Tatum Bell punch - you drinking it this year ? (1 Viewer)

[BL Titans]

THE NEWS

Mike Shanahan has told Tatum Bell that he needs to bulk up in preparation for the upcoming season. Shanahan loves Bell's 5.3 yard average, but is not happy with Tatum's inability to convert in short yardage situations. ESPN's John Clayton is reporting that Bell has risen to the challenge and is lifting weights diligently in an effort to cement himself as the Bronco's number one back.

Our View

Ron Dayne took more reps with the first team during their recent minicamp, but it appears like this could be a classic motivational move by Master Shanahan. Bell certainly has the explosiveness that traditionally marks successful backs in Denver, and if he can truly earn the solo spot he could rise up the rankings quite quickly. At this point it still appears that Dayne will be involved, but seeing Bell make added efforts is a very encouraging sign for fantasy owners.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

How'd that motivational move to give Mike Anderson more carries work out for Bell last year?

 

[zamboni]

I view it as Shanny saying Bell needs to improve his short-yardage acumen.

 

[Rovers]

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

 

[Big Score]

To me, the Tinker Bell Kool-Aid tastes the same as last year & the year before.

 

[Chase Stuart]

How'd that motivational move to give Mike Anderson more carries work out for Bell last year?

 

[The Jacket]

I've got Bell in a dynasty league and I traded for him (as part of a bigger deal) with a healthy belief that he could be my #1 running back next year and perhaps beyond.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell were within 100 yards of each other last year. The 2005 Broncos were the definition of RBBC.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell were within 100 yards of each other last year. The 2005 Broncos were the definition of RBBC.

A darn good one though.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

I maintain hope for Tater. I believe the statistical samples on him are still too small to draw definitive conclusions, and he seems to have matured and to have checked some of the atitude while not losing his confidence. As a realist I do not, however, place great hope in him clearly emerging as the classical Denver back from years past who gets upwards of 80% of the touches. At best I could see him moving to take up to 60% of the reps, but SSOG's arguments have convinced me that such is less than a 50/50 proposition.

Each Denver back brings different tools to the table and i believe that Shanahan will use all the tools available absent significant injuries changing the equation.

 

[bueno]

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell were within 100 yards of each other last year. The 2005 Broncos were the definition of RBBC.

I think at worst this will the situation again this year. Frankly, Dayne has to show that he has more speed than he did with the Giants. You have to be nimble in the Denver system, which uses so many lateral plays and cutbacks. Dayne is about as nimble as beached whale. The only reason to have Dayne in there is thehope that he can get tough yards inside.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell were within 100 yards of each other last year. The 2005 Broncos were the definition of RBBC.

I think at worst this will the situation again this year. Frankly, Dayne has to show that he has more speed than he did with the Giants. You have to be nimble in the Denver system, which uses so many lateral plays and cutbacks. Dayne is about as nimble as beached whale. The only reason to have Dayne in there is thehope that he can get tough yards inside.

Dayne is relatively fast for his size.His problem in New York was his indecisiveness after taking the handoff. I figured it would be his undoing in Denver, but time will tell.

 

[Ditkaless Wonders]

If I see hope for Tater it is in Denver returning to an era where it has several actual threats at W.R. thereby getting the defenses safties further back and getting their L.B.'s to have some additional coverage responsibilities slowing down their flow to the ball and thereby giving Denvers Zone blocking scheme that extra split second to address the second level. If that can be accomplished a speedier shifter back would seem to be called for as opposed to a steadier pedestrian contributor. I'll be watching Walker's return with great attention not just for it's own value, but for how it may shift the R.B. equation.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell were within 100 yards of each other last year. The 2005 Broncos were the definition of RBBC.

A darn good one though.

Sure. But aren't RBBCs supposed to be better than having one stud? The committee approach is very successful but it's hard to find multiple competent guys. Certainly a RBBC isn't bad in nature.

 

[Rovers]

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell were within 100 yards of each other last year. The 2005 Broncos were the definition of RBBC.

A darn good one though.

Sure. But aren't RBBCs supposed to be better than having one stud? The committee approach is very successful but it's hard to find multiple competent guys. Certainly a RBBC isn't bad in nature.

I don't see the Denver (and Shannahan's strategy) as being RBBC. To me, RBBC means splitting carries in each game. That isn't really what Shannahan does, at least that's my impression without going to the stats. What Shannahan does is pick a different guy each week. that RB will get the loin's share of the carries, it's just that even after a good week, Shannahan will put splinters in that RB's butt. No freakin rhyme or reason. I guess I'll have to go look at the stats.... or be called out on it! But.... this is the way Skeletor uses RB's, based on my impressions.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell were within 100 yards of each other last year. The 2005 Broncos were the definition of RBBC.

