What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Tatum Bell trade value....... (1 Viewer)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Big Score

Footballguy
In a re-draft league I know his trade value is virtually nill (except to the Anderson owner), but what about Bell's trade value in a Dynasty League?

 

Football Jones

Footballguy
I'm probably going to find out next week. Unless Bell unexpectedly gets a lot of carries, I'm going to see about dealing for him in the 2 dynasty leagues I don't already own him.Why? Because I believe dynasty FF is all about staying ahead of the curve. Bell is still the favorite to be the feature back in '06, IMO. If I can get him fairly cheap, I'll jump on it. Not so sure he's going to be as cheap as you would think, though. We'll see. :)

 

Big Score

Footballguy
I'm thinking he could be had pretty cheap. Gotta be a lot of disillusioned owners out there. I mean he couldn't take the job away from 30+ year old Mike Anderson even when given every chance in the world.Wouldn't you think he'd go for a bag of peanuts now?

 

Biabreakable

Footballguy
He should be very cheap after this game assuming he gets no carries.Question is if he is really worth trading for or not?He did have those decent games late last year and could enter the picture again this season. If he does nothing for the 1st couple games though I expect a lot of people to dump him for just about anything they could get.

 

Big Score

Footballguy
Question is if he is really worth trading for or not?
WOW! You think he's that bad? Even from a Dynasty standpoint?
If he does nothing for the 1st couple games though I expect a lot of people to dump him for just about anything they could get.
I'm thinking along the same lines here.
 

Slash

Footballguy
All of you that think you can get Bell on the cheap right now are out of your mind. The Denver RB situation is still very fluid at the moment. Clinton Portis didn't become the full-time starter until week 5? of his rookie year. Point is, Bell could not play at al the first month of the season, but if the opportunity comes that he gets named the starter he will put up huge numbers. Bell owners are holding right now because people won't be willing to pay what they potentially feel Bell is worth. So those of you that think you can offer up Travis Taylor for tatum Bell will get a swift kick in the nads. You have been warned.

 

Big Score

Footballguy
All of you that think you can get Bell on the cheap right now are out of your mind. The Denver RB situation is still very fluid at the moment. Clinton Portis didn't become the full-time starter until week 5? of his rookie year. Point is, Bell could not play at al the first month of the season, but if the opportunity comes that he gets named the starter he will put up huge numbers. Bell owners are holding right now because people won't be willing to pay what they potentially feel Bell is worth. So those of you that think you can offer up Travis Taylor for tatum Bell will get a swift kick in the nads. You have been warned.
Oh lord not you. Didn't you say this about Bell?
When Shanahan finds a back he truly likes and has that homerun speed he stays committed to him, unless said back threatens to holdout. Shanahan likes Bell....ALOT. The only thing that can bring Bell down at this point is injury or ego.
Shanahan was so commited to Bell that Mike Anderson is starting :loco:
 

Slash

Footballguy
Obviously, my enthusiasm on Bell was a bit off, though Mike Anderson will not remain the starter forever. Yes, Mike Anderson is starting this week, but there is no guarantee he will even be starting in Week 2. I haven't seen Shanahan come out and say that Anderson is the 2005 starting tailback for the entire year. All we know is that Anderson is the starter right now. So you're dreaming if you think can get Tatum Bell on the cheap, or off the waiver wire in a few weeks. Bell had a great preseason, Anderson had a better preseason that was sugar-coated by a 93 yard TD run. Anderson deserves to start right now, but I don't know if come week 8 Anderson will still be the starter.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

FreeBaGeL

Footballguy
I think a major issue in Bell's value is whether or not the guy you're trading with also has Anderson. If he does, he'll probably be more difficult to get as that guy will want to keep the pair together.

 

Big Score

Footballguy
Obviously, my enthusiasm on Bell was a bit off, though Mike Anderson will not remain the starter forever. Yes, Mike Anderson is starting this week, but there is no guarantee he will even be starting in Week 2. I haven't seen Shanahan come out and say that Anderson the 2005 starting tailback for the entire year. All we know is that Anderson is the starter right now. So you're dreaming if you can get Tatum Bell on the cheap, or off the waiver wire in a few weeks. Bell had a great preseason, Anderson had a better preseason that was sugar-coated by a 93 yard TD run. Anderson deserves to start right now, but I don't know if come week 8 Anderson will still be the starter.
Are you figuring on an injury to Mike Anderson?
 

rzrback77

IBL Representative
Traded D Foster for Bell in hopes of getting an end of the year solid performer. Already had J Jones, Tiki, and Taylor. Start 2 RB with a flex.Thoughts?

