Tatum Bell: 2005 stat predictions (1 Viewer)

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

Joe T,

Just admit that you are wrong so we can move on. Family Matters summed up our side of the debate very well.

 

[Family Matters]

It's funny that Shanny gets a bad rap for being hard to figure out on the RB issues. The guy we should be pissed about is Andy Reid. Talk about having a stud RB and underutilizing him for the sake of having a RBBC, poor Westbrook could be a top player in fantasy leagues if Reid would just forget about the RBBC thing and use his best RB. Obviously, Reid has never played fantasy football.

 

[Joe T]

Joe-based on your response and posts so far it sounds like you are missing some critical data on the Denver RB situation. The changes have been due to injuries for the nost part. If you'd like the deatils, just review the Bell threads as I have posted the explanation numerous times so I won't bother with boring everyone again. Clearly injuries have been the issue. To read anything more into the situation would be allowing yourself to be talked out of what should an excellent RB (top 5 likely) available in the 2nd round. You just can't get any better value than that.

I'm actually not missing any critical data. I think the guys that want to dismiss ALL of the Denver changes as 'due to injury' are just trying to spin things so that they can say that the situation is stable when in fact it isn't.Do you really thing that Q was going to hold down the job last year putting up 20 carries and 60 yards a game? Because outside of week one, that is what he was putting up on the high side. And I'm still not too certain about Q's 'injury' anyway. The guy didn't see the field the rest of the year... I think Shanahan had enough of him and his not seeing the field again wasn't due to 'injury'.

We will never know the answer so to assumme anything as fact is dangerous. But let's assume for minute that you're right and that Q would of lost his job due to performance. Well, who wouldn't? If a player can't get the job done it's expected that a change is required. Any coach would. So I'm not sure what point you are trying to make with this.

What about 2002 before Portis took over when Mike Anderson and Olandis Gary were effectively splitting carries 50/50 over the first five weeks? Were they splitting carries because of an alternating carry injury that I missed?

In Portis rookie year Shanny stated openly that he would use RBBC with Anderson, Gary and Portis until one of then established themselves. I think week 5 was the week Portis took over the rest of the season. So it was announced and he did exactly what he said he would do.

What about 2001 when you had T. Davis in and out of the lineup and M. Anderson filling in when he wasn't there? Yes, I know part of this was due to injury but still it is a trend that has continued.

Only due to Davis injury otherwise Davis would of been the man. Simple enough.

Yes, I know that this is a history where injuries have played a role.. but to suggest that MOST of the changes is due to injury is missing some data.

I think you are trying to twist the situation to fit your perception. When you look at what Shanny said he was going to do and what he did, he kept his word. Eliminate the injuries and this isn't even a story.



Good post though. But I am far from convinced.

I would be glad to bet the field (Dayne, Griffin, Anderson, Clarett) versus Bell this year on who will be the Broncos leading rusher. It is historically a crap shoot and you can't argue with that.

My responses in blue. It appears you are misreading the situation. If you observed the situation(s) when they occured then you would know. I have always know who the RB was (based Shanny's comments) before the season started except for Portis rookie year. But even then he stated it would be RBBC until someone established themselves.Shanny is not difficult to figure out and he has been loyal to his RB's. In fact you could argue too lotal. Last year, he probably should changed RB's after game 3 when it was apparent Q was not being effective. But he he's loyal and from a fantasy perspective you gotta love that.

I'm not saying I agree with you....but links to where Shanny said that Bell is getting majority of the carries in '05?

 

[MelvinTScupper]

For starters, all the backs you mentioned were gone in the secord round in the leagues I played in last year.

Are you serious?I don't think you are. In most WCOFF leagues including mine these guys were early third rounders.

Curtis was 3.03 and Tiki 3.04.

and Q. Griff was already well off the board as were other hyped backs like Chris Brown...etc.

I tend to agree with you Joe, but Q Griff was off the board in the second round??? WTF?? I got him for $5 in my auction/contract league.....Bell went for more.

 

[tommyGunZ]

Joe-based on your response and posts so far it sounds like you are missing some critical data on the Denver RB situation. The changes have been due to injuries for the nost part. If you'd like the deatils, just review the Bell threads as I have posted the explanation numerous times so I won't bother with boring everyone again. Clearly injuries have been the issue. To read anything more into the situation would be allowing yourself to be talked out of what should an excellent RB (top 5 likely) available in the 2nd round. You just can't get any better value than that.

I'm actually not missing any critical data. I think the guys that want to dismiss ALL of the Denver changes as 'due to injury' are just trying to spin things so that they can say that the situation is stable when in fact it isn't.Do you really thing that Q was going to hold down the job last year putting up 20 carries and 60 yards a game? Because outside of week one, that is what he was putting up on the high side. And I'm still not too certain about Q's 'injury' anyway. The guy didn't see the field the rest of the year... I think Shanahan had enough of him and his not seeing the field again wasn't due to 'injury'.

What about 2002 before Portis took over when Mike Anderson and Olandis Gary were effectively splitting carries 50/50 over the first five weeks? Were they splitting carries because of an alternating carry injury that I missed?

What about 2001 when you had T. Davis in and out of the lineup and M. Anderson filling in when he wasn't there? Yes, I know part of this was due to injury but still it is a trend that has continued.

Yes, I know that this is a history where injuries have played a role.. but to suggest that MOST of the changes is due to injury is missing some data.



Good post though. But I am far from convinced.

I would be glad to bet the field (Dayne, Griffin, Anderson, Clarett) versus Bell this year on who will be the Broncos leading rusher. It is historically a crap shoot and you can't argue with that.