A darn good one though.

Sure. But aren't RBBCs supposed to be better than having one stud? The committee approach is very successful but it's hard to find multiple competent guys. Certainly a RBBC isn't bad in nature.

I don't see the Denver (and Shannahan's strategy) as being RBBC. To me, RBBC means splitting carries in each game. That isn't really what Shannahan does, at least that's my impression without going to the stats. What Shannahan does is pick a different guy each week. that RB will get the loin's share of the carries, it's just that even after a good week, Shannahan will put splinters in that RB's butt. No freakin rhyme or reason. I guess I'll have to go look at the stats.... or be called out on it! But.... this is the way Skeletor uses RB's, based on my impressions.

Wk  Opp   MA   TB   Diff1   mia    4   13    92   sdg   15    0   153   kan   20    5   154   jax   23   15    85   was   11   12    16   nwe   15   13    27   nyg   24    8   168   phi   21   14    710  oak   17   16    111  nyj   26   10   1612  dal   11    0   1113  kan   13    5    814  bal    8   16    815  buf   21   12    916  oak   10   17    7

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

I don't see the Denver (and Shannahan's strategy) as being RBBC. To me, RBBC means splitting carries in each game. That isn't really what Shannahan does, at least that's my impression without going to the stats. What Shannahan does is pick a different guy each week. that RB will get the loin's share of the carries, it's just that even after a good week, Shannahan will put splinters in that RB's butt. No freakin rhyme or reason.

I guess I'll have to go look at the stats.... or be called out on it! But.... this is the way Skeletor uses RB's, based on my impressions.

I don't think it's possible to be further from the truth.He goes with the same guy unless that guy gets hurt. When the main guy is hurt, then maybe it's unclear who is "the guy"... but that's how it is everywhere.

 

[Rovers]

Going back to the days of Portis vs. whomever..... I think it's spot on. portis didn't get the starting spot due to some fumblitis in the preason. What was it, week 5 that Shanny finally let him start? That was not due to any injuries.

Are the Denver RB's THAT injury prone? off the top of my head, here's some starters who dropped off the radar, and the list is far longer than any other team's is.

Anderson, game starts:

2000: 12

2001: 7

2002: 12

2003: 5

2004: 0

2005: 15

Portis, game starts:

2002: 12

2003: 13

Dayne, game starts:

2005: 0

2006: ?

T Bell, game starts:

2004: 0

2005: 1

Droughns, game starts:

2001: 3

2002: 0

2003: 4

2004: 15

Griffin, game starts:

2003: 1

2004: 4

2005: 0

Outside of 2005, when Anderson got most of the starts, it certainly seems to me that Shanahan has no loyalty to any particular RB. Anderson got some starts as a FB, which skews thing a bit, but is this the mark of a HC that settles on one RB?

As I first said, this was my impression, and not researched, so don't hold my feet to the fire on it. this year, even more than most previous years, I think any Denver RB is a crap shoot. Which one starts in week 1? Will it be the same guy in week 2? Get the right one, and you can strike gold. Griffin is the poster boy for my losely based opinion. but, which one do you draft, and where? I'll pass.

 

[CrossEyed]

I just traded him to move up to 1.2 from 1.6. I had him and Anderson last year and it was too much of a headache trying to figure out who to play. I won't fall for the Denver RBBC again.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I just traded him to move up to 1.2 from 1.6. I had him and Anderson last year and it was too much of a headache trying to figure out who to play. I won't fall for the Denver RBBC again.

I've seen this comment a lot and I don't get it.Bell's ADP was RB24. He finished the season as RB22.

He finished ahead of 8 of the runners drafted ahead of him (Holmes, McAllister, Lewis, Jones, Green, Martin, Arrington and Taylor) and tied another (Kevin Jones). That's pretty good, and definitely not bust material.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Going back to the days of Portis vs. whomever..... I think it's spot on. portis didn't get the starting spot due to some fumblitis in the preason. What was it, week 5 that Shanny finally let him start? That was not due to any injuries.

Olandis Gary actually hurt his ankle.

 

[SSOG]

THE NEWS

Mike Shanahan has told Tatum Bell that he needs to bulk up in preparation for the upcoming season. Shanahan loves Bell's 5.3 yard average, but is not happy with Tatum's inability to convert in short yardage situations. ESPN's John Clayton is reporting that Bell has risen to the challenge and is lifting weights diligently in an effort to cement himself as the Bronco's number one back.

