, Crowell, and Tre.

Longterm I still think Hill is very valuable even in a time share. Gio is definitely a different type of back and I think he will slowly be moved into the Sproles, pass-catching role where he can be split out as a slot receiver as well as run the ball. They will want to pound Hill in the second halves of many future games against a worn-down opponent. As long as the Bengals' D holds up so the team is winning regularly despite Dalton's deficiencies, Hill and Gio will both put up solid RB2 numbers. I'll take it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how anyone could have much confidence in figuring it out. They are both going to get some touches, but how many and what they do with them is going to come down to game flow, performance, match ups, etc. Just no way of knowing which (if either) is the "play" right now.

Yep, this situation blows. I own both, and almost feel like I have two dead roster spots. It's not at all comforting feeling this way headed into the fantasy playoffs. I was hoping Crowell would takeover in Cleveland so I could just flip a coin between Gio/Hill going forward, but w/ him having a gimpy hip, playing both Gio/Hill is again back on the table, and with that comes exposure to Bad Andy (like in the Tampa game). FML. Have no clue what I'm gonna do week 14.

crowell is in over Hill for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hill has 144-683-6 rushing and 21-180-0 receiving through 12 games (5 starts listed at Pro Football Reference.com).

Prorated, that would be about 200-900-8 rushing and 28-240-0 receiving over a full season. He is in the top 15 RBs in some scoring formats, and is tracking fairly closely to some pre-season estimates/expectations noted in the thread.

As to whether Hill was a good pick or not, it's relative, and depends on who else would have been selected instead. I suspect since the draft his value has appreciated, and to use another rookie RB counterpart or peer taken around the same place in dynasty drafts for comparison purposes, Devonta Freeman's has declined below Hill's. IMO, in that instance, Hill has been the better pick than Freeman in dynasty leagues, so far (if nothing else, he could likely fetch a higher return in a trade at this point).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how anyone could have much confidence in figuring it out. They are both going to get some touches, but how many and what they do with them is going to come down to game flow, performance, match ups, etc. Just no way of knowing which (if either) is the "play" right now.

Yep, this situation blows. I own both, and almost feel like I have two dead roster spots. It's not at all comforting feeling this way headed into the fantasy playoffs. I was hoping Crowell would takeover in Cleveland so I could just flip a coin between Gio/Hill going forward, but w/ him having a gimpy hip, playing both Gio/Hill is again back on the table, and with that comes exposure to Bad Andy (like in the Tampa game). FML. Have no clue what I'm gonna do week 14.

crowell is in over Hill for me.

Me too and it wasn't close. Hip injury doesn't seem too serious. He's consolidated his hold on the starting job, whereas Hill's role has been muddied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hill has 144-683-6 rushing and 21-180-0 receiving through 12 games (5 starts listed at Pro Football Reference.com).

Prorated, that would be about 200-900-8 rushing and 28-240-0 receiving over a full season. He is in the top 15 RBs in some scoring formats, and is tracking fairly closely to some pre-season estimates/expectations noted in the thread.

I don't know where to start.

First of all, why would you pro rate his 12 game stats when there's a huge difference between the games where go played and the games where he didn't?

Second of all, his "top 15 numbers in some scoring formats" have people throwing up in their mouths right now about whether or not to use him. Why? Because "top 15" numbers suck.

Did you know hill has outscored Rashad jennings, cj Anderson, Isaiah Crowell, tre mason, and yes, even gio bernard? But people in this thread are saying they would tather have any of those guys in their lineup than hill right now. Except for the time that gio was hurt, Hill has been exactly what I said before the season - a high variance, touchdown dependent spot starter whose only real fantasy value was as a backup to gio.

What we are seeing now is that yes, hill is talented, but that offense doesn't have room for him to be a stud. I never questioned his talent. It was always this situation he's stuck in for the next four years or more.

And yes, i would still much rather have freeman on my dynasty roster. He's never tempted me to start him, and as I said, he may never amount to anything - but he has a shot at a feature role that hill still appears not to have.