$100

bump for Jhoe T

 

[Family Matters]

Joe-based on your response and posts so far it sounds like you are missing some critical data on the Denver RB situation. The changes have been due to injuries for the nost part. If you'd like the deatils, just review the Bell threads as I have posted the explanation numerous times so I won't bother with boring everyone again. Clearly injuries have been the issue. To read anything more into the situation would be allowing yourself to be talked out of what should an excellent RB (top 5 likely) available in the 2nd round. You just can't get any better value than that.

I'm actually not missing any critical data. I think the guys that want to dismiss ALL of the Denver changes as 'due to injury' are just trying to spin things so that they can say that the situation is stable when in fact it isn't.Do you really thing that Q was going to hold down the job last year putting up 20 carries and 60 yards a game? Because outside of week one, that is what he was putting up on the high side. And I'm still not too certain about Q's 'injury' anyway. The guy didn't see the field the rest of the year... I think Shanahan had enough of him and his not seeing the field again wasn't due to 'injury'.

We will never know the answer so to assumme anything as fact is dangerous. But let's assume for minute that you're right and that Q would of lost his job due to performance. Well, who wouldn't? If a player can't get the job done it's expected that a change is required. Any coach would. So I'm not sure what point you are trying to make with this.

What about 2002 before Portis took over when Mike Anderson and Olandis Gary were effectively splitting carries 50/50 over the first five weeks? Were they splitting carries because of an alternating carry injury that I missed?

In Portis rookie year Shanny stated openly that he would use RBBC with Anderson, Gary and Portis until one of then established themselves. I think week 5 was the week Portis took over the rest of the season. So it was announced and he did exactly what he said he would do.

What about 2001 when you had T. Davis in and out of the lineup and M. Anderson filling in when he wasn't there? Yes, I know part of this was due to injury but still it is a trend that has continued.

Only due to Davis injury otherwise Davis would of been the man. Simple enough.

Yes, I know that this is a history where injuries have played a role.. but to suggest that MOST of the changes is due to injury is missing some data.

I think you are trying to twist the situation to fit your perception. When you look at what Shanny said he was going to do and what he did, he kept his word. Eliminate the injuries and this isn't even a story.



Good post though. But I am far from convinced.

I would be glad to bet the field (Dayne, Griffin, Anderson, Clarett) versus Bell this year on who will be the Broncos leading rusher. It is historically a crap shoot and you can't argue with that.

My responses in blue. It appears you are misreading the situation. If you observed the situation(s) when they occured then you would know. I have always know who the RB was (based Shanny's comments) before the season started except for Portis rookie year. But even then he stated it would be RBBC until someone established themselves.Shanny is not difficult to figure out and he has been loyal to his RB's. In fact you could argue too lotal. Last year, he probably should changed RB's after game 3 when it was apparent Q was not being effective. But he he's loyal and from a fantasy perspective you gotta love that.

I'm not saying I agree with you....but links to where Shanny said that Bell is getting majority of the carries in '05?

You'd have to go back to Jan to find them but Shanny and Bowlens both stated that they feel Bell can be their man and will be given every opportunity to be the starter. So assumming he picks up where he left off last year I'm confident hes going to be the man. Besides, exactly who did they acquire to challenge Bell? Dayne-Ain't happening. Calrrett? He'll be lucky to get his acto together and make the team. Anderson and Griffin are returning from injury and may not be 100% but even if they are they don't have the skills Bell does.So I thnik it comes down to health. If Bell is healthy then he should be a top 5 back. Of course there is risk based on the injuries we saw last year. If anything, that would be reason to have a concern. Certainly not Shanny and definately not any player on their roster.

 

[Joe T]

 

[Joe T]

Actually, I did search briefly for any Shanahan quote saying Bell would 'be the man in 05' or anything to that effect and came up with nothing.If your argument (that I disagree with by the way) is that Bell is the man because Shanny said so and Shanny doesn't lie, I'd at least like to see where Shanny said Bell will be getting the bulk of the carries.All I could find was that it is an 'open race'.

 

[Prussian]

i'd be interesting in seeing how many people projecting high numbers for bell own him in keeper or dynasty leagues?

Good point ...Another forgotten element ... we saw the impact of Atlanta's running game based ont he O-line coach formally in Denver (drawing a big time blank - bad food at lunch). How will Denver's RBs fair two years removed from the "guru"? What impact has that had on the ability for Denver RBs to stay healthy?

I'd cut my own projections stated earlier by 40% if he goes down to injury as many fear.

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

test

 

[Peter]

So...the supporters are saying Shannahan is a man of his word? Whoever the he says is number one rb is actually the number one rb? Then why is it you're pimping Bell when Anderson is atop the chart? You can't have it both ways-either whoever is up there will get the most or admit-he changes things often. If you think Bell will win the job then that's one thing but to say he has it now is foolish.And yes, I am a Bell owner.

 

[P Boy]

i'd be interesting in seeing how many people projecting high numbers for bell own him in keeper or dynasty leagues?

Good point ...Another forgotten element ... we saw the impact of Atlanta's running game based ont he O-line coach formally in Denver (drawing a big time blank - bad food at lunch). How will Denver's RBs fair two years removed from the "guru"? What impact has that had on the ability for Denver RBs to stay healthy?

I'd cut my own projections stated earlier by 40% if he goes down to injury as many fear.

1) I do not own Bell in a FF league.2) The former O-line coach at DEN who is now with ATL is Alex Gibbs.

3) Alex Gibbs was the O-line coach in '00 when TD & Gary were both hurt in the opening MNF game vs STL, Gary going out for the season & TD only playing in a total of 5 games & getting 78 total carries for the season.

The last comment addresses one of the oddest questions I've seen on this board. Are you suggesting that DEN RBs had less injuries with Gibbs as the O-line coach?

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

I believe this from June 10 sums it up. Broncos RB Tatum Bell has lofty expectations for his second season. But first, Bell must win the starting job. That means overtaking accomplished veteran RB Mike Anderson, who currently is running No. 1

 

[Family Matters]

Actually, I did search briefly for any Shanahan quote saying Bell would 'be the man in 05' or anything to that effect and came up with nothing.

