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!
Jeremy Hill, RB (LVR) (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter zed2283
- Start date
Bostonfred - you don't know what will happen... Hill could be a bell cow and Bernard could be the receiver coming out of the backfield. 1st and goal at the one yard line - Hill will be on the field....
Talent rises... Hill is very talented...
jurb26
Footballguy
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
Its relevant to talk about Freeman in relation to Hill in a Hill thread if you think Freeman is better, some people maybe weighing the relative merits of one or the other.
If CIN has an outstanding offense for the next few years, and Hill has something like 50% of the carries and gets a lot of TDs, why couldn't he have sustained success?
To me, and I fall into the category of not liking Freeman's talent as much (point taken Hill has character concerns and who knows, they could fire Hue Jackson and hire Mike Martz as OC mid-season, anything could happen
), the choice between Freeman and Hill is kind of like a 50/50 prospect of getting $100 or getting nothing in Freeman and a reasonable prospect of getting $50 for Hill (that may be an exaggeragtion and grossly simplified, but to illustrate the point). It is hard to make blanket generalizations for all teams. If you have a great, loaded team, maybe swinging for the fences makes most sense, and the upside of Freeman as a potential future RB1. On the other hand, if he whiffs, is supplanted and not even a RB2 down the road, depending on roster composition, age, etc., if a team isn't as strong at RB or with a lot of depth, they may be more comfortable with a player that is likely to at least have a defined role from which he could still produce at a RB2 level even if he isn't the "starter". Law Firm did have more carries than Bernard last year (220-170). It might make sense for CIN to slide Hill into that role, as Bernard could already be getting a lot of extra touches as an extra receiver in the passing game, and they may not want to over-extend him given his size, but preserve him for a long season and hopefully long career.
* In FBG dynasty RB rankings, Mason is 25, Freeman and Hill tied-31, so not everybody sees a massive separation (or really any at all) between Freeman and Hill like you do. I respect your right to your opinion, just not as high on Freeman's talent as you, so understandably see things differently.
If CIN has an outstanding offense for the next few years, and Hill has something like 50% of the carries and gets a lot of TDs, why couldn't he have sustained success?
To me, and I fall into the category of not liking Freeman's talent as much (point taken Hill has character concerns and who knows, they could fire Hue Jackson and hire Mike Martz as OC mid-season, anything could happen
), the choice between Freeman and Hill is kind of like a 50/50 prospect of getting $100 or getting nothing in Freeman and a reasonable prospect of getting $50 for Hill (that may be an exaggeragtion and grossly simplified, but to illustrate the point). It is hard to make blanket generalizations for all teams. If you have a great, loaded team, maybe swinging for the fences makes most sense, and the upside of Freeman as a potential future RB1. On the other hand, if he whiffs, is supplanted and not even a RB2 down the road, depending on roster composition, age, etc., if a team isn't as strong at RB or with a lot of depth, they may be more comfortable with a player that is likely to at least have a defined role from which he could still produce at a RB2 level even if he isn't the "starter". Law Firm did have more carries than Bernard last year (220-170). It might make sense for CIN to slide Hill into that role, as Bernard could already be getting a lot of extra touches as an extra receiver in the passing game, and they may not want to over-extend him given his size, but preserve him for a long season and hopefully long career.* In FBG dynasty RB rankings, Mason is 25, Freeman and Hill tied-31, so not everybody sees a massive separation (or really any at all) between Freeman and Hill like you do. I respect your right to your opinion, just not as high on Freeman's talent as you, so understandably see things differently.
Last edited by a moderator:
bostonfred
Footballguy
So is Gio. So is AJ. So is Eifert. So is Gresham. So is Jones. And Sanu's not bad for the seventh best guy on that offense. How big are we thinking this Cinci pie is? How big a percentage of the work do you think Hill can take from Gio? And who do you think will be the receiving back?Assuming that Hill - who also has off the field issues and went to a team that has had lots of off the field problems blow up on them over the years - is super talented, do you think he's talented enough to push Gio into a minor role? Barring injury, can you see Hill getting more than 240 carries? More than 10 TDs? More than 5 YPC? More than 20 receptions for 200 yards? Because those numbers - 20 receptions, 1400 yards and 10 TDs - seem like an unreasonably optimistic estimate for him. And that would put him as a low end RB1 in non PPR, and a decent RB2 in PPR.
So are you saying that you see more than 240 carries, 5 YPC, 10 TDs and 20 receptions for 200 yards? How much more are you thinking he's going to do? And is he going to do this every year?
I can see him having marginally useful seasons, but it would be shocking to see him put up the numbers you want from a fantasy starting running back year in and year out. Maybe when he's 26 and Gio's gone, or when he's 27 starting for another team as a three down back, maybe then he'll start to perform. But barring an injury or just an absolute collapse from Gio, that's the best you're hoping for. And if that's what you're hoping for when you draft him, you can probably get him cheaper later.
bostonfred
Footballguy
I haven't made a single positive statement about Freeman's talent in this thread, or a single negative statement about Hill's. In fact, I've started from the position that Hill is a very talented player and the assumption that his talent will translate into NFL success. This isn't about me watching hours of film thinking Hill sucks and Freeman's great. It's just the reality of their situations.Freeman has a great opportunity in front of him and the coach and GM have said all the things you want them to say, referring to him as a three down back and a lead back. He may never be good enough to lead that team, but they seem to think he is, and they have more control over how many carries he gets than I do.
