Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
tdmills

[Dynasty] Todd Gurley

Recommended Posts

Is Gurley a generational talent?

Ernol, do you take Bell or Gurley right now?

He seems to address the second part of your question pretty clearly here:

Actually no he didn't He said "If" he loved Gurley, as in, "If" he liked the clearly less valuable guy more. He certainly was not clear whether he does or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if this were AP coming out, this is a different conversation, so stop trying to be cute and make this a "Ghost guy doesnt like rookies" type of strawman.

I am talking about THIS year, and THESE players, and THIS situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if this were AP coming out, this is a different conversation, so stop trying to be cute and make this a "Ghost guy doesnt like rookies" type of strawman.

I am talking about THIS year, and THESE players, and THIS situation.

Fine. So am I. You were the one who created the shiny new things strawman in the first place, so take a deep breath and just accept that some folks are lower on Bell and higher on Gurley than you are. No need to make a big stink about it. Edited by Proust Loves Cake
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Gurley a generational talent?

Ernol, do you take Bell or Gurley right now?

He seems to address the second part of your question pretty clearly here:

As for Bell and Gurley, Im not a huge Bell fan to begin with. I wouldnt draft Bell anywhere in the Top 7 or so picks in a startup. If Im at 1.8 and were unfortunate enough to have Bell drop (i.e., my top 7 were all taken) and I loved Gurley, Id probably just go ahead and take Gurley no matter that in other leagues, Bell would be taken ahead of Gurley. Id only take Bell ahead of Gurley (at any slot) if I were certain I could trade him for either Gurley (and then some) or a player I liked more than Gurley

I also like his earlier comparison to 2006 Stephen Jackson and 2007 rookie, Adrian Peterson. The example's strong because Jackson was no slouch and put up crazy good numbers the year (much like Bell in 2014) before we all had our first opportunity to draft AP (much like Gurley in 2015). Conventional wisdom would be take SJAX/Bell, they were young, proven, and you can't be 100 % sure how a rookie will translate to the NFL. Plus, working against AP was the valid perception of being stuck in a crummy situation in Minnesota (6 wins, Brad Johnson at QB). If it were 2007 and we were having this discussion, ghostguy would probably be telling us anyone would be nuts to take AP over SJAX. And while SJAX continued to have some very good seasons (much like I expect Bell could string together assuming nothing changes), it still would have been better to dismiss what the group or ghost guy said and take the rookie. The play at that time was to step aside a really good, productive back and with a little foresight, take the better talent--a generational talent--in AP, even though he had no NFL track record and SJAX had just come off a spectacular campaign.

Is Gurley a generational talent? That's the unknown, but my eyes and spidey senses tell me yes he is. And I am not going to lose any sleep passing on Bell to find out with Gurley on my team and no one else's.

that's kind of a terrible way of looking at it --- you just cherry picked some situation that already happened, removing all the risk out of the situation to make some kind of point.

I'm just kind of skimming the conversation, so I might not have this right, but I think some guy's entire point was factoring in that risk that you just removed.

what if we change peterson to trent richardson and sjax to anyone ---- aha! now he's right and you're wrong!

I think you should take whoever you want to take, but what a lot of people do in these drafts when they evaluate players is discount the risk, thinking there opinion is rock solid 100%, which of course it never is.

when a rookie enters the league, or when graham switches teams, etc, there's always risk that needs to be accounted for whether you think it's there or not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if this were AP coming out, this is a different conversation, so stop trying to be cute and make this a "Ghost guy doesnt like rookies" type of strawman.

I am talking about THIS year, and THESE players, and THIS situation.

Funny I though these discussions were for dynasty players. Now you eluding to this year alas redraft.

Bell isn't in the same talent tier as Gurley not even close. One has drug issues one doesn't. One is suspended 3games one isn't. Only thing Bell has over Gurley is he's older so he's actually played in the NFL.

This discussion is going to look silly in the no too distant future.

Edit to add. Zero chance I trade 1.1 for Bell. Just as you must take in adp value you must also consider over inflated value. Bell to me falls to that category. But I'm also someone that doesn't wait for the guy to "do it" before I buy Sometimes your too late. I think Gurleys value will pass Bells fairly quick and then it's too late.

