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.
RB Derrius Guice, Free Agent (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter Faust
- Start date
I see it as a Melvin Gordon situation. Gordon came in to the Chargers as the 2 down guy because Danny Woodhead was there and was extremely effective in that facet of the game. Gordon only caught 22 passes in 4 years of college but as we know now, had the skillset to excel in the passing game. I feel Guice's situation is similar both in terms what his college team asked of him and in terms of what the depth chart looks like in NFL. Even right down to the fact that Thompson seems to always be dinged up like Woodhead was in his later years. Hoping and anticipating Guice becoming the 3rd down guy eventually is projecting out and going out on a limb, I will grant that, but the same can be said of about 5 of the other 7 top backs.
Michel - has the ability but White and Burkhead both have been effective in the 3rd down role.
Johnson - Riddick is elite as a 3rd down guy
Chubb - Duke is also elite as a 3rd down player
Rojo - Sims has occupied that role for years and been ok (he appears the least threatening of the 3rd down obstacles)
Penny - Prosise and Mckissic are both still there, Prosise has been great every time he has been on the field (not often) and Mckissic was decent last year
All of these guys have a similar road blocks. Seattle's reporting on Penny being a 3 down guy sounds nice but if Prosise managed to stay healthy, I don't think there would be any shot of Penny getting the passing work over him and Mckissic may still get some looks. I think of the top 8 RBs, only Barkley and Freeman went to places where they look to have a clean shot at 3 down work (and in Freeman's case, Elway came out and said some things that indicate the exact opposite so who even knows).
I still like Guice the best of the group because pre-draft assessments based just on talent put him in tier 2 alone most of the time or in tier 2 with and above Chubb and Michel in those cases where he wasn't alone. Of those 3, his situation looks the clearest for early success. Michel is obvsiouly on the Pats and could be incredible but they are erratic in their usage and have not one, but 2 strong role player RBs under non-rookie contracts. Chubb doesn't need a lot of explanation in regards to his current situation. Penny gets in the conversation based off of situation alone and while volume is king, I don't think he will get enough quality volume to move him above Guice or even Michel in my personal rankings. Seattle's line was bad last year and if it is better this year, I still except it to be below average. Turn over at OC and a bad defense really temper my expectations of his volume. It is possible that Penny ends up a dynamo because they are passing to him so much with them being behind in games but if that happens, I will be happy for those who were right and lose no sleep over being wrong because I did not want the risk.
Second for me.
When the NFL draft concluded I stepped back and asked myself if maybe I'm wrong about him? After the draft I like to go back and watch videos of players and try and get a mental picture of them on their new team. I try not to do this with a bias but I think it's fair to say when I did this post draft I was looking for negatives in Guice's game and looking for positives I just was not seeing in Penny's game. My feelings on Penny remained fairly unchanged but he's a different story. I not only could not find any fault with Guice, it only reinforced my fondness for him more.
I'll answer your question with a homework assignment and put a question back on you. Watch this game, 2016- Guice vs Florida, and tell me what you don't like, what about his performance in this game would make you uneasy about picking him as the second RB in your draft? For me I would answer that question by saying the only thing I could come up with was he only got one pass directed at him I never saw him run a real route in the passing game.
Always a good idea to watch multiple games on prospects but here is why I recommend that game as the best one. I'll start by saying his stats are not great, he did not run for 100 yards. LSU lost that game and a costly fumble by Guice was a major contributing reason. But here are reasons I'd watch that game in particular. Outside of LSU without looking this up I'm pretty sure that Alabama, Georgia and Florida have been putting out the most defensive players in the NFL during Guice's time at LSU among SEC teams and probably among college teams period. He never played against Georgia so they are out. He played against Bama 3 times but once as a freshmen and got no carries, only got 2 carries against them the second time and then last year was only game he had a decent workload against them. I would list his game against Bama in 2017 as the second video I'd prioritize watching on him but considering that Bama always shut down Fournette and he was not as healthy in 2017 as he was in 2016 I put a greater emphasis on the Florida game.