 

Slash

Footballguy
Obviously, my enthusiasm on Bell was a bit off, though Mike Anderson will not remain the starter forever.  Yes, Mike Anderson is starting this week, but there is no guarantee he will even be starting in Week 2.  I haven't seen Shanahan come out and say that Anderson the 2005 starting tailback for the entire year.  All we know is that Anderson is the starter right now.  So you're dreaming if you can get Tatum Bell on the cheap, or off the waiver wire in a few weeks.  Bell had a great preseason, Anderson had a better preseason that was sugar-coated by a 93 yard TD run.  Anderson deserves to start right now, but I don't know if come week 8 Anderson will still be the starter.
Are you figuring on an injury to Mike Anderson?
I'm not figuring on anything right now. I'm not predicting a Mike Anderson injury, Mike Anderson ineffectiveness, or Mike Anderson hitting Mary Jane again. What I am counting on is that the NFL is unpredictable and to assume Mike Anderson is the starter for the entire year in a very fluid backfield is kind of ridiculous right now. Anderson doesn't have much room to slip because there's two guys behind him waiting to take his job. Maybe Anderson keeps the job the entire year, but personally I'm not counting on that. And for the record, yes I think Anderson deserves to be the starter RIGHT NOW. The edge always goes to the veteran, IMO, and yes Anderson looked great in the 3rd game of the pre-season. Anderson went out and won the job, but Bell didn't exactly lose it because he stunk it up. If Bell could have played with the first team offense against that porous Indianapolis defense I think Bell could have done just as well. All I'm saying is that Bell owners are very aware of the uncertainty of the Denver backfield and you won't find them ditching Bell as easily as you assume.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

fruity pebbles

Footballguy
All of you that think you can get Bell on the cheap right now are out of your mind. The Denver RB situation is still very fluid at the moment. Clinton Portis didn't become the full-time starter until week 5? of his rookie year. Point is, Bell could not play at al the first month of the season, but if the opportunity comes that he gets named the starter he will put up huge numbers. Bell owners are holding right now because people won't be willing to pay what they potentially feel Bell is worth. So those of you that think you can offer up Travis Taylor for tatum Bell will get a swift kick in the nads. You have been warned.
I agree. Too much invested in Bell to trade him away for a bunch of garbage. Better to just hold on and see how things play out.
 

Big Score

Footballguy
I'm not figuring on anything right now. I'm not predicting a Mike Anderson injury, Mike Anderson ineffectiveness, or Mike Anderson hitting Mary jane again. What I am counting on is that the NFL is unpredictable and to assume Mike Anderson is the starter for the entire year in a very fluid backfield is kind of ridiculous right now. Anderson doesn't have much room to slip because there's two guys behind him waiting to take his job. Maybe Anderson keeps the job the entire year, but personally I'm not cointing on that. And for the record, yes I think Anderson deserves to be the starter RIGHT NOW. The edge always goes to the veteran, IMO, and yes Anderson looked great in the pre-season finale. Anderson went out and won the job, but Bell didn't exactly lose it because he stunk it up. If Bell could have played with the first team offense against that porous Indianapolis defense I think Bell could have done just as well. All I'm sating is that Bell owners are very aware of the uncertainty of the Denver backfield and you won't find them ditching Bell as easily as you assume.
Intersting. When you were pimping Bell earlier, you said this;
Shanahan has never actively sought to replace his starting RB without good reason. Injuries have been the main reason and contract issues.
But of course you wrote that when you were talking Bell up.BTW Slash, do you still like this move?

Last year in a dynasty rookie draft I passed over Steven Jackson in favor of Tatum Bell.

I still like that move.
 

Slash

Footballguy
I'm not figuring on anything right now.  I'm not predicting a Mike Anderson injury, Mike Anderson ineffectiveness, or Mike Anderson hitting Mary jane again.  What I am counting on is that the NFL is unpredictable and to assume Mike Anderson is the starter for the entire year in a very fluid backfield is kind of ridiculous right now.  Anderson doesn't have much room to slip because there's two guys behind him waiting to take his job.  Maybe Anderson keeps the job the entire year, but personally I'm not cointing on that.  And for the record, yes I think Anderson deserves to be the starter RIGHT NOW.  The edge always goes to the veteran, IMO, and yes Anderson looked great in the pre-season finale.  Anderson went out and won the job, but Bell didn't exactly lose it because he stunk it up.  If Bell could have played with the first team offense against that porous Indianapolis defense I think Bell could have done just as well.  All I'm sating is that Bell owners are very aware of the uncertainty of the Denver backfield and you won't find them ditching Bell as easily as you assume.
Intersting. When you were pimping Bell earlier, you said this;
Shanahan has never actively sought to replace his starting RB without good reason.  Injuries have been the main reason and contract issues.
But of course you wrote that when you were talking Bell up.BTW Slash, do you still like this move?

