What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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.

[Dynasty] Todd Gurley (6 Viewers)

Hot Sauce Guy said:
Oh of course: but 2.10 is seemingly a lot different than 2.02, which is his current ADP. 

I’m partly playing devil’s advocate in here, because the discussion helps me to value Gurley. Selfish, sure. But by getting my thoughts on him out there it’s useful to hear others counter those - with your responses I get value.

With an extremist like @BobbyLayne who seems more bent on “winning an argument” than having a discussion, less so.

we all have our take on Gurley this year - at some point, just about every play is a good pick, even the riskier ones. 

I’m mostly interested in trying to figure out where that risk/reward point is with TG. (And also because I have an auction dynasty start-up draft starting tomorrow) 

That seems obvious by the mere ADP alone - if we all knew the right answer he’d be a no-brainer 1.01 again.

as for Zeke, the possibility of a “months-long” holdout scares me a bit as a top 3 pick. But that’s a discussion for another topic. ;)  
Click to expand...
No doubt.  As am I.  I’m also admittedly slightly biased (but only a very little honestly as I guard against that a lot in my thought processes).  

For Dynasty it’s a bit trickier as that is betting more on the long term value which is where I believe his value is most hindered.  I do own him in a Dynasty/Keeper hybrid league which is my main 20yr long league but his year over year cost is rising for me so I only had a year or 2 “value” left on him anyways.  For redraft, outside of the top 4 (which Zeke is now borderline due to the contract negotiations) I’m as comfortable with him as any.  Admittedly I’m a bit more risk/reward tolerant then some but this isn’t a life or death situation for me and I play to win so I’m not super scared of “possible” downsides.  

 
dkp993 said:
No doubt.  As am I.  I’m also admittedly slightly biased (but only a very little honestly as I guard against that a lot in my thought processes).  

For Dynasty it’s a bit trickier as that is betting more on the long term value which is where I believe his value is most hindered.  I do own him in a Dynasty/Keeper hybrid league which is my main 20yr long league but his year over year cost is rising for me so I only had a year or 2 “value” left on him anyways.  For redraft, outside of the top 4 (which Zeke is now borderline due to the contract negotiations) I’m as comfortable with him as any.  Admittedly I’m a bit more risk/reward tolerant then some but this isn’t a life or death situation for me and I play to win so I’m not super scared of “possible” downsides.  
Click to expand...
I think this is a good approach - I’m torn between what I see as the upside of Dalvin Cook & the downside of Gurley. 

I’m not sure that’s a fair way to approach it,  but I believe Cook has monster potential at the same ADP. He’s a player I see as “on the up”, with a quality offense committed to feeding him the ball.

of course there’s injury history there as well, so some of this is recency bias & having been burned by Gurley’s 2nd half last year, it makes me less objective - which is also why bouncing ideas off other FBG’s helps.  

But all that said, the “downside” of Gurley is more about the team’s approach to keeping him in bubble wrap for the playoffs, compared to Cook, who I believe will be a real workhorse. 

I’m planning on a sizable investment of my $500 budget on Cook tomorrow. Still not sure how much yet.  :shrug:

 
Hot Sauce Guy said:
I think this is a good approach - I’m torn between what I see as the upside of Dalvin Cook & the downside of Gurley. 

I’m not sure that’s a fair way to approach it,  but I believe Cook has monster potential at the same ADP. He’s a player I see as “on the up”, with a quality offense committed to feeding him the ball.

of course there’s injury history there as well, so some of this is recency bias & having been burned by Gurley’s 2nd half last year, it makes me less objective - which is also why bouncing ideas off other FBG’s helps.  

But all that said, the “downside” of Gurley is more about the team’s approach to keeping him in bubble wrap for the playoffs, compared to Cook, who I believe will be a real workhorse. 

I’m planning on a sizable investment of my $500 budget on Cook tomorrow. Still not sure how much yet.  :shrug:
Click to expand...
If it helps with context, the league I mentioned above is an auction.  $200 budget PPR Superflex.  Gurley’s costing me $41 to keep (history of the league has top tier RB’s are in the low 60’s) and I’m doing it feeling very comfortable.  

 
dkp993 said:
If it helps with context, the league I mentioned above is an auction.  $200 budget PPR Superflex.  Gurley’s costing me $41 to keep (history of the league has top tier RB’s are in the low 60’s) and I’m doing it feeling very comfortable.  
Click to expand...
That does help a lot. Same league format, and that’s about what I was hoping to land a Gurley or Cook for, ~10% of my budget. Assuming I’m able to get a top tier young WR as well of course. 

