Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

RB Melvin Gordon, DEN


gianmarco

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Alex P Keaton said:

Meh.  Bills might just not like losing out.  Schefter could be wrong, who really knows.

Or the broncos could have been bidding against the broncos for Gordons services. Sort of like the Bell and Foles contracts last season where everyone was scratching their heads asking who are these teams outbidding?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BoltBacker said:

Or the broncos could have been bidding against the broncos for Gordons services. Sort of like the Bell and Foles contracts last season where everyone was scratching their heads asking who are these teams outbidding?

Probably.  And if that’s the case......man, Elway seems like he isn’t very good at this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, FreeBaGeL said:

Right.  He got almost the same amount of guaranteed money over the first 2 years of the deal.  The problem is that he wasted a year which as an about to turn 27 year old RB was an extremely valuable year.

To be fair though he was due to make $4.5 million this season which would have balanced things out a lot.  I'm not sure how the holdout affected that.

If he signed in SD he would have made $20 mil over '19-'20 and whatever he signed for in '21 if he was cut. 

With his current situation he made $4.5 mil in '19 and $18 mil in '20-'21.  So the difference is however much over the $2.5 million difference he would have made in 2021 in scenario 1.  Minus whatever he lost in the holdout as well.

He was due to make $5.6M for the 2019 season. His holdout enabled the team to collect/withhold $3.3M in fines. It was reported at the time he ended his holdout that the team intended to collect/withhold all of the permissible fines. Again, assuming the Chargers would have given him a 4 year, $40M contract with $20M guaranteed:

  1. Scenario 1: Doesn't accept Chargers' offer, holds out, makes $2.3M + $16M (Broncos contract) = $18.3M for 2019-2021
  2. Scenario 2: Accepts Chargers offer last year, is released after 2020 season, and signs a third contract with more guaranteed money = $20M + new guaranteed money for 2019-2021, probably $30M+ through 2021 due to another signing bonus plus 2021 salary
  3. Scenario 3: Accepts Chargers offer last year, is released after 2021 season = $29M+ for 2019-2021
  4. Scenario 4: Doesn't hold out in 2019, probably gets a stronger contract offer this offseason, possibly from the Chargers, maybe the same offer... that would mean something like $25.6M for 2019-2021

He foolishly chose #1, the worst scenario of them all by a large margin.

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Dr. Dan said:

We may never know. I think it's very likely the Bills are lying. If they make zero moves at RB we know they were telling the truth

I don't think that can be seen as a connection...even if they are high on Singletary (which I believe they are) they would be smart to add another quality RB...they way they are constructed and want to play they need legit depth at RB which is a little iffy right now...the issue here is would it make sense to invest in a contract like Gordon's at that position.

Edited by Boston
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Dr. Dan said:

If they turn around and sign Freeman, or use a higher pick on a RB, it's a strong indicator, IMO, that they did offer Gordon a contract. To each their own I guess. 

If they give Freeman a contract like that then I agree...if they give him one year at something like 2.5 then I disagree....I don't think the pick is an indicator because that player will not be getting paid much...not to be repetitive but IMO the debate here is not about the position (they can use another RB), it is about the amount of the investment.

Edited by Boston
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, BoltBacker said:

Or the broncos could have been bidding against the broncos for Gordons services. Sort of like the Bell and Foles contracts last season where everyone was scratching their heads asking who are these teams outbidding?

The Jets outbid the 49ers who made an offer close to what the Jets paid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/22/2020 at 3:10 PM, Dr. Octopus said:

The Jets outbid the 49ers who made an offer close to what the Jets paid.

As I remembered that situation I thought the 49ers were never really a player because they weren't willing to give Bell the length of contract he was looking for all along with PIT. After holding out an entire year he wasn't going to take a short-term contract from the 49ers or anyone else. Technically, I think PIT made an offer close to what the Jets paid..... but for one year with the franchise tag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, ffmail4me said:

Would anyone have any concerns about drafting him at 7.12 in a PPR best ball SF dynasty start up? Seems like even if a committee with Lindsay that's pretty solid value considering his age right??? 

I wouldn't, but I may have a lower opinion of his dynasty value than most.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Just Win Baby said:

I wouldn't, but I may have a lower opinion of his dynasty value than most.

Well he is being paid a decent amount of money, just assume they are going to use him. And as you have documented, Lindsay is pretty awful at pass protection, Would just think that might ensure he have a solid role in the offense with a young QB. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ffmail4me said:

Would anyone have any concerns about drafting him at 7.12 in a PPR best ball SF dynasty start up? Seems like even if a committee with Lindsay that's pretty solid value considering his age right??? 