Meanwhile, even in a near best case season where gio got hurt before a stretch of winnable games, and hill broke long runs in two of them, he's still been disappointing. And now, hill's dumb dumb factor just started to rear its head, too, criticizing the coach and prompting the coach to call him out. That was always a risk with hill and it may continue to be.

The fact that hill is tracking close to his preseason expectations and yet is borderline unstartable according to several posts this week is pretty much confirmation of everything I've said since day one. I don't care that you're still trying to spin the stats to prove that he's really a top fifteen back, but I'm disappointed that you still don't seem to understand the point that a guy who stayed healthy all year and ended up borderline top fifteen is virtually useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hill has 144-683-6 rushing and 21-180-0 receiving through 12 games (5 starts listed at Pro Football Reference.com).

Prorated, that would be about 200-900-8 rushing and 28-240-0 receiving over a full season. He is in the top 15 RBs in some scoring formats, and is tracking fairly closely to some pre-season estimates/expectations noted in the thread.

I don't know where to start.

First of all, why would you pro rate his 12 game stats when there's a huge difference between the games where go played and the games where he didn't?

Second of all, his "top 15 numbers in some scoring formats" have people throwing up in their mouths right now about whether or not to use him. Why? Because "top 15" numbers suck.

Did you know hill has outscored Rashad jennings, cj Anderson, Isaiah Crowell, tre mason, and yes, even gio bernard? But people in this thread are saying they would tather have any of those guys in their lineup than hill right now. Except for the time that gio was hurt, Hill has been exactly what I said before the season - a high variance, touchdown dependent spot starter whose only real fantasy value was as a backup to gio.

What we are seeing now is that yes, hill is talented, but that offense doesn't have room for him to be a stud. I never questioned his talent. It was always this situation he's stuck in for the next four years or more.

And yes, i would still much rather have freeman on my dynasty roster. He's never tempted me to start him, and as I said, he may never amount to anything - but he has a shot at a feature role that hill still appears not to have.

Meanwhile, even in a near best case season where gio got hurt before a stretch of winnable games, and hill broke long runs in two of them, he's still been disappointing. And now, hill's dumb dumb factor just started to rear its head, too, criticizing the coach and prompting the coach to call him out. That was always a risk with hill and it may continue to be.

The fact that hill is tracking close to his preseason expectations and yet is borderline unstartable according to several posts this week is pretty much confirmation of everything I've said since day one. I don't care that you're still trying to spin the stats to prove that he's really a top fifteen back, but I'm disappointed that you still don't seem to understand the point that a guy who stayed healthy all year and ended up borderline top fifteen is virtually useless.

:lmao:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hill has 144-683-6 rushing and 21-180-0 receiving through 12 games (5 starts listed at Pro Football Reference.com).

Prorated, that would be about 200-900-8 rushing and 28-240-0 receiving over a full season. He is in the top 15 RBs in some scoring formats, and is tracking fairly closely to some pre-season estimates/expectations noted in the thread.

I don't know where to start.

First of all, why would you pro rate his 12 game stats when there's a huge difference between the games where go played and the games where he didn't?

Second of all, his "top 15 numbers in some scoring formats" have people throwing up in their mouths right now about whether or not to use him. Why? Because "top 15" numbers suck.

Did you know hill has outscored Rashad jennings, cj Anderson, Isaiah Crowell, tre mason, and yes, even gio bernard? But people in this thread are saying they would tather have any of those guys in their lineup than hill right now. Except for the time that gio was hurt, Hill has been exactly what I said before the season - a high variance, touchdown dependent spot starter whose only real fantasy value was as a backup to gio.

What we are seeing now is that yes, hill is talented, but that offense doesn't have room for him to be a stud. I never questioned his talent. It was always this situation he's stuck in for the next four years or more.And yes, i would still much rather have freeman on my dynasty roster. He's never tempted me to start him, and as I said, he may never amount to anything - but he has a shot at a feature role that hill still appears not to have.