About that 2016 Florida team. I looked this up and counted 9 players from their two deep depth chart on defense in 2016 that are in the NFL and that's not even getting into the guys who are still on the Florida team. So that 2016 game gave you a healthy Guice against as close to an NFL defense as you can get on the collegiate level. This is a very long winded way of saying I'm not cherry picking games.
I watched that video of that game multiple times, probably spent about 2 hours on it. Watched in full speed, watched the whole game in quarter speed slo-mo. A little overboard probably but I had pick 2 in multiple leagues, wanted to make sure. LSU was overmatched on offense and what Guice got he got on his own and I honestly can't think of any RB, not even if you put an existing RB in the NFL on that LSU team that day, that could have done more with less then Guice that day. Fournette played in that game and Guice outperformed him but Fournette was not healthy and that was the last game he would at LSU so I don't want to focus on that as a positive for Guice. But it was a virtuoso performance that put his vision, balance and maybe most of all his toughness on full display. He earned every yard he got. I mentioned earlier the one thing I did not see was much involvement in the passing game and I never saw him run a route but the one time they dumped it off to him and one time I recall he got put in space in that game he took it 29 yards.
So again in answer to your question I would encourage you to watch that video, and tell me what you see in his game that makes you feel uneasy spending pick 2 on him in your rookie draft?
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Nice post @gabes1919 I agree with most of what you said.
I don't think Freeman gets a pass though as Booker has been a pretty effective receiving RB and in my view has more feature RB ability than guys like Charles Sims.
Elway doesn't know what he is talking about. He thinks Freeman is a power RB.
I don't think Freeman gets a pass though as Booker has been a pretty effective receiving RB and in my view has more feature RB ability than guys like Charles Sims.
Elway doesn't know what he is talking about. He thinks Freeman is a power RB.
Fair enough, I was pretty much a true split for receiving work in Denver last year so I kind of threw it out but his usage there is something to watch. Elway totally has no clue and I’m not sure Vance Joseph does either. They completely misused CJA last year for whatever reason, almost like they didn’t want him to be the lead guy and wouldn’t give him a shot to carry the team. Hopefully hand picking Freeman will make that situation better
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
He broke his back and tore his ACL in college as well. Also didn't he tear his labrum twice?Chris Thompson is "injury prone" now?
a torn labrum 5 seasons ago and a broken leg last year....
2011: Broken back, out for season
2012: Torn ACL, out for season
2013: Torn labrum, out for season
2014: Played 2 games, 9 total touches
2015: Torn labrum, out for season
2016: Healthy!
2017: Broken fibula, out for season
So 5 season ending injuries in 7 years for a guy that typically only touches the ball a max of 120 times/year. And in one of the two years where he didn't have a major, season ending injury, he basically didn't play.
Pwingles
Footballguy
Maybe we disagree on this point, but IMO, that term is rarely used the way it should be. I feel its inaccurate and being applied to something it shouldnt be because we dont have a name for it that depicts the situation more correctly. Nobody is really "prone" to these injuries. It's a similar situation to Dion Lewis, whether its recency bias, theyre parroting someone else idk, but he, as someone who has been injured multiple times, is being labled as injury prone. Its simply untrue.
I feel the term is better used to describe guys who have re occurring soft tissue issues, lower leg, concussion history, stuff like that. I know concussions sort of come with football too, like ACL injuries, but the studies seem to point to them being easier to get, as you suffer more of them.
BigTex
Don't mess with Texas
Pwingles
Footballguy
is this like a "dude, i think i agree with you!"
or a "dude, you're a moron!"
ha, its cool either way, im happy to debate it. The time for a newly named injury descriptive term is now!
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Pwingles
Footballguy
It basically is that, right?