Also one failed drug test would kill Bells value. Someone who has already shown very poor judgement. When Blackmon or Gordon got busted for the first time I wasn't worried. This is a real issue.

Edited by Billy Ball Thorton

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to future usage questions, a Fisher quote (paraphrased):

"Once he is healthy, we're going to hand him that little brown thing a bunch."

Doesn't scream RBBC.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to future usage questions, a Fisher quote (paraphrased):

"Once he is healthy, we're going to hand him that little brown thing a bunch."

Doesn't scream RBBC.

:violin: for the Mason owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As to future usage questions, a Fisher quote (paraphrased):

"Once he is healthy, we're going to hand him that little brown thing a bunch."

Doesn't scream RBBC.

Has Fisher ever used a RBBC? Seems he always has a bellcow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if this were AP coming out, this is a different conversation, so stop trying to be cute and make this a "Ghost guy doesnt like rookies" type of strawman.

I am talking about THIS year, and THESE players, and THIS situation.

Funny I though these discussions were for dynasty players. Now you eluding to this year alas redraft.

Nothing I am talking about has anything to do with redraft. What are you talking about?

By THIS year I don't just mean this year's production. I mean this year, this draft, these players, this situation taking into account now and going forward. Sorry, really thought that was obvious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

chris johnson got 250 carries in his rookie year to lendale's 200

Right, and that was a healthy Chris Johnson who wasn't coming off a torn ACL.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

chris johnson got 250 carries in his rookie year to lendale's 200

Right, and that was a healthy Chris Johnson who wasn't coming off a torn ACL.

That is a more relevant concern in redraft than dynasty (if his rehab goes smoothly).

If Fisher prefers, to quote Christopher Walken, "more bellcow", than by process of elimination, beyond 2015, it ain't going to be Mason.

Below is a report from the Rams war room by Michael Silver (I'd say one of Fisher's higher profile media friends, along with Peter King, who has also done these in the past). It includes five embedded videos, the second one, titled "Fisher on Gurley: He's Special", is about five minutes. Again, everybody is entitled to their opinion if they don't think Gurley is special. But with absolutely zero doubt, Fisher clearly does think of him in those terms. He mentioned him in the context of being an extension and continuation of a long lineage of great Rams RBs, like Dickerson (my favorite player, period, not just Ram), Bettis, Faulk, Jackson, and he also talked with Gurley about Eddie George* and the fact that he was even part of the Bears when they had Walter Payton.

* Fisher once used George as a battering *RAM* against opposing defenses (in 2000) 403 X at 3.7 Y/C a pop.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000490604/article/st-louis-rams-warroom-drama-reveals-team-on-a-familiar-track

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is Gurley a generational talent?

Ernol, do you take Bell or Gurley right now?

He seems to address the second part of your question pretty clearly here:

As for Bell and Gurley, Im not a huge Bell fan to begin with. I wouldnt draft Bell anywhere in the Top 7 or so picks in a startup. If Im at 1.8 and were unfortunate enough to have Bell drop (i.e., my top 7 were all taken) and I loved Gurley, Id probably just go ahead and take Gurley no matter that in other leagues, Bell would be taken ahead of Gurley. Id only take Bell ahead of Gurley (at any slot) if I were certain I could trade him for either Gurley (and then some) or a player I liked more than Gurley

I also like his earlier comparison to 2006 Stephen Jackson and 2007 rookie, Adrian Peterson. The example's strong because Jackson was no slouch and put up crazy good numbers the year (much like Bell in 2014) before we all had our first opportunity to draft AP (much like Gurley in 2015). Conventional wisdom would be take SJAX/Bell, they were young, proven, and you can't be 100 % sure how a rookie will translate to the NFL. Plus, working against AP was the valid perception of being stuck in a crummy situation in Minnesota (6 wins, Brad Johnson at QB). If it were 2007 and we were having this discussion, ghostguy would probably be telling us anyone would be nuts to take AP over SJAX. And while SJAX continued to have some very good seasons (much like I expect Bell could string together assuming nothing changes), it still would have been better to dismiss what the group or ghost guy said and take the rookie. The play at that time was to step aside a really good, productive back and with a little foresight, take the better talent--a generational talent--in AP, even though he had no NFL track record and SJAX had just come off a spectacular campaign.

