I love him, but let's be realistic. Weeks 7-17 = 10 weeks, plus one of those 3 carry games was 105 yards and 2 TDs. His stats are not 1/2 season stats. But looking at a true half season of stats for him (weeks 9-17) is impressive enough that we don't need mental gymnastics to say he's underrated right now. Doubling his weeks 9-17 stats produces 280/1356/10 + 36/276/4.
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.
RB Nick Chubb, CLE (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter EBF
- Start date
Concept Coop
Footballguy
I know I’m late, but what deals are you referring to? This situation is pretty unique. My memory isn’t great, but I can’t think of a single comparable example.
I own Chubb and not Hunt, so I’m hoping you’re right, but I don’t know how we can be confident. Hunt is a legitimate talent. Williams put up big numbers late in the season, on fresh legs and limited carries. He got more than 15 carries once. Hunt was a workhorse and produced with Alex Smith, when the offense was still human and putting up 50 fewer yards and 9 fewer points per game.
I'm expecting 60/40 when Hunt returns, but wouldn’t at all be shocked by 50/50.
Last edited by a moderator:
Deals worth 0.5% of the salary cap. And if he's suspended for 8 games, I'm guessing they don't even have to pay half of that salary.
I'm honestly not even sure Hunt will outsnap Duke when he comes back from suspension.
And let's not downplay Alex Smith's career year. 67.5% completion percentage, 8.00 YPA, and a 5:1 TD:INT ratio are all elite stats. A balanced, efficient offense is ideal for RB1 production. Look back at the Trent Green/Priest Holmes years or Drew Brees/Rivers/LT2 years.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
Hunt’s salary is obviously no indication of his actual value or potential usage. We all know why he got the offer he did.
Nobody is discrediting Alex Smith. But the 2017 Chiefs were a top 5 offense; the 2018 Chiefs were top 5 all-time, arguably. 50 yards and 9 points is huge.
You can keep saying it, but it doesn't make it true. 50 yards and 9 points may be huge in terms of record setting NFL offenses, but in terms of RB opportunity, playing 80%+ of the snaps in a top 5 offense was already huge. That's realistically the best anyone could hope for in terms of situation. So let's not pretend like Hunt had much work to do in 2017. He was in the kind of spot that could make a mediocre talent look good or a good talent look great. It's really hard to grade a performance in a situation so ideal. Personally, I think the odds he's as good as Chubb are slim. He strikes me as David Montgomery with less pass blocking skills or Carlos Hyde with better hands, which is to say he's a nice contingency plan should Chubb or Duke miss time.
As for the contract, it was so cheap it was basically in the "why not?" category. If he has any minor infraction, he's cuttable. Chubb is their guy. The GM basically forced the coach's hand last year (trading Hyde) to make the coach use him. And now people think this delinquent is going to take a serious bite out of Chubb's pie?
But going back to situation, some of the best RB performances were achieved with teams that scored less than the 2017 Chiefs, much less the 2018 Chiefs. That 50 yards and 9 points delta means almost nothing in terms of making Williams' job easier than Hunt's. Trent Green only threw 17 TDs the year Larry Johnson blew up for 1750/20 on the ground. Matt Hasselbeck threw 24 TDs the year Alexander put up 1880/27 on the ground. Rivers threw 22 TDs the year LT put up 1815/28 on the ground. You don't need an insane passing game to put up great running stats. In fact, that seems to hold RBs back. The RB stats were not overly impressive when Manning threw 55 TDs, when Brady threw 50, or when Brees threw 46. It seems the best RB situation is when a team has a good run/pass balance and efficiency from the QB position. Efficiency keeps the offense on the field. Insane passing stats tend to minimize the RB role on the offense. So long story short, 50 yards and 9 points... not actually huge for the RB.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
I disagree about the offenses, but don’t care to go deeper into that. For that sake of moving the conversation along, we’ll say they played in similar offenses.
Hunt did it for 16 games (well 15 and a lone carry week 17) and 325 touches in 2017. Williams was in a timeshare late in the season on fresh wheels.
I think you’re much lower on Hunt than most, and that’s probably all it comes down to. If you see a lesser version of David Montgomery, there’s probably no point in arguing the details. I see a top 10 back.