If your argument (that I disagree with by the way) is that Bell is the man because Shanny said so and Shanny doesn't lie, I'd at least like to see where Shanny said Bell will be getting the bulk of the carries.

All I could find was that it is an 'open race'.

Here's what I remember Dhanny and Bolen saying. It's not word for word but what I remember:They feel Bell is their man and can handle the load. He will be given every opportunity to be the starter.

Now that doesn't say he will be handed the job but rather they feel he can be the man and will be given the opportunity. So I am not saying anything differnt but rather interpreting what I think they are saying. You don't nake those comments then trade away Droughns and not draft a guy early and expect that Bell won't be the man.

Obviously things could change but unless Bell gets injured I can't see anyway he won't be the man.

So your opinion is he won't be or won't be the fulltime starter, for whatever reason, and my opinion is that he will be. Looks like we'll have to go with that and see how it turns out.

But let's not forget how we got here. You stated the situation was unstable and when we looked a little closer we see the evidence suggests that injuries are the problem, not Shanny or unsuspecting RB's coming out of nowhere to take over from the starter.

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

I believe this from June 10 sums it up. Broncos RB Tatum Bell has lofty expectations for his second season. But first, Bell must win the starting job. That means overtaking accomplished veteran RB Mike Anderson, who currently is running No. 1

 

[schooner44]

Provided he stays healthy 1,100 -1,200 yards and 8-10 TDs with 20-25 receptions for 200 and 2 TDs is not unreasonable.

Considering the first part of the statement here, I can buy into that.

 

[P Boy]

So...the supporters are saying Shannahan is a man of his word? Whoever the he says is number one rb is actually the number one rb? Then why is it you're pimping Bell when Anderson is atop the chart? You can't have it both ways-either whoever is up there will get the most or admit-he changes things often.

If you think Bell will win the job then that's one thing but to say he has it now is foolish.

And yes, I am a Bell owner.

LOL @ using a June 10 depth chart as an iron-clad logic trap.

 

[Joe T]

So your opinion is he won't be or won't be the fulltime starter, for whatever reason, and my opinion is that he will be. Looks like we'll have to go with that and see how it turns out.

But let's not forget how we got here. You stated the situation was unstable and when we looked a little closer we see the evidence suggests that injuries are the problem, not Shanny or unsuspecting RB's coming out of nowhere to take over from the starter.

1. That's not my opinion.

2. I disagree that injuries are the only evidence that suggests the situation is unstable.

Hey, you want to blame injuries for all the changes. It is simply not true.... but keep on keepin on... hang in there.

 

[Joe T]

I would go as far as to say that injuries were only small factors if at all in both 2002 and 2004 in the changes that were made.

 

[Joe T]

So...the supporters are saying Shannahan is a man of his word? Whoever the he says is number one rb is actually the number one rb? Then why is it you're pimping Bell when Anderson is atop the chart? You can't have it both ways-either whoever is up there will get the most or admit-he changes things often.

If you think Bell will win the job then that's one thing but to say he has it now is foolish.

And yes, I am a Bell owner.

 

[David Yudkin]

HERE are some links to articles on Bell from the Blogger.

None of them quote the team directly as Bell being the #1, but they seem to indicate he is first in line (as reported by Denver reporters).

As with the thread on Julius Jones, take any of this to heart or with a grain of salt depending upon your perspective. And as other have mentioned, Shanahan has not also been forthright with the media even if he was quoted.

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

HERE are some links to articles on Bell from the Blogger.

None of them quote the team directly as Bell being the #1, but they seem to indicate he is first in line (as reported by Denver reporters).

Broncos RB Tatum Bell has lofty expectations for his second season. But first, Bell must win the starting job. That means overtaking accomplished veteran RB Mike Anderson, who currently is running No. 1.huh

I guess if you want to go by May instead of June that statement works.......

 

[Prussian]

i'd be interesting in seeing how many people projecting high numbers for bell own him in keeper or dynasty leagues?

Good point ...Another forgotten element ... we saw the impact of Atlanta's running game based ont he O-line coach formally in Denver (drawing a big time blank - bad food at lunch). How will Denver's RBs fair two years removed from the "guru"? What impact has that had on the ability for Denver RBs to stay healthy?

I'd cut my own projections stated earlier by 40% if he goes down to injury as many fear.

1) I do not own Bell in a FF league.2) The former O-line coach at DEN who is now with ATL is Alex Gibbs.

3) Alex Gibbs was the O-line coach in '00 when TD & Gary were both hurt in the opening MNF game vs STL, Gary going out for the season & TD only playing in a total of 5 games & getting 78 total carries for the season.

The last comment addresses one of the oddest questions I've seen on this board. Are you suggesting that DEN RBs had less injuries with Gibbs as the O-line coach?

My comment about the RBs behind Gibbs' O-lines was not intended to be odd or accusatory, just food for thought. His schemes have been accused of getting D-linemen hurt for years. Borderline (if not blatant) chop blocks schemes and the like. My comment was only to question whether his schemes might indirectly have impact on the RBs health. We all now the history of Denver backs, and a usually healthy Dunn went down for the last last four weeks of 2003. He also nursed a hammy part of last season. When the O-line litters the ground, the use of multiple cut-back schemes, etc. tend to change running patterns of RBs. Just food for thought.As for the running comments in this thread regarding Shanahan's "word", isn't he the same coach that was cautioned or fine every year for mis-leading or false injury reports? For the last few years, he is the running joke now for having the longest injury report every week. Didn't he even report one of his players having a hangnail once? Point being, Shanahan has been considered a master of dis-information for a long time.

 

[Family Matters]

So your opinion is he won't be or won't be the fulltime starter, for whatever reason, and my opinion is that he will be. Looks like we'll have to go with that and see how it turns out.