Our View

Ron Dayne took more reps with the first team during their recent minicamp, but it appears like this could be a classic motivational move by Master Shanahan. Bell certainly has the explosiveness that traditionally marks successful backs in Denver, and if he can truly earn the solo spot he could rise up the rankings quite quickly. At this point it still appears that Dayne will be involved, but seeing Bell make added efforts is a very encouraging sign for fantasy owners.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Tatum Bell opened last season at 213. Because he got injured, he couldn't lift weights over the last half of the season, and his weight dropped to 203. He's been working out again and had his weight up to 208, and was hoping to have it back at 213 by the start of the season.You hear that Tatum Bell is "bulking up". Don't believe it. He's hoping to open the season at the exact same weight he opened last season at. Emphasis on the word "hoping".

Also, Clayton is one of those that has always believed Bell would be the #1. He touted Bell last year, and he's touting Bell again this year. He was wrong last year...

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell were within 100 yards of each other last year. The 2005 Broncos were the definition of RBBC.

I think at worst this will the situation again this year. Frankly, Dayne has to show that he has more speed than he did with the Giants. You have to be nimble in the Denver system, which uses so many lateral plays and cutbacks. Dayne is about as nimble as beached whale. The only reason to have Dayne in there is thehope that he can get tough yards inside.

I always heard that his problems ran exactly the opposite- he had lots of shiftiness, but no toughness. Lots of wiggle, no pow, as it were.

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell were within 100 yards of each other last year. The 2005 Broncos were the definition of RBBC.

A darn good one though.

Sure. But aren't RBBCs supposed to be better than having one stud? The committee approach is very successful but it's hard to find multiple competent guys. Certainly a RBBC isn't bad in nature.

I don't see the Denver (and Shannahan's strategy) as being RBBC. To me, RBBC means splitting carries in each game. That isn't really what Shannahan does, at least that's my impression without going to the stats. What Shannahan does is pick a different guy each week. that RB will get the loin's share of the carries, it's just that even after a good week, Shannahan will put splinters in that RB's butt. No freakin rhyme or reason. I guess I'll have to go look at the stats.... or be called out on it! But.... this is the way Skeletor uses RB's, based on my impressions.

Your impressions are WRONG. I ran the numbers earlier this season. I forget the exact values, so I'm going off the top of my head here... but Mike Anderson failed to score at least 10 points a mere 5 times last season. The runners who finished 9th and 11th overall failed to score at least 10 points 4 and 5 times, as well. Rudi Johnson failed to score at least 10 points a whopping EIGHT TIMES. Those who blame Shanahan for the fact that Anderson had some bad games are extremely misguided- Anderson had just as many "bad games" as should have been expected of an RB who finished ranked 10th overall. Do you see people railing against Marvin Lewis saying he's holding down Johnson's value? OF COURSE you don't- despite the fact that Johnson had almost TWICE AS MANY bad games as Anderson did.

 

[Rovers]

THE NEWS

Mike Shanahan has told Tatum Bell that he needs to bulk up in preparation for the upcoming season. Shanahan loves Bell's 5.3 yard average, but is not happy with Tatum's inability to convert in short yardage situations. ESPN's John Clayton is reporting that Bell has risen to the challenge and is lifting weights diligently in an effort to cement himself as the Bronco's number one back.

Our View

Ron Dayne took more reps with the first team during their recent minicamp, but it appears like this could be a classic motivational move by Master Shanahan. Bell certainly has the explosiveness that traditionally marks successful backs in Denver, and if he can truly earn the solo spot he could rise up the rankings quite quickly. At this point it still appears that Dayne will be involved, but seeing Bell make added efforts is a very encouraging sign for fantasy owners.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Tatum Bell opened last season at 213. Because he got injured, he couldn't lift weights over the last half of the season, and his weight dropped to 203. He's been working out again and had his weight up to 208, and was hoping to have it back at 213 by the start of the season.You hear that Tatum Bell is "bulking up". Don't believe it. He's hoping to open the season at the exact same weight he opened last season at. Emphasis on the word "hoping".

Also, Clayton is one of those that has always believed Bell would be the #1. He touted Bell last year, and he's touting Bell again this year. He was wrong last year...

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell were within 100 yards of each other last year. The 2005 Broncos were the definition of RBBC.

I think at worst this will the situation again this year. Frankly, Dayne has to show that he has more speed than he did with the Giants. You have to be nimble in the Denver system, which uses so many lateral plays and cutbacks. Dayne is about as nimble as beached whale. The only reason to have Dayne in there is thehope that he can get tough yards inside.