I mean, he is playing a game where huge men have to hit him on every play. The activity itself is whats causing injuries like those. So people are willingly putting themselves in the situation that increases the odds of those injuries. Some people get hurt, some people never get hurt seriously. So what are the factors that make this happen?
- playing professional football
- playing a position that gets beaten up for a living
- size
Out of all of these the only thing that an NFL RB will have much control over is their size.
Chris Thompson and Dion fall into a category where they are on the smaller end of the spectrum, maybe this is the thing to focus on? Maybe smaller guys are slightly more inclined to encountering these major structural type injuries? Broken leg, arm, shoulder, ribs etc? It makes sense on the surface (smaller is weaker, or less durable) but Im not sure if there is data to back that theory up. Obviously all RBs are capable of having these injuries, and they do happen. But is it less often?
Is there some sort of data to back up "size adjusted injury risk"? How much would overall usage of the player multiply this risk? Now im curious
Who does all the BMI related stuff for rookies? Maybe we can chart some injuries and compare them to position and BMI?
Last edited by a moderator:
Interseptopus
Footballguy
From a medical perspective, I hate the term "fast healer" or "slow healer." No one heals faster or slower. Everyone heals at the same pace. If you truly are a fast healer you are using illegal or legal supplements to accelerate the natural healing process.It basically is that, right?
I mean, he is playing a game where huge men have to hit him on every play. The activity itself is whats causing injuries like those. So people are willingly putting themselves in the situation that increases the odds of those injuries. Some people get hurt, some people never get hurt seriously. So what are the factors that make this happen?
- playing professional football
- playing a position that gets beaten up for a living
- size
Out of all of these the only thing that an NFL RB will have much control over is their size.
Chris Thompson and Dion fall into a category where they are on the smaller end of the spectrum, maybe this is the thing to focus on? Maybe smaller guys are slightly more inclined to encountering these major structural type injuries? Broken leg, arm, shoulder, ribs etc? It makes sense on the surface (smaller is weaker, or less durable) but Im not sure if there is data to back that theory up. Obviously all RBs are capable of having these injuries, and they do happen. But is it less often?
Is there some sort of data to back up "size adjusted injury risk"? How much would overall usage of the player multiply this risk? Now im curious
Who does all the BMI related stuff for rookies? Maybe we can chart some injuries and compare them to position and BMI?
I feel the term "injury prone" is over-used. If a guy has a fluke injury and breaks his leg, that's not the same as a guy who is prone to rotator cuff or labral injuries because of scapular dyskinesis. Although one could argue frequent broken bones could be a sign of underlying issues. A broken back is often the result of poor core stability. A broken fibula, eh more of a fluke.
I've had this debate before, possibly iwth you even, that there are people who physically can be more prone to injuries than others in the same profession, putting the same demands on the body. Consider this: we all have two eyes, ears, a nose, mouth etc. But we all look different on the outside. Similarly, we all have the same inside body parts but we all look different on the inside as well. If you take an age-matched male and him and I go through a motion analysis test, you are likely to find that I may be at a higher risk of a left ACL tear than the age-matched male due to weaknesses, bone structure, movement patterns, etc. Genetics play a major factor, as does previous experiences with injury. I can sprain my ankle badly once. It will not go back to 100%. I am now prone to more ankle sprains. This is also thought to be true about concussions but it's a terrible misconception. Concussions are highly likely to reoccur 10-14 days after the first. You are at no greater risk for a concussion after recovery than you were prior to your first concussion. Concussions are mostly the result of your style of play, position of choice, and how you are used (over the middle WR vs a guy who runs fly patterns all game).
Looking at Thompson's injury patterns, I would say he is at risk for back, shoulder, and knee problems. ACL tear is a good possibility on his "healthy" side if his first ACL tear was non-contact. That's frequently an anatomical issue if there was no contact to facilitate the tear. I would put Thompson in the "higher risk" category for injuries given his history listed above, especially the types of injuries he has sustained.