But let's not forget how we got here. You stated the situation was unstable and when we looked a little closer we see the evidence suggests that injuries are the problem, not Shanny or unsuspecting RB's coming out of nowhere to take over from the starter.

1. That's not my opinion.

2. I disagree that injuries are the only evidence that suggests the situation is unstable.

Hey, you want to blame injuries for all the changes. It is simply not true.... but keep on keepin on... hang in there.

Joe,How can you this is not your opinion? Where are you getting it from? And if you want to disagree that injuries the reason then by all means do so. It's not my position to force my opinion on anyone but rather explain why. Sounds like we'll just have to see it differently.

 

[Family Matters]

i'd be interesting in seeing how many people projecting high numbers for bell own him in keeper or dynasty leagues?

Good point ...Another forgotten element ... we saw the impact of Atlanta's running game based ont he O-line coach formally in Denver (drawing a big time blank - bad food at lunch). How will Denver's RBs fair two years removed from the "guru"? What impact has that had on the ability for Denver RBs to stay healthy?

I'd cut my own projections stated earlier by 40% if he goes down to injury as many fear.

1) I do not own Bell in a FF league.2) The former O-line coach at DEN who is now with ATL is Alex Gibbs.

3) Alex Gibbs was the O-line coach in '00 when TD & Gary were both hurt in the opening MNF game vs STL, Gary going out for the season & TD only playing in a total of 5 games & getting 78 total carries for the season.

The last comment addresses one of the oddest questions I've seen on this board. Are you suggesting that DEN RBs had less injuries with Gibbs as the O-line coach?

My comment about the RBs behind Gibbs' O-lines was not intended to be odd or accusatory, just food for thought. His schemes have been accused of getting D-linemen hurt for years. Borderline (if not blatant) chop blocks schemes and the like. My comment was only to question whether his schemes might indirectly have impact on the RBs health. We all now the history of Denver backs, and a usually healthy Dunn went down for the last last four weeks of 2003. He also nursed a hammy part of last season. When the O-line litters the ground, the use of multiple cut-back schemes, etc. tend to change running patterns of RBs. Just food for thought.As for the running comments in this thread regarding Shanahan's "word", isn't he the same coach that was cautioned or fine every year for mis-leading or false injury reports? For the last few years, he is the running joke now for having the longest injury report every week. Didn't he even report one of his players having a hangnail once? Point being, Shanahan has been considered a master of dis-information for a long time.

Let clarify wjat I am saying about Shanny. When Shanny says someone is his back he sticks with it. He always has. Like I stated earlier in this thread, there was a period when Davs was injured until Portis arrived that he was playing the who's healthier RB and was vague with the media. Iremember it well. What has not done is mislead us about who his RB is. Last year he sadi Griffin was his guy. Many guys around here said no way and felt Shanny was misleading us. Low and behold Griffin was the man. So I feel ok with what he states as long as it's not answering injury questions.

 

[Slash]

Seems like the battle lines have been drawn in this one: those on Bell's side and those on the "other" side (Anderson/Clarrett/RBBC).Seems we get one of these every year, ie. Bennett vs. Onterrio Smith, Garrison Hearst vs. Kevan Barlow, etc.

 

[Family Matters]

Seems like the battle lines have been drawn in this one: those on Bell's side and those on the "other" side (Anderson/Clarrett/RBBC).

Seems we get one of these every year, ie. Bennett vs. Onterrio Smith, Garrison Hearst vs. Kevan Barlow, etc.

You're right about that. While I am a Bell fan and think he will do well, I can see why others might not be. The fact that so many don't even know what has heppened to the RB's over the years causes me to realize why I have such a huge advantage in so many of my leagues.

 

[horadadude]

i'd be interesting in seeing how many people projecting high numbers for bell own him in keeper or dynasty leagues?

Ron Dayne will get the carries

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

i'd be interesting in seeing how many people projecting high numbers for bell own him in keeper or dynasty leagues?

Ron Dayne will get the carries

 

[BGP]

I see this as being a little more RBBC than people would like to admit. There still is that midget from Oklahoma that will want some carries too. What if Bell gats the yds between the 20s and Shanny decides to run Clarett out there inside the 10 and MC eats up all the TD...than what have you got?

thats a lot of what if's?? What if Tomlinson blows out his knee in training camp? What if Buckhalter takes the starting gig from Westbrook? If we could predict everything, no need for predictions, we'd know.

Yeah...like what if you are a wolf who didn't kill me when you could have just to set yourself up to make it to endgame? What if?

 

[mario8723]

You're right about that. While I am a Bell fan and think he will do well, I can see why others might not be. The fact that so many don't even know what has heppened to the RB's over the years causes me to realize why I have such a huge advantage in so many of my leagues.

I couldn't agree more. Throughout this thread, I have read some pretty misguided statments that don't see the forest for the trees so to speak. It's pretty clear to me that injuries have played a major part in the Denver RB carousel the last few years. You can spin it any way you want to, but that's just the reality of the situation. Griffin WAS doing poorly, no doubt about that, but he also remained the starting RB-until he got injured. The notion that Shanahan somehow disguised a demotion as an injury is this thread's equivalent of the grassy knoll.

It's also fairly obvious that Shanny likes to run the ball if he can. As evidenced by some of the above posts, the Denver game certainly should be considered one of the more productive ones in the last few years, if not THE most productive (Don't have concrete figures to back that up, just going on feel here).

Is there injury risk associated with Bell? Of course there is. How many RBs can you honestly go into the year with and not be worried at least a little bit? ZERO. Let's face facts, LaDainian Tomlinson could go down just as easily as Bell could-they're only human. Injuries are part of the game-bottom line. Edgerrin James was touted early on in his career for his durability. Then he got hurt. The same thing could be said for countless backs. You could get run over crossing the street, but it shouldn't stop you from doing so several times a day. At some point in this hobby, if you become afraid of your own shadow, you just become chum for the rest of us. Plain and simple.