Hill may be the best running back on his team - and that's not a given. But he just doesn't have a great role. He's competing for receptions with AJ Green, two first round tight ends, two good receivers, and Gio, who seems likely to have the receiving back role at a minimum. The offense scores enough points to sustain him getting double digit TDs, but they have lots of viable options for running or catching TDs on this team. He's going to have to fight to get a piece of a big pie. Even if he gets a good sized piece, it still won't be as valuable as a less talented guy in a better situation. He would have to be an absolutely dominant player to command the kind of role that would make him a stud RB. And drafting guys with very limited stud potential is a good way to have a dynasty team without any studs.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Unless of course, you know, he's a very talented big back. If he's as good as Lacy or Bell, he'll emerge. It's that simple. True talent usually rises. Very rarely is a true talent kept on the bench.
There's also the possibility that he's better than Gio. Their respective draft statuses are close. Both were picked in years where no RB went in the first round. Both were the Bengals' second picks. Bernard went 37th, Hill 55th. Just because he lasted until the 55th pick doesn't mean much in and of itself. That's higher than Lacy went last season and only 7 picks after where Leveon went. So dang near same range. If the Bengals had traded for Lacy or Bell, would you still think they would have virtually no path to being a valuable starter? Of course not.
People are discounting a whole lot of possible outcomes because of Gio. He's going to have his role, but I think Hill was brought in to take Law Firm's job. Not Gio's. Both can co-exist. I think Hill has a good shot at being a top 20 fantasy back this season. If you just give him Law Firm's carries and a 4.0 average you are looking at Top 30. If he does better his point increase. If he catches a few balls, his point increase. If Gio gets dinged, his points increase.
I think RB30 is about his floor.
bostonfred
Footballguy
I don't disagree with any of this. I think I said just about the same thing. I just think you've described fantasy football poison. Do you really want a guy who should be top 30 and has a really good chance at being top 20? Maybe in your case, getting him at the bottom of the second or top of the third. There, he's a great depth pick. I have no problem with that whatsoever. I'm specifically talking about taking him early. And if I somehow ended up with him, I'd be looking to trade him after a couple good games - which I think he'll have. I just don't think there will be enough of him to justify having him in your lineup each week.
jurb26
Footballguy
Baring injury yes I can see Hill getting more than 240 carries. Do I expect it? No. The Bengal coaches have been very vocal all offseason about wanting to run the ball more this year. Use more ball control and more PA pass to take shots down field. It's 1 of the primary reasons they drafted Hill in the 1st place, he was the best between the tackles RB in the draft in their eyes. Can I see more than 10 TDs? Yes, if his carries get into the 240 range I can easily see that. Hell, they may not need to get into that range for me to see it but it's still possible. This is a very prolific offense in Cinci. They have several great weapons and also have a great oline. There will be lots of chances to score, particularly for Hill if they commit to the run the way they have stated. 20 receptions? I don't really see that with Gio there but I don't care about the receptions much. His lack of receiving opportunity is built into his price. I will say this, Hill is a good receiver who would do well with that oppotuntiy. If Gio gets injured for any period of time he would tear things up. What I see from Hill this year is him taking over BJGE role but doing it better. I think he will get more carries than Gio but less overall touches because of receptions. I've got my current projections for Hill at;
215 carries, 967 yds, 9 TDs
20 targets, 14 receptions, 112 yds
That would basically make him a RB2 this year. I think the potential is there for more but I'm not totally sure how much more Cinci will really run the ball. For example, this is less carries than BJGE actually had last year. I really don't think that happens but am accounting for some risk in the projection.
Last edited by a moderator:
cheese
Footballguy
This debate is less about Hill and more about how different people feel about RBBC. I think it's likely to be a JStew/DWill topic of discussion for multiple years into the future. Both of those guys were useable for years, but people never really got out of their heads what could have been if they weren't in RBBC. If you can draft him for what he is, a RB20-RB30 half of a good RBBC, I think he'll be fine. There is no doubt it limits his upside though and I don't blame those who shy away from RBBC whenever possible.
jurb26
Footballguy
You're not making sense. How is a guy you just acknowledged of having a floor of RB30 and a really good chance of being RB20 not somebody who is justified in your lineup week to week?That is the definition of someone you should be starting on your team unless you are one of the extremely few who happen to have 3 top 20 floor RBs.
jurb26
Footballguy
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Many backs play with talented WRs and TEs. I don't see how that is an issue. Mohammad Sanu? Really?
Gio could be (is) an obstacle for sure, but it's not impossible nor improbable, for both backs to succeed and be productive when roles are considered. It's likely the team does not expect Gio to be a high carry workhorse back and that is why they used an early pick on Hill in the first place. After all the team gave significant carries to a washed up (and frankly never was) BJGE last season, despite Gio's presence.
Just last season, we saw both Ryan Mathews and Danny Woodhead be fantasy relevant while co-existing. CJ Spiller and Fred Jackson have both done it. Darren Sproles and Pierre Thomas have done it - and these are all just recent examples. going back a little further I can point to Fred Taylor and MJD, Thomas Jones and Jamal Charles, etc. etc.
Your contention that Hill's ability to be a strong RB1 is capped due to RBBC? Well, welcome to the modern day NFL. If Hill's upside is RBBC and RB2 is that really so terrible?