Pwingles
Footballguy
I like this, it mostly makes sense to me. I am obv no doctor.
I think im going to create a topic for Size Adjusted Injury Risk and see where the information takes me, and stop clogging up this topic. I think your insight would be a good addition if you would like to chime in.
BigTex
Don't mess with Texas
BeGal, gave you a legitimate answer yet you still disagree. He might or might not be “prone” but his point is that he keeps missing time do to his injuries and he provides you with the injuries and the years to back up his comments. CT is a JAG anyway. Lol
Tex
kutta
Footballguy
I don’t understand how you can say with authority:
1. We all look different on the inside
2. Some people are more at risk for particular injuries because of the way their insides are constructed.
And then say that everyone heals at the same pace. If someone is prone to ACL tears and has weaker knee whatever whatever, couldn’t it be possible he is also slower to heal from an ACL tear?
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Maybe. It surely is true that playing RB in the NFL gets people dinged up but when that means one major injury for every 1000 touches for most guys (just guess there, would love to see more accurate data on that) and one guys has 5 major injuries in 450 touches, you have to think maybe something more than random variance is going on. I mean it's statistically possible for someone to win the lottery 3 weeks in a row, but realistically if they do they're probably cheating.
I don't know if Thompson is "injury prone" or not, but when a guy has had a catastrophic injury in 5 of the last 6 seasons where he received more than 10 touches it seems like it's not going out that far on a limb to think hey, maybe Guice will get a crack at some 3 down work at some point this year.
Regardless, Thompson's injury history is a lot more extensive than "a torn labrum 5 years ago".
Last edited by a moderator:
Hankmoody
Footballguy
That's not true at all. Some people have bad genetics. Their bones aren't full strength, they have trouble hydrating properly, their collagens aren't very elastic nor do they heal well - there are all kinds of physiological effects that differing people can be susceptible to.
Pwingles
Footballguy
I was unaware of his pre nfl injuries. Thats my oversight.
I wasnt questioning the correctness or legitimacy of his reply, I still just disagree that those injuries are something that one is "prone" to, in the sense that others use it.
If you're not available on Sunday consistently, then you're injury prone. I don't care if it is because you got your head bashed in, your knee torn up, or came down with a case of the sniffles.
Pwingles
Footballguy
Pwingles
Footballguy
I agree, he will likely get some extra work if CT's historical trend holds true. Maybe he will just out right earn it either way.
Yes, its a fair amount more substantial after more digging.
Jello_Biafra
Footballguy
A diabetic most definitely does not heal as quick as a non-diabetic. I have multiple examples I can give, but Dr. Dan do you agree?
https://www.dynastytradecalculator.com/trouble-in-paraguice/
Here's a film/video article on some negatives to Guice's game.
Here's a film/video article on some negatives to Guice's game.
Got him in one. I think he might be one of this class' elite runners.
santo71
Footballguy
This is well produced and I understand where he's coming from, just don't buy it. He's getting to the idea that Guice's vision and decision making are poor. He uses some examples that I would have to believe are weak at best. Multiple times he shows plays where Guice has trap lanes and must decide between them. In most cases thru his career he chooses correct, but in the 10 or so examples the host chooses to show, he has very little room and instead plows forward or takes the contested yard or two. His legs never stop and when he hits these guys, they know they got hit.tdmills said:
Whatever, everyone has their "thing" they look at during evaluations. I got little from this, but maybe this solidifies someone else's opinion.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
I watched the first half of this and I got the same impression.
While I don't think the creator of the video is wrong in his observations, some of these plays Guice could have been more decisive, and maybe this would have led to slightly better results, the same can be done with every single player. None of them are perfect all of the time.
Guice demonstrates good vision so frequently when looking at all of his plays. In my charting of 10 games for Guice I recorded 92 instances of his having good vision, which is much more than any other RB I charted from the 2018 draft class. For Nick Chubb for example I recorded 51 instances of his demonstrating good vision out of 10 games. For Sanquon Barkley 69 instances out of 10 games.