Here's a little blurb from Shanny himself regarding Bell's toughness:

Broncos | Bell Impresses Team - from www.KFFL.com

Tue, 11 Jan 2005 10:51:08 -0800

Denver Broncos head coach Mike Shanahan said RB Tatum Bell proved his toughness to the coaching staff by playing with a third-degree separated shoulder down the stretch. "I was really proud with his production, his toughness," Shanahan said.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seems to me a bit unfair that some people are questioning his toughness when the kid played the last few games of the year with a 3rd-degree shoulder separation.

As far as Mike Anderson being the #1 back, to my knowledge (and I have been pretty on top of the situation as a Bell owner) the only person who perceives Anderson as the #1 back is Bell himself. This is more flattery/respect than anything else gentlemen. Here is the scoop from several Denver beat writers who know more about this than both you and I...

Broncos | Bell Expected to Enter as No. 1 Back - from www.KFFL.com

Mon, 4 Apr 2005 15:07:54 -0700

Bill Williamson, of the Denver Post, reports Denver Broncos second-year RB Tatum Bell is expected to go into training camp as the team's No. 1 running back.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Broncos | Bell Must Come Through - from www.KFFL.com

Thu, 2 Jun 2005 17:37:32 -0700

David Ramsey, of the Gazette, reports the Denver Broncos are banking on RB Tatum Bell to deliver in 2005. If Bell stumbles, the Broncos' offense could fizzle and it could be a long, long football season. This year, the ball could be in his hands all the time and that's what he wants. "I want to be the man," he said after a workout at the Broncos' practice field. "They didn't get me to come here and sit on the bench. I want to play." He always has a chance to bust one for 80 yards. Bell is still humble, knowing he has not done anything yet. Serving as the man in the Broncos' backfield is a perilous job. Head coach Mike Shanahan isn't the kind of coach who worries about overworking his runners, but Bell might lack the size and durability for the task. Bell spent the offseason getting himself in better shape. He added 12 pounds to his 5-foot-11-inch frame and weighs 217 pounds. Bell said his weight gain was "good weight."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Broncos | Bell still the Favorite - from www.KFFL.com

Thu, 9 Jun 2005 18:35:32 -0700

Frank Schwab, of the Gazette, reports Denver Broncos head coach Mike Shanahan said RB Tatum Bell is the favorite to win the starting running back job in training camp. Shanahan said he anticipated the competition to start for the team at running back would intensify when training camp starts and there are contact drills.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Broncos | Bell Working with First and Second String Teams - from www.KFFL.com

Sun, 12 Jun 2005 10:16:06 -0700

Patrick Saunders, of the Denver Post, reports Denver Broncos second-year RB Tatum Bell wants to be a household name in 2005. However, Bell must first win the starting job at tailback. When asked if he felt he was the favorite to win the starting job, Bell said training camp and preseason games will determine the starter. He said to his knowledge, RB Mike Anderson is the No. 1 running back at this time. However, he noted both he and Anderson are running with the first- and second-string offenses at this time.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Assuming he stays healthy (again, something that should be placed in front of ANY player's projected numbers) I don't think 1300-1400 yds and 8-10 TDs is that much of a stretch, just based on prior production from the DEN running game. I think Yao Ming's projections from early on in this thread are optimistic, to put it nicely.

Mark my words. This is one of those situations that happen every year, where reality and perception diverge enough to make a player undervalued and underestimated. People who took a shot with Priest Holmes the year after his hip injury scare (2003) can attest to this. For those of you who have heard of the old saying "Sell High, Buy Low" this is one of those buy low scenarios.

Apparently, a lot of people are scared of the Denver running game because of a perception in their minds that is not based in reality. Taking a long, hard look at the facts may just help you steal a stud RB in your draft/auction this year. Sorting through all of the hub-bub and getting down to the black and white could mean the difference between being an also-ran and finishing in the winner's circle. Think about it...

 

[tommyGunZ]

great post mario. might as well lock this thread up; it's virtually impossible to refute mario's hammer.

 

[Slash]

Too many people play fantasy football wearing their panties and unless a situation is crystal clear and laid out for them they don't know what to do. You can see Tatum Bell having a hugely successful year coming from a mile away.

 

[Joe T]

Let's face facts, LaDainian Tomlinson could go down just as easily as Bell could-they're only human.

This is inaccurate and has been proven many times.It is among many inacccuracies in your post, but the only one I care to point out at this time as being blatantly wrong.

 

[Joe T]

great post mario. might as well lock this thread up; it's virtually impossible to refute mario's hammer.

you do realize you are the virtual equivalent to the kiss of death.

 

[salmonstud]

great post mario.  might as well lock this thread up; it's virtually impossible to refute mario's hammer.

you do realize you are the virtual equivalent to the kiss of death.

Joe,Why do I get the feeling that you are an 8th grader, currently taking summer school classes in order to advance to the 9th?

 

[P Boy]

Joe,

Why do I get the feeling that you are an 8th grader, currently taking summer school classes in order to advance to the 9th?

HEY! 8th grade were the best 3 years of my life!

 

[Joe T]

Joe,

Why do I get the feeling that you are an 8th grader, currently taking summer school classes in order to advance to the 9th?

I am not Chase Stuart.:graduate:

Edit:

Oh and hello tommygunz new alias.

 

[jurb26]

Let's face facts, LaDainian Tomlinson could go down just as easily as Bell could-they're only human.

This is inaccurate and has been proven many times.It is among many inacccuracies in your post, but the only one I care to point out at this time as being blatantly wrong.

