Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Dynasty & Redraft: RB David Montgomery, Bears


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

While week 1 overreactions are standard, I also think that people who are outraged about Montgomery's share are not appreciating the following: Cohen will always drain some looks as he is a prov

potential top rb in rookie drafts. Hoping KC decides to start over at rb and take him

Reality is: - The article you posted is from August 1, before any preseason games. - Davis was paid minimal money to come to Chicago.  - The Bears had no other meaningful RB besides Coh

Well, this injury probably makes it more likely I'll draft Montgomery now. Sounds like a 2-4 week timeline, but he's gone from RB21 to RB32 already, and will probably fall even further. If I can get him as my RB4, which I think will be possible in a few days, I'll be all aboard.

ETA: The Bears fan in me is really hoping they don't sign a guy like Freeman, who looked very washed, and just throw Patterson out there in the meantime.

Edited by travdogg
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, travdogg said:

Well, this injury probably makes it more likely I'll draft Montgomery now. Sounds like a 2-4 week timeline, but he's gone from RB21 to RB32 already, and will probably fall even further. If I can get him as my RB4, which I think will be possible in a few days, I'll be all aboard.

ETA: The Bears fan in me is really hoping they don't sign a guy like Freeman, who looked very washed, and just throw Patterson out there in the meantime.

That could be fun.

I am seeing Patterson still being listed as a WR for fantasy purposes. I wonder if this might change? The Bears have designated him as a RB now correct?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

NFL Network's Ian Rapoport reports Bears RB David Montgomery is expected to miss 2-4 weeks.

This timeline butts him up against Chicago's season opener versus Detroit. Fantasy players should at the very least prepare for Montgomery to sit (or be limited) in Week 1, adding viable spot-start FLEX options in the later rounds to ensure a serviceable starting lineup out the gates. Assuming the Bears don't trade for a backup, Chicago will lean on Tarik Cohen, Cordarrelle Patterson, Ryan Nall and Artavis Pierce -- 83 combined carries in 2019 -- in the interim.

SOURCE: Ian Rapoport on Twitter

Aug 27, 2020, 11:37 AM ET

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Biabreakable said:

That could be fun.

I am seeing Patterson still being listed as a WR for fantasy purposes. I wonder if this might change? The Bears have designated him as a RB now correct?

They haven't changed his designation to my knowledge, but he has mostly worked with the RBs in camp. I have always wondered if his career would have been far more effective if he'd been a RB all this time. 

On a similar note, I've always thought Tavon Austin should have been a 3rd down back. Ala Cohen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, travdogg said:

They haven't changed his designation to my knowledge, but he has mostly worked with the RBs in camp. I have always wondered if his career would have been far more effective if he'd been a RB all this time. 

On a similar note, I've always thought Tavon Austin should have been a 3rd down back. Ala Cohen.

(Patterson) Another Ty Montgomery possibly?

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:

(Patterson) Another Ty Montgomery possibly?

Very possibly, and Patterson is a lot more explosive than Montgomery ever was, as well as being a better pass catcher.

About 30 years ago, Rod Bernstine switched from TE to RB when Marion Butts got hurt with the Chargers. He was a different type of player, but its not unheard of. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, travdogg said:

They haven't changed his designation to my knowledge, but he has mostly worked with the RBs in camp. I have always wondered if his career would have been far more effective if he'd been a RB all this time. 

On a similar note, I've always thought Tavon Austin should have been a 3rd down back. Ala Cohen.

I was reading about it a little bit today after your comment.

Patterson says he is still learning how to read blocks and that it is challenging for him learning to run between the tackles.

I wish nothing but the best for Patterson but he doesn't seem like a fast learner.

Since the first time I saw Patterson in a Vikings uniform I thought he looks more like a RB than a WR and I still think that is the best fit for him. Not sure if he can learn the inside game well enough though. Would have been nice to make this switch a long time ago.

He is still wearing 84 which is a WR number. I suppose that doesn't matter but its likely going to take something more for him to change positions for fantasy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Biabreakable said:

He is still wearing 84 which is a WR number. I suppose that doesn't matter but its likely going to take something more for him to change positions for fantasy.

He's a great guy with the ball in space, but he doesn't strike me as having a running back's type of running style, which is shoulders forward and going seemingly downhill all the time. He's upright and not a real slasher.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rockaction said:

He's a great guy with the ball in space, but he doesn't strike me as having a running back's type of running style, which is shoulders forward and going seemingly downhill all the time. He's upright and not a real slasher.

I would like to see him try.

The Patriots probably the closest to using him as a traditional RB so far. A lot of his runs are jet sweeps and things of that nature.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, rockaction said:

He's a great guy with the ball in space, but he doesn't strike me as having a running back's type of running style, which is shoulders forward and going seemingly downhill all the time. He's upright and not a real slasher.