I genuinely don't see how. There's clearly - at a minimum - decreasing marginal utility for RB fantasy purposes as passing stats increase to that level. And I say at a minimum, because cursory research indicates a swing to negative marginal utility as passing stats get to a certain point. In no way shape or form can that extra 50 yards and 9 points be seen as "huge" for RB production.
For sure. I'm not a Williams truther by any means. I think he is a lesser talent than Hunt. I just question whether Hunt is actually as good as some believe, given how good Williams also looked. Let's not forget that even Spencer Ware had a hell of a half season to start 2016 and the 2016 offense was nothing like the 2017 offense.
To be clear, I see him as a very, very similar talent to Montgomery. I just know Hunt was still not very good at pass blocking after his rookie year. I think Montgomery as a rookie is probably better in that phase than Hunt as a third year back. But everything else I see as being very similar. I don't see either of them as top 10 backs, although I believe they both could perform as a top 10 fantasy back in the right situation.
Chubb, on the other hand, is absolutely a top 10 back to me. Redraft and dynasty.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
The obvious explanation for the below numbers is that defenses had to devote more resources to Mahomes than they did Smith. I’m kind of surprised we’re arguing this, honestly.
Stacked box rate:
Hunt (2017): 27.7%
Hunt (2018): 19.3%
Williams (2018): 14.0%
While an interesting stat, we both know there's a lot more to fantasy production than stacked boxes. 27.7% still seems pretty low, but I don't have anything to compare it to. Did you get that from NFL's next gen stats?
Concept Coop
Footballguy
Light box carry rate:
Hunt (2017): 36.0%
Hunt (2018): 51.4%
Williams (2018): 58.0%
Hunt (2017): 36.0%
Hunt (2018): 51.4%
Williams (2018): 58.0%
Concept Coop
Footballguy
Playerprofiler. And we’re comparing the 2017 Chiefs to the 2018 Chiefs.
It doesn’t make sense to use fantasy points as the measurement. We’re talking about their NFL ability. Kareem Hunt had A LOT less help from his offense in 2017 than Damien Williams did in 2018. And Hunt did it on meaningful volume. Williams was only in a timeshare for a few weeks at the end of the season.
I'm comparing the 2017 Chiefs to all the other situations in the NFL, my point being that situation inflated many people's opinion of Hunt's ability.
I already agree with you that Hunt > Williams. You don't need to sell me on that.
ETA: Saying he had "A LOT less help from his offense" is like saying playing a video game on "easy" is "A LOT harder than playing on very easy."
Last edited by a moderator:
Concept Coop
Footballguy
You suggested that Williams’ success could be a comment on Hunt. I’m pointing out that they put up numbers in two very different situations.
Stacked box rate is not a perfect stat, but:
Chubb (2018): 29.2%
Zeke (2018): 14.8%
Zeke (2017): 27.0%
Gurley (2018): 14.8%
Barkley (2018): 25.7%
electric Ape
Footballguy
While I agree that FF Ninja appears much lower than the market on Hunt, I don’t think the problem with his position is mainly about talent evaluation, I think he is making more of a technical or fundamental error.
For example, the fundamental theorem of poker is that every time you make a decision that’s different than what you’d make if you could see your opponent’s cards they gain and vice versa. Fantasy football is a noisier, more chaotic game and isn’t so much governed by one theorem as many. But certainly one of those theorems could be that, at any position, as the talent and skill of your fantasy player’s backup rises, so does the threat to his future volume. That isn’t a groundbreaking idea, it’s mostly just common sense.
Adding a 23 year old pro bowl RB behind Chubb is a fundamentally bad development for Chubb’s value. It just is. And even if Kareem Hunt were to tear both of his Achilles heels this offseason and never play another snap, it still would have been a bad development because the signing created the possibility of a bunch of bad outcomes that were less possible before Hunt signed. When you tie your position to only one future outcome that you are certain will happen (saying Hunt’s signing will have zero consequences) instead of creating a weighted range of future possibilities, you expose major flaws in your game.