Keep fighting the good fight JoeT.... it's not often that I agree with you. As for the above point by mario. You are missing the point as has everyone supporting Bell. Yes, Bell is just as likely as any RB to get hurt/miss time due to injury this year. The point is though, his odds of regaining his job and workload afterwards are not nearly as good. Bottom line, LT gets hurt, he will be starting again when healthy no matter what other RBs do. Bell gets hurt and another RB proves more effective or just as effetive, he will most likely be out of his job. Simply look at the history, RBs who miss time in Den loose jobs and seldom regain them. I think Joe showned this rather well. You guys are trying to place Bell on the same platform as guys like TD and Portis in Den and simply expecting them to show loyalty to him. What has Bell done to earn any kind of loyalty in Den though? TD and Portis was absolute mosters, the best RBs in the game when they ran in Den. These are the only 2 guys that Den has shown any bit of loyalty to over the past 10 years. Even Portis was shown little as he was sent packing after he wanted a new contract. So, what is it about Bell that has you all so convinced? I'd love to know.

 

[salmonstud]

Let's face facts, LaDainian Tomlinson could go down just as easily as Bell could-they're only human.

This is inaccurate and has been proven many times.It is among many inacccuracies in your post, but the only one I care to point out at this time as being blatantly wrong.

Keep fighting the good fight JoeT.... it's not often that I agree with you. As for the above point by mario. You are missing the point as has everyone supporting Bell. Yes, Bell is just as likely as any RB to get hurt/miss time due to injury this year. The point is though, his odds of regaining his job and workload afterwards are not nearly as good. Bottom line, LT gets hurt, he will be starting again when healthy no matter what other RBs do. Bell gets hurt and another RB proves more effective or just as effetive, he will most likely be out of his job. Simply look at the history, RBs who miss time in Den loose jobs and seldom regain them. I think Joe showned this rather well. You guys are trying to place Bell on the same platform as guys like TD and Portis in Den and simply expecting them to show loyalty to him. What has Bell done to earn any kind of loyalty in Den though? TD and Portis was absolute mosters, the best RBs in the game when they ran in Den. These are the only 2 guys that Den has shown any bit of loyalty to over the past 10 years. Even Portis was shown little as he was sent packing after he wanted a new contract. So, what is it about Bell that has you all so convinced? I'd love to know.

Have you ever watched Bell play Jurb? Bell has the goods. He will prove why he should be given loyalty. By week 5 you will be kicking yourself for taking smucks like L.Jordan and Chris Brown ahead of him.

 

[jurb26]

Let's face facts, LaDainian Tomlinson could go down just as easily as Bell could-they're only human.

This is inaccurate and has been proven many times.It is among many inacccuracies in your post, but the only one I care to point out at this time as being blatantly wrong.

Keep fighting the good fight JoeT.... it's not often that I agree with you. As for the above point by mario. You are missing the point as has everyone supporting Bell. Yes, Bell is just as likely as any RB to get hurt/miss time due to injury this year. The point is though, his odds of regaining his job and workload afterwards are not nearly as good. Bottom line, LT gets hurt, he will be starting again when healthy no matter what other RBs do. Bell gets hurt and another RB proves more effective or just as effetive, he will most likely be out of his job. Simply look at the history, RBs who miss time in Den loose jobs and seldom regain them. I think Joe showned this rather well. You guys are trying to place Bell on the same platform as guys like TD and Portis in Den and simply expecting them to show loyalty to him. What has Bell done to earn any kind of loyalty in Den though? TD and Portis was absolute mosters, the best RBs in the game when they ran in Den. These are the only 2 guys that Den has shown any bit of loyalty to over the past 10 years. Even Portis was shown little as he was sent packing after he wanted a new contract. So, what is it about Bell that has you all so convinced? I'd love to know.

Have you ever watched Bell play Jurb? Bell has the goods. He will prove why he should be given loyalty. By week 5 you will be kicking yourself for taking smucks like L.Jordan and Chris Brown ahead of him.So....how is that tree fort that you and Joe built this Summer working out?

Yeah, I have seen him play a bit, but not in detail. There wasn't much to see. He only had 75 carries last year and broke 15 in a game only twice. So I don't know how any real conclusions can be made as to his ability in the NFL just yet. If your convinced, thats fine by me. We all judge talent and ability on our own. I am not questioning Bell's opportunity to succeed, just the duration of that opportunity. The good thing for you is that it's within his control mainly. If he plays lights out, he will more than likely hold the job. How conviced are you that he can play that way though and stay healthy enough to establish himself as stable in the Den backfield? Seems to me that, looking at previous examples of the past, he will need to perform on par with TD and Portis and display thier type of talent to be able to do this. I don't think that is a fair expectation. Clearly Yao is convinced by his projections to start the thread and there is nothing wrong with that. It's just not me. As for that "tree fort", you can just consider that the winners circle (for those of us who don't draft Bell in the 2nd or 3rd)... and no you won't be admited.

 

[P Boy]

Seems to me that, looking at previous examples of the past, he will need to perform on par with TD and Portis and display thier type of talent to be able to do this.  I don't think that is a fair expectation.  Clearly Yao is convinced by his projections to start the thread and there is nothing wrong with that.  It's just not me.   