I think it depends on how sold you are on the den offense as a whole.

Some seem high on Lock, and to hear them tell it he was SOOOOO much better than Flacco last season. In reality Flacco had a better completion %, more yards/attempt, more yards per/completion, more yards/game, and the same interception %. I'm not saying all this to prove Flacco is some sort of pro-bowl player..... just pointing out that the popular take in the media is Flacco was TERRIBLE last season and Lock played so much better when in reality they were closer than a lot of people would like to admit. Lock had a better TD% and took fewer sacks but it's not like he was better than Flacco across the board.

If you are sold on their young core(Lock/Sutton/Fant) and think they are ready for an upswing then Gordon may be a good value, but I'd be looking to flip him in dynasty as soon as he strings several games together. He'll only be 27 this season but with a lot of wear on the tires(both pro and college).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, BoltBacker said:

 but I'd be looking to flip him in dynasty as soon as he strings several games together.

I tried. No interest, really, from at least a couple of owners and I was offering fair value, so I thought. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rockaction said:

I tried. No interest, really, from at least a couple of owners and I was offering fair value, so I thought. 

And this is one reason I wouldn't draft him in the 7th in a dynasty startup. I suspect he will disappoint again this season, and, at that point, his dynasty value will be nil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

And this is one reason I wouldn't draft him in the 7th in a dynasty startup. I suspect he will disappoint again this season, and, at that point, his dynasty value will be nil.

Yeah, I inherited the roster, took one look at it, and wanted he and Guice off of it. (Those were two guys of perceived value on it that I don't think hold much real value in the end.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BoltBacker said:

Some seem high on Lock, and to hear them tell it he was SOOOOO much better than Flacco last season. In reality Flacco had a better completion %, more yards/attempt, more yards per/completion, more yards/game, and the same interception %. I'm not saying all this to prove Flacco is some sort of pro-bowl player..... just pointing out that the popular take in the media is Flacco was TERRIBLE last season and Lock played so much better when in reality they were closer than a lot of people would like to admit. Lock had a better TD% and took fewer sacks but it's not like he was better than Flacco across the board.

With all due respect, it wasn't just a popular media take. Anyone who watched Denver play last season will tell you Lock was indeed SOOOO much better than Flacco.

The primary reason was mobility, which is also borne out in the stats. Flacco was an indecisive statue who was sacked 1 in 10 passing attempts (even worse percentage than Jameis Winston). Lock 1 in 30. Plus Lock's 72 rush yds vs. Flacco's 20.

In addition, Lock threw more TD's (7) in five games than Flacco threw in eight games (6). 

Not to mention the only stat that matters, W-L record (i.e. leadership). Lock 4-1 vs. Flacco 2-6.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, PhantomJB said:

With all due respect, it wasn't just a popular media take. Anyone who watched Denver play last season will tell you Lock was indeed SOOOO much better than Flacco.

The primary reason was mobility, which is also borne out in the stats. Flacco was an indecisive statue who was sacked 1 in 10 passing attempts (even worse percentage than Jameis Winston). Lock 1 in 30. Plus Lock's 72 rush yds vs. Flacco's 20.

In addition, Lock threw more TD's (7) in five games than Flacco threw in eight games (6). 

Not to mention the only stat that matters, W-L record (i.e. leadership). Lock 4-1 vs. Flacco 2-6.

Well, with all due respect, PFF watched Denver play, and they graded every play. Their grades:

Flacco:

  • Overall grade: 67.2
  • Passing grade: 65.1
  • Running grade: 66.7

Lock:

  • Overall grade: 57.6
  • Passing grade: 56.9
  • Running grade: 61.2

They graded Flacco better in each area. Lock had the best game between them (81.2 at home vs. DET) but also the worst (27.9 at KC). I don't think it is as clear cut as you claim it is.

:shrug: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Just Win Baby said:

Well, with all due respect, PFF watched Denver play, and they graded every play. Their grades:

Flacco:

  • Overall grade: 67.2
  • Passing grade: 65.1
  • Running grade: 66.7

Lock:

  • Overall grade: 57.6
  • Passing grade: 56.9
  • Running grade: 61.2

They graded Flacco better in each area. Lock had the best game between them (81.2 at home vs. DET) but also the worst (27.9 at KC). I don't think it is as clear cut as you claim it is.

:shrug: 

PFF gave Flacco a higher running grade than Lock. That's all anyone needs to know about the usefulness of those stats.

:shrug:

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gordon was offered the best possible deal for him last year and turned it down.
This year he was offered the best possible deal for him (in this climate for RBs) and took it. 

