JPeso
Footballguy
Interesting. I highly doubt the masses spend 1.5/1.6 on Gerhart even if he landed in HOU.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Gerhart (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Bob Magaw
- Start date
Zoomanji
Footballguy
I think they would especially since the incumbent had a broken neck. I would have loved to grab Gerhart in HOU instead of Tate in HOU.I'm still kind of shocked to see him go in the early 2nd round (IDP leagues)
Cecil Lammey
Footballguy
We get it...you're not happy about how your team drafted but enough of the "smaller Mike Alstott" stuff.Their running styles are COMPLETELY different. you might as well compare him to Eric Metcalf.
I disagree entirely. Gerhart is a good back landing in a bad situation. Tate is a decent back in a situation which is wide open. I think 1) Gerhart had enough hype to jump up to the 1.5 easily in HOU and 2) we would barely be talking about Tate in Minny.Now that's just my .02 but Gerhart had tremendous buzz both in Fantasy and Draft circles until he thudded into Minny behind oneof the premiere backs in the league. He'd look much better behind two guys who thus far haven't rushed away with the job.
Matt Waldman
Footballguy
I'd actually argue Gerhart didn't land in a bad situation at all if you're a dynasty league owner.
-Michael Turner landed behind LT got to showcase what he could do and then had the pick of the free agent litter.
-Ahman Green landed behind Ricky Watters in Seattle and got traded to GB and became one of the best fantasy backs in the past 20 years.
-Dorsey Levens was behind a strong player in Edgar Bennett
-Rudi Johnson was behind Corey Dillon
-Priest Holmes was signed as UFA behind Jamal Lewis
-MJD was behind Fred Taylor, who was still good enough to be a fantasy starter for a few years into MJD's career.
I'll be touching on this more next week in an article, but most backs have a peak of 3-4 years. While the all-time greats have had peaks of 8-10 years, only time will tell if Peterson can last that long. I would argue that time and odds are against him as much as I'm hoping otherwise.
The "white" argument being the "truth" is a specious one much like a magic trick of words - using the "not since the 70s has there been a great white RB" as supporting reason but without any real depth to explore why.
BTW-minor point, but John Riggins was great in the 80s and Craig James was very good in the 80s.
The same reason white RBs are rare is the same reason black QBs were rare until recently. It has little to do with athleticism and a lot to do with the way people are steered through the athletic system. So while "not since the 80s has there been a great white RB" might be a true statement, the conclusion implied from it is pretty faulty. There haven't been great, white RBs because great RBs can't be white. There haven't been great, white RBs because our society has encouraged the best white athletes with these skills to play other positions in the same way they used to steer black quarterbacks to DB, WR, or RB.
Another point...Gerhart didn't have a great four-year college stint due to a knee injury earlier in his career, playing much of his junior year with brace and still looking very good.
-Michael Turner landed behind LT got to showcase what he could do and then had the pick of the free agent litter.
-Ahman Green landed behind Ricky Watters in Seattle and got traded to GB and became one of the best fantasy backs in the past 20 years.
-Dorsey Levens was behind a strong player in Edgar Bennett
-Rudi Johnson was behind Corey Dillon
-Priest Holmes was signed as UFA behind Jamal Lewis
-MJD was behind Fred Taylor, who was still good enough to be a fantasy starter for a few years into MJD's career.
I'll be touching on this more next week in an article, but most backs have a peak of 3-4 years. While the all-time greats have had peaks of 8-10 years, only time will tell if Peterson can last that long. I would argue that time and odds are against him as much as I'm hoping otherwise.
The "white" argument being the "truth" is a specious one much like a magic trick of words - using the "not since the 70s has there been a great white RB" as supporting reason but without any real depth to explore why.
BTW-minor point, but John Riggins was great in the 80s and Craig James was very good in the 80s.
The same reason white RBs are rare is the same reason black QBs were rare until recently. It has little to do with athleticism and a lot to do with the way people are steered through the athletic system. So while "not since the 80s has there been a great white RB" might be a true statement, the conclusion implied from it is pretty faulty. There haven't been great, white RBs because great RBs can't be white. There haven't been great, white RBs because our society has encouraged the best white athletes with these skills to play other positions in the same way they used to steer black quarterbacks to DB, WR, or RB.
Another point...Gerhart didn't have a great four-year college stint due to a knee injury earlier in his career, playing much of his junior year with brace and still looking very good.
vikingdave
Footballguy
but he doesnt look anything like Eric Metcalf...