Many people have tried to explain all of this to FF Ninja in various ways but he either has a gap in his technical game or there are ego reasons why he can’t admit his position was bad. And now of course he is resorting to all of worst messageboard tactics to defend an indefensible position:
--Making up fake statistics (please show us the data behind your statement that 99% of these signings means the player is cheap insurance)
--Professing to know with 100% clarity why the Browns signed Hunt and their future intentions for Hunt when this is unknowable to him
--diverting the discussion with red herring arguments (who cares how old Marshall Faulk or Fred Taylor are that’s totally irrelevant to our discussion, our discussion was about usage rates)
FF Ninja, I read your posts on here, they’re usually good. In this case though you’re wrong. Honestly why not just plant your flag on the idea that Chubb is a bulletproof talent who will still thrive even with greater threats to his volume or that Hunt is way overrated, those seem like interesting, bold takes already. There is no reason to push your positions so far that they can no longer end up being right.
Actually, my stance has always been that Chubb was going to get 60%-70% of the snaps in 2019 (I've said this at least once or twice in this thread, I believe) and I contend that he will still get 60%-70% of the snaps, but if Hunt plays a role, it'll be hurt Duke more than Chubb. I never claimed to know with 100% certainty (speaking of made up crap) that I know the Browns intentions. I've merely hypothesized why they'd sign a troubled guy to a pittance of a salary to play half a season. As for Faulk's age, I was disproving a red herring. That stuff was nonsense and I was putting it to rest. It was never something I wanted to bring up.
Now if I expected Chubb to get 80%+ of the snaps then yes, the Hunt signing would be scary for that prediction.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Interesting data in regards to the defensive alignment Hunt and William's faced Coop.
barackdhouse
Footballguy
Is there any reason to believe defenses will adjust again and show Mahomes less respect? I kind of doubt it. Even without Hill Mahomes is for real. Seems a good chance that stacked boxes will not be a luxury for KC opponents.
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
Licking my Chubby chops on that.Concept Coop said:
Concept Coop
Footballguy
I think it’s safe to say that Chubb is likely to see fewer stacked boxes. It’s hard to project him to be any more efficient that he was last season, but OBJ will command a lot of attention and the CLE could potentially be a top 5 offense.Licking my Chubby chops on that.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
TripItUp
Footballguy
correct
he had 20 catches in 8 starts...he doesn't lose as much as people may think in PPR.
barackdhouse
Footballguy
I think that's the list. Plus probably one more random back that gets there. Maybe DJ. Maybe someone like Connor or Bell. Barkley I just realized should be the first choice even in that offense.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
Barkley had 90, CMC had 100, Zeke had 75, Bell and DJ will be getting a ton. I like Chubb, but he doesn’t have RB1 potential.
Last edited by a moderator:
Didn’t realize Saquon had 15 last year. He’s in the convo. Conner had 13 in 13 games he’s gotta be in the convo too I guess. Hyde scored 5 tds before relinquishing the role to Chubb who scored 10 in it. 15+ seems very realistic.
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
Nick will likely benefit from the OBJ acquisition where defenses will not have the luxury of stacking the box to stop Chubb. Defenses are going to have to use bracket coverage on OBJ which sets the table for Chubb to do some damage.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ian Hartitz @Ihartitz
Most yards after contact per touch in a season among all RBs since 2010 (PFF, min. 100 carries):
1. 2018 Nick Chubb (4.47)
2. 2017 Kenyan Drake (4.29)
3. 2018 Derrick Henry (4.21)
4. 2012 Adrian Peterson (3.93)
5. 2017 Alvin Kamara (3.83)
12:46 PM - 7 Jun 2019
Concept Coop
Footballguy
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Chubb's receptions/game after taking over the starting role were nearly identical to Zeke's receptions/game his first 2 years in the league before he exploded for 75 receptions last year. Not saying it's likely but it's always possible Chubb starts catching the ball more, especially if they do end up trading Duke at some point.Concept Coop said:
I agree RB1 is unlikely for him, but if that offense really explodes the way some people think it might there are ways he can get there.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
I don’t see it. Zeke was always a good receiver and pass blocker. The Cowboys just preferred to keep him in to block, until they needed him to help replace Witten and Dez last season. I don’t think Chubb will be the 3rd down back. If they trade Duke, it will likely be Hilliard.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hankmoody
Footballguy
Barkley - 15 last yearCobbler1 said:
Conner - 12
David Johnson - 10 in a clusterbomb situation last year
Melvin Gordon - 14
Derrick Henry - 12
Christian McCaffrey - 13
All are definitely candidates. Carson and Lindsay were in double digits too but could have big risk with competition.