Please let me start by reiterating that I do not own Bell in any FF league.Why does Bell have to perform like Davis or Portis? Why can't he perform like Anderson, when Anderson was the featured RB. Anderson gained 1500 yds in 12 games as a featured RB. Why can't Bell perform like Droughns when Droughns was the featured RB? Droughns gained 1240 yds in the equivalent of 10 games as a featured RB. Why can't he perform like Gary? Gary gained 1159 yds in 12 games as the featured RB. Those all project out to substantial rushing numbers over a 16 game season.In fact, a wealth of RBs have performed very well as rushers when they have gotten enough carries. Here is a list of DEN RBs under Shanahan as a HC who have had 10 or more carries in a game and their rushing averages in those games when they have had 10 or more carries:Ranked by yards per carry (w/ # of carries):

Player  Att	YPC  	Tatum Bell  45	5.7Clinton Portis  546	5.5Aaron Craver  43	5.2Mike Anderson  502	4.7Terrell Davis  1600	4.6Reuben Droughns  261	4.5Vaughn Hebron  35	4.4Olandis Gary  346	4.3Derek Loville  40	4.1Quentin Griffin  145	3.9KaRon Coleman  36	3.4Cecil Sapp  12	2.6

Ranked by carries per TD (w/ # of carries):

Player  Att	Ca/TD  	Clinton Portis  546	17.6Derek Loville  40	20.0Aaron Craver  43	21.5Tatum Bell  45	22.5Mike Anderson  502	22.8Terrell Davis  1600	25.4Reuben Droughns  261	32.6Vaughn Hebron  35	35.0KaRon Coleman  36	36.0Olandis Gary  346	38.4Quentin Griffin  145	48.3Cecil Sapp  12	N/A

You'll notice that Bell ranks very high on both lists (also - ex Q-Dog lovers & Cecil Sapp fans - notice where they are on the list). Sure, some of the samples are small, but this is what excites Bell proponents - his numbers in his small sample show that he can put up numbers like some of the DEN studs or better. Even FB Aaron Craver did very well when he got 10 or more carries in a game.Is this proof that Bell will succeed? Hell, no. It is a small sample, admittedly. But it shows potential, no question. If that potential is indeed born out, there isn't much question that Bell can seriously outperform his ADP & become an elite RB. Are there a lot of questions? Yes, and rightfully so. But it's that lurking potential that makes some guys willing to take the chance to be a league champion by getting DEN's potential featured RB at such a low price. DEN's prolific running game makes it well worth the risk, IMO.Of course, there still is Mike Anderson lurking - though he did very well in his chance as DEN's featured RB & still got moved to FB afterwards. Between that, his age, & his 2 strikes in the NFL drug program, I would give Bell the edge in that race.

 

[jurb26]

Seems to me that, looking at previous examples of the past, he will need to perform on par with TD and Portis and display thier type of talent to be able to do this. I don't think that is a fair expectation. Clearly Yao is convinced by his projections to start the thread and there is nothing wrong with that. It's just not me.

Please let me start by reiterating that I do not own Bell in any FF league.Why does Bell have to perform like Davis or Portis? Why can't he perform like Anderson, when Anderson was the featured RB. Anderson gained 1500 yds in 12 games as a featured RB. Why can't Bell perform like Droughns when Droughns was the featured RB? Droughns gained 1240 yds in the equivalent of 10 games as a featured RB. Why can't he perform like Gary? Gary gained 1159 yds in 12 games as the featured RB. Those all project out to substantial rushing numbers over a 16 game season.

In fact, a wealth of RBs have performed very well as rushers when they have gotten enough carries. Here is a list of DEN RBs under Shanahan as a HC who have had 10 or more carries in a game and their rushing averages in those games when they have had 10 or more carries:

Ranked by yards per carry (w/ # of carries):

Player Att YPC Tatum Bell 45 5.7Clinton Portis 546 5.5Aaron Craver 43 5.2Mike Anderson 502 4.7Terrell Davis 1600 4.6Reuben Droughns 261 4.5Vaughn Hebron 35 4.4Olandis Gary 346 4.3Derek Loville 40 4.1Quentin Griffin 145 3.9KaRon Coleman 36 3.4Cecil Sapp 12 2.6Ranked by carries per TD (w/ # of carries):

Player  Att	Ca/TD 	 Clinton Portis  546	17.6Derek Loville  40	20.0Aaron Craver  43	21.5Tatum Bell  45	22.5Mike Anderson  502	22.8Terrell Davis  1600	25.4Reuben Droughns  261	32.6Vaughn Hebron  35	35.0KaRon Coleman  36	36.0Olandis Gary  346	38.4Quentin Griffin  145	48.3Cecil Sapp  12	N/A

You'll notice that Bell ranks very high on both lists (also - ex Q-Dog lovers & Cecil Sapp fans - notice where they are on the list). Sure, some of the samples are small, but this is what excites Bell proponents - his numbers in his small sample show that he can put up numbers like some of the DEN studs or better. Even FB Aaron Craver did very well when he got 10 or more carries in a game.Is this proof that Bell will succeed? Hell, no. It is a small sample, admittedly. But it shows potential, no question. If that potential is indeed born out, there isn't much question that Bell can seriously outperform his ADP & become an elite RB. Are there a lot of questions? Yes, and rightfully so. But it's that lurking potential that makes some guys willing to take the chance to be a league champion by getting DEN's potential featured RB at such a low price. DEN's prolific running game makes it well worth the risk, IMO.

Of course, there still is Mike Anderson lurking - though he did very well in his chance as DEN's featured RB & still got moved to FB afterwards. Between that, his age, & his 2 strikes in the NFL drug program, I would give Bell the edge in that race.

Let me start with a to ya. I have bolded my areas of concern though. None of those featured backs played more than 12 games. Worse yet, none of them regained that title again. I think your missing the point that those like me are worried about. That point is that, yes, plenty of RBs have been able to produce in this system. Why should Bell, knowing this, be given special treatment (read as a stable RB in Den) unless he proves just that.... special ala TD or Portis? Its clear that Den can make average backs look good at times and IMO it is also clear that they are only loyal to those who are truely top notch producers and talents. I am not trying to say that Bell is not one of those such talents, I don't konw yet. Maybe you know more than I do regarding that as you probably watched all the Den games in detail (I know your a fan). Given the likelyhood of injuries to NFL backs (not just Bell) and the amount of productivity that I think Den will expect, I simply think its going to be hard for Bell to hold down that job all year. There just seems to be too much that can go wrong.