Meanwhile, even in a near best case season where gio got hurt before a stretch of winnable games, and hill broke long runs in two of them, he's still been disappointing. And now, hill's dumb dumb factor just started to rear its head, too, criticizing the coach and prompting the coach to call him out. That was always a risk with hill and it may continue to be.

The fact that hill is tracking close to his preseason expectations and yet is borderline unstartable according to several posts this week is pretty much confirmation of everything I've said since day one. I don't care that you're still trying to spin the stats to prove that he's really a top fifteen back, but I'm disappointed that you still don't seem to understand the point that a guy who stayed healthy all year and ended up borderline top fifteen is virtually useless.

:lmao:

This stance has gotten beyond ridiculous. I'm not sure how anyone could seriously still be trying to claim "victory". Sometimes it's ok to admit that you're wrong.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In dynasty? Sure. Obviously freeman's value has dropped off since the start of this thread, but he still looks like the leader in the clubhouse to start in 2015 when the Falcons line will be healthy. He still has a shot to put up some very good seasons. It seems less likely today than it did in august, but it's still a very real possibility.

With hill, it looks like what we've seen is what we get. A few weeks he was useful when gio got hurt. If I were in Vegas and they let me bet three good weeks for a chance at an every week starter, sign me up. You don't win in fantasy football by collecting a bunch of low upside, high variance guys. People who drafted Hill with a relatively early pick spent an early pick and a roster spot on him for the next few years, because you're never going to drop him and you'll never feel like your getting enough value to trade him. You might even see him have a good game one week and decide to start him the next - which has totally happened in this thread - and the odds are against you ever succeeding at chasing points. These guys are roster poison.

I totally agree that hill is the better player, much more talented, plays in a better offense, has a higher upside if he's the full time starter. But chances are very good that he will never be a useful fantasy player without a gio injury. Maybe he's the exception to that role, but it's just not likely imo. I'm willing to miss out on the rare outlier to avoid loading up my team with guys who I hope to never have to rely on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Atlanta is going to see a new regime this offseason. Freeman is a nice buy low. But no way I have him above Hill. Hills problem is situational. I don't think it's wise to dump a known good player in a muddled situation for a unknown player in a muddy situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In dynasty? Sure. Obviously freeman's value has dropped off since the start of this thread, but he still looks like the leader in the clubhouse to start in 2015 when the Falcons line will be healthy. He still has a shot to put up some very good seasons. It seems less likely today than it did in august, but it's still a very real possibility.

With hill, it looks like what we've seen is what we get. A few weeks he was useful when gio got hurt. If I were in Vegas and they let me bet three good weeks for a chance at an every week starter, sign me up. You don't win in fantasy football by collecting a bunch of low upside, high variance guys. People who drafted Hill with a relatively early pick spent an early pick and a roster spot on him for the next few years, because you're never going to drop him and you'll never feel like your getting enough value to trade him. You might even see him have a good game one week and decide to start him the next - which has totally happened in this thread - and the odds are against you ever succeeding at chasing points. These guys are roster poison.

I totally agree that hill is the better player, much more talented, plays in a better offense, has a higher upside if he's the full time starter. But chances are very good that he will never be a useful fantasy player without a gio injury. Maybe he's the exception to that role, but it's just not likely imo. I'm willing to miss out on the rare outlier to avoid loading up my team with guys who I hope to never have to rely on.

I know you're a smart guy, so how are you defining "upside" here, because based on the standard definition Hill has proven to be anything but "low upside?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In dynasty? Sure. Obviously freeman's value has dropped off since the start of this thread, but he still looks like the leader in the clubhouse to start in 2015 when the Falcons line will be healthy. He still has a shot to put up some very good seasons. It seems less likely today than it did in august, but it's still a very real possibility.

