CJ Anderson V Jeremy Hill (2 Viewers)

[ghostguy123]

I also think people are GREATLY overestimating some sort of airing it out effect Jones and Eifert will bring.

 

[Meatwad Reloaded]

There is nothing more constant in the NFL than change.

Then just throw every player's name in a hat and draft that way

DeMarco Murray or Ryan Matthews this year? What do you think guys? A 60/40 split?

Asiata is also looking good this preseason.

 

[Tau837]

\Hue has a pretty consistent history of running the ball around 48% of the time. This was referenced somewhere in the Hill thread. I see no reason that would suddenly change. In the scheme of the NFL today that's a pretty heAlthy balance and actually skewed a bit tears the run. They will certainly take shots in the passing game and Green/Effert will help that, but I see no reason for Cinci to go pass-centric this year. This is a pretty loaded team.

Hill will have over 260 carries if healthy.

Hue's OC history:

2003 Redskins:

- 527 pass attempts, 421 rush attempts = 44.4% rushing

- Spurrier's second season

- Patrick Ramsey and Tim Hasselbeck at QB and Trung Canidate, Rock Cartwright, Ladell Betts, and Chad Morton at RB... what a mess :X

- Spurrier was probably the de facto OC

- IMO this situation is not representative of the Bengals in 2015

2007 Falcons:

- 555 pass attempts, 385 rush attempts = 41% rushing

- The Bobby Petrino debacle season when he bailed after 13 games

- Joey Harrington, Byron Leftwich, and Chris Redman at QB

- Warrick Dunn and Jerious Norwood at RB

- Roddy White had a breakout year, and the supporting targets (Dunn, Norwood, Crumpler, Jenkins, Horn) were solid

- Dunn only averaged 3.2 ypc that season, so perhaps they were forced to the pass by ineffectiveness... or simply by the Petrino trainwreck

- IMO this situation is not representative of the Bengals in 2015


2010 Raiders:

- 491 pass attempts, 504 rush attempts = 50.7% rushing

- McFadden's monster year, and Michael Bush and Marcel Reese were also there

- Jason Campbell and Bruce Gradkowski were the QBs and TE Zach Miller (60 catches) was the strongest target

- Given the personnel and how well McFadden played, this split is not surprising

- IMO this situation isn't representative of the Bengals in 2015, since they have a stronger QB and much stronger targets in the passing game

2013 Bengals:

- 587 pass attempts, 481 rush attempts = 45% rushing

- No Hill, Green-Ellis and Bernard as the primary RBs

- IMO this situation isn't perfectly representative of the Bengals in 2015, since Hill is clearly a big upgrade on BJGE... however, IMO this is the most closely representative situation

2014 Bengals:

- 503 pass attempts, 492 rush attempts = 49.4% rushing

- Top targets hammered by injuries

- Hill emerged

- IMO this situation isn't representative of the Bengals in 2015, as already discussed


First, interesting that last season was the first time Hue made it to a second season as OC. Not wholly his fault, getting his first chances under Spurrier and Petrino, but still...

Second, in 3 of 5 instances, his teams ran the ball 45% of the time or less. I don't think his history is as robust as you seem to claim it is in this regard.

IMO this is a small enough sample size that it is possible and appropriate to examine each instance case by case. I think it's safe to throw the first three situations out, as they bear very little resemblance to the current Bengals situation. That leaves us with just the two Bengals seasons, and those have been discussed thoroughly. As I have said, IMO the offensive splits will fall between 2013 and 2014 (barring more significant injuries). Heck, I projected more total rushing attempts, not fewer. IMO anyone who thinks the Bengals will not pass more in 2015 than in 2014 in the absence of injuries (as is the case today) is simply refusing to be objective.

Furthermore, IMO you have to strike about 100 rushing attempts right off the top for players other than Hill and Gio, leaving them with a reasonable best case of about 400 combined carries. If you think Gio will be healthy and get fewer than 140 carries, we can just agree to disagree.

 

[georg013]

Funny stuff in here. Hill will have 300 carries this season. Take that to the bank, deposit it, then bring the slip back. Gio is the hype man to Hill's main attraction. I own Hill and would take him in the first round if I played redraft. His talent is real and so are his haters. Love it. Keep it coming!

 

[Don't Noonan]

Not touching Hill this year in any redraft

 

[Bob Magaw]

And I also still believe the much bigger problem is that he's not going to sniff that 5.4 ypc number again. Hill fattened up on some soft D's, including the league-worst rush D in Cleveland x2. Those NFC teams have been replaced by the much stouter NFC West, and Cleveland has stuffed the middle of that D with a now-healthy Phil Taylor and first round megaload Danny Shelton. They're not going to be anywhere NEAR the worst run D in football this year. The dreams based upon his Gio-less dream run buoyed by creampuff D after creampuff D simply aren't based in reality. Like any good back, he'll still have some good games against good teams, like he did vs. Denver, but he's going to have plenty like he did against Indy as well.Could it all work out? Sure. Gio could get hurt. That's really the major moving piece. But barring that, he's looking at something like 230/1100, plus a couple hundred bonus yards through the air. Maybe he storms his way to 15+ TD's and gives you Alfred-Morris-in-a-good-year type upside. But he's currently being horribly overdrafted by people who just don't understand the situation beyond, "He was really good at the end of last year."Football goes deeper than that. Sorry.

Could be, but again, Hill could partly make up a potential gap in volume. If last season wasn't a mirage, though, he could be a player capable of a high Y/C average. He was fourth in the league in YAC (yards after contact) per attempt. I never saw a single run last year (including the 60 and 85 yards TDs) where I thought, wow, he got really lucky on that play.