 
Hot Sauce Guy said:
Ouch - 20% of the budget. :doh:  
Click to expand...
Yeah I’ve done a ton of auctions over the years, RB1’s (even those on the RB2 boarder line) don’t go for 10%.  If they do I’d really like to see where the money is being spent.  It’s either a super deep league or some position/s are being overvalued.  

 
dkp993 said:
Yeah I’ve done a ton of auctions over the years, RB1’s (even those on the RB2 boarder line) don’t go for 10%.  If they do I’d really like to see where the money is being spent.  It’s either a super deep league or some position/s are being overvalued.  
Click to expand...
I’d love to come away with Cook/Mahommes but I’d probably have to drop 40% of my budget to do that. Add in a Juju & I’ve got 30% left to fill 25 more spots. :doh:  

 
Projection of an extremist

15 G 226-1007-4.5-9 59 targets 44-375-2

18 touches per game, regression from his historical performance, RB9 PPR

In my 25 year league, I have the tenth pick. Drafts are a fluid thing so I mock exactly like will on 8/25; would love to take Adams / OBJ / Julio to start if (as usually happens) it’s RB heavy. But if the top 3-4 WR are gone, I’ll probably be choosing between Bell / Conner / Gurley. Don’t feel super great about any of them, as with any RB after 1.04, each has potential risk.

If I get a target hog WR1, at the 15th pick I could possibly be deciding between Gurley over Chubb, Cook or Mixon. RB-RB is def in the table as well, very comfortable taking the WRs available at the 3/4 turn. We’ll see how it plays out.

 
BobbyLayne said:
Projection of an extremist

15 G 226-1007-4.5-9 59 targets 44-375-2

18 touches per game, regression from his historical performance, RB9 PPR

In my 25 year league, I have the tenth pick. Drafts are a fluid thing so I mock exactly like will on 8/25; would love to take Adams / OBJ / Julio to start if (as usually happens) it’s RB heavy. But if the top 3-4 WR are gone, I’ll probably be choosing between Bell / Conner / Gurley. Don’t feel super great about any of them, as with any RB after 1.04, each has potential risk.

If I get a target hog WR1, at the 15th pick I could possibly be deciding between Gurley over Chubb, Cook or Mixon. RB-RB is def in the table as well, very comfortable taking the WRs available at the 3/4 turn. We’ll see how it plays out.
Click to expand...
Which WRs are compelling to you at 3/4 turn?

 
My biggest red flag with Gurley isn't his arthritic knee or his potential inconsistency.  It's how the rams handled it last season.

When it comes time to submit your roster and the rams are giving no clear indication of what will happen with him, week in and week out, your entire lineup will be screwed.  Your bench spots (waiver picks, fa bucks, whatever) will have to hold a third string rb just for the occasion when Gurley is out at the last minute and your backup is on bye.  If you're busy Sunday morning and don't have time to check your phone before kick off you could end up with a dud, or leaving a huge game on your bench.

Too much of a headache.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Talking about where to value Gurley... I have him in a keep 3 league and am seriously considering Hill, D Johnson and M Thomas over him.  Hill is a whole nother bag of questions in a keeper situation.  What blows up first Gurley knee or hill's temper?  

 
wgoldsph said:
My biggest red flag with Gurley isn't his arthritic knee or his potential inconsistency.  It's how the rams handled it last season.

When it comes time to submit your roster and the rams are giving no clear indication of what will happen with him, week in and week out, your entire lineup will be screwed.  Your bench spots (waiver picks, fa bucks, whatever) will have to hold a third string rb just for the occasion when Gurley is out at the last minute and your backup is on bye.  If you're busy Sunday morning and don't have time to check your phone before kick off you could end up with a dud, or leaving a huge game on your bench.

Too much of a headache.
Click to expand...
s’what I keep saying. Gurley could be the picture of health all year, but if the Rams wanna bubble wrap him it doesn’t matter how healthy he is. 

Maybe they put a governor on his touches. Maybe if they’re way up in a blowout he sits. Maybe if they’re way down in a blowout he sits. 