Last year in a dynasty rookie draft I passed over Steven Jackson in favor of Tatum Bell.

I still like that move.
Yeah, I still like the move. Obviously most right now would definitely favor Jackson over Bell, but in a dynasty league you have to keep perspective on the long-term outlook. Bell will be the Denver starter someday. That could be week 4, maybe not until 2006. Whatever, the case, I own Bell and will reap the benefits. I favor the Denver running scheme over St. Louis' by a wide margin. I'm not a big Steven Jackson fan. I think he'll have his big games, but I still like Tatum Bell's long-term outlook. Patience is a virtue in dynasty leagues. I was able to pick up Drew Brees off the waiver wire because some fickle owner gave up too early last year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bigtime

Footballguy
Wouldn't that suck if you traded Tatum for a bag of chips and he took over for Mike Anderson. I'm not sure Mikey can carry the load all season. Tatum will be starting at some point this season IMHO.

 

Big Score

Footballguy
but in a dynasty league you have to keep perspective on the long-term outlook. Bell will be the Denver starter someday.
WOW! You've certainly changed your tune. Remember your lecture here?
Let me guess. You're one of those guys in a dynasty league who's always playing for next year, and we know every dynasty league has them. With guys like you it's always about how a certain player will develop into a super-stud as soon as NEXT year. Yet somehow you always find yourself having losing seasons year after year.
 

Slash

Footballguy
but in a dynasty league you have to keep perspective on the long-term outlook.  Bell will be the Denver starter someday.
WOW! You've certainly changed your tune. Remember your lecture here?
Let me guess.  You're one of those guys in a dynasty league who's always playing for next year, and we know every dynasty league has them.  With guys like you it's always about how a certain player will develop into a super-stud as soon as NEXT year.  Yet somehow you always find yourself having losing seasons year after year. 
I don't know what your point is. Tatum Bell could just as easily be a stud this year. Since you seem so ready to try and make me eat crow, let's see you put your money where your mouth is. Let's see you back up your antics. I bet you Tatum Bell has more yards than Mike Anderson for the 2005 season. We can bet $100 dollars and have a FBG moderator hold the money.
 

Slash

Footballguy
I really hope Big Score takes this bet. Chances are though he'll #### out.Come on Big Score, easy money, right?

 

Slash

Footballguy
And just like I thought, Big Score dissapears.It's easy to be a messageboard instigator right now proclaiming Mike Anderson to be so great and Tatum Bell to be so poor and bring up old posts like Bog Score is doing, yet apparently Big Score isn't willing to show his confidence in Mike Anderson for the entire 2005 season.

 

Big Score

Footballguy
I don't know what your point is.
I'm just trying to figure out what you really mean Slash. You've posted multiple completely contradictory posts and I'm simply wondering which side of the fence you're really on?Contradiction #1)

to assume Mike Anderson is the starter for the entire year in a very fluid backfield is kind of ridiculous right now.
~ vs ~
Shanahan has never actively sought to replace his starting RB without good reason. Injuries have been the main reason and contract issues.
I mean which one is it Slash? "A very fluid backfield"?

Or

"Shanahan has never actively sought to replace his starting RB"

Contradiction #2)

in a dynasty league you have to keep perspective on the long-term outlook. Bell will be the Denver starter someday. That could be week 4, maybe not until 2006.
~ vs ~
Let me guess. You're one of those guys in a dynasty league who's always playing for next year, and we know every dynasty league has them. With guys like you it's always about how a certain player will develop into a super-stud as soon as NEXT year. Yet somehow you always find yourself having losing seasons year after year.
In one instance you're saying "long-term outlook",

the other

"one of those guys in a dynasty league who's always playing for next year...you always find yourself having losing seasons year after year"

What's your real position here Slash?

I can't figure you what you mean and am just asking for clarification.

 

Bigtime

Footballguy
I don't know what your point is.
I'm just trying to figure out what you really mean Slash. You've posted multiple completely contradictory posts and I'm simply wondering which side of the fence you're really on?Contradiction #1)

to assume Mike Anderson is the starter for the entire year in a very fluid backfield is kind of ridiculous right now. 
~ vs ~
Shanahan has never actively sought to replace his starting RB without good reason.  Injuries have been the main reason and contract issues. 
I mean which one is it Slash? "A very fluid backfield"?

