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.

Zac Stacy vs. Mike Gillislee ...tale of the tape (1 Viewer)

Better Dynasty Value right now (Help me out with current ADP)

  • Stacy

    Votes: 75 69.4%
  • Gillislee

    Votes: 24 22.2%
  • Draw

    Votes: 9 8.3%

  • Total voters
    108

Sabertooth

Footballguy
This kind of grew out of the Stacy thread. I thought it would be fun to put this to the test. I will come up with a series of polls. I will try to update the first thread to reflect prevailing sentiment

Zac Stacy vs. Gillislee.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Stacy:
5'8", 216 lbs
40: 4.55
bench: 27 reps
vertical: 33
broad jump: 122
3 cone: 6.70
20 yd shuttle: 4.17

Gillislee:
5'11", 208 lbs
40: 4.55
bench: 15 reps
vertical: 30.5
broad jump: 119
3 cone: 7.12
20 yd shuttle: 4.40
 
I'm really not a believer in Gillislee. Not a big guy and not a great athlete. I think you can ignore him in drafts without much risk.

I like Stacy more, but I don't like him at his current price tag. He would be a lot more appealing if his ADP was around Gillislee's.

 
Stacy currently going in the 9th round, Gillislee in the 14th round. But that's redraft. I am still looking for decent dynasty ADP.

 
Stacy currently going in the 9th round, Gillislee in the 14th round. But that's redraft. I am still looking for decent dynasty ADP.
At DLF they have Stacy averaging pick 118 and Gillislee pick 152.

Don't know how accurate it is, but I check DLF out for quick reference.

 
I think Gillislee has elite vision and it allows him to excel being just an jack of all / master of none skill set where Stacy is a poor mans MJD

 
In my one dynasty startup I have drafted this year so far, Stacy was picked in the 19th round (190 overall), and Gillislee was picked in the 27th round (323 overall).

Full IDP draft, started at the end of April.

 
In my two dynasty drafts this year

Stacy went 26th and 16th respectively.

Gillislee went 25th and 48th respectively.

 
The only criteria here that is hard for me to decide on is who has a better surrounding cast. All others are easily in favor of Stacy for me. Unlike many, I think St. L is a pretty good fit and should be a much better offense this season vs last. They have a solid oline and did as much as they could to add playmakers on the edge. Then again, Mia added Wallace and list Long. I give this a push.

 
In an FFPC start-up I saw Stacy come off the board in the 9th round immediately before Vereen, Bryce Brown and Bernard Pierce.

So yeah.....

 
I think Gillislee has elite vision and it allows him to excel being just an jack of all / master of none skill set where Stacy is a poor mans MJD
Interesting comp. Other than top end speed (MJD=4.39), Stacy has better measurables in bench, cone, shuttle, and broad jump.Vision is, of course, an enormous variable that is virtually unaccounted for in the scouting world.
 
Why are people discounting Daryl Richardson's role in this. He more than doubled Lamar Miller's rookie production and people are just writing him off.

 
Why are people discounting Daryl Richardson's role in this. He more than doubled Lamar Miller's rookie production and people are just writing him off.
Daryl is competing with a top notch talent in stacy. Miller doesn't have an elite level guy to compete with.
 
Why are people discounting Daryl Richardson's role in this. He more than doubled Lamar Miller's rookie production and people are just writing him off.
Richardson is not a feature back, he is a complementary back, and was used as such last season. He exceeded 10 carries twice, and exceeded 10 touches four times. He did very well with the carries he received, but who else was going to get those touches last year? There was Jackson who was the lead back, but Pead was MIA (for whatever reason), so Richardson was the only other viable option. Look at his last 5 games, though... despite his very good production before, he got very few touches in those games and did not do much with them.

The Rams have two speed backs in Richardson and Pead... there is a hole to fill that those two do not seem to fill. I cannot speak well to Pead's ability to run inside, but Richardson has to have a hole to be effective. He does his damage with his burst, but usually goes down easily if there is not a hole. Maybe the Rams' OL starts blowing open more holes and Richardson/Pead are the best options, that is not crazy talk... otherwise, they will need a blue collar bruiser to take those inside carries. Enter Stacy.

So, in short, Gillislee has a potential (some would say probable) lead back who is bigger and faster than he is in front of him, and does not do much differently than that back. Stacy has two RBs that do not seem to be lead back types, and is a different kind of back himself. Neither player is guaranteed much, but Stacy seems to have a clearer path to relevance.