I think a fallacy in your thinking, is if it was as simple as Hill facing weak run defenses, and in reality he isn't a special RB, surely other RBs (rookie and vet) have benefited from similar circumstances, but not been as successful. The onus is on you to explain why. Other RBs last season faced weak defenses, yet Hill led the league in yards and Y/C average in the last nine games - over 100 yards more than the next closest, Lynch. Speaking of Lynch, should we be down on him because he plays in the NFC West? Other rookies have faced weak run defenses, yet only three in the last 40 years rushed for more yards with a higher Y/C average. If Hill isn't special, why wouldn't we have seen more RBs doing it before, too? Why is Hill the only rookie RB to have four 145+ yard games rushing and only needed about half the season as a starter to accomplish it, why haven't lots of rookie RBs done it previously that also faced weak run defenses? Unless you think he is the only rookie RB to ever face weak run defenses?

The idea that Hill might check most/all boxes for consideration at a certain juncture in drafts, but that he would be dropped by others after realizing, darn, the Browns drafted a rookie DT, is frankly a bizarre and imo ill-conceived objection (would anybody otherwise inclined to draft McCoy NOT do so because Suh is now in the division?), which more than anything having to do with Hill's talent or opportunity, speaks to how if you are determined to find reasons to not like a player, you generally can, albeit spurious in this case. ARI had an average run defense last year, SF lost a few players, you might have heard? The NFC West run defense bogeyman warnings could be overwrought and misplaced.

On what basis other than purely arbitrary are you projecting "plenty" of games like against IND as well? The Gio must get hurt for Hill to flourish meme was propagated just as mistakenly last year. That was more understandable at the time because it took more foresight to recognize and identify Hill's superior talent BEFORE he became the feature RB. Perversely remaining a full fledged, card carrying "not unless Bernard is injured-ite" AFTER Hill inexorably supplanted him, and decisively/dramatically out-carried him even AFTER Bernard was healthy and returned to the lineup, is much harder to rationalize and justify.

You seem to be horribly underestimating him based on a distortion/misrepresentation. "Really good at the end of last season". What is the end, last few games? It was more than a half season. If by really good you meant #1 in the NFL during that time frame (most of which Bernard had already returned), and one of the historically best seasons for a rookie RB in league history, than agreed. By that standard, the Taj Mahal, Mona Lisa and Shelby Cobra are examples of a "really good" building, painting and car, respectively.

Sometimes things aren't as complicated as you are making it (don't draft Hill high because of Danny Shelton).

 

[ghostguy123]

He could also, ya know, improve from his rookie year

 

[Bob Magaw]

To Freelove's point, here are the teams with 400+ RB rushing attempts last season:

473 DAL

473 HOU

427 CLE

425 NYG

416 PHI

414 CIN

402 BAL

401 DEN

In 2013, the leader was BUF with 454, and 7 other teams had 400+. In 2012, the leader was NE with 483, and 7 other teams had 400+.

In the past 3 seasons, there have been 4 instances of a team having more than 454 RB rushing attempts, peaking at 483. So the discussion in this thread about Hill and Bernard splitting 500 carries is starting from a bad premise, for 3 reasons:

1. The Bengals offense will likely have far fewer than 500 RB rushing attempts, since it had 414 last season and even heavy rushing teams have typically been much lower than 500 RB rushing attempts over the past few seasons.

2. It is very likely that other RBs besides Hill and Bernard will get at least a small number of the team's RB rushing attempts, further reducing the total for the Hill and Bernard to split. For example, CIN RBs Peerman and Burkhead combined for 70 rushing attempts last season. Part of that may have been influenced by Gio missing 3 games, but, even if he played 16 games, it is likely they would have had non-zero rushing attempts.

3. The CIN offense may have fewer overall RB rushing attempts than last season given probable better health of receiving options Green, Sanu, Eifert, and Bernard.

That has been Freelove's main premise in this tangent of discussion, and he is right.

1 - Be that as it may, this parameter describes CIN in 2014, and despite that, once he became the starter, Hill led the NFL in rushing over the last half season plus. How far of a decline are you predicting (to 10, 15, 20?).

2 - See above. Respectfully, so what? This also describes last season. Despite RBs OTHER THAN Hill and Bernard having a non-zero number of rush attempts, again, Hill led the league in rushing in the last nine games. Why would it be an obstacle to Hill succeeding at a high level this year, when it wasn't last season? Just to be clear, I'm not hung up on the 500 carry point, which you may be specifically addressing. In fact, the point I'm highlighting, it may be a red herring if Hill's brilliant rookie season is a proof of concept that it isn't necessary for CIN as a team to get anywhere close to that mark.

3 - Is it possible that a healthy Green, Eifert, etc. isn't a 100% negative development for Hill. Is it possible that having a more distracted defense, more first downs, longer sustained drives, overall plays and red zone possessions could help him in some ways, or be a wash?

I took as Freelove's main premise that Hill isn't worth a high selection, for reasons I find mostly spurious. Needless to say, if Hill continues to produce at an elite level, and is among the top RBs in the game, he could be wrong on this most important larger point, even if he is "right" on some smaller, less meaningful and consequential points.