ScottyFargo
Footballguy
Do you feel that way because... Eric Metcalf was black?
az_prof
Footballguy
Totally agree with the Wildman. ADP is 25 and while I hope he plays at the same level for the next five years, the odds are that sometime in year 27 or 28, two or three years from now, he will start to wear down. If Gerhart shows enough in the meantime, he could move into the starter role as early as that or as late as the end of his rookie contract, ala Michael Turner. Plus, if you are considering him you are probably drafting at the end of the draft. Which means you won last season. So, you have the luxury of taking someone who doesn't need to produce this year or even next year. If he is a starter in three years you will have gotten a huge return on a late first round pick, which is risky and uncertain.Finally, regarding the way society may influence the fact that there hasn't been a great white back since Riggins I totally agree. And it is the same reason why until the last decade there were not many black QBs. When I was in little league football I joined with a buddy, Charlie, who happened to be black. Charlie, who was usually the QB when we played in our pickup games, was made the HB. I, who usually played HB in our pickup games, was slotted into TE and OT. I am not saying I would have been a great NFL HB--I wouldn't. But I might have become a good HS HB and instead I quit playing organized football and transitioned to soccer (where the team was all white and where I was given a chance to compete for a starting spot). The point is, Charlie may have been a better QB than a HB and I would have been a HB than a OT. How often does this happen every day in junior leagues across the country? And then by the time kids get to high school the roles are established.
vikingdave
Footballguy
I thought it was kind of obvious, but maybe Im wrong...ScottyFargo said:
If you're a patient Dynasty owner, yes it could be. But I think in terms of where rookies are going in rookie drafts, Tate is going well ahead of Gerhart because of situation. It's not to say Gerhart WON'T pan out but it won't happen soon and Tate may have a far more immediate impact.I do agree with the thought that if you're at the back of a round, you probably won and can wait for him to develop, depending on roster size.
az_prof
Footballguy
Absolutely. If you start three RBs and you have only two reliable guys, then you take Tate because you may be able to plug him into that RB3 spot in 2010 and maybe you win something. If you have solid starting fantasy RBs, then longterm there may be more value in Gerhart. The other side of that though, is that short term opportunity may translate into more value in 2011. If Tate plays and gets close to a 1000 yards in 2010 his off season value before 2011 will go up; you might be able to trade him for something good next off season. The reality is that if you go with Gerhart you will expect to see his value go down (unless ADP gets hurt--which I hope doesn't happen) because he won't get on the field as much and he won't produce as much his rookie year. His value will probably continue to go down until he gets on the field enough to show people what he could do as a featured back. So if you aren't willing to hold onto him for three or four years you shouldn't draft Gerhart.
Someone (maybe in this thread) said that for in many fantasy leagues, Gerhart may finally start but not for the team which drafted him. It's likely the case.
FunkyPlutos
Footballguy
This reminds me of Childress' presser after the draft. Someone from the press compared him to Vardell and Childress started by answering something to the extent of "I know where you are going with this, I see him kind of like Darrin Nelson - you are comparing him to Stanford running backs, right??" I laughed like crazy.I thought it was kind of obvious, but maybe Im wrong...ScottyFargo said:
I guess put me in the camp that thinks this is a great spot for him to land.....I think he sees the field quite a bit with Taylor gone.....personally I think Peterson and Gerhart are just going to pound some teams.....I think there will be stretches where Gerhart stays in for several plays at a time.....especially if MIN has say a 14 point lead late in the third early 4th....Gerhart can come in, secure the rock, and pound on some teams working the clock.....I honestly think there are times where both he and ADP will put up points that have them starter worthy in the same week.....especially if Gerhart gets any goaline love.....if Taylor is still there, it is totally different......Gerhart can catch, etc.....and MIN will want to keep ADP fresh/healthy as they are no doubt considered a playoff team heading into the season.....
I think this is almost the perfect role for him as opposed to a feature back role right now somewhere else.....when given the chance, he might be able to take advantage of a team having to deal with ADP all day....I realize in fantasy a starting position should equate to more fantasy points in most cases....just not sure that is true here....
I think this is almost the perfect role for him as opposed to a feature back role right now somewhere else.....when given the chance, he might be able to take advantage of a team having to deal with ADP all day....I realize in fantasy a starting position should equate to more fantasy points in most cases....just not sure that is true here....
Last edited by a moderator:
FunkyPlutos
Footballguy
:whoosh:
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
i agree with the above...
recently took peterson in a startup dynasty and targeted gerhart as a very important handcuff (it so happened we liked his value there AS A HANDCUFF, more than other RBs avail)...
that said, i do think of him a potentially/probably more than just a handcuff... and more than a buy & hold with expectation he may start for MIN or somewhere else in a few years (all possible)... in deeper leagues, i think there will be weeks where both are startable...
as noted, ESPECIALLY if he gets some goal line carries (and he looks like he will slot into taylor's role & pick up some extra rushing yards & receptions)... the thing about that... with favre (could play for another 1-2 years?), rice/harvin/berrian/shiancoe (AND peterson & gerhart will all contribute to moving the ball)...
they could be around the goal line a LOT (peterson had 18 TDs last year)!
recently took peterson in a startup dynasty and targeted gerhart as a very important handcuff (it so happened we liked his value there AS A HANDCUFF, more than other RBs avail)...
that said, i do think of him a potentially/probably more than just a handcuff... and more than a buy & hold with expectation he may start for MIN or somewhere else in a few years (all possible)... in deeper leagues, i think there will be weeks where both are startable...
as noted, ESPECIALLY if he gets some goal line carries (and he looks like he will slot into taylor's role & pick up some extra rushing yards & receptions)... the thing about that... with favre (could play for another 1-2 years?), rice/harvin/berrian/shiancoe (AND peterson & gerhart will all contribute to moving the ball)...
they could be around the goal line a LOT (peterson had 18 TDs last year)!
Last edited by a moderator:
