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!
I disagree. Signing a RB is almost as bad for Edmonds value as drafting one.
You weren’t saying 60%, though that’s technically “the majority”, as is 51%.
Cost matters, but the only RB situations to avoid are ones on bad offenses. This is not one of those.
Jury’s out on that, but I’d say it’s also smart to avoid scat backs who don’t get as many receptions as the fantasy community seems to believe they do where the QB is a GL TD vulture for a team that doesn’t seem to use him in short yardage or even the RZ much.
I won't argue how good of a real-life player Conner is. But I will vehemently disagree that signing or drafting a RB is "bad for value" of Edmonds.
I wouldn't trade for him now, but this possibility is why I traded 3.9 for him in January.
I said they’d share the backfield and I expect edmunds to get more touches. You’re kind of putting words in my mouth. Now, I did say it was “best case scenario” for edmunds as I don’t see Conner as a guy who will come in and get 15-20 carries a game (and sustain that work). If they took a RB in rd 2 that would be a direct threat to value. If they added a receiving threat, where a lot of edmunds value is derived, he would take a hit. If they would have added someone like Carson, then I’d expect similar numbers to last year. If edmunds can get around 200 carries, which is adding less than 1/2 of drakes vacated carries, he will be a valuable back.
I don’t disagree on your overall take.
I quoted you. You just said 60%. You are putting words in your mouth, not me.
3.9 in January is a fair price. Dude in my dynasty wanted Samuel & I told him to kick rocks.
They aren’t on the roster to do nothing forever. Just because they’ve had zero carries doesn’t mean they will continue to have zero carries.
But there's an obvious logical flaw here: the same coaching staff and front office you are referring to actually brought about an increase in playing time and volume for Edmonds. As already detailed, his chances increased from 5.6 to 8.6 (roughly, see details in previous post), and his snap totals increased from 17/game to 31/game year-over-year.
So what? Conner had 32 carries in 2017 before getting 215 the next year, which he had one year and hasn’t come close to since. Drake had a season high of 170 before getting 239 the following year. Sometimes players get more opportunities. I’m not so much high on edmunds as I am down on Conner, or at least don’t view him as a guy who will get 15-20 carries a game.I quoted you. You just said 60%. You are putting words in your mouth, not me.
Also I find those numbers unrealistic. They didn’t just bring in James Conner for 140 carries.
And I very much doubt Chase is going to have 200. This dude has had 60, 60 & 97 rushes and you think he’s going to run 200x? Ooookay.
Conner is much better suited to the early down role. Wishful thinking is great, but they brought him in to run him between the tackles. That’s what they’ve been missing & I see no reason they wouldn’t use him that way.
They’re also fond of their other backups - I wouldn’t be shocked to see a 3-headed monster with Conner getting short yardage.
time will tell I guess. I think you’re way too high on Edmonds
Now is a difficult time to move him. Most teams have their starters and if they are trading for better ones they're aiming higher than Edmonds. If there is a window to move him I don't think it'd open until at least August. Maybe immediately after your rookie draft if a rb needy team doesn't add any.
Yet signing the corpse of Gio Bernard, who had his career highs in both carries and receptions in his rookie season a long 8 years ago, "would have taken a ton of value away"- that makes sense to you?
I agree with @rockaction - the instant Conner gets dinged up. Even a slight limp or a headache or a splinter or something - that’s when you sell high as possible on Edmonds.
We all have our tolerance / definition as to what defines a “RB2”, so this is vague.
As I pointed out, Chase’s value gets a bump because of his value in the passing game. If he isn’t in on 3rd down that takes a ton of value away. My line of thinking isn’t that hard to follow here. If a 3rd down back were signed and he lost targets it would sap a fair amount of upside. I’ll admit Conner is an able pass catcher, so edmunds role in that area might not expand, but I don’t expect him to lose targets either.
With an increase of workload I expect him to finish around RB 24 or better in scoring, which would be a rb2 in a 12 man league. He finished rb 25 in ppr last year through 17 games, so this take isn’t all that bold. I don’t think he will have huge weeks, just steady production and probably around the same 5 tds he scored last year. On a per game basis he finished rb36, so there’s room for growth if you look at it on that basis, and more carries would bring that up. I’m being very specific in my projections here, and I’m shorting his career averages by .5 yds on top of it. You’re arguing he somehow gets less work than he did last year with the signing of Conner. If they run about 340 times like last year, what do you expect the split to be? Why do you expect 7th rd pick Benjamin to factor in? Conner played in 13 games last year with some nobodies behind him, why didn’t he do more?We all have our tolerance / definition as to what defines a “RB2”, so this is vague.
My dynasty roster is mostly flex, so I can roll out 6 WR/2 RB. My second running back is a weekly dice roll, and all 6 WR are better. He’s technically a RB2. Ok, Edmonds qualifies as that. I would throw him out weekly in that exact scenario as a “RB2”.
Many in the fantasy community see Chris Carson as the ceiling of a RB2 who might creep into the RB1 convo occasionally.
I don’t think anyone believes Edmonds will remotely sniff Carson’s value.
So no offense, but saying Edmonds is a RB2 is true but so incredibly vague as to what it means as to not really mean anything.
Not necessarily. I bailed on Devonta Freeman (2nd rounder) before the rug got pulled out from under him in one league in 2019, but it's because I had the depth to withstand that short term loss. I didn't in another because I lacked such depth. A similar situation arose with RoJo last year too. I got out from under in one (Deebo and a 2), but needed him in the lineup in the other so he's still on the roster today. I think all of those decisions were the right ones.
I expected them to add a RB (or 2) as well, but a bottom-barrel back was a possibility (as was adding a very good RB). If they would have added someone like say Gio :cough:, it would shown more confidence in Edmonds and his value would have gotten a boost IMO. Out of the realistic options, Conner was a middle of the pack signing at worst, so it's just hard for me to get on board that this gives Edmonds a big boost, never mind "best case scenario". I get that this could reduce the chance of using a high pick on a RB, but I don't think it moves the needle much on that either- it's only a 1 yr. deal for Conner and it wasn't likely they were going to use one of those early picks on RB to begin with. Maybe it went from a 15% chance to a 10% chance, something like that.
Sure it does. I don't bother with tiered rankings until the other side of the draft, but just scrolling through them now I note it starts to get dicey around RB20. Since most leagues require starting at least 2 RB's whoever from below emerges can be someone's starter.We all have our tolerance / definition as to what defines a “RB2”, so this is vague.
My dynasty roster is mostly flex, so I can roll out 6 WR/2 RB. My second running back is a weekly dice roll, and all 6 WR are better. He’s technically a RB2. Ok, Edmonds qualifies as that. I would throw him out weekly in that exact scenario as a “RB2”.
Many in the fantasy community see Chris Carson as the ceiling of a RB2 who might creep into the RB1 convo occasionally.
I don’t think anyone believes Edmonds will remotely sniff Carson’s value.
So no offense, but saying Edmonds is a RB2 is true but so incredibly vague as to what it means as to not really mean anything.
As I pointed out, over the last 3 seasons Conner has more receptions, more receiving yards, a higher ypr, and more receiving TD's than both Gio and Lindsay (and the guy he's replacing, Drake), yet you think signing those 2 would have torpedoed his value while signing Conner is best case scenario. That's not even factoring in the obvious rushing/goal line differences.
Does Conner signing give Edmonds a boost? Well, no. In a vacuum any threat to touches obviously isn't a positive for one's value. Does Conner signing give Edmonds a boost relative to other potential RB's they could have added? This thread is leading me to believe there are divided opinions (this is not a bad thing).
Add a heavy dose of wishful thinking & it makes more sense.
I don't think any realistic Edmonds owner thought this would happen, though. I'm garnering that there's a lot of disagreement in this thread because we're acting like industry fantasy analysts and speaking in generalities rather than speaking in specifics to league requirements and team construction.
This simply doesn't make sense from a real-life football perspective. Why would they add another Chase Edmonds-esque player? Wouldn't adding a complement to him make sense? Honestly, I haven't seen anyone here arguing that Chase was going to be a three-down back.
Signing Conner makes it less likely they take any of the big 3 in the 2nd round, for sure.
Of all the guys that "survived" the NFL draft, this one is the one that I think might have the most real redraft value this year. I'm not quite buying the Mike Davis nor Myles Gaskin hype but I do think Edmonds is going to be valuable. Or possibly. And he is going after those guys from what I've seen. Mid 5th to late 6th. People are taking Davis and Gaskin as early as the 4th.
He may score a ton of touchdowns this year. At 6ft 1, 233 lbs that and short yardage work seems to be wide open. He averaged 4.3 YPC last year, that's more than explosive enough for a short yardage guy.
Conner has been a solid RB that had a really good situation for a few years when the Steelers committed to the run and their OL was in good shape.
Haven't looked for an update, but fairly sure Conner is still recovering from off-season surgery.
And now we’ve come full circle, as I just traded for Chase Edmonds.
There is a logical inconsistency in your position here.I quoted you. You just said 60%. You are putting words in your mouth, not me.
Also I find those numbers unrealistic. They didn’t just bring in James Conner for 140 carries.
And I very much doubt Chase is going to have 200. This dude has had 60, 60 & 97 rushes and you think he’s going to run 200x? Ooookay.
Conner is much better suited to the early down role. Wishful thinking is great, but they brought him in to run him between the tackles. That’s what they’ve been missing & I see no reason they wouldn’t use him that way. And between the 2 back, only Conner has exceeded 200 carries in a season.
They’re also fond of their other backups - I wouldn’t be shocked to see a 3-headed monster with Conner getting short yardage.
time will tell I guess. I think you’re way too high on Edmonds