Is Gurley a generational talent? That's the unknown, but my eyes and spidey senses tell me yes he is. And I am not going to lose any sleep passing on Bell to find out with Gurley on my team and no one else's.

that's kind of a terrible way of looking at it --- you just cherry picked some situation that already happened, removing all the risk out of the situation to make some kind of point.

I'm just kind of skimming the conversation, so I might not have this right, but I think some guy's entire point was factoring in that risk that you just removed.

what if we change peterson to trent richardson and sjax to anyone ---- aha! now he's right and you're wrong!

I think you should take whoever you want to take, but what a lot of people do in these drafts when they evaluate players is discount the risk, thinking there opinion is rock solid 100%, which of course it never is.

when a rookie enters the league, or when graham switches teams, etc, there's always risk that needs to be accounted for whether you think it's there or not.

There clearly is risk. Gurley could bust like Trent. In the other hand, i can't deny that my own eyes confirm a lot of things talent evaluators a lot more trained, experienced, and expert than me say... That he is pretty darn close to having that AP skill set. He looks nothing like Trent. But there's clearly risk involved.

But, the point I'm also making is that the tendency to undersell/minimize risk of "established" players. Bell has an inordinate number of red flags for me, including his usage last year which is not sustainable, as well as his own injury history / risk, and character concerns given he had already been suspended in his short career.

So, while you're right that i and others might be at risk for Gurley to not live up to the hype, i have to trust what I've seen--that he's unusually talented--and that Bell is being overvlaued by folks who think last year will just keep happening over and over again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Highest YPC of SEC backs over 200 lbs.(min. 1400 career yards):

        Player 	        From 	To 	School 	        Att 	Yds 	Avg 	TD2 	Felix Jones 	2005 	2007 	Arkansas 	386 	2956 	7.7 	203 	Nick Chubb 	2014 	2014 	Georgia 	219 	1547 	7.1 	144 	Eddie Lacy 	2010 	2012 	Alabama 	355 	2402 	6.8 	307 	Todd Gurley 	2012 	2014 	Georgia 	497 	3210 	6.5 	3513 	Jeremy Hill 	2012 	2013 	LSU     	331 	2013 	6.1 	2615 	Ciatrick Fason 	2002 	2004 	Florida 	315 	1877 	6.0 	1418 	DarrenMcFadden 	2005 	2007 	Arkansas 	785 	4590 	5.8 	4120 	T.Richardson 	2009 	2011 	Alabama 	540 	3130 	5.8 	3521 	T.J. Yeldon 	2012 	2014 	Alabama 	576 	3322 	5.8 	3722 	Vick Ballard 	2010 	2011 	Miss. State 	379 	2157 	5.7 	2923 	Mark Ingram 	2008 	2010 	Alabama 	572 	3261 	5.7 	42 	1726 	Tre Mason 	2011 	2013 	Auburn 	        510 	2879 	5.6 	30

that's pretty interesting, btw

I don't follow college ball at all, so these guys just pop into existence for me when they get drafted.

I always felt college stats are garbage, but it's kind of nice to get them lined up like this in a historical thumbnail.

I see lacy was pretty comparable stats-wise, albeit at a different school, what was the 'consensus' around here on him coming out?

obviously, the league wasn't as high on him, letting him go until the bottom of the second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes, pedigree counts at the highest levels.

"14 of the 16 Hall of Fame running backs selected in the first round were among the first ten selections in the draft."

* Hall of Fame RB, first round pedigree distribution fun fact source

http://www.101sports.com/2015/05/04/three-facts-we-learned-about-the-rams-in-the-draft/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes, pedigree counts at the highest levels.

"14 of the 16 Hall of Fame running backs selected in the first round were among the first ten selections in the draft."

* Hall of Fame RB, first round pedigree distribution fun fact source

http://www.101sports.com/2015/05/04/three-facts-we-learned-about-the-rams-in-the-draft/

Different time periods, where it was almost normal for RB's to go in the top-10 or even top-5, though.