With hill, it looks like what we've seen is what we get. A few weeks he was useful when gio got hurt. If I were in Vegas and they let me bet three good weeks for a chance at an every week starter, sign me up. You don't win in fantasy football by collecting a bunch of low upside, high variance guys. People who drafted Hill with a relatively early pick spent an early pick and a roster spot on him for the next few years, because you're never going to drop him and you'll never feel like your getting enough value to trade him. You might even see him have a good game one week and decide to start him the next - which has totally happened in this thread - and the odds are against you ever succeeding at chasing points. These guys are roster poison.

I totally agree that hill is the better player, much more talented, plays in a better offense, has a higher upside if he's the full time starter. But chances are very good that he will never be a useful fantasy player without a gio injury. Maybe he's the exception to that role, but it's just not likely imo. I'm willing to miss out on the rare outlier to avoid loading up my team with guys who I hope to never have to rely on.

And this started out as a dynasty discussion. People have popped in and have strictly been looking at him from a redraft perspective, and sure this week there may very well be some better options since Hill stupidly called out his coaching staff and is playing against a good run defense this week, but Hill has clearly not been "roster poison" in redraft and is certainly not in a dynasty league where most good teams are likely not starting many rookies. You yourself said that you'd rather have Feeman since you know he's unstartable. Let's brush aside what a silly thing that is to say, and assuming that it is a valid position to take, by that standard couldn't you just not start Hill as well and see what happens with both RBs going forward?

You cropped out what I had posted before in responding to one of my posts above regarding the fact that situations are always in flux? There's at lease an equal chance that Hill is a feature back before Freeman ever is. You call him the "leader in the clubhouse" but that's a disingenuous way to look at it, and I ssuspect that you know that. Steven Jackson has bee god awful for most of the season, and Quizz Rodgers has been Quizz Rodgers, yet Freeman has not carved out a significant role at all? There's a very good chance that (especially if a new coaching staff comes in) Atlanta signs one of the many FA RBs that will be available (their approach this offseason shows that this is a viable option) or that they spend a higher pick on a RB. They are very unlikely to just hand a job to Freeman. If they do can he be successful? I think it's possible. I like his college tape, but it's really not clear at all.

The reasons I say that the "fact gathering" that you're doing above is biased is that you clearly have an agenda. You're trying to show that Hill is "roster poison" and thus justify a unpopular opinion. Your study - which lets face it isn't exactly very scientific since about 2 or 3 people have responded each week - doesn't really prove what you are trying to convince us that it does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yiiikes. If you're basing your RB dynasty decisions on your expectations for long term depth chart situations, you're doing it wrong. Targeting and drafting RBs is about talent long term and situation short term. And by short term I mean "is he currently starting", not "how do I expect his situation to progress over the course of the season". Like others mention; the idea that an RB will become the future starter simply because he is next in line is silly. By the time the starting position becomes available there will be increased competition from UDFAs, veteran free agents and drafted players. Matt Williamson and Safchick had a discussion on this on one of the most recent DLF podcasts, if my memory serves me right. Do you really think that when/if the Seahawks cut Lynch they will simply hand the keys to the franchise to Christine Michael without bringing in competition? Or do you think Freeman will simply have a clear road to a starting gig? Those type of situations are obviously positives when you evaluate a player's value, you would rather want them to be playing behind Steven Jackson than Eddie Lacy, but if you make the expected future situation a big part of your valuation then you end up overdrafting and overpaying. Depth chart situations are so fluent at the RB position so to pretend like you can predict their future is kind of silly. Who expected Jerick McKinnon to be called into action this early? If you went by situation this past offseason, did you pass on Crowell? Did you draft Sankey and Freeman? Did you pass on Tre Mason since Zac Stacy was the established starter? If you draft by situation you will end up with players that struggle to perform when/if they get a chance, and are basically worthless when the situation doesn't turn out like you expected. If you draft by talent you'll stockpile your roster with running backs that will find their way to production at some point and more importantly they will be productive when they first get their shot. The difficult part is of course to be able to figure out who is the talented RB and who is not, which RB has limitations to his game and which RB can become a workhorse and/or a player who is involved in the passing game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure there is some good info there, but you need to learn to hit the ENTER key a couple times ever 3-4 lines so your posts are easy to read.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hill has 144-683-6 rushing and 21-180-0 receiving through 12 games (5 starts listed at Pro Football Reference.com).