There are a lot of scenarios that could cause FFB managers headaches this year without Gurley getting banged up at all. Now add a minor bump or bruise & that risk magnifies. 

Not saying it’s a guarantee, but it’s a legitimate risk. 

 
I agree whole hardheartedly with both observations. Gurley is a risk. As long as you draft him knowing all the variables, he could be a fine RB2 or even a decent flex option in your lineup. But the days of him being looked at as a "#1" RB in FF are over. IMHO. Granted anything could happen. He could end up being the "miracle of FF" this year. Who knows. But I'm not gonna waste a #1 on him and I'm not sure he's worth a 2nd round pick either. Of course he won't be there after the third, because everyone has their own ideas. Which is what makes it all fun.😁

Hot Sauce Guy said:
s’what I keep saying. Gurley could be the picture of health all year, but if the Rams wanna bubble wrap him it doesn’t matter how healthy he is. 

Maybe they put a governor on his touches. Maybe if they’re way up in a blowout he sits. Maybe if they’re way down in a blowout he sits. 

There are a lot of scenarios that could cause FFB managers headaches this year without Gurley getting banged up at all. Now add a minor bump or bruise & that risk magnifies. 

Not saying it’s a guarantee, but it’s a legitimate risk. 
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Local radio reporting Gurley looks 100% ... and beastly.  I'm pegging him as a huge value pick if he falls.

 
Rhythmdoctor said:
Hope this is accurate. Nabbed him at 2.08 in a high stakes draft last week.
Click to expand...
They're saying he looks 100%.  Now, as others have stated here and elsewhere, it very well could be that they limit his touches to keep him good for the whole season.  Still, I'd rather have Gurley at 80% of his normal production for an entire season than have him miss games.

 
As the offseason progresses I’m becoming more and more convinced that he suffered a knee injury against KC and gritted it out.  I’m not saying that the arthritis isn’t there, it always is after a major knee injury like he had in college, I just think his unwillingness to discuss the likely injury lead to lots of speculation and left us where we are.   

 
Last edited by a moderator:
dkp993 said:
As the offseason progresses I’m becoming more and more convinced that he suffered a knee injury against KC and gritted it out.  I’m not saying that the arthritis isn’t there, it always is after a major knee injury like he had in college, I just think his unwillingness to discuss the likely injury lead to lots of speculation and left us where we are.   
Click to expand...
Agree.  Anyone who was watching that game should remember the play.  He was very clearly injured.

 
dkp993 said:
As the offseason progresses I’m becoming more and more convinced that he suffered a knee injury against KC and gritted it out.  I’m not saying that the arthritis isn’t there, it always is after a major knee injury like he had in college, I just think his unwillingness to discuss the likely injury lead to lots of speculation and left us where we are.
Click to expand...
19 Nov - takes a hit to the knee in Chief game

25 Nov - bye week

2 Dec - 26 touches for 165 yards and 2 TD's, plays 65 of LAR's 69 snaps (94%)

I am gonna give the LAR trainers & staff the benefit of the doubt here.  They all saw the hit in week 11.  They saw it up close & in person.  They watched it over and over on slow mo instant replay.  They had a chance to monitor his knee for 13 days before his next game vs DET.  They were sitting at 10-1, cruising into playoffs.  If that hit was as bad as people in here are saying, why would LAR allow him to go out the next game and play so much?  He was on the field from start to finish.  Either the LAR staff were negligent in letting him play through an injury, or the hit wasn't as bad as it looked.  As I said earlier, I will give the staff the benefit of the doubt.

9 Dec - 14 touches for 58 yards, plays 62 of LAR's 63 snaps (98%)

Don't let the 14 touches fool you.  The Bears were stopping the run and Goff was forced to go to the air.  That's why Gurley was a non-factor, but he did play the whole game.  So, for the next 2 games after his hit to the knee, he played all but 5 snaps.  Does this sound like a guy battling through injury?  At this point, you would have to say the "negligent" staff are now grossly negligent if they thought Gurley was injured.  For the first 10 games before the Chiefs game, Gurley played 85% of the snaps (567/671).  Up until this point in the season, Gurley had not topped 58 snaps in consecutive games.