 

[Bob Magaw]

And now that I think of it, given the major changes to both the WAS offensive line and the switch to a VERY Alfred Morris friendly scheme, people should really be expecting Morris to outscore Hill for the year, and I'm not seeing that reflected in draft results...ever.Just another opportunity for people with their eyes open to get a leg up on people who aren't really plugged in to individual team dynamics. Last year ain't this year, last year's situations aren't this year's situations, and last year's meaningless PFF peripheral numbers aren't this year's meaningless PFF peripheral numbers. Each year's numbers exist at the nexus of talent, opportunity, health, surrounding cast, and scheme.That place is a lot rosier for Anderson than it is for Hill. And it's a lot rosier for lots of RB's that aren't commonly regarded as being in Hill's neighborhood. This is because people have gross misconceptions about what neighborhood Hill's currently dwelling in.

Yeah, no, not seeing the rationale of ignoring Hill's #1 production in the last nine games, instead taking a highly speculative leap of faith on the declining Morris, on the basis of OL changes and scheme. CIN already has a great OL, they are a known commodity. Maybe WAS will be improved, but they won't necessarily be as good as CIN already is. Was the CIN scheme that propelled Hill to #1 production in the second half plus of one of the greatest seasons for a rookie RB ever a VERY Jeremy Hill friendly scheme? And if not, does it matter, when he put up #1 production within that scheme, such as it was?

Just more spurious reasons to fail to recognize the opportunity presented by Hill.

You are right that last year ain't this year. Since then, Hill emerged as the feature, bell cow RB, and will be from the first game. Bernard showed with another season of replicated stats that he isn't as talented as Hill, and not the threat to Hill's carries that was mistakenly assumed last year.

Phrases and words like individual team dynamics and nexus, for all their vocabulary power, aren't meaning what you are trying to, no matter how hard you try. All the criteria you correctly identified, apply to Hill every bit as much as to Morris. He has the talent, opportunity, health, surrounding talent and scheme going for him. You say Anderson's situation is rosier, but as stated, it is baseless and unsupported. At any rate, it is far closer than your one sided critique would indicate. The only gross misconceptions I've seen regarding Hill's neighborhood are your own.

 

[ghostguy123]

I think Anderson's situation is better. It also helps he is a better pass catcher than Hill IMO (though this might be directly relater to his QB)

Hill has a better Oline. That is all. Anderson has Manning. That is all he needs to have a better situation than the RB who has Dalton.

That said, I like both guys to do rather well this year. CJ for redraft this year only, Hill every year after this year.

 

[jurb26]

I think Anderson's situation is better. It also helps he is a better pass catcher than Hill IMO (though this might be directly relater to his QB)

Hill has a better Oline. That is all. Anderson has Manning. That is all he needs to have a better situation than the RB who has Dalton.

That said, I like both guys to do rather well this year. CJ for redraft this year only, Hill every year after this year.

Hill is also a superior talent to Anderson. That's pretty important as well.

 

[ghostguy123]

I think Anderson's situation is better. It also helps he is a better pass catcher than Hill IMO (though this might be directly relater to his QB)

Hill has a better Oline. That is all. Anderson has Manning. That is all he needs to have a better situation than the RB who has Dalton.

That said, I like both guys to do rather well this year. CJ for redraft this year only, Hill every year after this year.

Hill is also a superior talent to Anderson. That's pretty important as well.

Absolutely he is.

Redraft, situation is more important than talent (not always, but more often IMO)

Dynasty, I almost always lean talent regardless of situation.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Offensive splits with Hue Jackson as OC:

2014: 503 passing attempts, 492 rushing attempts (414 RB rushing attempts)

2013: 587 passing attempts, 481 rushing attempts (397 RB rushing attempts)

Offensive rankings:

2014: 15th in points scored, 15th in offensive yards

2013: 6th in points scored, 10th in offensive yards

Cincy's 2014 offense also ranked worse in average time of possession per drive, plays per drive, yards per drive, and points per drive than in 2013.

So, did the radical drop in pass attempts and balancing of the pass/run ratio in 2014 occur by preference, or was it driven by circumstances, namely injuries to Green, Sanu, Eifert, and Bernard? IMO it was the latter, i.e., it did not happen by choice. Now we have heard Hue Jackson specifically say they plan to open the offense back up this year, which further reinforces that their preference is to pass more than they did last season.

Comparing to the 2013 offense, if they remain healthy, Green, Sanu, Eifert, and Bernard should all be as good or better in 2015 as in 2013. So it seems reasonable to look at 2013 as a starting point for projections. However, the Bengals have now seen Hill excel, so that will be an influence. I'd project 540 pass attempts and 500 rushing attempts, which should break down something like this:

250 Hill

150 Bernard

30 Other RBs

10 WRs

60 QBs (Dalton has had 60 and 61 the past two seasons)

That breakdown assumes full health for everyone, but we can't predict whatever injuries may happen. Reasons this breakdown may be optimistic for Hill:

1. Hill may not stay fully healthy. No way to know.

2. The team could easily have fewer than 500 total rushing attempts, which would probably drop the RB rushing attempts. IMO this is likely.

3. The RBs could easily have fewer than 420 total rushing attempts, since they haven't reached that number yet under Jackson and only reached it twice in Lewis's 12 year history as Bengals HC (423 RB rushing attempts in 2003 and 450 RB rushing attempts in 2009). As the lead rusher, any reduction will impact Hill the most. IMO this is possible.

4. Bernard could have more than 150 rushing attempts. He has had 170 and 168 rushing attempts in his 2 seasons. IMO this is likely.

5. Players other than Hill and Bernard could have more than 100 carries. Last season, they had 102. IMO this is possible.

Reasons this breakdown may be pessimistic for Hill:

1. Bernard could get hurt again. This is certainly possible, but I'm not sure it is any more likely than Hill himself getting hurt.

2. Bernard could stay healthy but have his rushing attempts cut more than I project and shifted to Hill. IMO this is possible but unlikely.

