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 will be the #1 fantasy RB this year (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter ponchsox
- Start date
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
No. Forte was born on 12/10/85 (per MFL at least) so he was 28 to start last season.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Saw this in the Doug Martin thread -- Cincy projects as the hardest SOS for RBs.
https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/news/5956/exploitation-theory-what-the-nfl-schedule-can-teach-us-about-drafting-running-backs#
Take it FWIW.
https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/news/5956/exploitation-theory-what-the-nfl-schedule-can-teach-us-about-drafting-running-backs#
Take it FWIW.
Had no idea he was that old.
So the new, revised thinking: draft only RB's who start the season 28 or older.
32 Counter Pass
Footballguy
LOL. I stand corrected again. So we are up to 3 RBs 28 yo or older that have finished top 5. Up to 6% chance...
32 Counter Pass
Footballguy
One more, Thomas Jones in 2008. Now at 8% chance.
3 out of 5 in a single season isn't 5%. Just let it go.LOL. I stand corrected again. So we are up to 3 RBs 28 yo or older that have finished top 5. Up to 6% chance...
32 Counter Pass
Footballguy
I think that there are statistics showing a relationship between age and production decline in older RBs. Whether you think it is evidence or not is your call. The other issue with this line of reasoning is the definition of "elite".
I assume a RB that rushed for +1800 and scored 27TDs would be consider elite, yes? That same RB did not finish in the top20 the next year. That back's name: Shaun Alexander. Interestingly, he had just turned 28 several days before the start of his huge season, making him the 5th RB 28 or older. But the main point is that there MAY be a relationship between the age and production. At very least it is a cautionary tale of rubber stamping an older RB with a certain top 5 finish. We are now a 10% chance.
I assume a RB that rushed for +1800 and scored 27TDs would be consider elite, yes? That same RB did not finish in the top20 the next year. That back's name: Shaun Alexander. Interestingly, he had just turned 28 several days before the start of his huge season, making him the 5th RB 28 or older. But the main point is that there MAY be a relationship between the age and production. At very least it is a cautionary tale of rubber stamping an older RB with a certain top 5 finish. We are now a 10% chance.
Instinctive
Footballguy
Just checking in here after deciding to go Hill at pick 8 last night. Really like the opportunity he is presented with this season. I'm trying to get the #1 overall guy at his position with my top pick, and he seems like a great shot at it.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Well since there were 3 just last season that you missed (in addition to Barber and Jones who you named, which would be 5) perhaps you missed a few others?LOL. I stand corrected again. So we are up to 3 RBs 28 yo or older that have finished top 5. Up to 6% chance...
Last edited by a moderator:
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
I think everyone would agree that RBs don't age well - but I don't think we can just make arbitrary lines in age (28) or even rank (top 5). Were there any RBs above age 28 that finished 6th or 7th, for instance? That would hardly make said back a bust.
I'm not going back to check but since Frank Gore is now 32/33, I'm guessing he had some top 5 years after age 28 as well.
bigmiiiiike
Footballguy
I'm debating him or CJ Anderson (or Gronk or WR) at 1.06 in a 12 team non-ppr standard draft. Feel like Anderson's opportunity is better, but Hill's talent is better. Both have the potential to put up a #1 overall season. Leaning Anderson right now as the Broncos oline looks like it might have come together in the preseason.
32 Counter Pass
Footballguy
Don't misunderstand, I am not saying these guys can't finish top 10. Only that the statistics show a very low probability of finishing top 5. So if you are drafting an older RB as one of the first off the board, this stat suggests you may be over drafting him. It may only be by a couple of slots, but that could translate to a lot of points. Just food for thought.Dr. Octopus said:
T with T
Footballguy
yes he looks amazing 1200 yards 10 tds and 5.1 ypc. He actually had a better rookie year then Bell. I hope Hill is top rb in ppr but for that to happen I think he is gonna need 320 carries = 1650 rushing 40 catches for 400 yards and 12 rush 4 rec tds... that would put him at 2050 yards from scrimmage 16 tds and 40 catches, that should at least put him in big time running for top back in the league.
T with T
Footballguy
he had 27 catches last year and that was starting only 8 games.. If he could get that number to around 40 that would be top 6-7 for rbs catching passes...
T with T
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't Noonan
Footballguy
Trying to decide between Hill, Gore, or Ingram at 3.8 right now. Going with Ingram I think.
jurb26
Footballguy
It's a fisherman's league.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
TZMarkie
Footballguy
My biggest league had some highly unexpected players get taken off the board in round 1.
Namely several big name WRs that I had not anticipated.
At 12th I picked up Hill and Demaryius on the swing pick. (I had anticipated going WR-WR)
Because of the WRs going faster than I had anticipated, I decided to get a big name RB to couple with DT.
I was high on Hill all preseason, but doubted I would be able to get him because of the way I was expecting to draft.
I'm all on board now kids. (btw- scored Gio Bernard later on too, as a semi-handcuff)
TZM
Namely several big name WRs that I had not anticipated.
At 12th I picked up Hill and Demaryius on the swing pick. (I had anticipated going WR-WR)
Because of the WRs going faster than I had anticipated, I decided to get a big name RB to couple with DT.
I was high on Hill all preseason, but doubted I would be able to get him because of the way I was expecting to draft.
I'm all on board now kids. (btw- scored Gio Bernard later on too, as a semi-handcuff)
TZM
Last edited by a moderator:
This is something a few people have pointed out now, including Sigmund Bloom covering it extensively in one recent podcast.davearm said:
FWIW, Cincy had a lot of favorable-RB games last season; this one looks the opposite, at least on paper. And it's not like Dalton&Co look like an offensive juggernaut right now. Great as he looked last year, I am not comfortable projecting Hill in PPR even as top 5 RB on a ppg basis.
Cinci did have some favorable rb games but I think it's also been stated that for every game Hill had against a ####ty defense last year, he had one against a stud one. And he performed just as well. Now, I'm not saying he doesn't wear down a little or take a statistical regression (maybe less ypc), but they always talk about how the top end guys are matchup proof. If we think Hill can be a top 5 talent, at some point we have accept him as matchup proof.
FWIW Lynch and Forte have hard af schedules this year and no one is backing off enough to let them slip into the 2nd round or late 2nd round respectively. Hill might not be that level just yet but by years end, I hope so
FWIW Lynch and Forte have hard af schedules this year and no one is backing off enough to let them slip into the 2nd round or late 2nd round respectively. Hill might not be that level just yet but by years end, I hope so
LittlePhatty
Footballguy
Yeah, I'd be curious to see what the 2014 SOS was like pre-season, as compared to how it ended up in hindsight.
Even mid-season I only use SOS as a tie breaker between marginal players.
I think O-line matters a lot more, and Cincy has a good one.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Preseason SoS analysis is mostly based on last year. While I'm sure a lot of it holds up from one season to the next, logic and history should tell you that a lot of it will not as well. For example I was looking at a SoS analysis for QBs marking defenses as "easy", "average" and "tough" against the pass that was totally based on last year's statistics. It listed both the Jets and Eagles among the "easy" matchups which totally ignores what has happened this offseason. The Jets for example were starting a marginal safety at CB and two strong safeties since they lacked a free safety type once they moved Allen to CB. They have since added Revis, Cromartie, Skrine and Gilchrist to the mix. That doesn't seem like an "easy" matchup (on paper at least).
Last edited by a moderator:
Jack White
Footballguy
TBB has one of the easiest on-paper rush-D skeddys.
Doug Martin in the 3rd!
Doug Martin in the 3rd!
bigmiiiiike
Footballguy
Yeah but there is a difference between just having a tougher matchup and therefore efficiency is not as high, and being game-scripted out, which is what happened to Hill in four games last year.
Week 10: Cleveland: 12 carries 55 yards, 0 TDs
Week 13: Tampa Bay: 13 carries 40 yards, 0 TDs
Week 14: Pittsburgh: 8 carries 46 yards, 0 TDs
Wildcard Weekend against the Colts: 13 carries, 47 yards, 1 TD
Soulfly3
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Soulfly3
Footballguy
Well then...