He did fine for himself. Sometimes you take a chance and lose. He didn't lose that badly, all things considered. I don't really see either team making the playoffs, so whatever. Nice paycheck. 

Edited by Neil Beaufort Zod
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PhantomJB said:

PFF gave Flacco a higher running grade than Lock. That's all anyone needs to know about the usefulness of those stats.

:shrug:

Sure, you are free to dismiss it. But it refutes the stance that “anyone who watched Denver games last year could easily see the difference...” Since PFF has multiple people grade every play. 

IMHO some people are unreasonably optimistic about Lock going forward. We’ll see. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Neil Beaufort Zod said:

Gordon was offered the best possible deal for him last year and turned it down.
This year he was offered the best possible deal for him (in this climate for RBs) and took it. 

He did fine for himself. Sometimes you take a chance and lose. He didn't lose that badly, all things considered. I don't really see either team making the playoffs, so whatever. Nice paycheck. 

He lost at least $6M, probably more. That is not “doing fine.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, PhantomJB said:

With all due respect, it wasn't just a popular media take. Anyone who watched Denver play last season will tell you Lock was indeed SOOOO much better than Flacco.

The primary reason was mobility, which is also borne out in the stats. Flacco was an indecisive statue who was sacked 1 in 10 passing attempts (even worse percentage than Jameis Winston). Lock 1 in 30. Plus Lock's 72 rush yds vs. Flacco's 20.

In addition, Lock threw more TD's (7) in five games than Flacco threw in eight games (6). 

Not to mention the only stat that matters, W-L record (i.e. leadership). Lock 4-1 vs. Flacco 2-6.

Well, yeah. That's why I said... "Lock had a better TD% and took fewer sacks but it's not like he was better than Flacco across the board."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Neil Beaufort Zod said:

Gordon was offered the best possible deal for him last year and turned it down.
This year he was offered the best possible deal for him (in this climate for RBs) and took it. 

He did fine for himself. Sometimes you take a chance and lose. He didn't lose that badly, all things considered. I don't really see either team making the playoffs, so whatever. Nice paycheck. 

I think Gordon did lose badly, but I agree with you that I like to see players bet on themselves.

It's one of the reasons I've always felt like the last person rooting for Kirk Cousins. He has never threatened to holdout for a long term deal(or an unreasonable deal as the market has proven). He has just said, "Fine I'll honor THIS contract and I'll play well enough that it'll cost you even more when we go to the bargaining table next." The big difference of course is Cousins has always been willing to honor his current contract and has never been afraid to take the field to earn even more in his next contract.

When you consider that this very well may be Gordons last paycheck(he'll be an NFL RB turning 29 the next time he hits FA) he lost pretty big on a major miscalculation. I get how FF fans don't think there's all that much difference between 2yr/$20mil and 2yr/$13.5mil guaranteed but that difference accrued over time for a guy in his 20's surprisingly adds up if that is the bulk of your income for the entire rest of your life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Shawnky said:

Anyone who watched Denver games last year could easily see the difference.  Locke was clearly the better QB.

That's what I think the popular perception is in the media. They can just "FEEL" he's a better QB. They can't really put their finger on it. It's just a vibe they are getting.

And to be fair Lock probably has many more possibly good years ahead of him than Flacco. It's just interesting to see people straining so hard to make the numbers last year fit the narrative they had decided on before the season every started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Just Win Baby said:

Well, with all due respect, PFF watched Denver play, and they graded every play. Their grades:

Flacco:

  • Overall grade: 67.2
  • Passing grade: 65.1
  • Running grade: 66.7

Lock:

  • Overall grade: 57.6
  • Passing grade: 56.9
  • Running grade: 61.2

They graded Flacco better in each area. Lock had the best game between them (81.2 at home vs. DET) but also the worst (27.9 at KC). I don't think it is as clear cut as you claim it is.

:shrug: 

to be 100% fair, these were Locks first 5 games of his career.  He has never even had the benefit of a training camp with him installed as the starting QB.  further, Flacco had the luxury of throwing to Manny Sanders, Lock did not.

Locks 27.9 game - that was a snow game, on the road, vs a divisional rival who happened to win the SB.  kind of a tough spot.

I'm not here to say Lock is the best QB in the league.  I do think he will be servicible, at the very least, and that will be heads and shoulders better than what the Broncos have had since 2015.