I doubt we'll see an equivalent SJtew/Dwill situation anytime soon, it was really the perfect storm. I agree that Hill's upside is somewhat limited in the near term (although that's true for most RB's and people seem to be forgetting that Gio red shirted his freshman season with a torn ACL and missed 2 1/2 games in 2012 with pain in his knee), but it isn't something that's likely to dog him his entire career if he turns out to be as good as some think he is.
cheese
Footballguy
Fair enough, but in this case I would think "near term" means at least the next 3 years. He can be as good as his biggest supporter in this world believes and he's not pushing Gio below 40% of the RB snaps at any point the next 3 years without an injury. He is pretty locked into RBBC for a good chunk of a RB's prime IMO.
How do you figure? BJGE got 220 carries last year... while being terrible... and on an offense that likely ran less than they will run this year.
If you're saying this because of Bernard's presence, then I'd argue that it's very possible that Hill is a better early down/between the tackles runner than Bernard anyway. It's not like Gio lit the world on fire with his 4.1 ypc behind that strong line and in a very balanced offense. I won't be shocked if Hill ends up with 240 carries @ 4.4 ypc this year, getting most of the goal line work. That is pretty much the opposite of "virtually no path" to fantasy football starter stats. He's not inheriting a job with no competition, but he is taking over a prominent role behind a good/great line.
Freeman on the other hand is just a middling talent behind a good, but aging vet on an above average offense. When Jackson is gone next year, I'd say there is a 95% chance they bring in a vet and/or draft someone in the first 3 rounds to take over. If his name is ever mentioned again, it'll just be as part of the "draft talent over situation" argument. Personally, I use a hybrid approach and I still don't like Freeman. I think a 31 year old SJax is still better than Freeman and don't expect him to miss more than 2-3 games, making Freeman pretty much useless this year and useless next year when he's in the same role behind someone younger.
Sure, but so are most RBs these days, and he can still be plenty valuable with those touches.
People are making huge assumptions if they think 4th round guys like Freeman are going to walk in and be handed 65%+ of the workload for the foreseeable future just because there doesn't appear to be much competition right now.
Monsters of the Midway
Footballguy
FWIW-In my rookie draft-took place in May-Hill was RB 7 (3.11-14 Teams, PPR, TE Premium, IDP, Super Flex). I took Paul Richardson a few picks earlier and got Ka'Deem Carey 8 picks after that.
bostonfred
Footballguy
If you consistently take low upside, high floor guys over high upside, low floor guys, then you probably wont be one of the extremely few who have 3 top 20 floor rbs.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
In dynasty I see your point. We are talking dynasty right? I wouldn't want to use him as an every week starter either. But he's a depth guy with some upside. If Gio were to get hurt badly, his value would skyrocket as people had visions of Eddie Lacy dancing through their heads.
FWIW I just offered Hill one of my three 2015 1st rounders for Leveon Bell. I doubt he goes for it despite being in a total rebuild.
jurb26
Footballguy
Yup and it's a ridiculous assumption at that. 1st, he has major competition right now... Jackson. 2nd, there is a lot that can happen between now and next season. We know that Hill will get opportunity this year and it's pretty safe to say he is more talented than Freeman. Some may disagree but the majority view and data suggegests Hill is superior. Not only is Hill in line for better immediate results, he's also the better long term bet.
jurb26
Footballguy
Hill has a higher floor, lower risk and higher upside than Freeman. I'm not seeing you're point. Hill has the greater immediate opportunity, is a better talent and has more upside if either player in front of them gets injured.
bostonfred
Footballguy
this is a lot of hyperbole and overcertainty. Between using the words "95% chance", predicting the number of games missed for sjax, predicting the falcons draft next year, and predicting with absolute certainty that your evaluation of freemans talent is better than the coach and gm who have both referred to freeman as a lead back and/or three down back, you've pretty much shown that you have no interest in serious discussion on this topic. your thoughts on freemans talent are noted and are no longer required in the jeremy hill thread.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Freeman was the 9th back off the board. Hill was the 2nd. Hill went off the board 48 picks before Freeman. That says something. Looking at the tiers this year you had pretty clear distinction The fact that Hill went off the board before Hyde was a mild surprise with his character issues. The fact that Freeman went off the board after bit players like Archer and McKinnon is interesting.
1st Teir
Sankey (54)
Hill (55)
Hyde (57)
12 picks
2nd Tier
Sims (69)
Mason (75)
19 picks
Third Teir
West (94)
McKinnon (96)
Archer (97)
Freeman (103)
10 picks
Williams (113)
Carey (117)
1st Teir
Sankey (54)
Hill (55)
Hyde (57)
12 picks
2nd Tier
Sims (69)
Mason (75)
19 picks
Third Teir
West (94)
McKinnon (96)
Archer (97)
Freeman (103)
10 picks
Williams (113)
Carey (117)
Last edited by a moderator:
jurb26
Footballguy
Really, this coming from the person who posted this to start?"And Hill has virtually no path to being a valuable fantasy starter. If everything works out right for Hill for a year, he might have a low end RB1 season, then fade back to RB2/RB3 status playing alongside another talented back in a talented offense. That would be a hugely successful fantasy career for Hill over the next four years. It's not impossible for him to be relevant for fits and spurts, but it's pretty close to impossible for him to have sustained success as a dynasty back. There are just too man things stacked against him, as I outlined above."