16 Dec - 22 touches for 124 yards and 2 TD's, plays 63 of LAR's 76 snaps (83%)

For the third game in a row after the "hit", Gurley surpasses 60 snaps.  The last time Gurley had 3 consecutive games of 60+ snaps was... never.  As a matter of fact, before the Chiefs game, Gurley had never even topped 60 snaps in 2 straight games, let alone 3.  And he wasn't just a decoy in these 3 games - he was getting his usual workhorse load.  I am sure he would've topped 20 carries in the CHI game if he was having success, but they were bottling him up.  The "grossly negligent" staff has now turned completely insane, if they thought Gurley was injured.

What makes more sense - A) the hit wasn't as bad as it looked, or B) the entire staff with all their game film and personal contact with Gurley overlooked his injury and let him play through it?  Have you ever been hit in the nuts real hard and it didn't hurt, but then you barely get hit and it kills?

 
TheWinz said:
19 Nov - takes a hit to the knee in Chief game

25 Nov - bye week

2 Dec - 26 touches for 165 yards and 2 TD's, plays 65 of LAR's 69 snaps (94%)

I am gonna give the LAR trainers & staff the benefit of the doubt here.  They all saw the hit in week 11.  They saw it up close & in person.  They watched it over and over on slow mo instant replay.  They had a chance to monitor his knee for 13 days before his next game vs DET.  They were sitting at 10-1, cruising into playoffs.  If that hit was as bad as people in here are saying, why would LAR allow him to go out the next game and play so much?  He was on the field from start to finish.  Either the LAR staff were negligent in letting him play through an injury, or the hit wasn't as bad as it looked.  As I said earlier, I will give the staff the benefit of the doubt.

9 Dec - 14 touches for 58 yards, plays 62 of LAR's 63 snaps (98%)

Don't let the 14 touches fool you.  The Bears were stopping the run and Goff was forced to go to the air.  That's why Gurley was a non-factor, but he did play the whole game.  So, for the next 2 games after his hit to the knee, he played all but 5 snaps.  Does this sound like a guy battling through injury?  At this point, you would have to say the "negligent" staff are now grossly negligent if they thought Gurley was injured.  For the first 10 games before the Chiefs game, Gurley played 85% of the snaps (567/671).  Up until this point in the season, Gurley had not topped 58 snaps in consecutive games.

16 Dec - 22 touches for 124 yards and 2 TD's, plays 63 of LAR's 76 snaps (83%)

For the third game in a row after the "hit", Gurley surpasses 60 snaps.  The last time Gurley had 3 consecutive games of 60+ snaps was... never.  As a matter of fact, before the Chiefs game, Gurley had never even topped 60 snaps in 2 straight games, let alone 3.  And he wasn't just a decoy in these 3 games - he was getting his usual workhorse load.  I am sure he would've topped 20 carries in the CHI game if he was having success, but they were bottling him up.  The "grossly negligent" staff has now turned completely insane, if they thought Gurley was injured.

What makes more sense - A) the hit wasn't as bad as it looked, or B) the entire staff with all their game film and personal contact with Gurley overlooked his injury and let him play through it?  Have you ever been hit in the nuts real hard and it didn't hurt, but then you barely get hit and it kills?
Click to expand...
This feels like a good post perhaps minus the nut punching. Good perspective on what happened after the hit in the KC game. 

 
TheWinz said:
19 Nov - takes a hit to the knee in Chief game

25 Nov - bye week

2 Dec - 26 touches for 165 yards and 2 TD's, plays 65 of LAR's 69 snaps (94%)

I am gonna give the LAR trainers & staff the benefit of the doubt here.  They all saw the hit in week 11.  They saw it up close & in person.  They watched it over and over on slow mo instant replay.  They had a chance to monitor his knee for 13 days before his next game vs DET.  They were sitting at 10-1, cruising into playoffs.  If that hit was as bad as people in here are saying, why would LAR allow him to go out the next game and play so much?  He was on the field from start to finish.  Either the LAR staff were negligent in letting him play through an injury, or the hit wasn't as bad as it looked.  As I said earlier, I will give the staff the benefit of the doubt.