To get back to Gordon, IMO we are looking at a clear RBBC.  The offiense will be coordinated by Pat Shurmur (take from that what you will - he is at minimum competant), with Mike Munchak on the OL.  The D should be decent - Miller, Chubb, and Casey will be a pretty good pass rush.  The Broncos are setting themselves up to be a "run the ball well and play good D" type of team.  I expect Gordon to be the dirty-work guy - goal line work, and passing situations.  first and second downs, I expect more of a drive rotation instead of situational rotation.  I think he's the clear guy in PPR but closer to a split in non-PPR.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, BoltBacker said:

That's what I think the popular perception is in the media. They can just "FEEL" he's a better QB. They can't really put their finger on it. It's just a vibe they are getting.

And to be fair Lock probably has many more possibly good years ahead of him than Flacco. It's just interesting to see people straining so hard to make the numbers last year fit the narrative they had decided on before the season every started.

under pressure, Flacco tended to drift into sacks.  He wasn't stepping up into the pocket, he wasn't escaping.  It was uncanny how he would take a sack at the wrong time.  Lock seemed to have a much better feel in the pocket, stepping up, rolling away from pressure, and getting the ball out on time.

The sack ratio is a really big deal.  getting sacked every 10 drop backs - that's significant. Sacks end drives and keep teams out of scoring opprotunities.  We can't just discount sack ratios as if it's nothing.  Flacco's sack ratio was 40st in the league - Locks was 2nd, behind only Drew Brees (amongst QBs who started more than one game).

I'm not saying Lock will always magically be the guy who doesn't take sacks - defenses will get after him.  Part of that may be defenses were not pressuring him, trying to trick him into throwing into a disguised coverage.  The point is that Flacco taking stupid sacks cost the Broncos wins, and Lock did not do that nearly as much.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Quote

NFL Network's James Palmer reports, "The belief is that (Melvin) Gordon will be Denver’s bell cow."

The $16 million deal isn't necessarily enough money for the Broncos to bend over backwards in an effort to get Gordon touches. Still, the veteran's three-down skill-set makes him a better bet than both Phillip Lindsay and Royce Freeman to ultimately lead this backfield in snaps, carries and targets alike. Most teams utilize a committee of sorts these days anyway, so Gordon could feasibly flirt with RB1 fantasy production if he can get something in the range of even 60-70% snaps per game. 2019 wasn't great, but we've seen Gordon flash tantalizing talent before. Overall, he led the NFL in total broken tackles from 2016-2018 (PFF).

SOURCE: James Palmer on Twitter

Mar 26, 2020, 12:34 PM ET

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Faust said:

Was going to offer him for a package of Hunt, Pollard, and Higbee in dynasty (Zeke rosterer), but I thought even that might be an unrealistic question right now. Need to wait until he has a big game or two or three. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

 

Baker Mayfield will bounce back; plus, five most improved units

Excerpt:

Quote

MELVIN GORDON: Renaissance coming in Denver?

Don't be surprised if Melvin Gordon enjoys the best season of his NFL career after changing addresses in the spring. 

After amassing 6,000-plus scrimmage yards and earning two Pro Bowl selections in five seasons with the Chargers, Gordon has a chance to go from good to great with the Denver Broncos. The 6-foot-1, 215-pound runner not only joins a team that is committed to featuring him as the No. 1 back, but he reunites with a scheme that showcased his talents as an explosive, downhill runner. 

"It (the Chargers' scheme) really didn't play out to my strengths, especially the first couple years there," Gordon said on the Rapsheet and Friends podcast. "I kind of just had to adjust and make it work. It kind of wasn't a system built for me. But I feel like Denver kinda runs my style of football, and I think it's a great fit."

Reviewing my notes on Gordon prior to the 2015 NFL Draft, when he was selected 15th overall by the Chargers, I loved Gordon's patience, vision and explosiveness as a runner. The Wisconsin product showed exceptional zero-to-60 acceleration, and his ability to slither through cracks made him a threat to score from anywhere on the field. In his final year in the Badgers' zone-based offense, Gordon racked up 2,587 rushing yards and 29 touchdowns as a workhorse runner with outstanding stamina, endurance and toughness. He reminded me of Jamaal Charles in his prime, and I expected him to run up big numbers with the Chargers as an RB1.

As a pro, it took Gordon a little time to settle in as a blue-chip runner. He underwent microfracture surgery after a disappointing rookie campaign but bounced back with three straight seasons of at least 1,375 scrimmage yards and 12 total touchdowns. Although he failed to average more than 4 yards per carry in four of his five seasons, he would occasionally flash A-plus speed and burst on off-tackle runs. 