But talent is talent, so it does have some application here. The cream rises and all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Highest YPC of SEC backs over 200 lbs.(min. 1400 career yards):

        Player 	        From 	To 	School 	        Att 	Yds 	Avg 	TD2 	Felix Jones 	2005 	2007 	Arkansas 	386 	2956 	7.7 	203 	Nick Chubb 	2014 	2014 	Georgia 	219 	1547 	7.1 	144 	Eddie Lacy 	2010 	2012 	Alabama 	355 	2402 	6.8 	307 	Todd Gurley 	2012 	2014 	Georgia 	497 	3210 	6.5 	3513 	Jeremy Hill 	2012 	2013 	LSU     	331 	2013 	6.1 	2615 	Ciatrick Fason 	2002 	2004 	Florida 	315 	1877 	6.0 	1418 	DarrenMcFadden 	2005 	2007 	Arkansas 	785 	4590 	5.8 	4120 	T.Richardson 	2009 	2011 	Alabama 	540 	3130 	5.8 	3521 	T.J. Yeldon 	2012 	2014 	Alabama 	576 	3322 	5.8 	3722 	Vick Ballard 	2010 	2011 	Miss. State 	379 	2157 	5.7 	2923 	Mark Ingram 	2008 	2010 	Alabama 	572 	3261 	5.7 	42 	1726 	Tre Mason 	2011 	2013 	Auburn 	        510 	2879 	5.6 	30

that's pretty interesting, btw

I don't follow college ball at all, so these guys just pop into existence for me when they get drafted.

I always felt college stats are garbage, but it's kind of nice to get them lined up like this in a historical thumbnail.

I see lacy was pretty comparable stats-wise, albeit at a different school, what was the 'consensus' around here on him coming out?

obviously, the league wasn't as high on him, letting him go until the bottom of the second.

Yes and no. Lacy was an interesting guy. He went for the longest time as the "it" guy and people talked very highly of him. And then, when he did come out, it was if all this other stuff and concerns came out and people either got tired of talking about him or he simply became old hat or something. Whatever happened, I think its clear to say Denver made a huge mistake. One that might have cost them a title or two. Lacy ended up being exactly what people said in the earliest days.

I have a strong belief when it comes to fantasy speculation of rookies that it is best to ignore almost everything that happens between December and the time they get drafted. I think people are best served if they simply remember what they saw on the field amongst their peers and try to tune out the myriad of analytics, stories, rumors, hype, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Highest YPC of SEC backs over 200 lbs.(min. 1400 career yards):

        Player 	        From 	To 	School 	        Att 	Yds 	Avg 	TD2 	Felix Jones 	2005 	2007 	Arkansas 	386 	2956 	7.7 	203 	Nick Chubb 	2014 	2014 	Georgia 	219 	1547 	7.1 	144 	Eddie Lacy 	2010 	2012 	Alabama 	355 	2402 	6.8 	307 	Todd Gurley 	2012 	2014 	Georgia 	497 	3210 	6.5 	3513 	Jeremy Hill 	2012 	2013 	LSU     	331 	2013 	6.1 	2615 	Ciatrick Fason 	2002 	2004 	Florida 	315 	1877 	6.0 	1418 	DarrenMcFadden 	2005 	2007 	Arkansas 	785 	4590 	5.8 	4120 	T.Richardson 	2009 	2011 	Alabama 	540 	3130 	5.8 	3521 	T.J. Yeldon 	2012 	2014 	Alabama 	576 	3322 	5.8 	3722 	Vick Ballard 	2010 	2011 	Miss. State 	379 	2157 	5.7 	2923 	Mark Ingram 	2008 	2010 	Alabama 	572 	3261 	5.7 	42 	1726 	Tre Mason 	2011 	2013 	Auburn 	        510 	2879 	5.6 	30

that's pretty interesting, btw

I don't follow college ball at all, so these guys just pop into existence for me when they get drafted.

I always felt college stats are garbage, but it's kind of nice to get them lined up like this in a historical thumbnail.

I see lacy was pretty comparable stats-wise, albeit at a different school, what was the 'consensus' around here on him coming out?

obviously, the league wasn't as high on him, letting him go until the bottom of the second.

Yes and no. Lacy was an interesting guy. He went for the longest time as the "it" guy and people talked very highly of him. And then, when he did come out, it was if all this other stuff and concerns came out and people either got tired of talking about him or he simply became old hat or something. Whatever happened, I think its clear to say Denver made a huge mistake. One that might have cost them a title or two. Lacy ended up being exactly what people said in the earliest days.