From my charting vision is Guices best trait.
So to isolate these instances where he fails to make a good decision is really overlooking the many many times when he does make a good decision. In my view his spatial awareness is excellent. He reads his blocks very well and has good timing with the flow of the defense to create successful runs.
The author above also chooses Guices worst games from my charting for his examples. His game against Florida was the worst game I kept in my 10 game sample. His game against Auburn was worse than the game against Florida and I ended up throwing that game out, not just because it was bad, but also because he had so few plays (20) in that game.
I just don't think that the author is being fair with his criticism to not at least mention that Guice does have very good vision most of the time. I suppose doing that would not support the point he is trying to make, but if he did I would think he is being fair and honest with his criticism, instead of pointing out the worst plays of his college career, while ignoring all of the good plays.
cloppbeast
Footballguy
Chaka
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
Biabreakable
Footballguy
cloppbeast
Footballguy
I'm drunk, sorry.
Chaka
Footballguy
santo71
Footballguy
He really cherry picks bad plays. Specifically ones where he shows a lack of "pro" discipline. He fails to note the other 100x Guice makes the right call and shows how decisive he really can be. And really, some of these "bad" plays are not really that bad. He never lost yards. He just didn't get as much as he might have had he made a few impossible reads. Dunno, but it feels like these plays are abnormalities...
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Stuff happens.
I didn't listen to the whole thing, only about half way as I had other stuff to do today. After I posted my response agreeing with you and I was on the road, I was still thinking about it a bit and was feeling bad for my comments, as I imagined maybe he turns this around with some positive comments later on? I didn't see the whole thing, so I worried maybe I was being unfair to the guy.
Based on what you are saying that is not the case?
The thing about him saying Guice should have burst forward before receiving the toss seems questionable to me also. But maybe he is right about that and it is something I have yet to learn. I know some of the pre hand off steps of RB still confuse me at times. Some guys really like to hop step before they get the ball, others don't. I think those hop steps can be a big tell for defenders to key on before the RB even gets the ball, through film study defenders should be able to suss out such tendencies and be able to predict where the run is going when they do that. To me this is similar to a WR needing to make every route look the same, a RB should be doing that too. Giving away tells lets savvy defenders cheat and anticipate where the RB is going before they have a chance to get there. The comments about wanting him to burst closer to the line of scrimmage before the toss seem to be ignoring how that might create more risk of a bad QB RB exchange and possibly throw the play off if Guice does what he is saying he wanted him to do. If he surges forward before getting the ball, he is going to have less space and less time to read the blocking and find the right path, he would already be committed to a certain path before getting the ball, and no time to change his direction.
I disagreed with his assessment of good blocking on one of the goal line runs. It didn't look good to me. One of the others he shows from the backside though, you can see where Guice could have hit it up in there and likely scored. I think some his observations were accurate.
He just seemed to be giving Guice the stink eye though. There is a lot of good that Guice does that he wasn't focused on. Not sure what he concludes with or where he ranks Guice compared to the other 2018 though.
I think it is fine, even a good thing to point out a players flaws, just as long as that doesn't dominate the whole picture.
I made similar observations and critique of Joe Mixon last year when the majority of people seemed to think he was a perfect RB. Thinking that the only thing wrong with him was the off the field stuff that dominated conversations about him. I disagreed with that and tried to point out that he was almost always schemed into space and he rarely had to make decisions required to run between the tackles. When he did, at times he would hesitate too much and at other times he would just fail to see cut back lanes that I think a lot of RB would. So I had questions about his ability to process this. I also didn't like his pad level, he is a pretty big player and he would leave a larger target for defenders to bring down than a RB who runs low and more compact. These flaws were not frequent in watching his games because the coaches did a really good job of making his decisions on plays clear and easy for him most of the time. They schemed him into space and got the most out of him.