As the No. 1 running play in the Chargers playbook, the "stretch," or outside zone, would instruct Gordon to attack the outside leg of the tackle, with the running back expected to "bend" (cut back), "bounce" (take it outside) or "bang" (attack the hole), based on the reaction of the defense. Gordon had his moments as a perimeter runner, but his straight-line running style is better suited to play in an offense with more downhill runs. 

The Broncos are employing a zone-based system under new offensive coordinator Pat Shurmur that's expected to feature more downhill plays designed to limit negative runs while enabling runners to attack the line of scrimmage with squared-up shoulders. Looking at Gordon's game, the marriage between player and system should be a perfect fit. 

"They run a lot of inside zones, and that's what I did a lot at Wisconsin," Gordon said. "It's going to really help me get back in the feel of what I do best. I'm an inside-zone runner."

If Gordon can get back to playing like the all-star who tormented defenses as a dual-threat playmaker, he'll give the Broncos' offense an added dimension with a couple of young runners already in the stable.

"Obviously we had two good backs in Royce Freeman and (Phillip) Lindsay," said general manager John Elway, when explaining the decision to add Gordon. "We know that [Lindsay] is a guy that's had a great year for us. I know there's people going, 'Why do you need another horse?' Well, when you have an opportunity for Melvin Gordon to come in here, we felt like it was an addition to the team. He's a guy that obviously has had a lot of success in this league. He's scored a lot of touchdowns and has caught the football a ton. So we feel like with him -- with Melvin, as well as Phillip -- that we've got a great one-two punch, and we'll only get better in the backfield.

"Ultimately, we have to score more points this year. We've struggled on the offensive side the last two, three years, and so we've got to get better on that side. I think Melvin will be one of those key pieces to help us get better."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like I always love the guy based on his previous production.  And then I realize he's never been THAT great other than TD's. His career YPC is 4.0.  He's broken 1,000 yards rushing once.  He's never had a 60 catch season.  He's played 16 games once (holdout last year, but still).  

On the flip-side--he's had 12, 12, 14 TD's from 2016-2018.  He had 9 TD's last year in 12 games coming off a holdout.  

Everything I've read is that people believe Shurmur will use Gordon as the bell cow.  I think he'll be motivated to "show" San Diego after they didn't pay up and he switch teams in the division.  Lock being young will likely dump off a lot.  He completed 20 passes to Lindsay in Freeman from weeks 13-17.  

If he can give you the full 16 games, he can be pretty special.  His per game production should still be pretty elite.  Assuming he actually gets the bell cow treatment, I think he's pretty underrated at this point.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, jm192 said:

I feel like I always love the guy based on his previous production.  And then I realize he's never been THAT great other than TD's. His career YPC is 4.0.  He's broken 1,000 yards rushing once.  He's never had a 60 catch season.  He's played 16 games once (holdout last year, but still).  

On the flip-side--he's had 12, 12, 14 TD's from 2016-2018.  He had 9 TD's last year in 12 games coming off a holdout.  

Everything I've read is that people believe Shurmur will use Gordon as the bell cow.  I think he'll be motivated to "show" San Diego after they didn't pay up and he switch teams in the division.  Lock being young will likely dump off a lot.  He completed 20 passes to Lindsay in Freeman from weeks 13-17.  

If he can give you the full 16 games, he can be pretty special.  His per game production should still be pretty elite.  Assuming he actually gets the bell cow treatment, I think he's pretty underrated at this point.  

Co-signed.  Ive never been an MG proponent or had him on any team until a recent trade, but I see a big year coming.  Lots of TDs to be had in that revamped offense.  Lindsay isn't going away but I can pretty easily envision a 250+ point ppr campaign, which should be good for an RB1 level season.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Vandelay said:

Co-signed.  Ive never been an MG proponent or had him on any team until a recent trade, but I see a big year coming.  Lots of TDs to be had in that revamped offense.  Lindsay isn't going away but I can pretty easily envision a 250+ point ppr campaign, which should be good for an RB1 level season.

I'm going the other way here. I think Lindsay is a better runner than Gordon. Lindsay is also a worse pass catcher and a far worse pass blocker. I'm thinking this could be about a 55-45 split, with Gordon seeing a large majority of the passing game work, but pretty close in carries. 

I view Gordon as a low end RB2, and Lindsay as an ok flex option. Unless the Broncos score a lot more TD's as an offense, like 10-15 more than a year ago, I think it'll be tough for there to be RB1 numbers for anyone, and Freeman likely just slots in if Gordon/Lindsay go down.