I always heard that his problems ran exactly the opposite- he had lots of shiftiness, but no toughness. Lots of wiggle, no pow, as it were.

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell were within 100 yards of each other last year. The 2005 Broncos were the definition of RBBC.

A darn good one though.

Sure. But aren't RBBCs supposed to be better than having one stud? The committee approach is very successful but it's hard to find multiple competent guys. Certainly a RBBC isn't bad in nature.

I don't see the Denver (and Shannahan's strategy) as being RBBC. To me, RBBC means splitting carries in each game. That isn't really what Shannahan does, at least that's my impression without going to the stats. What Shannahan does is pick a different guy each week. that RB will get the loin's share of the carries, it's just that even after a good week, Shannahan will put splinters in that RB's butt. No freakin rhyme or reason. I guess I'll have to go look at the stats.... or be called out on it! But.... this is the way Skeletor uses RB's, based on my impressions.

Your impressions are WRONG. I ran the numbers earlier this season. I forget the exact values, so I'm going off the top of my head here... but Mike Anderson failed to score at least 10 points a mere 5 times last season. The runners who finished 9th and 11th overall failed to score at least 10 points 4 and 5 times, as well. Rudi Johnson failed to score at least 10 points a whopping EIGHT TIMES. Those who blame Shanahan for the fact that Anderson had some bad games are extremely misguided- Anderson had just as many "bad games" as should have been expected of an RB who finished ranked 10th overall. Do you see people railing against Marvin Lewis saying he's holding down Johnson's value? OF COURSE you don't- despite the fact that Johnson had almost TWICE AS MANY bad games as Anderson did.

Settle down there big fella! I thought I did a very admirable job of making it quite clear..... it was just impression.... what that means for those who don't get it, is that I might very well be wrong.... just added a post without a detailed analysis. Your points are well taken, and I will adjust my thoughts comensurately, but ya didn't have to go with the caps. Talk, don't yell, dude.

 

[SSOG]

Settle down there big fella! I thought I did a very admirable job of making it quite clear..... it was just impression.... what that means for those who don't get it, is that I might very well be wrong.... just added a post without a detailed analysis.

Your points are well taken, and I will adjust my thoughts comensurately, but ya didn't have to go with the caps. Talk, don't yell, dude.

Sorry about that. The caps are for emphasis. I don't use them to yell, I use them to highlight key points to make it clearer what I am talking about if you're like me and are a skimmer.

 

[SSOG]

I hate to spike the kool-aid, but...

http://blogs.rockymountainnews.com/denver/...he_broncos.html

slade: between Bell and Dayne, who do you think will be the most effective this season?

Jeff_Legwold: I think the plan right now is they split time so they both can be effective. Dayne will be the early-down runner for the most part and he fits the Broncos system. I think there is potential for him to be far better in the Denver offense than he has been previously in his pro career. The numbers show that Bell's production starts to dip after Game 8 last season and after the 12th carry -- on average -- in games. That's the Broncos' belief as well. They will keep him in that 10-12 carry a game range because they believe that's the best way to main Bell's impact. Tatum disagrees with that, but it is something he will have to overcome to get more carries in the offense. So heading into camp it's safe to say they will likely mix and match like last season unless a back's performance forces them to do otherwise. Dayne would have a better opportunity to do that because he will likely get more carries.

 

[Rovers]

Settle down there big fella! I thought I did a very admirable job of making it quite clear..... it was just impression.... what that means for those who don't get it, is that I might very well be wrong.... just added a post without a detailed analysis.

Your points are well taken, and I will adjust my thoughts comensurately, but ya didn't have to go with the caps. Talk, don't yell, dude.

Sorry about that. The caps are for emphasis. I don't use them to yell, I use them to highlight key points to make it clearer what I am talking about if you're like me and are a skimmer.

 

[CrossEyed]

I just traded him to move up to 1.2 from 1.6. I had him and Anderson last year and it was too much of a headache trying to figure out who to play. I won't fall for the Denver RBBC again.

I've seen this comment a lot and I don't get it.Bell's ADP was RB24. He finished the season as RB22.

He finished ahead of 8 of the runners drafted ahead of him (Holmes, McAllister, Lewis, Jones, Green, Martin, Arrington and Taylor) and tied another (Kevin Jones). That's pretty good, and definitely not bust material.

But you never knew which week he'd actually get any carries. I know not every back is completely consistent, but I just couldn't handle another year of that.

 

[SSOG]

I just traded him to move up to 1.2 from 1.6. I had him and Anderson last year and it was too much of a headache trying to figure out who to play. I won't fall for the Denver RBBC again.