Prorated, that would be about 200-900-8 rushing and 28-240-0 receiving over a full season. He is in the top 15 RBs in some scoring formats, and is tracking fairly closely to some pre-season estimates/expectations noted in the thread.

I don't know where to start.

First of all, why would you pro rate his 12 game stats when there's a huge difference between the games where go played and the games where he didn't?

Second of all, his "top 15 numbers in some scoring formats" have people throwing up in their mouths right now about whether or not to use him. Why? Because "top 15" numbers suck.

Did you know hill has outscored Rashad jennings, cj Anderson, Isaiah Crowell, tre mason, and yes, even gio bernard? But people in this thread are saying they would tather have any of those guys in their lineup than hill right now. Except for the time that gio was hurt, Hill has been exactly what I said before the season - a high variance, touchdown dependent spot starter whose only real fantasy value was as a backup to gio.

What we are seeing now is that yes, hill is talented, but that offense doesn't have room for him to be a stud. I never questioned his talent. It was always this situation he's stuck in for the next four years or more.

And yes, i would still much rather have freeman on my dynasty roster. He's never tempted me to start him, and as I said, he may never amount to anything - but he has a shot at a feature role that hill still appears not to have.

Meanwhile, even in a near best case season where gio got hurt before a stretch of winnable games, and hill broke long runs in two of them, he's still been disappointing. And now, hill's dumb dumb factor just started to rear its head, too, criticizing the coach and prompting the coach to call him out. That was always a risk with hill and it may continue to be.

The fact that hill is tracking close to his preseason expectations and yet is borderline unstartable according to several posts this week is pretty much confirmation of everything I've said since day one. I don't care that you're still trying to spin the stats to prove that he's really a top fifteen back, but I'm disappointed that you still don't seem to understand the point that a guy who stayed healthy all year and ended up borderline top fifteen is virtually useless.

Hill's stats

Pre-Bernard injury (total through first 7 games - 50-195-3 rushing, 13-131-0 receiving / proration - 115-445-7 rushing, 30-300-0 receiving)

1) 4-19-0

2) 15-74-1 rushing, 2-22-0 receiving

3) 7-39-1

4) 2-1-0 rushing, 3-68-0 receiving

5) 8-22-1 rushing, 4-13-0 receiving

6) 4-15-0

7) 10-25-0 rushing, 4-28-0 receiving

Bernard injury (total in the three games - 62-361-2 rushing, 3-28-0 receiving / proration - 331-1,925-11 rushing, 16-150-0 receiving

8) 24-154-2 rushing, 1-9-0 receiving

9) 12-55-0 rushing, 1-6-0 receiving

10) 27-152-0 rushing, 1-13-0 receiving

Post-Bernard injury (total in the past two games - 31-127-1 rushing, 5-21-0 receiving / proration - 248-1,016-8 rushing, 40-168-0 receiving)

11) 18-87-1 rushing, 1-9-0 receiving

12) 13-40-0 rushing, 4-12-0 receiving

Bernard's stats

Pre-injury (total through first seven games - 107-446-5 rushing, 20-179-0)

1) 14-48-0 rushing, 6-62-0 receiving

2) 27-90-1 rushing, 5-79-0 receiving

3) 14-47-2 rushing, 1-7-0 receiving

4) 13-62-0 rushing, 2-10-0 receiving

5) 18-137-1 rushing, 4-20-0 receiving

6) 7-17-0 rushing, 2-[-1]-0 receiving

7) 16-45-1 rushing, 2-2-0 receiving

Post-injury (total in the past two games - 27-94-0 rushing, 3-26-0 receiving)

11) 17-45-0 rushing, 2-22-0 receiving

12) 10-49-0 rushing, 1-4-0 receiving

General observations

Hill had more than 10 carries just once in the first seven games, averaging slightly more than 7 carries per game.