I start looking at Gordon in round 4 of a redraft right now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, travdogg said:

I'm going the other way here. I think Lindsay is a better runner than Gordon. Lindsay is also a worse pass catcher and a far worse pass blocker. I'm thinking this could be about a 55-45 split, with Gordon seeing a large majority of the passing game work, but pretty close in carries. 

I view Gordon as a low end RB2, and Lindsay as an ok flex option. Unless the Broncos score a lot more TD's as an offense, like 10-15 more than a year ago, I think it'll be tough for there to be RB1 numbers for anyone, and Freeman likely just slots in if Gordon/Lindsay go down.

I start looking at Gordon in round 4 of a redraft right now.

They were the 5th lowest scoring offense last year with 282 points, so adding 10-15 TDs would put them in the 350-375 range, which would have been good for pretty much middle of the pack last year.  I definitely think that's doable with the additions of Jeudy, Hamler, and Gordon to go along with continued growth from Sutton and Fant.  Lock has to perform and that is a legit question mark, but I love the blend of weapons on offense.  Feel like it will be difficult not to succeed with that cast.

I like Lindsay a lot, let me just get that out.  Hes been overlooked at every step and he just produces whenever he gets a shot.  Glad you mentioned Gordon is the better 3rd down back because it feels like most viewed him as that to Royster as a 2 down guy.  

So while I like Lindsay and think he'll be involved for sure, the Broncos have made it pretty clear they intend to utilize Gordon heavily, both with their words and their money.  55/45 seems generous to me, but even if it winds up there...last year, Lindsay and Freeman combined for 98 targets.  Let's pencil in Gordon for 70, considering we're orojecting the offense to be better and hes just a better receiving back in general.  His career catch rate is 75% and he averages 8.4 ypr.  Apply those averages to 70 targets and you get 52 receptions for 436 yards.  Throw in 2-3 TDs and thats roughly 110 points before we get to rushing stats.

Last year, the teams in the middle of the pack in scoring averaged about 1700-1800 yards rushing, and around 15 TDs.  Let's go with your 55% of the rushing yards and since he's always had a nose for the goalie, lets give him 9 of the TDs.  Thats about 950 yards and another 150 ppr points.  Where does that leave us?

260 points on a middle of the pack offense, which would have put him in the RB7-10 mix last year.  And again, this is only for a middle of the pack offense.  Theres plenty more upside if Lock turns out to be *actually* good.

Personally, I think Denver sniffs more around a top 10-15 offense and Gordon gets more than 55% of the work, so I see 300 point upside.  Its always dangerous to use last years point thresholds to project current year finishes, which is why I wanted to put this into pure points.  And honestly I hadn't run the numbers so I was more doing this for myself than to prove a point or anything.  Was genuinely curious.  The results do align with the generalities I had in my head though, so thats nice lol.

I really don't play redraft anymore, just dynasty, so no clue where I'd take him there.  I expect a two year window for this level of production so I am a dynasty buyer.  Hes not sexy and therefore able to be acquired. Everybody flocks to the younger RBs like Jacobs and Sanders, and sure they theoretically have more value because of age, but i see MG putting up more points the next two seasons than both of em.  Two years is an eternity particularly with RBs.  Projecting further out is almost pointless.

So yeah, I consider him a steal.  Aaron Jones too, for all almost all the same reasons except he's also a better player.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Vandelay said:

They were the 5th lowest scoring offense last year with 282 points, so adding 10-15 TDs would put them in the 350-375 range, which would have been good for pretty much middle of the pack last year.  I definitely think that's doable with the additions of Jeudy, Hamler, and Gordon to go along with continued growth from Sutton and Fant.  Lock has to perform and that is a legit question mark, but I love the blend of weapons on offense.  Feel like it will be difficult not to succeed with that cast.

I like Lindsay a lot, let me just get that out.  Hes been overlooked at every step and he just produces whenever he gets a shot.  Glad you mentioned Gordon is the better 3rd down back because it feels like most viewed him as that to Royster as a 2 down guy.  

So while I like Lindsay and think he'll be involved for sure, the Broncos have made it pretty clear they intend to utilize Gordon heavily, both with their words and their money.  55/45 seems generous to me, but even if it winds up there...last year, Lindsay and Freeman combined for 98 targets.  Let's pencil in Gordon for 70, considering we're orojecting the offense to be better and hes just a better receiving back in general.  His career catch rate is 75% and he averages 8.4 ypr.  Apply those averages to 70 targets and you get 52 receptions for 436 yards.  Throw in 2-3 TDs and thats roughly 110 points before we get to rushing stats.

