humpback said:
He is a talent!
You have missed that in your caveman determination of things!!!
I gotta defend BF here. What exactly has he said that's been wrong? He said Hill would be basically useless because of Gio and that's pretty much what's happened so far.
Let's ignore the fact that he
hasn't been useless so far, but for starters, that Hill is "roster poison" and has a "low ceiling". He then followed that up by saying he "stands by everything he has said" (which obviously includes those ridiculous statements), even after his monster game.
I think this post still sums up my feelings on Hill:
As a late second, hes a fine pick. But in a draft this deep, its a crime to take a low upside player early. If you dont like freeman, take a receiver. If you dont like a receiver, see what you can get for the pick.
That may seem to be my unreasonably harsh critique of his situation, but i don't think anyone here has actually refuted it. They've disagreed, but mostly with generalities about how there's plenty of room to do well in this offense, and how its possible for people to do well in rbbcs. And that's fine. But nobody seems to have examples of rbbc backs who were legit studs for more than a year while sharing with another very good back. And while plenty of people think hill is uber talented, nobody seems to be saying that he's going to push gio into a minor role.
So when push comes to shove, the best and most optimistic projections for hill are still just above average numbers for a committee back. Which is good, but hardly dominant. And again, for a second round pick, I will take good but not dominant. But for a first round pick, I don't want someone whose upside is good but not dominant. And we all seem to agree on that part going in.
again, I think people are misunderstanding my point here. I've never questioned hill's talent, and never said he cant or wont be a top 30 back with top 20 upside. In fact I've strongly agreed with people who said that about him. I just think that a top 30 back with top 20 upside is a bad pick in the first round.
Now, a few people have tried to argue that his stats could be even better than top 20. Like your post, where you showed that hes capable of handling a full workload, and of catching the ball, and certainly scoring. And believe it or not, I agree. I think he could flirt with borderline rb1 numbers, and I think an optimistic projection is that he will do so once in the next four years. I gave him a very optimistic 5 ypc, a higher than most 240 carries, a very reasonable 20 receptions as a higher than average 10 ypr. And thats still low end rb1 territory, or rb2 in a ppr. that's his best case scenario without a gio injury. And nobody seems to be projecting much more than that.
A few other people have mentioned how well he would do if gio got hurt. and that's probably true. But there are plenty of backup rbs who would excel if someone got hurt, and none of them are worth a first round rookie pick. you could trade your first round pick right now for a serviceable rb2 type and a backup rb who would do well if their starter got hurt, and you'd still get more in return. I suppose there's some utility to only using one roster spot for both things, but its not really exciting to me.
I don't think that's a specific or unfair take on the situation, but you're welcome to refute any part of it you like. Do you think hill will push gio to the side? Do you think he will get more than 240 carries? More than 10 tds? More than 20 receptions? More than 5 yards per carry? More than 10 yards per reception? Do you think he will exceed those numbers every single year while gio is there? Where specifically do you think im being unfair?
Or, if you don't think that's unfair, then tell me why you would spend a first round pick on a guy like that?
I'm not going to bump every post I made earlier, but here's one example. I stand by everything I said about Hill here. He had a very good week with Gio out. That was not unexpected. I don't see why it would be. He looked very talented. I readily conceded that he was very talented. He would be outstanding on another team. On Cinci, I still wouldn't spend an early dynasty pick on him.
I also said that his value was going to dip. It did, during this thread. When we first started talking, he was going top ten in some rookie drafts, as high as #7 overall in a couple. Then he started sliding further down. I said it was a bad idea to take him early, and if you really wanted him, you'd be able to get him a lot cheaper once people saw what the committee looked like. Prior to Gio's injury, what do you think his trade value was? A top ten dynasty pick? I don't think so. His trade value had plummeted. People who were calling me names during the offseason started saying things like "I never drafted him to start, I'm only using him as a backup RB in case Gio gets hurt". And I agreed with them and said that's about what he's worth - one of the most valuable backup RBs, with some crummy emergency start potential, but not a guy you'd ever want to start.
So yes, I stand by everything I said. I'll bump up the roster poison stuff, too, if you want - I still 100% believe that these are the types of guys who are too expensive to use as a pure injury backup, and dangerous because they tempt you into screwing yourself by starting them when they're in a committee. It's easy to get excited about Hill's potential
while Gio is hurt. I love him and used him as a daily play. And Gio getting hurt during Hill's rookie season might be the best thing that could have happened for Hill's career. But that doesn't change my thoughts on the situation one iota.