3. The top 4 receiving targets could all get hurt again. Or maybe even the top 5 or 6 (though Hill himself might fit in as #5 or #6...). IMO there is virtually no chance of this.

4. The Bengals could go against their prior success and their stated intentions for this season and skew even more toward running, giving the RBs significantly more rushing attempts than last season. IMO this is very unlikely.

5. Players other than Hill, Bernard, and Dalton could get fewer rushing attempts than the 40 I projected above. (Dalton doesn't count here, since the majority of his runs are scrambles, and thus not subject to instead handing off.) This is possible, but, even if so, the difference should be minimal.

All of this is just focused on how many rushing attempts to project for Hill. IMO taking all this into account, I'd probably project something like 240 rushing attempts x 4.8 ypc = 1152 rushing yards. Add in some modest receiving yards and a solid but unremarkable TD total, e.g., 10, and IMO Hill should definitely be taken after Anderson.

Good post, I don't agree with everything, but appreciate the balanced, non-hatchet job presentation.

You address some thorny issues which are difficult to disentangle. But in general, I think healthier receiving weapons and a more balanced attack should lead to a more robust, productive offense. In that case, even if the relative pass to run ratio takes an uptick, if there are more plays to be divided, it could still lead to a net gain in rushes, or a wash.

I think it is important to recall that BEFORE all the WR/TE injuries, there were a few indications signaling a likely intent to run more than the previous year (on a percentage basis). Drafting a second round RB in Hill for the second year in a row was one, and a rare occurrence in this era. That would effectively be a lot of draft capital to not use (though Green and Eifert, as well as Gresham at the time, are also all first rounders and perhaps the same could be said about them?). In addition, I think in the preseason Jackson strongly implied an intent to run more, more effectively, or both. This was coming off the third year in a row in which Dalton flamed out on the first round of the playoffs and looked bad in the process (which he did again, BTW, for the fourth year in a row), so there may have been a sense they had gone as far as he could take them, and it wasn't good enough. They were no longer going to hitch their wagon to Dalton.

What exactly has Jackson stated recently about wanting to pass more, I missed it. Not doubting it, but sometimes language can be ambiguous and mean different things to different people, subject to multiple interpretations.

Elsewhere you envisioned 240 carries most likely for Hill, we may not be that far apart in projections. That is 15 carries per game, I see something like 17-18, so only talking a few carries. But multiplied over the course of a season, that is the difference between 240 and 275 carries.

I don't like to predict injuries, but if we were looking for material to base that on, I think Bernard has been hurt more than Hill, dating back to high school (notably, torn ACLs as a prep and in college).

I'm not as sure a drop in RB carries is likely, if a more balanced, potent and productive offense acts like a rising tide that lifts all boats.

Again, Hill was very productive last year over the second half, despite the lack of high volume, so he may not be as high carry-dependent as some other top RBs. But in discussing Jackson's history, if Hill is the most talented RB he has ever had to work with, history may not be the best guide to the future, if he was working with less talented RBs in the past.

Bernard's carries in 2013 were as a complement to BJGE, who was, to be blunt, dog meat (3.3 Y/C average?). Hill is far from that. His carries last year were partly due to his beginning the year as the starter. In the second half of the season, I think he averaged less than 10 carries per game, so that distribution scenario could get him close to 150 carries, but technically under. Of course, something that has been discussed a lot, going forward, Bernard could get a few less carries, but more than make them up by throwing to him more, which would probably be playing to his greatest strength and what he may be best suited for in the NFL, anyways (perhaps eventually evolving into something like CINs version of Sproles?). Therefore, I'm not as sure as you that an increase in carries is likely.

As to backs other than Hill and Bernard having more than 100 carries in 2014, as you noted elsewhere, Bernard missed three games. Also, maybe some of those carries may have been prior to Hill's breakout. If it isn't an overwork precaution (and if Hill does average 15-18 carries, that wouldn't seem to fall into that category), not sure they would want to take too many carries out of Hill's hands for a third-fourth string RB.

As to 10 rushing TDs being modest, only Lynch and Lacy had more last year (?). And Hill could be starting for 16 games instead of nine, and see a significant increase over the 9 TDs he had as a rookie.

 

[Bob Magaw]

\Hue has a pretty consistent history of running the ball around 48% of the time. This was referenced somewhere in the Hill thread. I see no reason that would suddenly change. In the scheme of the NFL today that's a pretty heAlthy balance and actually skewed a bit tears the run. They will certainly take shots in the passing game and Green/Effert will help that, but I see no reason for Cinci to go pass-centric this year. This is a pretty loaded team.

Hill will have over 260 carries if healthy.

Hue's OC history:

2003 Redskins:

- 527 pass attempts, 421 rush attempts = 44.4% rushing

- Spurrier's second season

- Patrick Ramsey and Tim Hasselbeck at QB and Trung Canidate, Rock Cartwright, Ladell Betts, and Chad Morton at RB... what a mess :X

- Spurrier was probably the de facto OC

- IMO this situation is not representative of the Bengals in 2015

2007 Falcons:

- 555 pass attempts, 385 rush attempts = 41% rushing

- The Bobby Petrino debacle season when he bailed after 13 games

- Joey Harrington, Byron Leftwich, and Chris Redman at QB

- Warrick Dunn and Jerious Norwood at RB

- Roddy White had a breakout year, and the supporting targets (Dunn, Norwood, Crumpler, Jenkins, Horn) were solid

- Dunn only averaged 3.2 ypc that season, so perhaps they were forced to the pass by ineffectiveness... or simply by the Petrino trainwreck

- IMO this situation is not representative of the Bengals in 2015

2010 Raiders:

- 491 pass attempts, 504 rush attempts = 50.7% rushing

- McFadden's monster year, and Michael Bush and Marcel Reese were also there

- Jason Campbell and Bruce Gradkowski were the QBs and TE Zach Miller (60 catches) was the strongest target

- Given the personnel and how well McFadden played, this split is not surprising

- IMO this situation isn't representative of the Bengals in 2015, since they have a stronger QB and much stronger targets in the passing game

2013 Bengals:

- 587 pass attempts, 481 rush attempts = 45% rushing

- No Hill, Green-Ellis and Bernard as the primary RBs

- IMO this situation isn't perfectly representative of the Bengals in 2015, since Hill is clearly a big upgrade on BJGE... however, IMO this is the most closely representative situation

2014 Bengals:

- 503 pass attempts, 492 rush attempts = 49.4% rushing

- Top targets hammered by injuries

- Hill emerged

- IMO this situation isn't representative of the Bengals in 2015, as already discussed

First, interesting that last season was the first time Hue made it to a second season as OC. Not wholly his fault, getting his first chances under Spurrier and Petrino, but still...

Second, in 3 of 5 instances, his teams ran the ball 45% of the time or less. I don't think his history is as robust as you seem to claim it is in this regard.

IMO this is a small enough sample size that it is possible and appropriate to examine each instance case by case. I think it's safe to throw the first three situations out, as they bear very little resemblance to the current Bengals situation. That leaves us with just the two Bengals seasons, and those have been discussed thoroughly. As I have said, IMO the offensive splits will fall between 2013 and 2014 (barring more significant injuries). Heck, I projected more total rushing attempts, not fewer. IMO anyone who thinks the Bengals will not pass more in 2015 than in 2014 in the absence of injuries (as is the case today) is simply refusing to be objective.

Furthermore, IMO you have to strike about 100 rushing attempts right off the top for players other than Hill and Gio, leaving them with a reasonable best case of about 400 combined carries. If you think Gio will be healthy and get fewer than 140 carries, we can just agree to disagree.

The main takeaway point that stands out for me in your research is that Hill seems to be the most talented RB Jackson has had, and having him as the starter from the beginning of the season, puts us in uncharted territory relative to 2014 (or any previous season). I'm a firm believer in historical context where applicable, but this may not be such a case.One obversation, if you have Hill pegged for about 240 carries, the supremely plodding, pedestrian BJGE had 220 in 2013. So only about 1 carry per game more for Hill. If there is such a large talent discrepancy between them (and I think everybody, including even the biggest Hill detractors, which I don't count you among, can agree on that ), I think they may want to give Hill more than just one carry per game more in 2015, relative to what Law Firm had in 2013.

As to the expected split of carries between Hill and Bernard going forward, I have a question for you, with no preconceived notions, or intent as a gotcha vehicle. Just genuinely curious. Specifically about Bernard's role, in your opinion, are those 140-150 carries, barring injury, almost destined, a virtual certainty, regardless of how he does? Or, on the other hand, should they be based on merit? The reason I'm asking, since Hill did have a historically great rookie season by some metrics, and Bernard has been decidedly more ordinary as a pure runner and in terms of his Y/C average, what if the disparity between them continues to be something like a 1 yard average? Will they continue to force the ball to Bernard if he continues to be significantly less efficient, essentially giving him carries just to give him carries, to make sure he gets to 150? If the discrepancy continues, why would they (again, if it isn't an overwork precaution for Hill)? Since we are already dealing with small differences on a per game basis that could become magnified and compounded over the course of a season, could there come a point where a glaring difference in efficiency causes Jackson to question the sense of forcing the ball to Bernard on 10 rushes per game, at the expense of Hill only getting 15? Might he at some point, decide to give Hill a few more carries (17-18) and Bernard a few less (7-8, especially if he could augment those reduced CARRIES with additional TOUCHES with could more than compensate)?

* A last thought. If you had been on Mars last season (with no access to video or news at all), and upon returnng home, knew nothing more about the Begals run game other than Hill led the NFL in rushing the last nine games, had some historically impressive metrics for a rookie RB, and Bernard had been somewhat ordinary, AGAIN, would your immediate thought be, it would be a good idea to cap Hill's carries to an average of no more than 15 carries per game?

 

[Bob Magaw]

Hill had a perfect storm last season.

If by perfect storm, you mean Hill is far more talented than Bernard and that quickly became obvious to everybody, including the CIN coaches, agree. He earned his promotion and feature back role, it wasn't random or an accident.

Those long runs represented skill, not luck.

It is indeterminate at present if the injuries to the receiving weapons last year, and their potential health this year, was/will be a net positive, negative or neutral.

Hill played great against bad teams (and better than other backs against weak competition, in general) and also against average and good teams. His production wasn't purely the product of his schedule,

 

[Sabertooth]

Gio got hurt. he's not hurt now.

 

[Bob Magaw]

There is nothing more constant in the NFL than change.

Case in point, Hill relegating Bernard to change of pace status. Though some seem to have a residual concern over Bernard not in accord with what went down in the second half of the season.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Gio got hurt. he's not hurt now.

He wasn't hurt at the end of last season, though, when the changing of the guard had already taken place.