That said I still recognized Mixon had great change of direction ability along with good speed and power that could be even better if he improved his technique. He also looked like a pretty natural receiver and that should translate to the pro level. I try to focus on what a player does well much moreso than what they do not do well. I think body lean and pad level are things that can be coached and improved upon, although it does require breaking down the players habits, and teaching them to run in a way that isn't coming naturally to them. One thing I am not sure can be coached is the RB vision though. I suppose you can drill that into a player through film study and critique of poor decisions they have made on plays in the past. They can maybe learn from that. You can't really teach a player to see or feel something they just don't see instinctual though. The player still has to be able to process what is going on around them in real time. I am not sure how much coaching can really improve that. So its a really big deal to me.
Talking about the negatives with Mixon was more in reaction to these things too often being glossed over in peoples opinions about him. The off the field stuff seemed to be the only thing they thought was wrong with him. Maybe the above host feels similarly in regards to Guice, and he is just trying to play devils advocate by focusing on these bad plays?
If so I can understand and appreciate that. There does seem to be some group think in regards to Guice that does need to be challenged. I just didn't really agree with his criticisms much in the context of all the good I have seen of Guice. Most of his criticisms a legit on a play for play basis. It just would be more honest or a complete evaluation to also show the good side of his decision making as well.
Skeletore Eh
Footballguy
Derrius Guice - RB - Redskins
Redskins coach Jay Gruden said "it's been very exciting" watching second-round RB Derrius Guice catch the football.
Gruden said Guice is "more of a first-, second-down banger" after the draft, but the rookie's performance during the offseason program seems to be changing his mind. Chris Thompson should still be the primary third-down back, but it makes sense for Washington to get Guice involved in the passing game as well, especially on early downs. If he is used as a receiver, Guice will have a great shot to out-play his fourth-round ADP.
Source: NBC Sports Washington
Jun 7 - 10:32 AM
https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/redskins/some-positions-become-clear-while-others-get-murky-redskins-otas
Redskins coach Jay Gruden said "it's been very exciting" watching second-round RB Derrius Guice catch the football.
Gruden said Guice is "more of a first-, second-down banger" after the draft, but the rookie's performance during the offseason program seems to be changing his mind. Chris Thompson should still be the primary third-down back, but it makes sense for Washington to get Guice involved in the passing game as well, especially on early downs. If he is used as a receiver, Guice will have a great shot to out-play his fourth-round ADP.
Source: NBC Sports Washington
Jun 7 - 10:32 AM
https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/redskins/some-positions-become-clear-while-others-get-murky-redskins-otas
BigTex
Don't mess with Texas
Bojang0301
Omar4Heisman
My twitter feed has had a bunch of Guice clips the past week or so. He looks really damn good. Specifically this play here.
Redskin OTA report
Paul Richardson worked very well in misdirection schemes while in Seattle, and it seems like Washington intends to do the same thing. On one red-zone drill, Richardson went in motion toward the short side of the field, and the defense shifted to the wideout. At the snap, Derrius Guice leaked out to the opposite flat, and Smith found the rookie runner for an easy TD.
Speaking of Guice, any questions about his ability catching passes are over. Gruden said of Guice after the session "it's been very exciting" watching the rookie as a pass-catcher.
One more Guice note - on one catch near the sideline in a red zone drill, he quickly jumped and re-planted his feet. It looked like he was heading to the sideline, and that's where the defender went, only when Guice landed and cut inside the defender fell to the ground. Guice's quick feet caused the Ashburn grass to tear a bit, only when the linebacker on the ground tried to point to the grass as the reason he fell, one player from the offensive bench yelled out, "It's not the field."
As much excitement as Guice continues to create, don't sleep on Rob Kelley. He's looked good.