I have a strong belief when it comes to fantasy speculation of rookies that it is best to ignore almost everything that happens between December and the time they get drafted. I think people are best served if they simply remember what they saw on the field amongst their peers and try to tune out the myriad of analytics, stories, rumors, hype, etc.

For the most part, I agree with this with 2 possible exceptions.

QBs - depending on the system, you can't just rubber stamp them and say, "Gee, he looked great in that (spread) offense, so he'll be great in the NFL."

RBs - ones that play programs that routinely have great OLs (Wisconsin and Alabama come to mind) frequently have huge stats but they also run through highway-wide lanes. (Ron Dayne and the like.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
. Whatever happened, I think its clear to say Denver made a huge mistake. One that might have cost them a title or two.

wat

Think the Broncos could have won with Lacy instead of Ball. Just an opinion but it seems their inability to play smash-mouth football when it mattered came back to haunt them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I hate Lacy. I hate Gurley. I like Jeremy Hill. I like Melvin Gordon. You are wrong. I am right. Trent sucks."

Take a guess who this is???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

they would've reversed that 43-8 beating because eddie lacy comes running out of a phonebooth.

plz stop

An entire season of Lacy in Denver has a million moving parts. Its not as easy as to just point to one game and say whatever. A dominant running game may have been the difference between a bomb TD on play-action that first play versus what it was. No one knows for sure. Like I said. Just an opinion that Lacy was the better option.

Your hate for Lacy is well-documented so let's not make it about something it's not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I hate Lacy. I hate Gurley. I like Jeremy Hill. I like Melvin Gordon. You are wrong. I am right. Trent sucks."

Take a guess who this is???

I want to say Kool Aid Larry, but that seems too obvious. Let me think on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the only 2 games the mighty lacy has encountered seattle have both been losses, while he put up a 2 game total of 33/107/0

/thread

Edited by Kool-Aid Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at my rookie draft last night, a league mate who for whatever reason hates Gurley (which is fine, that is his opinion), I asked him what he didnt like, he says, "hes just not that good"..... I laugh and shrug it off. He then says, that he was a system product and his numbers were "pedestrian" , big laugh from me. Made my night.

that is my story

Edited by Pwingles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at my rookie draft last night, a league mate who for whatever reason hates Gurley (which is fine, that is his opinion), I asked him what he didnt like, he says, "hes just not that good"..... I laugh and shrug it off. He then says, that he was a system product and his numbers were "pedestrian" , big laugh from me. Made my night.

that is my story

IMO his vision is average to somewhat below, he doesn't make good cuts, he is the product of the SEC bias that most people display. He's not the best runner in this class, this was even before his injury. Edited by bucksoh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at my rookie draft last night, a league mate who for whatever reason hates Gurley (which is fine, that is his opinion), I asked him what he didnt like, he says, "hes just not that good"..... I laugh and shrug it off. He then says, that he was a system product and his numbers were "pedestrian" , big laugh from me. Made my night.

that is my story

IMO his vision is average to somewhat below, he doesn't make good cuts, he is the product of the SEC bias that most people display. He's not the best runner in this class, this was even before his injury.

May well be. However his numbers are nowhere near pedestrian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at my rookie draft last night, a league mate who for whatever reason hates Gurley (which is fine, that is his opinion), I asked him what he didnt like, he says, "hes just not that good"..... I laugh and shrug it off. He then says, that he was a system product and his numbers were "pedestrian" , big laugh from me. Made my night.

that is my story

IMO his vision is average to somewhat below, he doesn't make good cuts, he is the product of the SEC bias that most people display. He's not the best runner in this class, this was even before his injury.
You might be on to something new here. There isnt an analyst out there who agrees with your assessment. If you are right you will be a genius. If you are wrong, you are just a Gurley hater. Cant wait to find out which you are!
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at my rookie draft last night, a league mate who for whatever reason hates Gurley (which is fine, that is his opinion), I asked him what he didnt like, he says, "hes just not that good"..... I laugh and shrug it off. He then says, that he was a system product and his numbers were "pedestrian" , big laugh from me. Made my night.

that is my story

IMO his vision is average to somewhat below, he doesn't make good cuts, he is the product of the SEC bias that most people display. He's not the best runner in this class, this was even before his injury.

hmmmm ... I must be looking at a completely different player.