He had 63 in the three games Bernard DNP due to injury, for an average of 21 carries.

With 31 carries the past two games after Bernard returned from injury, averaging 15.5 carries.

Bernard had less than 14 carries just once in the first seven games, averaging slightly more than 15 carries per game.

With 27 carries the past two games since returning from injury, averaging 13.5 carries.

So Bernard's usage in terms of rushing numbers is similar before and after the injury. Hill has had three distinct phases. Relative to his number of carries in the first seven games prior to Bernard's injury, he received on average about triple that amount in the three games Bernard was out, and once he returned, double the initial amount. Which "phase" looks more like a baseline for Hill, now and going forward, when Bernard is healthy?

The proration earlier didn't just include the games without Bernard that aren't as representative, but also the first seven games, in which he had just 2, 4 (twice), 7 and 8 carry games, which similarly may not be as representative of present projections and future expectations. There are many reasons why Hill might receive a higher AVERAGE number of carries than he did in his first seven games. He is more experienced in pass protection. Presumably knows the plays better. Is more acclimated to the speed of the game. But as far as the coaching staff is concerned, he has had two 150+ yard rushing games since those first seven games. As far as the mechanics of prorations, you can take out whatever numbers you want, and the thread can decide what seems more reasonable. The memory of what Hill did can't be excised from the coaching staff so neatly, I don't think they are going to unremember what happened. In his three career starts, he already has two 150+ yard games, more than Bernard has ever had in his career (broken 100 rushing yards once in 25 games and 9 career starts). Hill might be a better overall, pure rusher than Bernard. Bernard is a more skilled receiver. Using the games since Bernard has returned as a basis for Hill's forward projection, leaves out the potentially objectionable three games in which he started, but also the ones before his double 150+ yard breakout games.

That would yield (per above) about 250-1,000-8 rushing, 40-168-0 receiving.

Compare that to the proration numbers you objected to above (200-900-8 rushing and 28-240-0 receiving).

But isn't this just a smoke screen, since even if you hadn't objected to the proration numbers, even if you let them stand, you would still pronounce them as roster poison anyway, right?

I have to concur with Doctor Octo, the desultory participation in the weekly tracking is a sign that it is essentially meaningless, and isn't revealing what you are purporting it does. You have no idea about roster composition, what is the context of teams not starting or starting him? It is also hard to not interpret it as biased when before it began, you alluded to it not being an I told you so exercise, and than on something like a weekly basis, you say some variant of I told you so. :) Gabriel Byrne did that to John Polito in Miller's Crossing. How can it not come off as biased and appear that you are deeply invested in "being right" when you went on record in the thread with feverish intensity saying you were going to pound the table so not one person drafted Hill?

I would boil down our differences to my focusing on talent, and you focusing on situation. IMO you have overstated how problematic Hill's situation is at times. You have a penchant at times to go for everything and the kitchen sink-type arguments, and when (mixing metaphors) you piled on and got caught with your hand in the cookie jar by including Gresham, you were called on it, and not just by me. Gresham, despite Eifert playing just one game, is around #20. When asked if we should be scared about Gresham, NOT IN CUMULATIVE RELATION TO OTHER PLAYERS BUT BY HIMSELF, you couldn't answer, and were unable to make a concession on even a simple point. When you make overreaching statements, try too hard, paint yourself into a corner, dig in your heels and thereby undermine your own credibility and make it difficult to take your arguments seriously, that is on you. Literally nobody on the planet would make a decision based on the presence of Gresham, where they were all set to add Hill, but once they alarmingly realized Gresham was on the roster, perished the thought because Gresham is too darned good! :) So congrats, you are one out of 6-7 billion that profess to actually base your decision on such an extraneous, peripheral factor.