9 Dec - 14 touches for 58 yards, plays 62 of LAR's 63 snaps (98%)

Don't let the 14 touches fool you.  The Bears were stopping the run and Goff was forced to go to the air.  That's why Gurley was a non-factor, but he did play the whole game.  So, for the next 2 games after his hit to the knee, he played all but 5 snaps.  Does this sound like a guy battling through injury?  At this point, you would have to say the "negligent" staff are now grossly negligent if they thought Gurley was injured.  For the first 10 games before the Chiefs game, Gurley played 85% of the snaps (567/671).  Up until this point in the season, Gurley had not topped 58 snaps in consecutive games.

16 Dec - 22 touches for 124 yards and 2 TD's, plays 63 of LAR's 76 snaps (83%)

For the third game in a row after the "hit", Gurley surpasses 60 snaps.  The last time Gurley had 3 consecutive games of 60+ snaps was... never.  As a matter of fact, before the Chiefs game, Gurley had never even topped 60 snaps in 2 straight games, let alone 3.  And he wasn't just a decoy in these 3 games - he was getting his usual workhorse load.  I am sure he would've topped 20 carries in the CHI game if he was having success, but they were bottling him up.  The "grossly negligent" staff has now turned completely insane, if they thought Gurley was injured.

What makes more sense - A) the hit wasn't as bad as it looked, or B) the entire staff with all their game film and personal contact with Gurley overlooked his injury and let him play through it?  Have you ever been hit in the nuts real hard and it didn't hurt, but then you barely get hit and it kills?
Click to expand...
Good post. And it’s certainly a valid viewpoint. My viewpoint, having to really bad knees (4 surgeries, PRP injections, both needing replacement etc and I’m only 44) along with knowing that Gurley has a history of playing through bad injuries (Waldman has a great piece on this) is that the bye gave him a bit of time to rest and recover.  As the weeks went on the injury worsened from the banging on it.  Having first hand experience I know that the swelling in the joint dramatically effects the pain level and your confidence in the knee. This can change from day to day.   I have days where my knees only hurt at a level one or two and then the next day I can barely walk.  So I can see a pretty linear progression after the Kansas City week of the injury worsening and worsening but him having spurts where he can perform.  

Again none of us know, It’s all speculation due to the tight lipped nature of Gurley.  His history is one of someone who tries to grit it out and doesn’t really talk to anybody, including his coaches, about where he’s really at. 

 
TheWinz said:
What makes more sense - A) the hit wasn't as bad as it looked, or B) the entire staff with all their game film and personal contact with Gurley overlooked his injury and let him play through it?  Have you ever been hit in the nuts real hard and it didn't hurt, but then you barely get hit and it kills?
Click to expand...
Good post.  Been following your posts in this forum, and I think your take is dead on - and this is coming from a Rams fan.  Really concerned about the true nature and depth of whatever is going on here, both for the Rams and Gurley.

His usage and the team's game plan down the stretch was mind boggling - and incredibly frustrating, obviously - in my mind.  There is just smoke emanating from every which direction on this one.  On top of that, Rams will be good this year again.  Even if he stays healthy, I could see them shutting him down or massively reducing his workload during the FF playoffs.

 
dkp993 said:
Good post. And it’s certainly a valid viewpoint. My viewpoint, having to really bad knees (4 surgeries, PRP injections, both needing replacement etc and I’m only 44) along with knowing that Gurley has a history of playing through bad injuries (Waldman has a great piece on this) is that the bye gave him a bit of time to rest and recover.  As the weeks went on the injury worsened from the banging on it.  Having first hand experience I know that the swelling in the joint dramatically effects the pain level and your confidence in the knee. This can change from day to day.   I have days where my knees only hurt at a level one or two and then the next day I can barely walk.  So I can see a pretty linear progression after the Kansas City week of the injury worsening and worsening but him having spurts where he can perform.  

Again none of us know, It’s all speculation due to the tight lipped nature of Gurley.  His history is one of someone who tries to grit it out and doesn’t really talk to anybody, including his coaches, about where he’s really at. 
Click to expand...
I was just trying to illustrate how Gurley was used as his workhorse self for 3 straight games after the hit.  If that hit was as serious as people say, the entire staff should be fired.

So now we are heading into the preseason, and by all accounts, he is 100% healthy (well, except for his arthritis).  At least that's all we have heard.  I cannot find a single article saying otherwise.  I ain't buying.  He has Alzheimer's of the knees, it only gets worse, and there is no cure.  Sure, he will have his good and bad days, but will be even more inconsistent than Chad Ocho Cinco for fantasy purposes.  Not what I look for in the first 2 rounds, which is where he will go.