 

[P Boy]

Let me start with a  to ya.  I have bolded my areas of concern though.  None of those featured backs played more than 12 games.  Worse yet, none of them regained that title again.  I think your missing the point that those like me are worried about.  That point is that, yes, plenty of RBs have been able to produce in this system.  Why should Bell, knowing this, be given special treatment (read as a stable RB in Den) unless he proves just that.... special ala TD or Portis?  Its clear that Den can make average backs look good at times and IMO it is also clear that they are only loyal to those who are truely top notch producers and talents.  I am not trying to say that Bell is not one of those such talents, I don't konw yet.  Maybe you know more than I do regarding that as you probably watched all the Den games in detail (I know your a fan).  Given the likelyhood of injuries to NFL backs (not just Bell) and the amount of productivity that I think Den will expect, I simply think its going to be hard for Bell to hold down that job all year.  There just seems to be too much that can go wrong.

That's a good post and some good points. As always, it comes down to tolerance for risk. The way I see it, if I'm playing in a 12 or 14 team league & all other owners have roughly my ability in FF - which BTW is my preference in playing FF - I figure that I legitimately have no better than a 1 in 8 chance of winning the league in any given year. I need to cut those odds down, which means taking risks. If I take a risk & it turns out poorly, the result will be essentially the same as if I played it safe - I'm out of the playoffs.I feel that I have to be willing to take a few risks in order to make a legitimate run at the championship. I'd rather go down swinging for the fences than go down meekly enjoying mediocre season-after-season of FF. That's my personality. That's why I like taking a risk like Bell at his ADP of 28. That's a very late 2nd rounder in a 14 team league to an early 3rd rounder in a 12 team league. I'll be hopeful that I can find a diamond in the rough later in the draft to cover my butt in case I'm wrong. But if I'm right, I've got 2 top 6/8 RBs in my stable, and that makes me a legit contender for the championship. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But that's better than just playing safe & the subsequent consequences, IMO. The Bell pick just smells like some great potential value this year.

 

[jurb26]

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But that's better than just playing safe & the subsequent consequences, IMO. The Bell pick just smells like some great potential value this year.

If Bell works out, I would expect nearly all of his owners to make the playoffs.

 

[by_the_sea_wannabe]

Let's face facts, LaDainian Tomlinson could go down just as easily as Bell could-they're only human.

This is inaccurate and has been proven many times.It is among many inacccuracies in your post, but the only one I care to point out at this time as being blatantly wrong.

Keep fighting the good fight JoeT.... it's not often that I agree with you. As for the above point by mario. You are missing the point as has everyone supporting Bell. Yes, Bell is just as likely as any RB to get hurt/miss time due to injury this year. The point is though, his odds of regaining his job and workload afterwards are not nearly as good. Bottom line, LT gets hurt, he will be starting again when healthy no matter what other RBs do. Bell gets hurt and another RB proves more effective or just as effetive, he will most likely be out of his job. Simply look at the history, RBs who miss time in Den loose jobs and seldom regain them. I think Joe showned this rather well. You guys are trying to place Bell on the same platform as guys like TD and Portis in Den and simply expecting them to show loyalty to him. What has Bell done to earn any kind of loyalty in Den though? TD and Portis was absolute mosters, the best RBs in the game when they ran in Den. These are the only 2 guys that Den has shown any bit of loyalty to over the past 10 years. Even Portis was shown little as he was sent packing after he wanted a new contract. So, what is it about Bell that has you all so convinced? I'd love to know.

Have you ever watched Bell play Jurb? Bell has the goods. He will prove why he should be given loyalty. By week 5 you will be kicking yourself for taking smucks like L.Jordan and Chris Brown ahead of him.So....how is that tree fort that you and Joe built this Summer working out?

XBell is a better prospect than those two, but you guys are still projecting numbers to high for him.

 

[Family Matters]

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.  But that's better than just playing safe & the subsequent consequences, IMO.  The Bell pick just smells like some great potential value this year.

If Bell works out, I would expect nearly all of his owners to make the playoffs.

Based on 1 guy? I wouldn't count on it. Just like last year's Mannings owners. Unless you have a solid team all around you won't make the playoffs.

 

[jurb26]

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. But that's better than just playing safe & the subsequent consequences, IMO. The Bell pick just smells like some great potential value this year.

If Bell works out, I would expect nearly all of his owners to make the playoffs.

Based on 1 guy? I wouldn't count on it. Just like last year's Mannings owners. Unless you have a solid team all around you won't make the playoffs.

Manning and Cpep were late 1st guys last year, Bell is a mid 3rd right now. I think thats a rather large contrast. The point is, "working out" in the sense they are talking has Bell as a top 10 RB for sure and closer to top 5. Drafting a guy like that in the 3rd and not making the playoffs means you absolutly blew the rest of your draft or just got clobbered by injuries.

 

[mario8723]

This is inaccurate and has been proven many times.It is among many inacccuracies in your post, but the only one I care to point out at this time as being blatantly wrong.

I would love to hear your take on this Joe....PLEASE point out to me where I went wrong.

 

[Joe T]

Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.  But that's better than just playing safe & the subsequent consequences, IMO.  The Bell pick just smells like some great potential value this year.

If Bell works out, I would expect nearly all of his owners to make the playoffs.

Based on 1 guy? I wouldn't count on it. Just like last year's Mannings owners. Unless you have a solid team all around you won't make the playoffs.

Manning and Cpep were late 1st guys last year, Bell is a mid 3rd right now. I think thats a rather large contrast. The point is, "working out" in the sense they are talking has Bell as a top 10 RB for sure and closer to top 5. Drafting a guy like that in the 3rd and not making the playoffs means you absolutly blew the rest of your draft or just got clobbered by injuries.

Bell is going mid to late second in the No Mercy drafts.That, my friends, is the definition of overrated.