Paul Richardson worked very well in misdirection schemes while in Seattle, and it seems like Washington intends to do the same thing. On one red-zone drill, Richardson went in motion toward the short side of the field, and the defense shifted to the wideout. At the snap, Derrius Guice leaked out to the opposite flat, and Smith found the rookie runner for an easy TD.
Speaking of Guice, any questions about his ability catching passes are over. Gruden said of Guice after the session "it's been very exciting" watching the rookie as a pass-catcher.
One more Guice note - on one catch near the sideline in a red zone drill, he quickly jumped and re-planted his feet. It looked like he was heading to the sideline, and that's where the defender went, only when Guice landed and cut inside the defender fell to the ground. Guice's quick feet caused the Ashburn grass to tear a bit, only when the linebacker on the ground tried to point to the grass as the reason he fell, one player from the offensive bench yelled out, "It's not the field."
As much excitement as Guice continues to create, don't sleep on Rob Kelley. He's looked good.
Skeletore Eh
Footballguy
But I thought he couldn’t catch?Bojang0301 said:
Interseptopus
Footballguy
while I understand you're being facetious, I dont think anyone ever said he couldn't catch or had stone hands. he had 600 receiving yards as a senior. what was said was that chris thompson would be the 3rd down guy. now that they are seeing Guice in the passing game. maybe they will change that mindset. Thompson cant fo half of what Guice can with the ball
also, this isn't an impressive catch; it was a quite easy one. it's a very impressive run after the catch and has me excited for his role to grow.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
I think Thompson will be the 3rd down back even if Guice shows he's capable in the passing game - Thompson is very good in that role and spelling even a workhorse type back is necessary. Just because Thompson is the main guy for that role doesn't mean Guice will not see work in the passing game however. Teams do pass on first and second downs and Guice may occasionally be left in on passing downs or 2 minute drills. I can see Guice ending up with 30-32 receptions (which helps in ppr) which is only 2 a game on average.
Of course there's always the (strong) possibility Thompson misses games with injury so those reception totals have room to grow.
Interseptopus
Footballguy
I agree, and I'll take it! Those 2 points per game are the difference between being a flex player or a RB2 IMO.
In the end, if he's making plays they will get him the ball. If that means passing him the ball, then they pass him the ball.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Chaka
Footballguy
Was it? Nice move on the LB covering him but the safety would have leveled him at the two if it was a full contact practice.
Interseptopus
Footballguy
That's what I was curious about too. Wondering how it would have looked if it was in a game or full contact. I was most impressed with the move on the LB, however that was more a result of the LB over-pursuing than Guice "breaking his ankles." Good move regardless. He looks kind of small/short was my first impression, but he's really not
Last edited by a moderator:
I took a look at this a few weeks ago and I understand when Gruden said Guice was first/second down back that did not mean that in obvious passing situations that would be the case but like you mentioned, like a Fournette, he'll get some receptions.Dr. Octopus said:
I looked only at first and second down production of NFL RB's last year and at least 8 of them averaged over 15 fantasy points a game if you omitted any third/fourth down production.
JPeso
Footballguy
Excited to see what he does and not really scared with Thompson being the pass down specialist. If anything a quality guy like Thompson can keep them from signing bell cow competition.
If Guice gets it rolling on early downs, he’s going to be tough to take off the field. And I believe he is competent enough in the pass game by w8 where he isn’t getting pulled as much if WAS is leading or in a closer game.
He plays with a lot of intensity, I expect the team to feed off of energy as he extends plays. There will be enough for Guice to be a successful back and Thompson to have his role catching a fair number of passes.
If Guice gets it rolling on early downs, he’s going to be tough to take off the field. And I believe he is competent enough in the pass game by w8 where he isn’t getting pulled as much if WAS is leading or in a closer game.
He plays with a lot of intensity, I expect the team to feed off of energy as he extends plays. There will be enough for Guice to be a successful back and Thompson to have his role catching a fair number of passes.