1. Vision - When I watch his film, I see plenty of timely cutbacks and solid vision inside the tackles. He does tend to bounce outside but when you are a world-class sprinter and hurdler, that's not necessarily a bad thing and probably a reason to try to take the corner more than other slower RB's.

2. Cutting - He doesn't cut like Ameer Abdullah but the guy is 6'1" and 231lbs. He's a big back and I feel his lateral quickness and agility is at least above average for his size.

3. Best runner? - Who in this class is a better runner than Gurley? "Runner" is a very, very vague term. Are you saying he isn't the most productive back in the draft? Or are you saying he doesn't have alot of the sharp cuts and lateral agility that the other backs have? If it's the latter, I have to assume you are comparing him to the small backs in this draft because he blows away Tevin Coleman and Ajayi and any other big back in the draft.

I agree there are some backs that can hit the whole a little faster and make some sharper cuts and have slightly better vision, however, when gurley hits the whole, he's almost always going to get through (or by) that first tackler. That's the difference between him and the smaller back you are comparing him to. And he's faster than most of them to boot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a Clemson fan and when I watched the past two Clemson/UGA games the two players who were far superior to everyone else on the field were Watkins and Gurley. Their talents were far and above and almost like they were playing a different game than everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at my rookie draft last night, a league mate who for whatever reason hates Gurley (which is fine, that is his opinion), I asked him what he didnt like, he says, "hes just not that good"..... I laugh and shrug it off. He then says, that he was a system product and his numbers were "pedestrian" , big laugh from me. Made my night.

that is my story

IMO his vision is average to somewhat below, he doesn't make good cuts, he is the product of the SEC bias that most people display. He's not the best runner in this class, this was even before his injury.
You might be on to something new here. There isnt an analyst out there who agrees with your assessment. If you are right you will be a genius. If you are wrong, you are just a Gurley hater. Cant wait to find out which you are!

I'd go with SEC hater. That "SEC bias" goes both ways...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at my rookie draft last night, a league mate who for whatever reason hates Gurley (which is fine, that is his opinion), I asked him what he didnt like, he says, "hes just not that good"..... I laugh and shrug it off. He then says, that he was a system product and his numbers were "pedestrian" , big laugh from me. Made my night.

that is my story

IMO his vision is average to somewhat below, he doesn't make good cuts, he is the product of the SEC bias that most people display. He's not the best runner in this class, this was even before his injury.
You might be on to something new here. There isnt an analyst out there who agrees with your assessment. If you are right you will be a genius. If you are wrong, you are just a Gurley hater. Cant wait to find out which you are!

Not a Gurley hater, I think he will do well playing for the rams. I just don't fall for what everyone tells me he is sometimes I'm right sometimes I'm wrong. Only time will tell with Gurley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at my rookie draft last night, a league mate who for whatever reason hates Gurley (which is fine, that is his opinion), I asked him what he didnt like, he says, "hes just not that good"..... I laugh and shrug it off. He then says, that he was a system product and his numbers were "pedestrian" , big laugh from me. Made my night.

that is my story

IMO his vision is average to somewhat below, he doesn't make good cuts, he is the product of the SEC bias that most people display. He's not the best runner in this class, this was even before his injury.

hmmmm ... I must be looking at a completely different player.

1. Vision - When I watch his film, I see plenty of timely cutbacks and solid vision inside the tackles. He does tend to bounce outside but when you are a world-class sprinter and hurdler, that's not necessarily a bad thing and probably a reason to try to take the corner more than other slower RB's.

2. Cutting - He doesn't cut like Ameer Abdullah but the guy is 6'1" and 231lbs. He's a big back and I feel his lateral quickness and agility is at least above average for his size.

3. Best runner? - Who in this class is a better runner than Gurley? "Runner" is a very, very vague term. Are you saying he isn't the most productive back in the draft? Or are you saying he doesn't have alot of the sharp cuts and lateral agility that the other backs have? If it's the latter, I have to assume you are comparing him to the small backs in this draft because he blows away Tevin Coleman and Ajayi and any other big back in the draft.

I agree there are some backs that can hit the whole a little faster and make some sharper cuts and have slightly better vision, however, when gurley hits the whole, he's almost always going to get through (or by) that first tackler. That's the difference between him and the smaller back you are comparing him to. And he's faster than most of them to boot.