Mixon - 9 last year (280 touches) and bellcow type workload coming, all he needs is for the offense to support it.
Le'Veon - Can't possibly dismiss him, even if you wanted to bash the NYJ offense
Drake - had 9 on just 180 touches in 2018 and they didn't add anything.
Conner actually had 13 in 13 games. I agree with everyone from CMC up as candidates but would take Chubb over them for tds except Saquon and maybe Gordon for various reasons.
Le’Veon’s career high is 11 in Pittsburg’s offense not sure you can expect more with the Jets. Drake isn’t on the field enough and I’m not sure he will be on more enough to get a few more tds. Mixon, maybe. He had 9 in 14 games last year and Gio had 3 more while he was out. I still think he’s in the 10-12 range while Chubb can push for 14-16.
electric Ape
Footballguy
I will try to explain this using a different approach. Let’s say you just turned 16 and wanted to get drivers insurance. Imagine that there is a bad insurance company that determines a policy cost for you by either giving your case to actuary A who says I’ve looked over all of FF Ninja’s data and there is no way he is getting into any accidents, let’s write him a policy for $100, or actuary B who says hmmmm seems like this FF Ninja is going to have an accident this year but luckily it will only be a fender bender so we’ll charge him $1,500, or actuary C who says holy crap, this daredevil FF Ninja is going to total 3 Lamborghinis, we better charge him $999,000. That would be a silly way to write insurance right? A good company would plug all your stats into a model that weighs a wide range of probabilities and ultimately outputs a policy cost that allows for long term profit given the chance of all of the above scenarios happening. They might use some human intuition to shade the final price a bit one way or the other but it would only be a lesser factor.
When you say Hunt’s signing is inconsequential because you only expected him to get 65% volume before and you still expect him to get 65% you are acting like the bad actuary in the above example who decides there will be one fender bender and then prices accordingly. 65% volume is just one possibility but you are making pronouncements as if it’s assured. The chances of some scenario that you haven’t accounted for—like Chubb starting the season with crazy high CMC-like volume but then losing significant volume to Hunt—must be factored in because the probability of those scenarios occurring is non-zero.
Now, for example, let’s say we were offering fantasy players an insurance policy on Nick Chubb’s not reaching some milestone of future productivity (maybe him scoring 10 TDs in 2019 or 2020). When Hunt was signed the cost of that policy absolutely needs to increase. But based on your thinking and on being so locked in on the 65% scenario, you’re saying the signing is inconsequential and the price should stay the same. For the same reason that kind of thinking would drive an insurance company straight out of business, it isn’t good for fantasy football either.
You spend all this time trying to create an analogy, but you missed the point from the start. Everyone drafts based on expected outcomes. I've got a certain amount of draft capital I'm willing to pay for Chubb based on an expected workload of 60%-70% of the snaps when healthy. I'm not trying to tell you this is assured. That's my expectation and I made that abundantly clear. You keep claiming that I'm claiming to know things for certain. I can only tell you so many times that I'm not. Fantasy football is an inexact science. My expectation of 60%-70% of snaps did not change a bit with the Hunt signing, thus it was inconsequential to me.
If you want to think Hunt is a top 10 RB and he'll make a push for more snaps, that's your judgment call and you are welcome to it. You might think, oh no, they brought in a pro bowl talent... well, Chris Ivory and Latavius Murray were pro bowlers. It means very little.
You see I was always expecting something to happen. I did not expect the Browns to enter training camp with only two RBs of note on the roster, especially with Duke pouting and asking for a trade. If you see this as some sort of game changer for Chubb you either think Chubb is not that good or you think Hunt is a lot better than I do.
barackdhouse
Footballguy
It continually blows me away how many people don't seem to understand this. As if it is improper or misguided to state one's opinion in a FF forum. We all strive to be as informed as possible and to frame our arguments/assessments in the most logical way we can. But this leads to inevitable disagreement. And that is fine. But nobody is claiming their prediction of the future is to be thought of as fact. That's just weird to me.