 
The superbowl was surreal in that Gurley busted off a good run or two, but was largely a non factor.  

As a viewer of that game I was left with the distinct impression that Gurley had a serious injury / pain management situation to deal with at the time.

I suppose its possible that teams didn't figure out until the end of the year to stop the run to stop play action, but the inference here is that McVay is a mediocre coach, which I'm not buying.

Still confused by that game.

 
seems like they overused him after the hit in the KC game ,60 + snaps as someone pointed out, and he further injured the knee. it's great that he can go 21 MPH in a straigh line in practice, but what we need to see is him cutting juking and busting moves on defenders like the old Gurley used to do. and I'd like to see him take a couple of hits on the legs and see how he responds.McVay won't use him till week 1, right? he's going to sit the remainder of preseason? If  so it's pretty much a guessing game.I'd love to see him  fully healthy and ready to go , but to acquire him in a draft you're going to spend a 1st or 2nd pick to get him. this isn't a case like Zeke where you know the Cowboys will get a deal done, even if he misses a week or two , he'll play this season - and a top 5 pick on Zeke is still worth the investment. Gurley could play all year and still not be as effective as he was in the past.thats the real risk of drafting him.

the upside is that he is fully healed and looks as electric as ever - but he's still on borrowed time with a bum knee. too much risk for the reward IMO

 
wgoldsph said:
My biggest red flag with Gurley isn't his arthritic knee or his potential inconsistency.  It's how the rams handled it last season.

When it comes time to submit your roster and the rams are giving no clear indication of what will happen with him, week in and week out, your entire lineup will be screwed.  Your bench spots (waiver picks, fa bucks, whatever) will have to hold a third string rb just for the occasion when Gurley is out at the last minute and your backup is on bye.  If you're busy Sunday morning and don't have time to check your phone before kick off you could end up with a dud, or leaving a huge game on your bench.

Too much of a headache.
Click to expand...
Good pt

 
Skoo said:
So now I'm hearing Malcolm Brown is the direct handcuff from preseason action, anyone else?
Click to expand...
I've never thought otherwise. We saw same mindset with John Kelly last year. Everyone thought he was the handcuff, then Brown (the true HC) is hurt and  the Rams sign CJA off the trash heap. Granted Henderson has more draft capital than Kelly, but Rams have given no indication Brown is not backup.

 
BobbyLayne said:
If Gurley had 50% of the Rams RB fantasy football points from 2018, he still would have been a top 12 RB.
Click to expand...
This is my line of thought as well. Even if he's playing on a decreased workload, 75% of previous Gurley will still be a Top 5 RB.

I think if you make sure to handcuff with Brown and are willing to hold him, it's probably worth the risk in the 2nd.

 
Skoo said:
So now I'm hearing Malcolm Brown is the direct handcuff from preseason action, anyone else?
Click to expand...
Early downs more Brown, at least initially. Henderson the receiving back and probably gets some early down work too in the event Gurley goes down. Henderson more ppr value IMO.

 
Skoo said:
This is my line of thought as well. Even if he's playing on a decreased workload, 75% of previous Gurley will still be a Top 5 RB.

I think if you make sure to handcuff with Brown and are willing to hold him, it's probably worth the risk in the 2nd.
Click to expand...
Probably just mock draft mentality - not the same mindset as live drafts but I just took him in the third, Henderson in the 10th, and could have cuffed him with Brown in the 18th (went Darwin Thompson for my RB7 - doubt he’ll get past the 12th in my league.)

Would be silly to lock up that much capital on one backfield. 

I think Gurley will be efficient with double digit TDs, but prefer him only as my RB2.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
tombonneau said:
I've never thought otherwise. We saw same mindset with John Kelly last year. Everyone thought he was the handcuff, then Brown (the true HC) is hurt and  the Rams sign CJA off the trash heap. Granted Henderson has more draft capital than Kelly, but Rams have given no indication Brown is not backup.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the situations are comparable. I don’t remember how everyone felt after the preseason but it should have been obvious to everyone after the first couple weeks that Brown  was the handcuff. And this year Henderson should have a role allowing him to see the field and probably have ppr value. Way different from Kelly.

 
Skoo said:
This is my line of thought as well. Even if he's playing on a decreased workload, 75% of previous Gurley will still be a Top 5 RB.