Last year, the teams in the middle of the pack in scoring averaged about 1700-1800 yards rushing, and around 15 TDs.  Let's go with your 55% of the rushing yards and since he's always had a nose for the goalie, lets give him 9 of the TDs.  Thats about 950 yards and another 150 ppr points.  Where does that leave us?

260 points on a middle of the pack offense, which would have put him in the RB7-10 mix last year.  And again, this is only for a middle of the pack offense.  Theres plenty more upside if Lock turns out to be *actually* good.

Personally, I think Denver sniffs more around a top 10-15 offense and Gordon gets more than 55% of the work, so I see 300 point upside.  Its always dangerous to use last years point thresholds to project current year finishes, which is why I wanted to put this into pure points.  And honestly I hadn't run the numbers so I was more doing this for myself than to prove a point or anything.  Was genuinely curious.  The results do align with the generalities I had in my head though, so thats nice lol.

I really don't play redraft anymore, just dynasty, so no clue where I'd take him there.  I expect a two year window for this level of production so I am a dynasty buyer.  Hes not sexy and therefore able to be acquired. Everybody flocks to the younger RBs like Jacobs and Sanders, and sure they theoretically have more value because of age, but i see MG putting up more points the next two seasons than both of em.  Two years is an eternity particularly with RBs.  Projecting further out is almost pointless.

So yeah, I consider him a steal.  Aaron Jones too, for all almost all the same reasons except he's also a better player.

Excellent post, and thank you for going into detail. I do find a few things I disagree with, but I appreciate the content.

I think the 75% catch rate and 8.4 YPR are probably wishful thinking. Philip Rivers might be the best QB in the NFL at hitting flat routes and swing routes in stride. Guys are almost always going full speed when he hits them. I highly doubt Drew Lock will be able to do that,  we'll see that issue effect Austin Ekeler too this year, and probably Hines/Mack will see a big increase in how effective they are as receivers.

I do agree with the weapons that Denver has added, the offense should be better, perhaps much better,  but Lock is a major question mark. I'd love to have seen Denver do something at QB, because they have nothing if Lock doesn't pan out. They should be in on Cam Newton,  and probably should have been on Winston too. Maybe Alex Smith if he is healthy? Maybe I am pessimistic, but Lock didn't really show me anything last year. 

I'd be very surprised if Gordon was better than Jacobs or Sanders over the next 2 seasons. I think both will see more work than Gordon, and Sanders is in a better offense. Where as I see Gordon at 55%, I see Sanders at 75% and Jacobs at 80%. Those guys simply don't have to deal with the competition that Gordon has for carries. Its possible Gordon outdoes Jacobs in the receiving game, especially if Lynn Bowden takes to RB quickly, but he won't touch Sanders, who could catch 75+ passes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, travdogg said:

Excellent post, and thank you for going into detail. I do find a few things I disagree with, but I appreciate the content.

I think the 75% catch rate and 8.4 YPR are probably wishful thinking. Philip Rivers might be the best QB in the NFL at hitting flat routes and swing routes in stride. Guys are almost always going full speed when he hits them. I highly doubt Drew Lock will be able to do that,  we'll see that issue effect Austin Ekeler too this year, and probably Hines/Mack will see a big increase in how effective they are as receivers.

I do agree with the weapons that Denver has added, the offense should be better, perhaps much better,  but Lock is a major question mark. I'd love to have seen Denver do something at QB, because they have nothing if Lock doesn't pan out. They should be in on Cam Newton,  and probably should have been on Winston too. Maybe Alex Smith if he is healthy? Maybe I am pessimistic, but Lock didn't really show me anything last year. 

I'd be very surprised if Gordon was better than Jacobs or Sanders over the next 2 seasons. I think both will see more work than Gordon, and Sanders is in a better offense. Where as I see Gordon at 55%, I see Sanders at 75% and Jacobs at 80%. Those guys simply don't have to deal with the competition that Gordon has for carries. Its possible Gordon outdoes Jacobs in the receiving game, especially if Lynn Bowden takes to RB quickly, but he won't touch Sanders, who could catch 75+ passes. 

No dispute to the notion that Lock is a major question mark.  I definitely agree.  

If we're comparing Ekeler and MG as receivers, the biggest difference to me is that Ekeler was used downfield as a legit receiver a lot.  Definitely agree he will miss Rivers and his production will suffer.  I'm not so sure about MG though.  He's much more of a dump off/swing pass receiver, and while Rivers is very good at them it's not the most difficult pass to complete, particularly when you have the weapons Denver has opening things up underneath.