Or

"Shanahan has never actively sought to replace his starting RB"

Contradiction #2)

in a dynasty league you have to keep perspective on the long-term outlook.  Bell will be the Denver starter someday.  That could be week 4, maybe not until 2006.
~ vs ~
Let me guess.  You're one of those guys in a dynasty league who's always playing for next year, and we know every dynasty league has them.  With guys like you it's always about how a certain player will develop into a super-stud as soon as NEXT year.  Yet somehow you always find yourself having losing seasons year after year. 
In one instance you're saying "long-term outlook",

the other

"one of those guys in a dynasty league who's always playing for next year...you always find yourself having losing seasons year after year"

What's your real position here Slash?

I can't figure you what you mean and am just asking for clarification.
Were you heading the Bush campaign vs. Kerry last year? Either take the bet or you've lost all cred.
 

Slash

Footballguy
Thanks Big Score for acknowledging the bet I proposed. Way to step up, man. I suppose come week 5 or 6 when something happens that Bell gets the start we can all dig up your old posts. Wait, some of us don't get our kicks digging up old posts.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

cracKer

Shawn Culcasi
Tatum Bell appears to have the talent to be a special running back, but he doesn't have a job to showcase his skills. Mike Anderson has that job, but I think that most of us would agree that he doesn't possess Bell's toolbox. Will Bell take over the starting job at some point this year? Possibly, but it's impossible to tell. Shanahan knows what he has in each back and decided to go with Anderson. Unless MA hands the job over through injury or ineffectiveness, it's unrealistic to think that Bell has much fantasy value this year. Dynasty is another story and you'd like to think that Tatum Bell will be given a shot at some point, but who's to say that Shanahan doesn't have other plans in mind (again).Nothing but speculation at this point.Either way, get this thread back on track. It's not a pissing match.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Big Score

Footballguy
Thanks Big Score for acknowledging the bet I proposed. Way to step up, man.

I suppose come week 5 or 6 when something happens that Bell gets the start we can all dig up your old posts. Wait, some of us don't get our kicks digging up old posts.
Thanks Slash for acknowledging the question I asked. Way to step up, man.How about we bet $100.00 on this Slash?

Keep doubting Bell, keep sleeping. Come talk to me in 5 months and we'll see where things stand, by that point Bell should have logged in pre-Washington Clinton Portis-type numbers.
 

Slash

Footballguy
Thanks Big Score for acknowledging the bet I proposed.  Way to step up, man. 

I suppose come week 5 or 6 when something happens that Bell gets the start we can all dig up your old posts.  Wait, some of us don't get our kicks digging up old posts.
Thanks Slash for acknowledging the question I asked. Way to step up, man.How about we bet $100.00 on this Slash?

Keep doubting Bell, keep sleeping.  Come talk to me in 5 months and we'll see where things stand, by that point Bell should have logged in pre-Washington Clinton Portis-type numbers.
Nice try to turn the tables on me Big Score. Now you've changed the parameters of the bet in an attempt to one up me and make me look foolish. Look, if Tatum Bell is starting by week 5 I will most certainly take that bet. However, you seem to be in the camp that believes since Mike Anderson is the starter going into week 1 that he will remain the starter indefinitely and that Tatum Bell couldn't beat out a 32 year old running back. Given that, I urge you to steal $100 from me and take my bet that Mike Anderson WILL NOT outproduce Tatum Bell for the 2005 season. How much easier can winning $100 be for a man that is so sure Tatum Bell stinks?If you don't take the bet, you've lost your credibility as a previos poster mentioned. I'm willing to back up my statements, apparently you are not.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Slash

Footballguy
Is it just me, or is this Big Score a joke? I have given him a great opportunity to rake in $100, Mike Anderson is the starter and Tatum Bell might or might not even be the #2 RB on the team. I'm saying Bell will outproduce Anderson for the 2005 season and he still won't take the bet. :lmao: Must not be such easy money after all, heh Big Score?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Big Score

Footballguy
And just like I thought, Big Score dissapears.
Ahem....exactly who dissapeared?
Umm...ever heard of it taking aguy a minute or two to type a response. You have me shaking in my boots, Big Score. :rolleyes:
Oh! I see....if I take a couple of minutes to type a response....I've dissapeared....but if you take a couple of minutes to type a response...that's cool. Righttttt :bs:

Anyway, you gonna sack up and put your money where your mouth is?

Keep doubting Bell, keep sleeping. Come talk to me in 5 months and we'll see where things stand, by that point Bell should have logged in pre-Washington Clinton Portis-type numbers.
$100.00?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top