You set the bar for hyperbole and uncertainty, were called out on it and now cast stones?
bostonfred
Footballguy
That's not hyperbole and I've repeatedly outlined the problem witn his situation. Its not that he's in a rbbc. Its very possible for rbbc backs to be good. The problem isnt even that he's in a rbbc with another good young back who can catch the ball and has some red zone skills, too. The problem is that's he's in that rbbc on a team that has so many good weapons in the passing game, and he's unlikely to be on the field in passing situations, and he's unlikely to have a lock on all the goal line carries, and he's extremely unlikely to be so good that hs the absolute focal point of the offense. None of these should be contentious statements. Now add in that he has character issues, and those have been problematic in cinci. Add in that he hasnt proven himself on the field. Add in that his skillset appears to be one dimensional - he's a very talented big back, but not a true every down back.
There are so many things going against him besides just the normal rbbc complaint. He may be a very talented back, play very well, and still be a mediocre fantasy option. And while people have brought up past examples of rbs who have succeeded in committees, most of them are significantly different.
Mjd and fred taylor splitting carries, for example. Well, the passing offense wasn't nearly the same as what cinci has going. They had no other great red zone options, which gave mjd the lions share of tds. And hill seems closer to taylors role than mjds in that offense. Taylor was barely startable once mjd came on the scene. Two years of 1300 yards and 6 td production over a 16 game season? Meh. And hill would be lucky to be as talented as taylor.
Fred jackson and cj spiller? again, buffalo is a ridiculously run oriented team. And spiller and jackson only have one good overlapping season, whcThe bengals were 8th in the nfl
There are so many things going against him besides just the normal rbbc complaint. He may be a very talented back, play very well, and still be a mediocre fantasy option. And while people have brought up past examples of rbs who have succeeded in committees, most of them are significantly different.
Mjd and fred taylor splitting carries, for example. Well, the passing offense wasn't nearly the same as what cinci has going. They had no other great red zone options, which gave mjd the lions share of tds. And hill seems closer to taylors role than mjds in that offense. Taylor was barely startable once mjd came on the scene. Two years of 1300 yards and 6 td production over a 16 game season? Meh. And hill would be lucky to be as talented as taylor.
Fred jackson and cj spiller? again, buffalo is a ridiculously run oriented team. And spiller and jackson only have one good overlapping season, whcThe bengals were 8th in the nfl
Sleeper 43
Footballguy
So what your saying is, they spent a 2nd round pick on a Goalline RB?
Gio is not an every down NFL back, they have already began giving Hill 1st team reps alongside Gio. And I love Gio btw, I own him in many league but I know 2 RBs on this team are both capable of producing RB2 fantasy numbers... maybe more.
Bringing receivers an TEs into the discussion is irrelevant outside of exceptions such as Denver, NE and GB - Cincy is far off of pass heavy.
bostonfred
Footballguy
that overlapping season was last year. In 2012 fjax was totally worthless and spiller was awesome. In prior years, spiller was worthless and fjax was good, not really great. They had their first overlapping success in 2013, and it took them literally leading the nfl in rushing attempts last year.
The bengals were 8th in rushing attempts last year, up from 17th pre bernard. They had more running back talent, so they ran more. Makes sense. But if we simply give bjge's 220 carries to hill, and up his ypc dramatically to 5.0, that's not enough to make him a stud (110o rush yard and good tds with a handful of receptions) so we have to assume he not only puts up elite ypc but also gets more carries than law firm did to predict him to be good. And those carries need to come at the expense of... what? Does gio get fewer? Do they pass significantly less with all those weapons? And does he totally replace bernards 8 tds, too?
So basically we need hill to outperform gio to demand more carries, and put up otherworldly ypc, maybe display enough receiving skills to get a significant number of receptions in an oversaturated passing offense, and maybe become the dominant goal line force instead of the stuff that's already working so he can put up double digit tds. And that would make him a low end rb1.
So thanks, jurb, but this isn't hyperbole and its not unfounded. Its very difficult to construct a scenario where hill is a legitimate upside pick in the next several years without injury or a total collapse by gio. I think I've done a much more thorough job explaining this that ff ninja saying that sjax isn't going to miss more than two or three games ro injury and there's a 95 percent chance that atlanta drafts someone in the first three rounds. That's just made up numbers. Its silliness.
The bengals were 8th in rushing attempts last year, up from 17th pre bernard. They had more running back talent, so they ran more. Makes sense. But if we simply give bjge's 220 carries to hill, and up his ypc dramatically to 5.0, that's not enough to make him a stud (110o rush yard and good tds with a handful of receptions) so we have to assume he not only puts up elite ypc but also gets more carries than law firm did to predict him to be good. And those carries need to come at the expense of... what? Does gio get fewer? Do they pass significantly less with all those weapons? And does he totally replace bernards 8 tds, too?
So basically we need hill to outperform gio to demand more carries, and put up otherworldly ypc, maybe display enough receiving skills to get a significant number of receptions in an oversaturated passing offense, and maybe become the dominant goal line force instead of the stuff that's already working so he can put up double digit tds. And that would make him a low end rb1.