About Freeman. By far, the weakest part of your chain of reasoning (and a chain is as weak as its weakest link) is the bizarre it is good that he has done bad (never tempted to start him) mantra, and the counterpart, it is bad that Hill has done good (enough to tempt you to use him). The bottom line is, if Freeman fails, he was a bad pick, there is no rationalizing that it was "really" a good pick. Again, you don't get to declare victory in advance. We will have to wait and see how it plays out. To quote your colorful, though at times melodramatic, histrionic and overwrought language, if Freeman busts, he will be ROSTER POISON, you will have to stick your finger down you throat and vomit up the pick, and you will have screwed yourself by chasing opportunity over talent.

Hill's dumb dumb factor is relative. Is he as dumb dumb as Adrian Peterson or Ray Rice? No, he probably isn't a candidate to be an intern at CERN any time soon, but he isn't being paid to a be a physicist. If Hill is a superior between the tackles runner to Bernard (hint - he is), and gives the team the best chance to win, would Hue Jackson be a dumb dumb to cut off his nose to spite his face and play him less than he would otherwise, thereby increasing the chance of losing?

Clearly lots of things disappoint you and it doesn't take much to elicit that response from you, so that comes as zero surprise, but as it relates to others not following along with your elaborate belief structure when it comes to Hill, just for the record, I'm not sure if you realize how fringe your preference for Freeman over Hill appears to be, as of today? It isn't flat Earth, Elvis is alive or extraterrestrial aliens shaking hands with the President fringe, but it is really, really, really, really fringe. Maybe having a realization or epiphany on that will help you come to terms with your profound disappointment.

You stated potential owners would be better off not drafting Hill this year, as his value would surely go down, and he could be gotten cheaper next year. That was mistaken, that has not gone down as you predicted. Freeman has done very little with the opportunities he has been given, and his value may well have gone down. Not everything you have "been saying all along" has transpired like you suggested.

For me, it always gets back to the numbers not adding up.

How many RBs in the league currently meet your criteria as non-roster poison? How many are there to go around? Could you have gotten those players with the pick you used on Hill?

Did some of those RBs start out like Hill, or were they more like Freeman? Who fits the profile better for RBs that eventually attain non-roster poison stature?

IMO, you are speaking for yourself in most cases (see the Hill/Freeman dynasty poll) with the roster poison rhetoric and thread posturing. Others have suggested it may have to do with the fact that your being in one league doesn't give you a lot of perspective, and the strident tone betrays some kind of belief that you can extrapolate it to everybody (you know, like the ham-fisted roster poison refrain hundreds of times). What percentage of teams/leagues would rostering Hill comprise being roster poison? Does it matter if they are 14 or 16 team leagues? Start 1-2 RBs? One flex? Two Flex? Already loaded at other positions? Is your advice relevant 90% of the time? 80%? 70%? No idea (in which case, by definition, you just don't know what you are talking about in dispensing advice that isn't relevant to many teams/leagues)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I had to roll with Gio or Hill at this point, gotta go with Gio. Hill is in the doghouse with the coach, and I think Cincy goes back to their original formula.

I think it's a bit premature to make the call that Hill is in the doghouse. I see Hue and Lewis as pretty tolerant guys so I think they will put the best guys out there in what is a crucial game for their playoff chances. However, I think there is a level of trust in Gio that makes them see their RBs in a different light than what most fantasy players and experts do. And I think it might be a mistake to read too much into their usage these last few weeks since Gio came back from his injury. There's been some chatter that they've been easing Gio back in, in order to keep him healthy. I think Gio is their lead RB but if gameflow, defensive scheme or situation calls for it they will lean on Hill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doc oc, if you think hill has shown himself to be a high upside dynasty play then I guess you don't understand a thing I've said. You don't build a strong running back stable in dynasty by taking guys who are going to be mediocre every year. Hill has been everything his supporters have said he would be, and Bob seems to think these numbers are good, too. But they're not.