 
I have a hard time thinking Stacy is going to be as good as Sjax was last year even if he does win that role. Sjax didn't break 1k and scored 4 touchdowns. So if Stacy is less talented the Sjax (highly probable) you can probably expect less from Stacy. Which puts him in RB3/4 territory IF he wins the job.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the Rams lead back might not even be on the roster yet.

 
I have a hard time thinking Stacy is going to be as good as Sjax was last year even if he does win that role. Sjax didn't break 1k and scored 4 touchdowns. So if Stacy is less talented the Sjax (highly probable) you can probably expect less from Stacy. Which puts him in RB3/4 territory IF he wins the job. I have a sneaking suspicion that the Rams lead back might not even be on the roster yet.
Why are you so blatantly ignoring that this St. L team could and should be better. The addition of J. Long at T alone is a massive step forward for this team and should pay huge dividends in the running game as well as overall offense. On top of that, St. L made it a clear priority to bring in playmakers on the outside to help open things up. In short, this is not going to be the same team as the one SJax played on. Bringing up the struggles he had last year is a point that misses on every level IMO. Stacy, or any other RB, doesn't need to be as good as SJax to put up comparable or better stats. The team could and should just improve to a level that makes it easier to produce.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why are people discounting Daryl Richardson's role in this. He more than doubled Lamar Miller's rookie production and people are just writing him off.
Daryl is competing with a top notch talent in stacy. Miller doesn't have an elite level guy to compete with.
I doubt it. He's competing with a 5th round pick. Nothing more, nothing less. Just like Miller.
Everyone is discounting Pead, who was a second round pick.

 
Why are people discounting Daryl Richardson's role in this. He more than doubled Lamar Miller's rookie production and people are just writing him off.
Daryl is competing with a top notch talent in stacy. Miller doesn't have an elite level guy to compete with.
I doubt it. He's competing with a 5th round pick. Nothing more, nothing less. Just like Miller.
Everyone is discounting Pead, who was a second round pick.
Arian Foster > Ben Tate.

 
I have a hard time thinking Stacy is going to be as good as Sjax was last year even if he does win that role. Sjax didn't break 1k and scored 4 touchdowns. So if Stacy is less talented the Sjax (highly probable) you can probably expect less from Stacy. Which puts him in RB3/4 territory IF he wins the job.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the Rams lead back might not even be on the roster yet.
257 - 1042 rushing, 38 - 321 receiving <<< S.Jackson's stats last year. Finished RB 17.

Stacy is certainly less talented than Jackson. A rising tide lifts all boats, however... the Rams offense will be better than last year.

(Again, I expect a RBBC... but if Stacy carves out a bigger role than I expect, there is upside, especially in TDs)

 
I have a hard time thinking Stacy is going to be as good as Sjax was last year even if he does win that role. Sjax didn't break 1k and scored 4 touchdowns. So if Stacy is less talented the Sjax (highly probable) you can probably expect less from Stacy. Which puts him in RB3/4 territory IF he wins the job. I have a sneaking suspicion that the Rams lead back might not even be on the roster yet.
Why are you so blatantly ignoring that this St. L team could and should be better. The addition of J. Long at T alone is a massive step forward for this team and should pay huge dividends in the running game as well as overall offense. On top of that, St. L made it a clear priority to bring in playmakers on the outside to help open things up. In short, this is not going to be the same team as the one SJax played on. Bringing up the struggles he had last year is a point that misses on every level IMO. Stacy, or any other RB, doesn't need to be as good as SJax to put up comparable or better stats. The team could and should just improve to a level that makes it easier to produce.
I think because the playmakers they brought in a largely unproven. Jared Cook looks like Tarzan but plays like Jane. Tavon Austin is a rookie....he could bust entirely or get smeared out there when he gets hammered by a 255 lbs linebacker that outweighs him by nearly 100 lbs.

I agree the team could improve from where they were last year. But for every team that rises, another falls and I'm not so sure there is much room for improvement when I think of St. Louis. They play 5 games against tough defenses right off the bat. Fantasy owners kind of luck out with the second Seahawks game (in Seattle) being Week 17. They also get Atlanta and Chicago.

I just don't know that they are going to be any better than last year after losing perhaps their best player in Sjax. Bradford may or may not be anything more than a middling quarterback. I'm just not sold on them. So to answer your questions (bolded), I guess I'm just not sold on them. Long is a great addition though, no doubt. But lines take time to gel. They are doing quite a bit of shuffling.

