Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
I wouldn't. Obviously, if all conditions remain the same in PIT, it might be hard to outproduce Bell. But, things change so fast in this league, I'll take talent over situation long-term. And Gurley > Bell from a talent perspective.
I can see that. if push came to shove would be very tough call between Gurley/Bell for me. Gun to my head i'd probably take Bell but not sure. Gurley is just so beastly.
that's a good point and i was huge on T-Rich but Gurley is a far better athlete. I like Gurley more than i liked Richardson but was very high on Richardson coming out of college. Maybe i'm wrong again, but Gurley seems to be very driven and has all the talent in the world. Richardson doesn't seem to care about football anymore.Dez said:
He could have been if he'd shown more, for sure. Would have only taken half a season of great production, and even without it he made the top-5 easily and the 1st round in start-ups. But McCoy and Charles and AP were all still productive and young enough to hold Trent off for the most part.Dez said:
I think Bell is being underrated from a talent standpoint.ILUVBEER99 said:
Gurley is a decent enough receiver out of the backfield, but Le'Veon Bell is running WR routes downfield and lining up in the slot like no workhorse RB has since a 23 year old Steven Jackson. Gurley isn't in the same stratosphere here.Gurley has elite vision and receiving ability.
I agree but (going strictly off of my poor memory) most of that Seattle defense was/is filled with guys that weren't projected to be superstars except maybe Earl Thomas. Which might lead Quinn to look towards the offense in round one and defense most of the way after that. With some OL sprinkled in.
That logic would have worked really poorly with guys like Arian Foster and Priest Holmes.
Again, I think it's a misconception that Bell is just an average guy in a good situation. People are forgetting that everyone was saying "WOW, this guy looks amazing" right out of the gates this past year, well before he had compiled the production to match.
But would have fit well for Chris Johnson, DeAngelo Williams, Maurice Jones-Drew.
Sure. And if he keeps the weight off, if he doesn't smoke weed, if the offense doesn't change a thing, perhaps he repeats his impressive 2014 campaign.
MJD had multiple really good years. I get what you are saying --- Bell very well could regress. But even if he regresses a bit, he is still worth a lot.
I agree with this 100%. If Gurley looks like a quality starter right out of the gates, there are few (if any) RBs I would trade him for straight up next offseason.
If you take Gurley at pick 1 and his career mimics Chris Johnson or MJD, then you should feel pretty good about it
Correct. But until then, wow, would be insanity to rank him #1.
Exactly. There is a lot of real estate between a regression and zero value. Just because I don't think he'll be a #1 RB doesn't mean I think he's a bum. I assume he will have a strong few years, maybe even have a Curtis Martin-esque career arc. But, I don't expect he will ever land #1 amongst RBs again, whereas I think Gurley has that kind of talent.
Because in some leagues you may never get that opportunity again, not when all doubt has been erased.
You mean Bell? Taking him #1 over Gurley, and his career mimics MJD ? No, I wouldn't feel good about that, not at all. Especially not if Gurley is the next AP.
If you wanna pay the ROOKIE #1 pick price, fine.
I guess I wouldnt feel good if I drafted Gurley instead of trading him for Latavius Murray, to have Murray be the next AP while Gurley was only the next MJD.
That's why you watch him play and his game cut ups and not just look at the production. When you watch him, you see the reasons why he's getting so much hype. Besides, Chubb is going to be a very good pro as well.
Fantasy football is nothing like the stock market, except for the fact that perception and performance of assets fluctuate. Otherwise, it's a terrible analogy. You assume I can find a seller for that stock at $25 and that I can be guaranteed to get him at that price. Of course, if I can trade out of the #1 spot and still get Gurley, I would, and I will.
It's the best analogy there is for fantasy football player values.
I never said this approach works long term or generalizes to all situations. Broadly, I am going to take the better player period. For the purposes of this discussion, I'm referring to the specific comparison between Gurley and Bell.
The better player is pretty obviously Bell.
Based on scout ratings, the better player is not pretty obviously Bell, if we're talking about talent. Gurley consistently has received much higher ratings than Bell. The better talent is pretty obviously Gurley.
I pretty clearly said talent does not always translate to being a good player because, well, it is proven to be so.
No, I am not expecting Gurley will equal or "be" Bell. I think I've made that pretty clear.
This is a ridiculous statement. He had 80 receptions last year and outscored RB5 by ONE HUNDRED fantasy points. You could cut his reception total in half and he'd still be comfortably in the top 5. I agree that his receiving numbers will likely regress to the mean some, but he has to lose a LOT of receptions to drop out of the top 5. His rushing numbers were in no way unsustainable. If he can maintain that you could literally cut his receiving numbers all the way down to 40 catches for 400 yards and he'd still be in the top 5, comfortably.
You're obsessed with trying to create an argument that's not there. People aren't arguing that situation > talent. They're arguing that you're vastly underrating Bell's talent. Maybe not quite as talented as Gurley but close enough that his other advantages (vision, receiving ability, past production) make up the difference.