 

[starks]

Funny. The Hill enthusiasts are providing detailed descriptions and great data on why Hill will succeed this year. The anti hill crowd is saying things like "he won't get 250 carries" and "I won't touch him"

 

[Freelove]

Funny. The Hill enthusiasts are providing detailed descriptions and great data on why Hill will succeed this year. The anti hill crowd is saying things like "he won't get 250 carries" and "I won't touch him"

There's plenty of detailed description and great data about why Hill hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell of reaching the astronomical projections the pie-in-the-sky crowd are dreaming of. You don't want to see them because it's more comfy with your head in the sand.

That's what I find funny. That and the absurd notion that some here have that sheer volume of irrational nonsense makes for a more compelling argument than cogent, correct thought.

If I can save a couple lost souls from blowing a first round pick on a committee back whose own OC has sworn they'll be passing more this year, then it hasn't been for nought. For the rest of you, GL hitting 280 and 5.4.

 

[Chaka]

I think Anderson's situation is better. It also helps he is a better pass catcher than Hill IMO (though this might be directly relater to his QB)

Hill has a better Oline. That is all. Anderson has Manning. That is all he needs to have a better situation than the RB who has Dalton.

That said, I like both guys to do rather well this year. CJ for redraft this year only, Hill every year after this year.

Hill caught the ball pretty darn well last year (84% catch rate with 8 YPC). Anderson did too (77% & 9.5).

I agree Manning is more of a threat than Dalton but I can't diminish the quality of the offensive lines between Cin & Den (just saying "That is all" doesn't work for me, because "That" can be enough). Cin had a very good line last year and they doubled down on that in the draft. It looks like they are going with the Dallas model of team building.

I think the choice between them is truly one of the most difficult decision points in the early portion of fantasy drafts this season. Right now I really don't know who I would roll with if I were faced with the choice.

 

[RBM]

Gio got hurt. he's not hurt now.

He wasn't hurt to start the season last year and was pretty terrible.

 

[Sabertooth]

Gio got hurt. he's not hurt now.

He wasn't hurt at the end of last season, though, when the changing of the guard had already taken place.

You don't know that. Coaches hide injuries all the time.

 

[humpback]

Gio got hurt. he's not hurt now.

He wasn't hurt at the end of last season, though, when the changing of the guard had already taken place.

You don't know that. Coaches hide injuries all the time.

True. Maybe Hill was hurt and he would have averaged 8 ypc if healthy?

 

[Sabertooth]

Gio got hurt. he's not hurt now.

He wasn't hurt to start the season last year and was pretty terrible.

He wasn't hurt in 2013 either. And he was pretty good. In fact there was a thread floating around asking if he should the be #1 overall pick. 20 pages long

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?/topic/681094-why-not-giovani-bernard-at-101/page-20#entry18234216

 

[jurb26]

Gio got hurt. he's not hurt now.

He wasn't hurt to start the season last year and was pretty terrible.

He wasn't hurt in 2013 either. And he was pretty good. In fact there was a thread floating around asking if he should the be #1 overall pick. 20 pages long https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?/topic/681094-why-not-giovani-bernard-at-101/page-20#entry18234216

The myth of how good Gio is has been around for a long time. That doesn't change the fact that it's a myth.

 

[Sabertooth]

Oh ok.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Gio got hurt. he's not hurt now.

He wasn't hurt to start the season last year and was pretty terrible.

He wasn't hurt in 2013 either. And he was pretty good. In fact there was a thread floating around asking if he should the be #1 overall pick.20 pages long https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?/topic/681094-why-not-giovani-bernard-at-101/page-20#entry18234216

The myth of how good Gio is has been around for a long time. That doesn't change the fact that it's a myth.

Right. He had some flashy plays but wasn't an efficient runner. RB is/was in such dire straits in dynasty that it was easy for people to talk themselves into him being the next Shady, me included for a while.

 

[Sabertooth]

Yep. And he was a rookie then, and he got hurt. . I'm cautioning those who are simply extrapolating out those good games.

 

[jurb26]

Yep. And he was a rookie then, and he got hurt. . I'm cautioning those who are simply extrapolating out those good games.

He marginally out played BJGE who people poo'd on at every turn. Then he was soundly out played by Hill. Re-read that Gio #1 thread. Some of us tried to warn you then.

 

[Sabertooth]

Nah, we will just have to see. You aren't convincing me he's going to be a true workshorese and I'm not going to convince you he isn't. We will just have to see what happens.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Nah, we will just have to see. You aren't convincing me he's going to be a true workshorese and I'm not going to convince you he isn't. We will just have to see what happens.

Better luck next year.

 

[georg013]

Nah, we will just have to see. You aren't convincing me he's going to be a true workshorese and I'm not going to convince you he isn't. We will just have to see what happens.

Better luck next year.

Lol. You can lead a horse to water but...

 

[Bob Magaw]

Gio got hurt. he's not hurt now.

He wasn't hurt at the end of last season, though, when the changing of the guard had already taken place.

You don't know that. Coaches hide injuries all the time.

I infer he likely wasn't too injured from the fact there is a fairly negligible Y/C average difference in his last six games compared to his first seven in 2014 (and in turn, between those two "segments" to his 2013 Y/C average - I think about 4.0, for most of two seasons running now, is what he is, WYSIWYG). As far as I could tell, there just isn't a discernible difference that might account for hypothetical injury-diminished play. If we aren't just throwing stuff up to see what sticks, can you think of a likely mechanism by which he would have been hurt and it negatively impacted his play, yet his Y/C average was near identical? It is fun to spin the hypothetical kaleidoscope wheel, but sometimes these questions border on the empirical, we can look them up and figure things out for ourselves. If you CAN'T think of a realistic response to your objection, even to yourself, again, maybe he just is what he is. Which is to say, not as good as Hill, and it really isn't close.