I believe Gordon is the better back than Gurley and who I will take in my drafts. I also think their will be at least two more backs out of this class that will have a better career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at my rookie draft last night, a league mate who for whatever reason hates Gurley (which is fine, that is his opinion), I asked him what he didnt like, he says, "hes just not that good"..... I laugh and shrug it off. He then says, that he was a system product and his numbers were "pedestrian" , big laugh from me. Made my night.

that is my story

IMO his vision is average to somewhat below, he doesn't make good cuts, he is the product of the SEC bias that most people display. He's not the best runner in this class, this was even before his injury.

hmmmm ... I must be looking at a completely different player.

1. Vision - When I watch his film, I see plenty of timely cutbacks and solid vision inside the tackles. He does tend to bounce outside but when you are a world-class sprinter and hurdler, that's not necessarily a bad thing and probably a reason to try to take the corner more than other slower RB's.

2. Cutting - He doesn't cut like Ameer Abdullah but the guy is 6'1" and 231lbs. He's a big back and I feel his lateral quickness and agility is at least above average for his size.

3. Best runner? - Who in this class is a better runner than Gurley? "Runner" is a very, very vague term. Are you saying he isn't the most productive back in the draft? Or are you saying he doesn't have alot of the sharp cuts and lateral agility that the other backs have? If it's the latter, I have to assume you are comparing him to the small backs in this draft because he blows away Tevin Coleman and Ajayi and any other big back in the draft.

I agree there are some backs that can hit the whole a little faster and make some sharper cuts and have slightly better vision, however, when gurley hits the whole, he's almost always going to get through (or by) that first tackler. That's the difference between him and the smaller back you are comparing him to. And he's faster than most of them to boot.

I believe Gordon is the better back than Gurley and who I will take in my drafts. I also think their will be at least two more backs out of this class that will have a better career.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but why do you like Gordon better? I'm asking because I have Gordon behind 3 other backs in this draft and I'd like to hear some analysis in his favor. From what I've seen of Gordon, he seems pretty upright and not much of a cutback runner. I'm worried he's more of a product of the Wisconsin running machine than an actual elite back just like the rest of the Wisconsin backs that have come into the NFL. It's so hard to really evaluate him. When you watch the highlights they are all of him running through gaping wide holes on long runs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is how it works:

In the one league that I own Gurley, I believe he is a generational talent.

In the leagues that I don't have a chance to own him, I feel Jay Ajayi has better vision, is healthier, and is a better overall prospect.

Edited by georg013
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is how it works:

In the one league that I own Gurley, I believe he is a generational talent.

In the leagues that I don't have a chance to own him, I feel Jay Ajayi has better vision, is healthier, and is a better overall prospect.

Haha nice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at my rookie draft last night, a league mate who for whatever reason hates Gurley (which is fine, that is his opinion), I asked him what he didnt like, he says, "hes just not that good"..... I laugh and shrug it off. He then says, that he was a system product and his numbers were "pedestrian" , big laugh from me. Made my night.

that is my story

IMO his vision is average to somewhat below, he doesn't make good cuts, he is the product of the SEC bias that most people display. He's not the best runner in this class, this was even before his injury.

hmmmm ... I must be looking at a completely different player.

1. Vision - When I watch his film, I see plenty of timely cutbacks and solid vision inside the tackles. He does tend to bounce outside but when you are a world-class sprinter and hurdler, that's not necessarily a bad thing and probably a reason to try to take the corner more than other slower RB's.

2. Cutting - He doesn't cut like Ameer Abdullah but the guy is 6'1" and 231lbs. He's a big back and I feel his lateral quickness and agility is at least above average for his size.

3. Best runner? - Who in this class is a better runner than Gurley? "Runner" is a very, very vague term. Are you saying he isn't the most productive back in the draft? Or are you saying he doesn't have alot of the sharp cuts and lateral agility that the other backs have? If it's the latter, I have to assume you are comparing him to the small backs in this draft because he blows away Tevin Coleman and Ajayi and any other big back in the draft.