Comparing him to Jacobs will come down to passing game usage.  Jacobs will probably get more carries, but he was not very involved in the passing game last year, they still have Jalen Richard and they just drafted Bowden.  I like Jacobs as a runner but I can't see projecting much more than the two targets per game he averaged last year.  

Sanders is closer in my view and the only reason I think MG will outscore him is because of the Eagle's team philosophy.  Now, maybe they finally adjust their system due to the talent level of Sanders, but it's been about a decade since they truly featured a runner and I'm just not betting on it to happen this year.  Boston Scott should be a threat to be involved in the passing game, but I agree he faces less competition than Gordon.  It's just up to Pederson whether he allows it to happen or not.  With the right volume, Sanders could be CMC light.

Anyway, good stuff.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Vandelay said:

No dispute to the notion that Lock is a major question mark.  I definitely agree.  

If we're comparing Ekeler and MG as receivers, the biggest difference to me is that Ekeler was used downfield as a legit receiver a lot.  Definitely agree he will miss Rivers and his production will suffer.  I'm not so sure about MG though.  He's much more of a dump off/swing pass receiver, and while Rivers is very good at them it's not the most difficult pass to complete, particularly when you have the weapons Denver has opening things up underneath.

Comparing him to Jacobs will come down to passing game usage.  Jacobs will probably get more carries, but he was not very involved in the passing game last year, they still have Jalen Richard and they just drafted Bowden.  I like Jacobs as a runner but I can't see projecting much more than the two targets per game he averaged last year.  

Sanders is closer in my view and the only reason I think MG will outscore him is because of the Eagle's team philosophy.  Now, maybe they finally adjust their system due to the talent level of Sanders, but it's been about a decade since they truly featured a runner and I'm just not betting on it to happen this year.  Boston Scott should be a threat to be involved in the passing game, but I agree he faces less competition than Gordon.  It's just up to Pederson whether he allows it to happen or not.  With the right volume, Sanders could be CMC light.

Anyway, good stuff.  

I echo your thoughts on Jacobs.  Jacobs could hit 300 carries, but I doubt he has more than 25-30 passes.  I also don't think the Raiders offense lends itself to a lot of TD's--whereas I can see the Broncos scoring quite a bit more in 2020.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

 

Will Drew Lock be the second-best 2020 fantasy quarterback in the AFC West?

Excerpt:

 

Quote

There is a huge ADP disparity between Melvin Gordon (33.8) and Phillip Lindsay (115.3). Do you believe this is Gordon’s backfield to lose, or will we be seeing a 1A/1B situation in Denver, making them both valuable/usable in fantasy?

Dalton: I’m in on Gordon, as his contract suggests Denver is going to treat him as a workhorse. Lindsay is a fine runner but has an extremely low BMI and just finished 49th out of 50 backs in receiving DVOA, so Gordon should at minimum see all of the passing down and goal-line work. Gordon is coming off his worst season but dealt with a (poorly devised) holdout, led the NFL in broken tackles the previous two years, and is finally running behind an inside-zone scheme similar to the Wisconsin one in which he thrived during college. I’m not sold on Drew Lock, but having Courtland Sutton, Jerry Jeudy and Noah Fant as teammates should also help Gordon, whom I’ve been willing to draft aggressively this summer.

Liz: Lindsay has been a top-20 FF option in back-to-back seasons, showing off his 4.4 speed and explosiveness via double-digit breakaway runs over two consecutive efforts. Does that mean that the Broncos want to get all up in their feelings about a diminutively-sized underdog and make him their RB1? Apparently not. That’s why they added Gordon — a player who has averaged 3 red zone rushing attempts and over 4.5 targets per contest over three straight campaigns — and guaranteed the Chargers’ former bell cow $13.5 over two years. 

Given Gordon’s three-down skill set, in tandem with the team’s reluctance to commit fully to Lindsay, their respective ADPs appear appropriate. Gordon is a top-20 option (ADP = RB17) while Lindsay offers FLEX appeal (ADP = RB39). 

Andy: Lindsay has delivered back-to-back 1,000-yard seasons for Denver, running efficiently (4.9 YPC) and playing on a low-dollar deal. He’s given the team everything it could possibly want. So, naturally, the Broncos threw a buncha million bucks at a brand-name running back. Sure.

Gordon is obviously an excellent back and a capable receiver, plus he was paid like a featured runner. We have to assume he’s going to handle 65-70 percent of the backfield touches, with Lindsay in a rotational role. The ADPs of each player seem reasonable, given their likely roles. Lindsay is a very good back, but he’s hardly an ideal opening week fantasy starter.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Joe Bryant changed the title to RB Melvin Gordon, DEN

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
  • Create New...