 
Why are people discounting Daryl Richardson's role in this. He more than doubled Lamar Miller's rookie production and people are just writing him off.
Daryl is competing with a top notch talent in stacy. Miller doesn't have an elite level guy to compete with.
I doubt it. He's competing with a 5th round pick. Nothing more, nothing less. Just like Miller.
Everyone is discounting Pead, who was a second round pick.
Exactly. Stacy is competing with a sophomore who showed some ability (Richardson) and another who was a high pick (Pead). Nothing is going to be handed to him. Remember Cedric Benson, Beanie Wells, Michael Turner, and Peyton Hillis are all still out there too.

 
Why are people discounting Daryl Richardson's role in this. He more than doubled Lamar Miller's rookie production and people are just writing him off.
Daryl is competing with a top notch talent in stacy. Miller doesn't have an elite level guy to compete with.
I doubt it. He's competing with a 5th round pick. Nothing more, nothing less. Just like Miller.
Everyone is discounting Pead, who was a second round pick.
Arian Foster > Ben Tate.
I'm not sure what the point of this analogy is. Are you saying that if Zac Stacy is as talented as Arian Foster, it doesn't matter who his competition is? That's not exactly breaking news, but it hinges on an Everest-sized "if". Are you saying that highly-drafted rookies who fail to produce in year 1 are hardly consequential for fantasy purposes? If so, Ray Rice, (454 rushing yards, no TDs, handily beaten out by Le'Ron McClain), or Jamaal Charles, (357 yards, 0 rushing TDs), might like to have a word with you. Are we even ready to hold up Ben Tate as a negative comparison that this point? I mean, Tate did have 1,000 yards from scrimmage in 2011, he does have a career YPC over 5.0, and he very well might wind up turning into the next Michael Turner, (or even the next Lamont Jordan, or the next Chester Taylor, or the next Rudi Johnson).

Hyperbole like this is why I want nothing to do with Stacy at his inflated value. He's almost certainly not the next Arian Foster or Terrell Davis. Isaiah Pead is not yet locked in as the next Montario Hardesty or Brandon Jackson. Daryl Richardson may or may not yet be the next Jerious Norwood or Mewelde Moore. Facile analogies like these might seem superficially compelling, but they do far more to obscure than to reveal. The reality is that we have a messy situation on an historically awful (if potentially positive-trending) franchise. We have competition between a late rounder in 2012 who was good in limited action, an early rounder in 2012 with suggestively limited opportunities, and a late rounder in 2013 with a more historically prototypical body type. None of these guys have clearly differentiated themselves yet, all three are clearly in play, and any faction that becomes too excited about one while summarily dismissing the other two is guilty of either dangerously underrating the entire NFL scouting institution or equally dangerously overrating their own ability to predict the future. There exists ample risk surrounding all three players. None of their ascendency is a fait accompli, and none should be priced as if it were.

My process tends to defer heavily to the NFL Talent Evaluation Apparatus, so I naturally prefer Pead. Others defer to physical comparisons and body types, and those guys love Stacy. Still others hold on-field production above all else, and those guys like Richardson. All three viewpoints have their own merits. At least two of those viewpoints (and likely all three) will produce unsatisfying results for their proponents. We don't know in advance which will fail and which will prevail, but I would suggest that a healthy dose of skepticism towards all three players would be prudent.

Edit: I would also suggest an equally healthy degree of skepticism towards Gillislee. 5th rounders, as a rule, are not good bets for anything. If the price gets low enough, I'd be happy to roll the dice on Gillislee, but I certainly wouldn't be optimistic about them coming up in my favor.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why are people discounting Daryl Richardson's role in this. He more than doubled Lamar Miller's rookie production and people are just writing him off.
Daryl is competing with a top notch talent in stacy. Miller doesn't have an elite level guy to compete with.
I doubt it. He's competing with a 5th round pick. Nothing more, nothing less. Just like Miller.
Everyone is discounting Pead, who was a second round pick.
Arian Foster > Ben Tate.
I'm not sure what the point of this analogy is. Are you saying that if Zac Stacy is as talented as Arian Foster.
No.
 
I'm saying that I'm not defaulting to 2nd rounder >>> 5th rounder without further analysis. Both were drafted to different situations, and I'm not willing to pretend 2012 didn't happen.

That said, I don't really disagree with anything else you wrote.

I play with people less educated about potential sleepers than the SP, so I'm sure I can land Stacy at a significant discount from his potential value. Obviously, there's a price I wouldn't be willing to pay, as his upside is limited even if he were a featured back. This contrasts with elite upside guys like CJ Spiller who I took last year several rounds ahead of ADP.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If not for how bad MIA depth is at RB I wouldn't be surprised if Gillislee never took a carry in the NFL. LSU and Fla st. games don't really describe how his career went. He also was one of the most nonathletic backs in the draft. I'd take Stacy in a heartbeat.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top