So thanks, jurb, but this isn't hyperbole and its not unfounded. Its very difficult to construct a scenario where hill is a legitimate upside pick in the next several years without injury or a total collapse by gio. I think I've done a much more thorough job explaining this that ff ninja saying that sjax isn't going to miss more than two or three games ro injury and there's a 95 percent chance that atlanta drafts someone in the first three rounds. That's just made up numbers. Its silliness.
bostonfred
Footballguy
No, not a goal line back. let's give him 240 carries for 5 ypc and 10 tds plus 20 catches for 200 yards. Outstanding numbers considering his situation. If gios carries didn't change and bjge didn't get any carries, that would still be an increase over last year when they we'ree 8th in the nfl in carries as a team. And he still ends up being a mediocre rb1 or rb2 in ppr.Personally, I think its silly to project 5 ypc for him. And double digit tds seems high. And getting more than 60% of the carries in a committee with gio, and that those carries would be split between virtually nobody but him and gio, seems unrealistic. And having the team go that run heavy when they've got such quality weapons at receiver and tight end would be pretty significant, too. But if all those things work out just perfect, and his character issues aren't a concern, then he can be a low end rb1/ppr rb2 for a year. That's basically best case, and I can't see it happening year after year when it didn't happen with some of the other very talented rbbcs I mentioned.
jurb26
Footballguy
You are ignoring anything anyone has said and worse yet, just making things up at times. He's a RB in a RBBC that has a lot of passing threats. So what? As has been pointed out numerous times in this very thread, to you directly, Cinci has gone on record several times that they want to RUN THE BALL MORE. They have a new coach who likes to run the ball. Hue in his last 2 seasons in Oak ran the ball 48.9% of the time, 50% in 2010 and 48.9% in 2011. Cinci has run the ball only 45% in 2013 and 44.3% in 2012. They drafted Hill as the 2nd RB off the board saying he's the best between the tackles runner in the draft. You keep going to this passing attack as if it hold merit and it doesn't. There is a new OC in town and the pass happy Gruden has been replaced with a more run based and balanced approach. Nobody has said Cinci doesn't have great weapons. We've all agreed. There is no reason to believe 1) these weapons can't largely coexist and 2) the pie will be skewed towards passing.
BJGE had 220 carries in Cinci last year and last years team was in fact pass heavy. What do you think Hill will do with the same body of work BJGE got? Most of the information we have would suggest the rushing numbers are going to increase. So if Hill does in fact simply take over the role of BJGE it's logical that he would also get more carries. There is risk with all rookies however, thus I've tempered my projections as stated earlier.
Hill is a one dimensional RB? Where do you come up with this? Did you watch him play or even read his scouting profile? He's a very good receiver and pass catcher. He's displayed this on the field and at the combine by catching the ball smoothly and naturally. Here's one such excerpt of his profile;
"STRENGTHS Outstanding size. Good initial quickness -- gets rolling downhill in a hurry. Quick feet for a bigger back. Slashes through holes. Spins off tackles and picks up yards after contact. Shows good hands in limited exposure -- effective short receiver. Productive in a pro-style power offense -- averaged nearly 7 yards per carry as a sophomore."
So he's a big talented RB who can run between the tackles and also catch passes well. How does that qualify as one dimensional?
The only thing you've outlined is your assumptions, some of which have credence but most are either reaches or even just made up.
bostonfred
Footballguy
Again, not to turn this into a freeman conversation, but this is my response (from the devonta freeman thread). I agree with you that there were tiers. Fwiw, Im not sure hill was in that top tier, I just think he was the best big back available for a team that was looking for a big back. But im fine with saying he's in tier one if you feel strongly about it. It doesn't really change my thoughts on the matter.
bostonfred
Footballguy
Don't be like this. You're better than this.
What team in the nfl says they want to run the ball less in the offseason? Every team says they want to run the ball more.
The bengals were 8th in the nfl in rush attempts last year, up from 17th in the nfl in 2012. There were very few teams that had over 50% rushing. And hue has never had over 50% rushing with aj green and co.
Last edited by a moderator:
bostonfred
Footballguy
Hill has a great NFL body and ran like a beast at LSU. I always trust my gut on talent and Hill looks ungodly talented to me. I generally throw situation out the window in dynasty, and just take the most talented player. Talk all you want about situation. The coach/OC will get the ball in the hands of talented players. Almost every team has RBBC (every team will employ RBBC next year with the addition of another deep RB class) so to me RBBC does not matter.
Jeremy Hill looks like a true pro...
I took him at 1.07 in a non-RB PPR league. He is going to gobble up yards and TDs...
Jeremy Hill looks like a true pro...
I took him at 1.07 in a non-RB PPR league. He is going to gobble up yards and TDs...
bostonfred
Footballguy
The thing that makes this rbbc unique is that the team is loaded with talented skill position players. The coach is going to go out of his way to get the ball to hill. But he's also going to go out of the way to get the ball to gio. And to aj green. And to tne two first round tight ends on the team. And to marvin. They've got too many good guys for someone to just come in and demand the ball, unless he really is a true once in a generation talent.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Did they not have all of this talent last year (plus Hawkins), when BJGE had 220 carries? Cincy has a good offense, but let's not act like Gresham and Sanu are world-beaters. If he's good, he'll get his touches.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
This team gave the ball 220 times to BJGE last year while also "loaded with talented skill position players". While I think your overstating just how great these receiving weapons are (outside of AJ Green) and also ignoring the fact that that their new OC is more run orientated, and has said so repeatedly this offseason - even assuming just those same 220 carries now go to Hill, Hill can still be fantasy relevant. With only a modest 4.2 ypc that's 924 yards on the season. With 6-10 TDs and somewhere in the range of 20 receptions - how does that not make Hill fantasy relevant?