BUt to be fair, he did play PIT and CLE twice...
and in the other 2 games he had:
PIT: 23/100
CLE: 25/148/2
Both screaming terrible defenses last year. You certainly know both the run D issues the Browns faced last year, and the pretty tremendous difference opposing RB's will face this year. You counting on a repeat as the worst run D in football? Me neither.
IOW, even their divisional rushing matchups won't be nearly as juicy this year. Though PIT still looks like a cupcake, at least.
bigmiiiiike
Footballguy
I am certainly not EXPECTING any particular D to remain terrible, or even for any particular game to give Hill trouble with a bad game-script. My point is that unless something changes from last year to this year (e.g., they trust Hill more as a passing-downs back if they're in catch up mode), then there will be games like last year that get away from the Bengals and they abandon the run, or at least the downhill run with Hill. That's my biggest issue with picking him over CJ Anderson or Murray, or over the top tier WRs.
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
All teams abandon the run when down.
. I have heard experts suggest what you are saying or repeating and I don't buy what you are selling....especially when you added Murray to your argument.
LittlePhatty
Footballguy
Meatwad Reloaded
Footballguy
That is actually great news as every year those projections turn out to be a load of crap. Teams only play 16 games, so if three or four 'top defenses' turn out to be awful, which actually does happen because...well...dudes are getting hurt, like all over the place, then the projections become a load of bs.
Jeremy Hill looks to me like an amazing, ascendant talent. How many of these types relied on soft schedules to reach their goals? None. They play who they play every year.
Is Jamal Charles a crappy rb when he plays against a hard schedule? How about Aaron Rodgers? Does he pack it in when he has to play a good d?
This thread is about a guy that some of us think will be #1!!! Its not going to matter what defenses he is playing.
P.S. If Cincy is full strength....they actually ARE an offensive juggernaut. I am not sure what season you all watched last year, but I am pretty sure they lost Marvin Jones for the year, Eifert (1st round talent) for the year, and AJ Green played all last year nicked up. Dalton was a top 10 qb the year before when all systems were firing.
T with T
Footballguy
Gopher State
Footballguy
LOL. I stand corrected again. So we are up to 3 RBs 28 yo or older that have finished top 5. Up to 6% chance...
Since 1996, 21 of the 95 RBs that finished top 5 were age 28 or older. That's 22%, but it misses the point.
The age-related decline you allude to is a given, and it's baked into ADP. Older guys don't usually finish top 5, and they don't usually get taken top 5 either.
What would be useful is to see if older guys tend to under-perform their draft position more often, relative to the overall RB population. The answer to that question seems to be no.
I took a look at my league's drafts since 2003, and compiled a list of RBs that were drafted at least twice, and at least once in the top 100 picks. That gave me a pool of 124 RBs, and 689 seasons.
There were 174 instances of guys with an ADP of 12 or lower (first round picks). 47 of these first-rounders were 28 and older.
Overall, 53 of the 174 had an end-of-season rank that matched or exceeded their ADP (30%); 16 of the 47 older guys (34%) met that criteria.
Meanwhile 92 of the 174 drafted in the first stayed in the top 12 end-of-season (53%), 24 of the 47 older guys (51%) met that criteria.
So a guy's chance of outperforming a first-round draft slot, or at least producing top-12 numbers, doesn't seem to be adversely impacted by being 28+ years old.
I pick #10 in a 12 team PPR tonight. Want to lock down a #1 RB in round 1. It's usually either CJ or Hill.
Hill has an ADP that's more like 11-15. Sometimes makes it back to me in round 2, sometimes not. May take the plunge at #10 instead of getting cute and hoping he's around at 15 in round 2.
Sounds like most people here are on board with Hill being a first round pick.
Shouldn't the CIN D be significantly better this year as well with Atkins back? Better defense should equal more offensive snaps, better game flow for Hill, etc.