I agree there are some backs that can hit the whole a little faster and make some sharper cuts and have slightly better vision, however, when gurley hits the whole, he's almost always going to get through (or by) that first tackler. That's the difference between him and the smaller back you are comparing him to. And he's faster than most of them to boot.

I believe Gordon is the better back than Gurley and who I will take in my drafts. I also think their will be at least two more backs out of this class that will have a better career.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but why do you like Gordon better? I'm asking because I have Gordon behind 3 other backs in this draft and I'd like to hear some analysis in his favor. From what I've seen of Gordon, he seems pretty upright and not much of a cutback runner. I'm worried he's more of a product of the Wisconsin running machine than an actual elite back just like the rest of the Wisconsin backs that have come into the NFL. It's so hard to really evaluate him. When you watch the highlights they are all of him running through gaping wide holes on long runs.

I like Gordon's footwork a lot. He has much better vision than Gurley. To me Gordon is going to be in the HOF, if he doesn't get injured. Gurley is only going to be as good as his line, which is all he'll ever be. If Gurley wasn't playing in the SEC, he wouldn't be viewed by most as the best back. He probably would have been drafted 5-7 or a udfa, with his injury. Unpopular I know but it needs to be said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't realize all SEC RBs were 1st round picks, or top 10 picks for that matter. Someone better let the SEC leading rusher, Artis-Payne, know so can leverage this information in his contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That latest post was ridiculous. UDFA? LMAO. Next.

Yeah, right?

Rando messege board guy thinks he woulda been late round or udfa, if not for conference? Seems pretty far off from people who do this for a living taking a guy with 1 knee 10th overall, obviously someone doesnt think he is a system product.

Although, theyve been wrong before, *cough* tavon

Edited by Pwingles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

at my rookie draft last night, a league mate who for whatever reason hates Gurley (which is fine, that is his opinion), I asked him what he didnt like, he says, "hes just not that good"..... I laugh and shrug it off. He then says, that he was a system product and his numbers were "pedestrian" , big laugh from me. Made my night.

that is my story

IMO his vision is average to somewhat below, he doesn't make good cuts, he is the product of the SEC bias that most people display. He's not the best runner in this class, this was even before his injury.

hmmmm ... I must be looking at a completely different player.

1. Vision - When I watch his film, I see plenty of timely cutbacks and solid vision inside the tackles. He does tend to bounce outside but when you are a world-class sprinter and hurdler, that's not necessarily a bad thing and probably a reason to try to take the corner more than other slower RB's.

2. Cutting - He doesn't cut like Ameer Abdullah but the guy is 6'1" and 231lbs. He's a big back and I feel his lateral quickness and agility is at least above average for his size.

3. Best runner? - Who in this class is a better runner than Gurley? "Runner" is a very, very vague term. Are you saying he isn't the most productive back in the draft? Or are you saying he doesn't have alot of the sharp cuts and lateral agility that the other backs have? If it's the latter, I have to assume you are comparing him to the small backs in this draft because he blows away Tevin Coleman and Ajayi and any other big back in the draft.

I agree there are some backs that can hit the whole a little faster and make some sharper cuts and have slightly better vision, however, when gurley hits the whole, he's almost always going to get through (or by) that first tackler. That's the difference between him and the smaller back you are comparing him to. And he's faster than most of them to boot.

I believe Gordon is the better back than Gurley and who I will take in my drafts. I also think their will be at least two more backs out of this class that will have a better career.

I'm not trying to be argumentative, but why do you like Gordon better? I'm asking because I have Gordon behind 3 other backs in this draft and I'd like to hear some analysis in his favor. From what I've seen of Gordon, he seems pretty upright and not much of a cutback runner. I'm worried he's more of a product of the Wisconsin running machine than an actual elite back just like the rest of the Wisconsin backs that have come into the NFL. It's so hard to really evaluate him. When you watch the highlights they are all of him running through gaping wide holes on long runs.

I like Gordon's footwork a lot. He has much better vision than Gurley. To me Gordon is going to be in the HOF, if he doesn't get injured. Gurley is only going to be as good as his line, which is all he'll ever be. If Gurley wasn't playing in the SEC, he wouldn't be viewed by most as the best back. He probably would have been drafted 5-7 or a udfa, with his injury. Unpopular I know but it needs to be said.

We get it, you don't have the #1 pick in your dynasty draft...

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.