I agree with Gio healthy his upside is capped - but the thing is that upside becomes much larger should an injury to Gio occur.
jurb26
Footballguy
If you're going to pull things like Hill is one dimensional out of thin air then I'm going to say something about it. It simply isn't true. While things said about Hill may not be a huge endorsement, they are a far cry from him being one dimensional. It's also worth noting that excerpt is listed under his STRENGHTS. I'm not sure how much more of an endorsement you want. The guy isn't just a big bodied power runner and he's not one dimensional. Will he force Gio out of his role? No, not likely. But he's capable of much more than BJGE ever was. Yeah teams can say a lot of things right now we can agree on that. Funny that doesn't dissuade you from the talk coming out of Atl in regards to Freeman, though. What every team cant talk about is the fact they hired a new coach. A coach who has a history of, well, running the ball more than Cinci has been. Most teams simply can't run the ball more because they are not good enough too. Why exactly would that apply to Cinci who is littered with all this talent? Again, they have a great oline, an above average QB, 2 pretty good looking RBs, an elite WR and 2 pretty good TEs.
Your choose and interesting place to cut the quotes. Yeah Cinci had a high total number of runs last year but what was their run/pass ratio? What about the year before? You know why they had a high number of runs? Because they had a high amount of plays, 5th in the NFL. Hue has shown to run the ball just under 49% of the time. Cinci hasn't run it more than 45% of the time in the past 2 years. I've built in less plays but a higher % of runs into my projections. That comes with the territory of a more ball controlled offense. That is another reason I'm not projecting Hill to surpass BJGE in total carries.
Who's going to lose? Seems pretty easy to me. All the WRs and most likely the TEs will lose. They are going to lose targets. I'd expect AJ to sustain the hit the best. He's the best playmaker and maybe overall player on the team. I think his skill set works well with the offense, too. He will get opportunities off PA to make plays down the field and that is where he excels.
So true on both statements above. Mathews got less than 50% of his team's RB snaps and he finished top 12. Hill could easily have a Mathews-esque role in this offense (1st and 2nd down thumper, very few targets). And agreed, 4th round guys rarely see that kind of workload. I don't know why people think SJax is going to disappear and they'll hand the job over to a 4th round rookie. If anything, he'll be splitting with Quiz. Plus, that o-line is still going to be bad. It'll be better, but not good or even average.
Your thoughts on Freeman are noted as ridiculous are are no longer required in the forum.
There was no hyperbole in my post. Just predictions. I never claimed them to be a prophecy written in stone. A large part of what I'm trying to get across is that most 4th round backs don't pan out, especially in year 1. And even if they look good, the team probably still brings in a veteran or rookie (see Gio, see Stacy). This guy is starting the year behind two veterans. He's not getting the keys to the car any time soon. Hill is already taking reps ahead of BJGE. Big difference.
Pro tip: don't read into the coach speak. Everybody says the guy they drafted is awesome. Quoting the staff saying he's a three down work horse back means exactly nothing. If I had the time, I'd find quotes almost exactly like it for any number of guys who flamed out in less than 3 years.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Umm, he was picked between the first back (54) and third back (57) at 55. Not sure how he's not in that tier. That's just simple counting.
bostonfred
Footballguy
Tier might be the wrong word. I think that sankey and hyde were drafted as complete backs who could step in and be the lead back. I dont think hill was. Two years ago cinci said they were explicitly looking for a back to complement bjge. They drafted gio. This year they were explicitly looking for a big back to complement gio. They drafted hill. That doesn't mean that hill can't be more than just a regular "big back", it just means I think they drafted him to fill a specific role on the team. So in that sense, I have him in the same tier as andre williams, not sankey. the specific draft pick used on them doesn't necessarily indicate the order the marketplace perceived their talent, so much as the order in which teams picked players who fit their needs. If seastrunk was the next most talented guy on their board, I don't think cinci would have taken him, because it wasn't a good fit. Contrast that with tennessee, who was drafting a guy to replace chris johnson, or san francisco, who was drafting a future starter to replace gore. They might have been looking for a specific type of back, too, and may have considered the types of backs currently on their roster, but not the same as cinci, who seems very happy with gio.
So in that sense, hill might be a better "big back" than hyde, but still be a tier below him as a situational guy instead of a complete guy. its not like fantasy football where they're looking for the guy who will score the most fantasy points. There's a question of fit.
That probably feels like im moving the goal posts, but that was the whole point of the post you quoted. you were talking about something different, and you're right, they were drafted in a similar spot in the draft. I definitely get what you're saying about them being perceived as the best of the class. Maybe that is the better way of looking at it. Im just looking at it from a little different perspective.
So in that sense, hill might be a better "big back" than hyde, but still be a tier below him as a situational guy instead of a complete guy. its not like fantasy football where they're looking for the guy who will score the most fantasy points. There's a question of fit.
That probably feels like im moving the goal posts, but that was the whole point of the post you quoted. you were talking about something different, and you're right, they were drafted in a similar spot in the draft. I definitely get what you're saying about them being perceived as the best of the class. Maybe that is the better way of looking at it. Im just looking at it from a little different perspective.
Spookytooth
Footballguy
I have Gio and picked Hill at 1.12 in our rookie draft. I had 1.9 and thought that was a tad early (got Beckham) and had 2.4 but thought he might be gone by then. 1.12 felt right though and happy to have him there as a gio owner.