He’s not built like a RB either. 6’2”, 238 sn’t usually well-suited to cutting into holes in the OL. Might was well put a “where’s Waldo” hat on him for defenses to key in on. He’d be like the bizarro world Emmet Smith out there. Put a giant bullseye on his chest while you’re at it. lol

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, Biabreakable said:

A lot of his runs are jet sweeps and things of that nature.

Yeah, that’s about the only way I could see it working. Basically WR-style rushing plays. 

it would be amusing to see him take it up the guy 15x a game, but likely ineffective. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

He’s not built like a RB either. 6’2”, 238 sn’t usually well-suited to cutting into holes in the OL. Might was well put a “where’s Waldo” hat on him for defenses to key in on. He’d be like the bizarro world Emmet Smith out there. Put a giant bullseye on his chest while you’re at it. lol

Patterson doesn't weight 238. Maybe that was a typo.

Patterson is basically the same physically as Adrian Peterson. Same height same weight.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

He’s not built like a RB either. 6’2”, 238 sn’t usually well-suited to cutting into holes in the OL. Might was well put a “where’s Waldo” hat on him for defenses to key in on. He’d be like the bizarro world Emmet Smith out there. Put a giant bullseye on his chest while you’re at it. lol

That is basically what Steven Jackson was. James Conner isn't far off. I'm not suggesting the Bears use Patterson as their feature back, just as maybe a 12-15 touches guy. They could use the playmaking ability, whether its unconventional or not.  

52 minutes ago, Biabreakable said:

Patterson doesn't weight 238. Maybe that was a typo.

Patterson is basically the same physically as Adrian Peterson. Same height same weight.

Patterson has clearly bulked up a bit, perhaps expecting more run as an RB. 238 feels hard to believe, but 225+ seems highly likely. Montgomery is listed around 225, and Patterson is noticeably bigger than him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ryan Nall time baby!

The 2-4 week timeframe makes it possibly less likely that they address the position in any meaningful way. Nall is the only real RB there and is a good, versatile player in his own right. 

Not sure why Freeman is thrown out as some RB savour whenever a team needs one. Dude is completely washed up from what we've seen the last couple of years, and he would need time to get familiar with a new offense. Better off sticking with what you have in house. 

Edited by RushHour
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Biabreakable said:

Patterson doesn't weight 238. Maybe that was a typo.

Patterson is basically the same physically as Adrian Peterson. Same height same weight.

That’s what his profile has him at on Pro Football Reference - they're usually quite reliable. 
6-2, 238lb

Maybe he’s bulking up to be the new Trey Burton? :shrug: 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, travdogg said:

That is basically what Steven Jackson was. James Conner isn't far off. I'm not suggesting the Bears use Patterson as their feature back, just as maybe a 12-15 touches guy. They could use the playmaking ability, whether its unconventional or not.  
 

can he still make those plays at the bulked up weight tho? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

can he still make those plays at the bulked up weight tho? 

 

Maybe, maybe not. Its probably more worth a try than signing somebody like Freeman would be, especially since Montgomery sounds likely to be back by week 3 at the latest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

That’s what his profile has him at on Pro Football Reference - they're usually quite reliable. 
6-2, 238lb

Maybe he’s bulking up to be the new Trey Burton? :shrug: 

Huh your right that is what PFR has him listed at.

It is possible that he has gained that much weight and I think PFR uses data that is put out by the teams. That is why you will see some difference in these things on PFR compared to combine numbers.

PFR isn't infallible but maybe they are right. Maybe Patterson has put on weight with the plan of him moving to RB in mind.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, jm192 said:

Where are you looking for him at in drafts?  On Yahoo he's been going end of the 6th/early 7th in mocks.  I appreciate he may miss a couple of games, but feels like a nice value at that point

Sounds right to me. I’m not into him as a player but he’s locked into a starting role and was going in the 4th prior to the injury. That’s a pretty good discount if he’s only going to miss a game or 2. I took him in the early 7th as my rb4 in a draft this week. Limited keeper league though so played more like a mid 8th.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, candian fantasy guy said:

As a Bears fan, I'm passing on Montgomery and buying Cohen 3 rounds later instead(PPR). 

Montgomery stands to have a huge workload.  Cohen is what he is.  He'll be solid in PPR, but he isn't going to win you any leagues.  If I'm getting Montgomery in the 6th, I'm here for it all day. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, jm192 said:

Montgomery stands to have a huge workload.  Cohen is what he is.  He'll be solid in PPR, but he isn't going to win you any leagues.  If I'm getting Montgomery in the 6th, I'm here for it all day. 

The potential issue is that the injury lingers, or (worse) he tries to come back too soon and reinjures it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think many around here that didn't follow the Bears closely know just how bad their playcalling/offensive line were last season. That on top of Trubisky making the wrong reads much of the time and being inaccurate was a recipe for disaster. They did minor tweaks to the line which hopefully will make them at least average. Montgomery should be the workhorse and if they commit to him I expect him to be fine. Hopefully Foles can stabilize the QB position which will make the entire offense better. I took a shot on him in 1 draft and think he could be a steal at his ADP. Hopefully the groin injury doesn't linger into the season. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, JFS171 said:

The potential issue is that the injury lingers, or (worse) he tries to come back too soon and reinjures it. 