If you've got hill in your starting lineup, and you're a contending team, you're looking to upgrade the position because he just isn't a good fantasy play when gio is healthy. And he's not going to carry your team next year or the year after, either, unless gio gets hurt. You can point to season totals and say he's been borderline startable, but he's 21st in non ppr ppg, which not only counts the weeks gio was injured, it doesn't even count guys like cj Anderson. He's been a predictably bad fantasy play for most of the season.

Maybe cj Anderson is a good comp player though. He's tearing it up at the right time. Ronnie Hillman was good for a stretch, too. And Matt asiata. And boom herron. And Jonas grey. And legarrett blount. And a bunch more. All of those guys bubbled to the surface as good gangway plays when the guys around them got hurt or suspended. A few weeks of good production, maybe more if the injury is severe. That's what hill gives you for upside - a guy who is instantly a top play for the week of gio gets hurt, but it's otherwise almost completely useless. If you bench him every week, as doc oc suggested, then you spent an early pick on a boom herron when everyone else got those guys for free off waivers.

The reason I'm asking people which weeks they would start him is because several people quite vocally said he was valuable Eben if gio didn't get hurt. Bob still seems to be making that case. Ok, tell me, do you start him every week? Just certain weeks? Help me understand how you get value from hill when gio is healthy. There's nothing biased about giving people a podium to defend their stance. You're just attacking me on every front as you have throughout this thread. I never said it was a scientific study, I said up front it's an ongoing conversation, specifically with people in this thread, who said that he would be useful during the season. So far, the people who have gotten value from him seem to be the ones who benched him all year except when gio was hurt, but they almost certainly paid a high price for two good games in the middle of the season.

Why would I have preferred a guy like freeman, tre mason, or even mckinnon or kadeem carey? Because all of those guys had the potential to be starters either by beating out the incumbent or simply outlasting them en route to the job. Freeman hasn't done it yet, but he may. Mason appears to have taken that job for good. Mckinnon was a decent play for a while, but it's up in the air whether he will ever pan out. Carey looks decent but has a tough path to the starting job the next couple years. But at least, unlike hill, he doesn't have to worry about them potentially resigning a 30 year old forte to a long term deal. He can win or lose the job on his own merits.

Hill doesn't seem to have that kind of upside. His path to a starting job is blocked until 2017, and maybe longer if they re sign gio at that point. Until then, he's a low upside play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of you guys have a lot of time on your hands. Sheesh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BF, you make some good points at times, but it's drowned out by your inability to be objective. Very EBF-like.

It probably feels that way because you're entrenched on the opposite side. But I was the first one in here saying he looked good in relief of gio, I immediately pointed out that he could get a huge workload and was the first to cite the preseason game where they ran him more than anyone thought was wise to get him used to an nfl workload, and I have repeatedly said I think he's very talented. I don't know what you want me to say that's more objective than that when the rest if the stuff I've said about him has been dead on accurate so far. Maybe I should have called him a top ten FF rb the week he made his first nfl start against a middle of the road defense, but I still think in the long run youre better off starting known studs in that spot.

The big difference, though, is that i haven't been back here saying, humpback, you're wrong. I'm not here to argue with people and tell them who's wrong and get board cred. I haven't gone back and quoted some if the statements you guys have made in this thread. I'm not fighting, I'm defending my point.

Once again, you choose to make a personal comment out of this, just like the last couple posters who have said I was being dishonest or criticizing me for not currently playing in as many dynasty leagues as they do. This is the worst of the shark pool right here, when people try to pile on opposing view points and attack each other.

I appreciate your backhanded compliment, though. It's more than any of the other guys have said.

Edited by bostonfred

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hill is a very good player in a mediocre situation. Gio is too. Fred made some good points but in the end, his conclusion was probably off. Hill has only gained value this season. He showed he can play in the NFL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm just happy nobody has quoted the thesis statement. Us mobile users appreciate it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hill is a very good player in a mediocre situation. Gio is too. Fred made some good points but in the end, his conclusion was probably off. Hill has only gained value this season. He showed he can play in the NFL.

How was fred wrong? The situation played out exactly as he predicted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.