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
You were right, at that time, you were referring to Hill and Freeman in terms of situation, I misunderstood your take as at least in part being informed by scouting-type information. Though downthread from your response here, you later addressed how you see them respectively in those terms. So I would still retroactively stand by the point since your respective scouting-type takes have come to light. I agree Hill is very talented, not that he is one dimensional or not a true three down RB. I'm not as high on Freeman as a talent. Even on opportunity, I think Hill's is better, and Freeman's may not be as good, as you have characterized. For instance, what is the chance that CIN drafts a first or second round RB like Yeldon or Gordon next year and Hill is displaced. I would say extremely low. It wouldn't be a surprise to me at all if once Jackson leaves ATL, they draft a RB that could be a direct threat to Freeman. The flip side to not paying enough attention to opportunity (and I do like Hill's, as long as expectations are realistic), is to pay too much attention to it, chase it at the expense of talent, and not realize how much things can change in even one year.
In talking about the reality of their situations, IMO there is a lot of interpretation going on. You seem to see more negative than positive things with Hill's situation, and vice verce with Freeman. I'm not sure if that is the reality of the situation, but how you see it. Not unlike me, but I acknowledge it is my interpretation, not that the reality of either situation is so clear and obvious that it dictates how we should look at this. Ultimately, there is speculation coming from both sides, and all we can invoke, is not reality, but our ability to marshall as coherent and well reasoned a position that accounts for the known facts as possible, and let those in the thread decide for themselves which position makes the most sense, or if in fact a synthesis combining the strengths of several positions and attempting to eliminate their weaknesses best accounts for the situation.
I think the best, most robust and constructive debates happen for a few reasons and circumstances. Being consistent. If we are going to incorporate information from coaches and team sources that can be construed as a positive to one player, we have to allow the other side that as well (jurb addressed this already, but I was thinking the same thing). Also a committment to not being selective (speaking for myself and addressed to the thread a whole, not necessarily directed at you). Follow the evidence wherever it leads. Being receptive to information even when it doesn't fit our our narrative, and not suppressing it when it may corroborate the other narrative.
I'll work through the thread and make various observations as I go later. First, I think part of the issue that imo may be causing some mischief here and miscomminication/misunderstanding, is that in your draft, Hill seems to have gone higher than average, and only Sankey and Hyde went higher (if I got that right?). Like the draft in which Hill went 2.09, and you admitted you are lucky to even get a starter there. Part of your critique keeps coming back to his not being a stud. I don't necessarily agree talent-wise, I do opportunity-wise that he is unlikely to be a top 5-10 RB unless Bernard were injured, than he might have a chance. But where a lot of people picked him, he doesn't need to be a stud to be worth his pick and represent good value. What other RB are you going to take instead of Hill that you think is going to be a stud, and won't have competition for carries now or in the future?
As far as what ATL has said about Freeman, and not shooting it down on principle, they may sincerely believe that he can be the future feature RB, at this time. My concern, since I don't think he is as talented as Hill, is if he underwhelms, they may think differently in a year or two. Of course we could say the same thing about Hill, but because I think he is more talented, I find that less likely that he won't hang on to HIS role, such as it is.
I definitely wouldn't trade Bernard for Hill, BUT, I think there are things that each do better than the other. Bernard is quicker, more elusive and a better receiver (reminds me in some ways of Faulk/Westbrook/Bush). Hill is bigger and more powerful (but not a stiff). I think they have very complementary skill sets, can definitely co-exist as fantasy relevant, and have a chance to be the best young RB tandem in the NFL in a year or two, possibly sooner. One thing that is different about Hill and Law Firm, is before, when Bernard was on the field Law Firm wasn't, and vice verce. But they are talking about having them in the same backfield at times (it helps in this personnel grouping that Bernard could go in motion and just split out like a WR, also that Hill is a good enough receiver out of the backfield to keep defenses guessing and unable to lock on to tendencies). This factor if it holds up could lead to more opportunity for Hill, and we could be setting our sights too low in thinking of Law Firm too literally in basing ceiling and floor-type projections. Hill is a vastly more dynamic and explosive talent.
Than we get to the CIN supporting cast/surrounding talent critique. But first, you are right that Hill has character concerns. But I'm not sure if the Bengals have more than their fair share of trouble makers NOW. I may be forgetting some players, but core players like Bernard, Dalton, Green, Eifert strike me as having good character, maturity for their age and professionalism, and they should be a good influence and role models for him. I don't see any (late) Chris Henry or Odell Turman-types in that group. What about Gresham, I do think he is underrated, perhaps (one of three TEs in league history, with Ditka and Keith Jackson, to have 50+ receptions in his first three seasons, and just missed making it four in 2014), but I'm not assuming he will be back in 2015. Jones is a good player, I'm not sure about great. Eifert is an outstanding prospect, but also not sure he will ever be as good as Jordan Cameron. ATL might have the best WRs in the league when healthy, should we view that as a negative for Freeman?
CIN really does have a great assemblage of young talent on offense, among the best in the league. In theory, if Eifert and Hill are as good as advertised (I think we are pretty sure Green and Bernard are), there could be a lot of yardage and scoring opportunities in play in the pass and run game. There could be more overall TDs in play than in 2013. Bernard could get more TDs than he did as a rookie, Hill could have more than Law Firm, Green will get his (Hall of Fame-type first three years), also Eifert and Jones.