Concept Coop
Footballguy
A team bringing in a pro-bowler means very little? Even cherry picking examples - two injury replacements in a bad RB class - Ivory and Murray would have moved the needle, at the time.
cloppbeast
Footballguy
Expected outcomes: how much weight do you put on historical trends vs your reading of the situation. Piggybacking Electric Ape, the preferred method is that of the actuarian who does not put stock in how he views the situation.
Last edited by a moderator:
barackdhouse
Footballguy
Who says he is doing anything other than that? Not trying to speak on his behalf, as I too have *some* concern over Hunt's impact on Chubb. But bottom line is that even in a world where we are all managing our teams by the best actuarial methods, we still all rely on the same old (and new) assessment tools, like draft capital, combine, and a host of statistical measures. And not every actuary uses or believes in the same tools (in FF), and comes up with different results sometimes. That's all this is. Ninja's impartial assessment is different than some others. That shouldn't be controversial. This *isn't* car insurance. Standardization of risk assessment methodology doesn't exist in fantasy football. Which is why our own individualized and preferred methods come into play when trying to assess risk in a fantasy situation. One person's method says Hunt brings more risk to Chubb. One's method says it doesn't, or perhaps not in a significant enough way to influence one's choice. But that doesn't mean it is biased. There is just a wider range of predictions out there than in the insurance industry. We can strive for the dispassionate actuarial method, but let's not confuse a method we disagree with as being biased just because we don't agree with the assessment.
My take is that Hunt absolutely adds a greater than zero risk to Chubb's value. I am *betting* it won't be significant enough to merit a downgrade of any kind. I have my method and reasons to think that but it's nothing more than a bet. And I own neither though I did sell Hunt in three leagues last year.
TLDR version - put simply the FF landscape is far broader than the car insurance industry. It's a bad analogy other than to say I agree we should be *striving* to manage as actuaries.
cloppbeast
Footballguy
Based on historical facts, we have 2 good/great running backs on a team. Without adding some bias in there, how do you assume one will get vast majority of the work?
Last edited by a moderator:
electric Ape
Footballguy
Of course there is room for differing opinions and different methods of play in FF. But this discussion has now gotten long enough that two distinct methods of play have been described in detail, and one method is technically superior to the other.
On the one hand, you have the FF Ninja / Miss Cleo approach where you close your eyes, try to see a game or games unfold as best as you can predict, and then make decisions using the single outcome you’ve imagined. On the other hand you have the Las Vegas approach where you create a model that accounts for many weighted scenarios and make decision that project as favorable against the full range of possible outcomes. You can use the Miss Cleo approach if you like, but I promise you that Las Vegas was built by swallowing up a whole lot of Miss Cleos.
Back in 1876 cowboys used to play poker by saying, I put you on a pair of queens! Fast forward to today and good players put their opponents on a weighted range of hands. This is not a controversial advancement, it is universally known as a superior way to play poker. If you don’t like the car insurance analogy then use the poker one. You don’t want to be the last cowboy using yesterday’s methods of play when better methods are available to you.
barackdhouse
Footballguy
I believe Ninja and myself (and others) are doing this very thing. But we are assigning a small weight to the Hunt impact where you are assigning a larger one. The methods by which we arrive at that weight is where the difference lies. There is far less difference in car insurance methods. I actually do like the poker analogy much better because poker also allows for diverse schools of thought. Insurance doesn't but that's ok it's still a useful and thoughtful analogy.
Assuming 65% is considered vast majority, as I believe that was the number being discussed, I see Chubb as the runaway favorite to earn that level of a split. All indications are as such to me. Again I own neither. The Brown I am rooting for is Njoku.
Also, making assumptions is what we do here. It is the essence of the hobby. And of this silly debate we're having regarding making *claims*. Yeah we want to be as informed and unbiased as possible. We all agree there. Don't know why that is hard to see.
Noah Davis
Footballguy
8 weeks of zero competition. At which point, if you are good, you address the risk of Hunt by snagging the inevitable waiver wire darling that covers the risk of the final 8 weeks if it were to materialize.
He basically put up Steve Slaton rookie stats. Hunt made the pro bowl, Steve didn't, but the stats were very similar despite the Chiefs being a much better offense. I'm sorry but a flukey rookie performance in a plug & play offense doesn't mean much to me. You've crowned him a top 10 talent based on that, but I think you are in the minority there... At least you've got electric ape there keeping you company