Hill had four 145+ yard games rushing in essentially half a season. Bernard has none in most of two seasons. Even at his best, Bernard has at no point in his pro career looked like Hill, at his best. Average for Bernard vs. average for Hill is worse, he suffers even more in the comparison.

While I agree it is more likely that Bernard could encroach on Hill's carries in the RBBC distribution (compared to the, imo, remote, extremely unlikely scenario there is a reversal, Gio beats out Hill, and reemerges as the feature RB again), the above is why I'm not that concerned about either scenario, as being an obstacle to more than a 15 carry per game average. Where we seem to differ most, is how we view the talent gap between them. I see it as significant. Just for the record, since JWB has made specific projections, he seems to see closer to 15 carries per game, I expect closer to 17-18 (20 seems high in this era, only two RBs cracked 300 carries last season, but 15 seems light for a RB talent that might be the best young back in the league, by some metrics, HISTORICALLY elite for a rookie). So the somewhat contentious DIFFERENCE we are debating, is really only 2-3 carries per game on average. That is probably on the order of, or slightly exceeding, a margin of error difference. The difference between 240 and 275 carries is a bit more than 10%. These are some fine grained distinctions we are making. At least some of us are. I don't learn much from posts that are littered, strewn (not referencing you, BTW) with condescending references to the hopelessly deluded blah blah blah.

To the thread, another way to break this down, how many teams could Hill start for - 20-25, maybe more? How about Bernard - between 10-15 (some situations are close calls, but quite a few spots from my perspective in the AFC South and East)?

Also to the thread, could be a poll, but for now, what is your degree of confidence expressed as a probability that Hill averages more than 15 carries per game (240+ in a season)? 50%, higher, lower? How about landing in the 16-17 carries per game range (roughly 255-270 carries)?

 

[ghostguy123]

Gio got hurt. he's not hurt now.

Hill greatly outperformed bernards rookie season. And then last year happened.

 

[ghostguy123]

I think Anderson's situation is better. It also helps he is a better pass catcher than Hill IMO (though this might be directly relater to his QB)

Hill has a better Oline. That is all. Anderson has Manning. That is all he needs to have a better situation than the RB who has Dalton.

That said, I like both guys to do rather well this year. CJ for redraft this year only, Hill every year after this year.

Hill caught the ball pretty darn well last year (84% catch rate with 8 YPC). Anderson did too (77% & 9.5).I agree Manning is more of a threat than Dalton but I can't diminish the quality of the offensive lines between Cin & Den (just saying "That is all" doesn't work for me, because "That" can be enough). Cin had a very good line last year and they doubled down on that in the draft. It looks like they are going with the Dallas model of team building.

I think the choice between them is truly one of the most difficult decision points in the early portion of fantasy drafts this season. Right now I really don't know who I would roll with if I were faced with the choice.

Hill barely had any refeptions........good catch rate??? Cmon

 

[Captain Hook]

Hill is the superior back and it is not even close. Situation doesn't scare me one bit.

Hill's situation doesnt scare me either. But for this year, I like Anderson.

Dynasty give me Hill.

I agree with this. I think they are both undervalued a bit.

Anderson is undervalued with a mid 1st round ADP?

I don't see anywhere where he's higher than 15th overall. And that seems high for a mediocre talent with half of a proven season behind him. I would roll with Rodgers/Luck as the top tier QB over anderson right now. Floor > ceiling in the first two rounds.

CBS has him ranked 5th.

ESPN has him ranked 6th.

You're not looking very hard.

who cares about those rankings unless that is the only place you play - in which case you probably aren't reading much here anyway.

LOOK at the ADP of real $ leagues where both are going in the second round - Anderson maybe a little earlier but neither are first rounders

 

[TripItUp]

who cares about those rankings unless that is the only place you play - in which case you probably aren't reading much here anyway.
LOOK at the ADP of real $ leagues where both are going in the second round - Anderson maybe a little earlier but neither are first rounders

Anderson is overvalued as a 2nd round pick.

 

[Chaka]

I think Anderson's situation is better. It also helps he is a better pass catcher than Hill IMO (though this might be directly relater to his QB)

Hill has a better Oline. That is all. Anderson has Manning. That is all he needs to have a better situation than the RB who has Dalton.

That said, I like both guys to do rather well this year. CJ for redraft this year only, Hill every year after this year.

Hill caught the ball pretty darn well last year (84% catch rate with 8 YPC). Anderson did too (77% & 9.5).I agree Manning is more of a threat than Dalton but I can't diminish the quality of the offensive lines between Cin & Den (just saying "That is all" doesn't work for me, because "That" can be enough). Cin had a very good line last year and they doubled down on that in the draft. It looks like they are going with the Dallas model of team building.

I think the choice between them is truly one of the most difficult decision points in the early portion of fantasy drafts this season. Right now I really don't know who I would roll with if I were faced with the choice.

Hill barely had any refeptions........good catch rate??? Cmon

Did you bother to check the numbers before posting?

How do CJ's 34 career receptions (44 targets) make him a better receiver when Hill caught 27 passes (32 targets)? Seems they are both very much in the same ballpark.

 

[Sabertooth]

We will see. Everything will be pretty clear in about 8 weeks. I tend to be more tepid on Hill. I don't think he approached Lynch, Peterson, Lacy, or Bell in terms of points.

 

[ghostguy123]

Did you bother to check the numbers before posting?

How do CJ's 34 career receptions (44 targets) make him a better receiver when Hill caught 27 passes (32 targets)? Seems they are both very much in the same ballpark.