What about the stated intent to run more. Why? Think of the 0-3 playoff record. I think last year was a kind of culmination, a realization and ephipany that Dalton can be above average but may never be great, and they had gone as far as they could with him and Green as the focal point of the offense. To run the ball more and more effectively is a committment. The kind of physicality and toughness it requires doesn't lend itself to flipping a switch in the playoffs. I think they are serious about it and mean business in stating they want to run more. I don't think all teams say they want to run more this time of the year, so that might be a stretch. SEA and SF were already leading the league running it 50% of the time, don't see that going up much if at all. It might remain there, but SEA gets Harvin (and Richardson), SF Crabtree and Stevie Jonson (also rookie Ellington), so they may open up the offense a little going forward as Wilson and Kaepernick mature and develope.
I think it is very unlikely Dalton has 33 TDs again any time soon (if ever). But even if that number contracts, that still leaves plenty for Green, Eifert, etc. But it could leave a lot more rushing TDs available that simply weren't there in recent years. The better the offense is OVERALL, it can help the top weapons synergistically. Green and Eifert can advance the ball near the stripe where Hill can pound it in. I take that as a good thing, also realizing if Bernard and Hill are a dynamic duo, they will sustain more drives and put Green in position to get his TDs as well. I don't view this as a bad thing, far from it. The bigger the scoring pie, the bigger pieces for some, if not all. I think Hill is going to get a big piece. Unlike you, I dont think if he does it it will be flukey and unlikely to be approximated again. I think because of the confluence of his talent, the surrounding talent (a positive for me) and the unexpected upside there may be in his possible usage could could be systemic-type positives, for lack of a better descriptive term, and could be replicated. If he gets 225-250 carries, 25 receptions, 8-12 TDs in 2015, unless there is some kind of material change or substantive scheme/usage concern, I don't see why he couldn't do that the following year, etc.
In saying Hill doesn't have a great role, imo that is a bit premature when we aren't even sure what it is yet. Maybe Gresham is gone in 2015 which seems to be is a concern of yours. Maybe he will be on the field at the same time as Bernard, who could be deployed as more of a WR, which you didn't seem to be acounting for as a possibility. Bernard looked like he wore down at the end of the season a little, he isn't as big as Hill, and he could get more carries than we are accounting for on the basis of spelling Bernard. Hill may be more valuable than the lesser talented guy in the better situation, IF that situation becomes meaningless in a year because the lack of talent causes that player to be replaced or marginalized. He doesn't have to be dominant or a fantasy "stud" to justify his draft pick for many in drafts where he didn't go as high as in yours.
I'm not sure it is as black and white as ALWAYS being committed to drafting ALL high upside but risky players, or ALL more sure thing with defined role but lower floor players. I think many teams employ some kind of mix of strategies. It is great when guys like that hit, but its bad when they bust. If you only draft types like that, there is some risk many of them bust. Chasing opportunity can have its pitfalls, too. There is no universally right way for team building, I've won in different ways, I've seen other teams win in many different ways.
Carlos Hyde received 9 and Jeremy Hill 7 first place votes in a pre-draft scouting poll (no other RB received more than 1). Various scouts note Hill can catch the ball, has starter ability, a complete skill set and can be an every down player.
http://www.rotoworld.com/recent/cfb/131161/jeremy-hill
LSU RB Jeremy Hill finished only three points behind Carlos Hyde for top RB prospect honors in the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel's poll of 18 NFL scouts.
"That big (expletive) is faster and a better athlete than Hyde, and he catches the (expletive) out of it," a scout said. "Damn right I like him as a starter." Hyde earned nine first-place votes and 72 points, while Hill finished with 69 points and seven first-place votes. Bishop Sankey (43) and Tre Mason (35) finished third and fourth respectively, each garnering one first-place vote. Andre Williams (13), Terrance West (11) and Devonte Freeman (10) rounded out the top eight. "He's a complete back," another scout said of Hill. "He can be an every-down player and carry the load. He's really good in the passing game, too. Smooth runner. Natural run instincts."
Hue Jackson notes Hill is a three down back that can catch.
http://www.wcpo.com/sports/football/bengals/cincinnati-bengals-jeremy-hill-fits-new-mold-of-running-back
"The Bengals think Hill can take Green-Ellis' spot and give them a power runner who is also a receiving option and could stay in the game on passing downs, making the offense more diversified.
"He's not Giovani Bernard we're not going to ask him to be that but at the end of the day, he has the ability to catch the ball," offensive coordinator Hue Jackson said. "And that's what I meant about being a three-down player."
Last edited by a moderator:
Nice post James Brown : )
I agree with a lot that you've said here....
NFL scouts always side with bigger backs though - it is too easy to play the too small card as a scout...
I agree with the top 4 backs from the scouts that you quoted - I think they will all be studs!
I have a different order though Sankey, Hill, Mason, Hyde...
I agree with a lot that you've said here....
NFL scouts always side with bigger backs though - it is too easy to play the too small card as a scout...
I agree with the top 4 backs from the scouts that you quoted - I think they will all be studs!
I have a different order though Sankey, Hill, Mason, Hyde...
Bob Magaw
Footballguy
I think Bernard and Hill could end up being what DeAngelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart were supposed to be, if Cam Newton hadn't rushed for 28 TDs since 2011, Stewart hadn't become injury prone after a promising start to his career and CAR hadn't felt the need to sign Tolbert.
Last edited by a moderator:
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Who made you the gatekeeper of what is required or not in this forum?
Pro tip: don't listen to any opposing points of view. You just might learn something if you did that.
Similar threads