I've seen this comment a lot and I don't get it.Bell's ADP was RB24. He finished the season as RB22.

He finished ahead of 8 of the runners drafted ahead of him (Holmes, McAllister, Lewis, Jones, Green, Martin, Arrington and Taylor) and tied another (Kevin Jones). That's pretty good, and definitely not bust material.

But you never knew which week he'd actually get any carries. I know not every back is completely consistent, but I just couldn't handle another year of that.

Bell, I completely agree on. Anderson was the model of consistancy, but Bell was WILDLY inconsistant. If you look at his number breakdowns, he had ELEVEN games with under 10 points, which was FAR MORE than the RBs who finished around him in the rankings. He basically scored pretty much all of his points in 5 weeks- a 4-week span early in the season, and the last week of the year when Anderson was resting for the playoffs.I was talking to a friend of mine who was a Bell owner after Bell had just run off his 4 straight productive games early in the season. My friend said he was thinking of starting Bell, and I strongly advised against it. I rationalized that the reason why Bell had been so dang valuable was that he was averaging 10+ yards per carry during that span, and told my friend that Bell would continue to have value... as long as he continued to get 10+ yards per carry. Turns out that one was pretty much right on. I'll say it again this year- Bell will have value when Bell averages 10 yards per carry (or maybe even as few as 8 yards per carry). Not the kind of guy you want to have to start as anything other than a bye-week fill-in, hope for the best kind of guy.

 

[Z-Dog]

Of all the Denver RBs, the only one who I'm reasonably sure will get carries is Tatum Bell. And he does have the potential to take over the job entirely - certainly none of the talent in Denver is scaring me away.

 

[Gold Plated Nails]

Am I the only one who would have bet Ron Dayne would be 10 times more likely to be bagging groceries in 2006 then getting the bulk of the Bronco carries if you asked me that question 2 or 3 years ago? It still hasn't really sank in yet, that he is going to be draftable this year.

 

[KCC]

I just traded him to move up to 1.2 from 1.6.  I had him and Anderson last year and it was too much of a headache trying to figure out who to play.  I won't fall for the Denver RBBC again.

I've seen this comment a lot and I don't get it.Bell's ADP was RB24. He finished the season as RB22.

He finished ahead of 8 of the runners drafted ahead of him (Holmes, McAllister, Lewis, Jones, Green, Martin, Arrington and Taylor) and tied another (Kevin Jones). That's pretty good, and definitely not bust material.

I think his ADP last year was lower than some people's expectations of what he might (but didn't) accomplish on the field. Remember FFI was pimping him as the #4 RB last year (I think they featured him on the cover and referred to him as "the key to winning your league" or something like that) and I think this caused his ADP to shoot up from where it was earlier last summer.

 

[Kit Fisto]

I will NEVER draft another Denver RB, unless it's in the last round of the draft. Shannahan does go with one back, but which RB that will be can, and has, and will continue to change on a weekly basis.

Mike Anderson and Tatum Bell were within 100 yards of each other last year. The 2005 Broncos were the definition of RBBC.

A darn good one though.

Sure. But aren't RBBCs supposed to be better than having one stud? The committee approach is very successful but it's hard to find multiple competent guys. Certainly a RBBC isn't bad in nature.

I don't see the Denver (and Shannahan's strategy) as being RBBC. To me, RBBC means splitting carries in each game. That isn't really what Shannahan does, at least that's my impression without going to the stats. What Shannahan does is pick a different guy each week. that RB will get the loin's share of the carries, it's just that even after a good week, Shannahan will put splinters in that RB's butt. No freakin rhyme or reason. I guess I'll have to go look at the stats.... or be called out on it! But.... this is the way Skeletor uses RB's, based on my impressions.

Wk  Opp   MA   TB   Diff1   mia    4   13    92   sdg   15    0   153   kan   20    5   154   jax   23   15    85   was   11   12    16   nwe   15   13    27   nyg   24    8   168   phi   21   14    710  oak   17   16    111  nyj   26   10   1612  dal   11    0   1113  kan   13    5    814  bal    8   16    815  buf   21   12    916  oak   10   17    7

I gotta agree with Rovers on this one. Those 0's, 5's and 8's are enough to scare me away.Yes, I agree, when he plays he's electric. But guessing which games he'll get 15 carries and which games he gets 0 were enough for me to trade him away this off season. I can't be depending on guys like that. PM me if you want to know who I got for him (trade partner is drinking the Bell Kool-Aid).

 

[BlueOnion]

Hey Bartender, can you serve me up another. That is some good stuff.