I think if you make sure to handcuff with Brown and are willing to hold him, it's probably worth the risk in the 2nd.
Click to expand...
Agreed, I’ve been saying this for months.  Everyone in Gurley’s current tier come with some risk, as Gurley does now, but no one outside of Saquon or CMC offer the upside Gurley does.   To me he’s well worth the risk at his current ADP.

As far as handcuff is concerned it is and will be Brown.  But with the addition of DH I won’t be going out of my way to grab Brown as a handcuff.  If Gurley goes down its a clear RBC situation and DH has the highest upside in that situation..

 
Last edited by a moderator:
For those of you that have already drafted where has he been going? I have the 8th pick in a 12 team ppr league and have been giving some thought to taking Gurley in the 2nd.

 
theToes said:
For those of you that have already drafted where has he been going? I have the 8th pick in a 12 team ppr league and have been giving some thought to taking Gurley in the 2nd.
Click to expand...
He will go somewhere right around that pick in the 2nd.  Two of my drafts he went before you pick actually

 
I have Henderson on a 6 player bench but someone just dropped Brown.......Do I drop Henerson to stash Brown?   Drafts are telling us most still value Henderson way over Brown....

 
I'd like to stay away from this guy. I feel like he'll be fine then we will play this game where he's active then out of no where inactive or worse active but not playing. Ugh.

 
Brad Evans @YahooNoise

According to The Athletic's @VinnyBonsignore, Todd Gurley's knee "appears to be fine ... The Rams want to keep it that way come Dec/Jan." Team likely to mange his touch and snap counts, "especially through first part of the season." 

Yet another major work reduction sign.
Click to expand...


Vincent Bonsignore @VinnyBonsignore

I don't anticipate it being "major"
Click to expand...


Brad Evans @YahooNoise

Thanks for the clarification, Vincent. Gurley logged 86.2% of the Rams RB opportunities last year. If it's not a "major" reduction, what do you foresee? 70%? 60%?
Click to expand...


Vincent Bonsignore @VinnyBonsignore

75% to 80% with the score playing a role in the 75%
Click to expand...

 
To me, it boils down to - do you believe your eyes or ears?

What you see - clearly limited at the end of 2018, losing weight to save knees

What you hear - 100% healthy, running as fast as ever, a full-go for 2019

What you see - LAR trading up to grab a RB

What you hear - We wanted a guy with his skillset

What you won't see - full-contact footage of Gurley since the end of 2018

What you won't hear - negative comments from LAR staff

The bolded is why I am so skeptical.  Would you trust a used car salesman and buy a car from him sight unseen?  As a minimum, wouldn't you demand a test drive?  And for those saying 75% Gurley is still great, are you assuming you get that 75% on a weekly basis?  What if you get 100% for 4 weeks, 75% for 4 weeks, 50% for 4 weeks, and 0% for 4 weeks, yet you don't get to decide which weeks are which?

 
TheWinz said:
To me, it boils down to - do you believe your eyes or ears?

What you see - clearly limited at the end of 2018, losing weight to save knees

What you hear - 100% healthy, running as fast as ever, a full-go for 2019

What you see - LAR trading up to grab a RB

What you hear - We wanted a guy with his skillset

What you won't see - full-contact footage of Gurley since the end of 2018

What you won't hear - negative comments from LAR staff

The bolded is why I am so skeptical.  Would you trust a used car salesman and buy a car from him sight unseen?  As a minimum, wouldn't you demand a test drive?  And for those saying 75% Gurley is still great, are you assuming you get that 75% on a weekly basis?  What if you get 100% for 4 weeks, 75% for 4 weeks, 50% for 4 weeks, and 0% for 4 weeks, yet you don't get to decide which weeks are which?
Click to expand...
Good news is we’re close to finding out and the vast majority of people have already drafted and made their decisions.  

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JohnnyU
Is the 2024 RB Class really that bad?
2 3
Replies
113
Views
4K
BigTex
BigTex
T
Travdogg's pre-combine mock draft
2
Replies
52
Views
2K
(HULK)
(HULK)
JohnnyU
WR Trey Palmer, TB
Replies
39
Views
2K
ignatiusjreilly
ignatiusjreilly

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 7 (members: 0, guests: 7)
Top