The only numbers of any real significance for these two guys is when they were starting. Anderson had 33 catches in weeks 9-17 last year, and frankly just looks like a better receiver out of the backfield than Hill, not to mention the obvious better QB. Hill had 14 catches last year weeks 9-17.

Looking at the overall "career numbers" without looking into it a bit more is kinda lazy.

Anderson wasn't even any part oft he offense for almost the first two months last year, while Hill was, which is why he got some receptions the first half of the year.

So, again, the only reasonable comparisons for these guys is for the games when they were the starter, in which case Anderson was a much bigger part of the passing game.

But I guess if you just want to look at 34 vs 27, well, have at it.

 

[Pots]

who cares about those rankings unless that is the only place you play - in which case you probably aren't reading much here anyway.
LOOK at the ADP of real $ leagues where both are going in the second round - Anderson maybe a little earlier but neither are first rounders

Anderson is overvalued as a 2nd round pick.

I'd argue he's undervalued as a late 1st round pick.

 

[TripItUp]

who cares about those rankings unless that is the only place you play - in which case you probably aren't reading much here anyway.
LOOK at the ADP of real $ leagues where both are going in the second round - Anderson maybe a little earlier but neither are first rounders

Anderson is overvalued as a 2nd round pick.

I'd argue he's undervalued as a late 1st round pick.

According to FFPC data, he is going at 1.11, so it appears that more people agree with you than with me.

I have him ranked as a late third rounder.

 

[Deamon]

who cares about those rankings unless that is the only place you play - in which case you probably aren't reading much here anyway.
LOOK at the ADP of real $ leagues where both are going in the second round - Anderson maybe a little earlier but neither are first rounders

Anderson is overvalued as a 2nd round pick.

I'd argue he's undervalued as a late 1st round pick.

According to FFPC data, he is going at 1.11, so it appears that more people agree with you than with me.

I have him ranked as a late third rounder.

he is steadily moving up the ranks. He is now being seen as a late 1st rounder by most people/sites... maybe very early 2nd. Seems to be locking himself into the rb6 spot.

 

[Chaka]

Did you bother to check the numbers before posting?

How do CJ's 34 career receptions (44 targets) make him a better receiver when Hill caught 27 passes (32 targets)? Seems they are both very much in the same ballpark.

The only numbers of any real significance for these two guys is when they were starting. Anderson had 33 catches in weeks 9-17 last year, and frankly just looks like a better receiver out of the backfield than Hill, not to mention the obvious better QB. Hill had 14 catches last year weeks 9-17.

Looking at the overall "career numbers" without looking into it a bit more is kinda lazy.

Anderson wasn't even any part oft he offense for almost the first two months last year, while Hill was, which is why he got some receptions the first half of the year.

So, again, the only reasonable comparisons for these guys is for the games when they were the starter, in which case Anderson was a much bigger part of the passing game.

But I guess if you just want to look at 34 vs 27, well, have at it.

You make a good point if you are talking about utilization but that feels like you are changing the conversation when it really seemed as if you were talking catching ability. Whether or not they are good receivers doesn't relate to how much they were used in the passing game (different schemes and all that) or which games who started.

When it comes to catching ability subjective observation isn't a strong enough talking point either relative to something empirical like catch rates and YAC (8.6 for Anderson & 8.3 for Hill, although not sure how reliable sportingcharts.com is).

If you want to say that CJ will be used more in the passing game then I absolutely agree and if you want to say CJ has a better QB then I also agree (although relying on Manning to be Manning for 16 games gets more tenuous every year) but, based upon the data we have, whether or not CJ has better receiving ability than Hill seems far from decided.

 

[VaTerp]

My initial rankings had Anderson at RB6 and Hill at RB9. I thought I was higher on CJ than most but see that he is now settling into RB6 on most of the consensus rankings. And Hill seems to be doing the same with the 9 spot. In 12 teamers that is typically putting Anderson late 1st and Hill mid 2nd. Given that scenario if I'm picking toward the back of the 1st I probably lean toward grabbing an elite WR first and trying to get Hill on the way back. I'd rather have say Demaryius or Julio and Hill than Anderson and any of the WRs after AJ Green.

But just in terms of who I like better for this year, I still go with Anderson for the reasons I've already mentioned. I think its part of a larger question of what RB you prefer from the tier that for me includes these 2 along with Murray, Forte, and McCoy. 3 established vets vs 2 up and comers. All have question marks to some extent though the argument could be made that Hill has the least in terms of new team, coaches, scheme, etc. Honestly I'd be pretty happy with any of the 5 as my RB1 depending on the circumstances. I like Anderson's ceiling as much if not better than all of them but he also has the lowest floor. So if I'm drafting at the end of the first I may look for the WR of my choice and see who falls in the 2nd.

I'm cooling slightly on Anderson while the consensus seems to be edging him up a bit. But overall I still really like him in redraft. I'm warming up on Hill though not sure which way his stock is going among the masses. A lot of folks whose opinions I respect here seem to have him a bit higher than consensus. And the more I look at it, I think for good reason.

 

[georg013]

Just wondering where we are with this...

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Oh, this thread. lol

 

[Meatwad Reloaded]

This was a pretty easy call. I am very surprised FBG had him in their top ten. Here is to hoping that by next year, some of the experts on this site shy away from groupthink and make some calls that are outside the box....anyone who relied on this one is screwed.

 

[georg013]

This was a pretty easy call. I am very surprised FBG had him in their top ten. Here is to hoping that by next year, some of the experts on this site shy away from groupthink and make some calls that are outside the box....anyone who relied on this one is screwed.

Who in his right mind actually bought into the CJ Anderson top 10 hype? Saber?