Groin injuries are notoriously tricky.

that said i’ve seen Montgomery’s stock drop to the 8-9 round range, where a RB-needy team could do a lot worse as a BYE week filler. Let’s say you have Zeke/Mostert as your 1-2 & went big on WR/TE early on. I could see him being the best option at that point. 

i wasn’t in on him as a 5th round RB2 before the injury. I like his injury discount as a RB3-4 though. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jm192 said:

Montgomery stands to have a huge workload.  Cohen is what he is.  He'll be solid in PPR, but he isn't going to win you any leagues.  If I'm getting Montgomery in the 6th, I'm here for it all day. 

I love Cohen as my RB4, he should catch a bunch of balls this year. Montgomery was so disappointing last year, he looked slow out there. Something a groin injury is not likely to help. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, candian fantasy guy said:

As a Bears fan, I'm passing on Montgomery and buying Cohen 3 rounds later instead(PPR). 

Shark move.

Given my league's PPR scoring, I had Cohen ranked higher than Montgomery outright coming into the season based on projections.

Cohen caught the second most balls and had third most receptions on the team last year, and was just behind Monty in snap counts (factoring in ST snaps, Cohen passes him by far). 

Cohen will never give you enough to be a RB2 when Montgomery is healthy, but he is a pretty reliable flex in PPR.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

On 8/28/2020 at 10:14 AM, Biabreakable said:

PFR isn't infallible but maybe they are right. Maybe Patterson has put on weight with the plan of him moving to RB in mind.

that’s what I tell people when I put on a few lbs, anyway. :shrug: 

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Rhythmdoctor said:

Just had 2 high stakes drafts this week.  Montgomery went in rounds 5 and 6 while Cohen went round 8 in both.

I can’t believe his ADP is relatively unchanged after sustaining a 2-4 week groin injury. 

in mocks on CBS today he was falling to the 7-8 regularly. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I can’t believe his ADP is relatively unchanged after sustaining a 2-4 week groin injury. 

in mocks on CBS today he was falling to the 7-8 regularly. 

He was going 3-4 beforehand.  2 round drop seems about right for losing him for 2-4 weeks.  He's been going round 6-7 in most of mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Deamon said:

He was going 3-4 beforehand.  2 round drop seems about right for losing him for 2-4 weeks.  He's been going round 6-7 in most of mine.

I’d more typically seen him in the early 5th. I only mocked a few times before he got hurt though so maybe I missed some of the earlier ADP reaches. 

i had him pegged for a 4-5 rounder this year. Not like he did anything last year to deserve getting taken in the 3rd.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hot Sauce Guy said:

I’d more typically seen him in the early 5th. I only mocked a few times before he got hurt though so maybe I missed some of the earlier ADP reaches. 

i had him pegged for a 4-5 rounder this year. Not like he did anything last year to deserve getting taken in the 3rd.

Ya his adp in standard leagues was around 4.03... which has quickly dropped now to 6.06.  Seems like an appropriate big drop given the injury.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Deamon said:

Ya his adp in standard leagues was around 4.03... which has quickly dropped now to 6.06.  Seems like an appropriate big drop given the injury.

Agreed. Also agreed I’d rather have Cohen in the 8th. Or avoid Chicago altogether since Cohen will lose value around week 4 when Montgomery returns. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think he’s supposed to miss 2-4 games. My understanding was 2-4 weeks from when he was hurt 8/26. Might miss a game or 2. I thought his ADP in ppr was mid 4 and I had no interest there. Late 6 early 7 after the injury he became a target of mine. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cobbler1 said:

I don’t think he’s supposed to miss 2-4 games. My understanding was 2-4 weeks from when he was hurt 8/26. Might miss a game or 2. I thought his ADP in ppr was mid 4 and I had no interest there. Late 6 early 7 after the injury he became a target of mine. 

But this inherently assumes he doesn’t have a single hiccup in his return. Soft tissue injuries are notoriously finicky. I distinctly remember Doug Martin’s last year in Tampa with a hamstring or groin injury one, and every time he returned to practice he had a setback. I think he played like 5 games all year (hurt week 3/4 and given the 2-4 week timetable and maybe came back super late in the year).

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JFS171 said:

But this inherently assumes he doesn’t have a single hiccup in his return. Soft tissue injuries are notoriously finicky. I distinctly remember Doug Martin’s last year in Tampa with a hamstring or groin injury one, and every time he returned to practice he had a setback. I think he played like 5 games all year (hurt week 3/4 and given the 2-4 week timetable and maybe came back super late in the year).

Absolutely the chance of hurting it again should be a factor. Just clarifying that people seem to be taking the 2-4 week timeline to mean 2-4 games. That’s not how it was reported. So any risk of injury reoccurrence should be added to that baseline. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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...