Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Live Draft Gone Bad


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

Gallman would be another.

Gallman isn't a bad option.   He has little competition.  He even gets some receptions.  He had 34 receptions as a rookie while only playing 29% of snaps.  And now he is in his third year of playing with Eli so he could be even more effective as a receiver.   Few handcuffs can be counted on to actually be lead back when the starter goes down.  Wayne would be lead back if Saquon goes down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Don Hutson said:

Gallman isn't a bad option.   He has little competition.  He even gets some receptions.  He had 34 receptions as a rookie while only playing 29% of snaps.  And now he is in his third year of playing with Eli so he could be even more effective as a receiver.   Few handcuffs can be counted on to actually be lead back when the starter goes down.  Wayne would be lead back if Saquon goes down.

Salient points, with one quibble. Eli's done starting. It's Jones. I'm not sure I like Gallman as an addition. They're not a great team; what makes them so attractive at times is Barkley's transcendent talent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, rockaction said:

Salient points, with one quibble. Eli's done starting. It's Jones. I'm not sure I like Gallman as an addition. They're not a great team; what makes them so attractive at times is Barkley's transcendent talent. 

Gallman is a nice running back for the Giants to pair with Jones.  Gallman is great at pass protection.  His PFF pass block grades from the last 2 years are 85.7 and 88.3.  Gallman probably has a ceiling of a RB2 because of being on the Giants.  He is not Saquon.  But getting a RB2 from the waiver wire is massive.  It would be extra massive in a running back heavy league where 72 running backs are rostered.

Edited by Don Hutson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, -X- said:

Dropped Henderson instead of Ty Monty for Gallman?

:oldunsure: :wall:

Henderson has much more talent than Gallman, even if he’s currently buried on the Rams’ depth chart.

For Mostert, though. I agree he might have dropped the wrong guy, but it was for Mostert. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, -X- said:

My mistake.  Mostert is an upgrade as long as he keeps getting touches, but his usage bump was rather out of the blue.  I would’ve dumped Ty Monty and kept Henderson.

I would have held waiver priority, but you know what? I never made my case as to why, so that's out the window. 

Mostert is fine, but there's a bye week Week Four, IIRC, for Coleman to heal and send Mostert back to the bench. Mostert also just ceded goal line work to another back, whose name I cannot recall right now. Wilson? 

This is outstanding. Breida runs outside, Mostert runs inside and catches dump offs, and some chap named Wilson takes it to the house from close. Lovely. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Dr. Octopus said:

It wasn’t out of the blue - Coleman was out.

What I meant was that Breida was thought to get the majority of the touches, not a relatively equal distribution with Mostert, but I guess that’s to be expected with Shanahan.

Edited by -X-
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, rockaction said:

I would have held waiver priority, but you know what? I never made my case as to why, so that's out the window. 

Mostert is fine, but there's a bye week Week Four, IIRC, for Coleman to heal and send Mostert back to the bench. Mostert also just ceded goal line work to another back, whose name I cannot recall right now. Wilson? 

This is outstanding. Breida runs outside, Mostert runs inside and catches dump offs, and some chap named Wilson takes it to the house from close. Lovely. 

All I read was that Shanahan “hinted at” Wilson getting GL work.  Never have been a fan of Shanahan RBBC guys.  Too inconsistent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, -X- said:

All I read was that Shanahan “hinted at” Wilson getting GL work.  Never have been a fan of Shanahan RBBC guys.  Too inconsistent.

After Wilson scored two TDs from runs inside the 20. I think he was 10-34-2 or something like it.  

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, -X- said:

Dropped Henderson instead of Ty Monty for Gallman?

:oldunsure: :wall:

Henderson has much more talent than Gallman, even if he’s currently buried on the Rams’ depth chart.

Remember, no matter what his son does to this team - it's all puppies and rainbows in this thread!  Kinda like how the entire team says "good answer" on Family Feud, even when the answer blows chunks.

  • Thanks 1
  • Laughing 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, -X- said:

I guess bellcow is subjective regarding percentage.  I mean, even Walter Payton was spelled occasionally by Roland Harper and Dennis Gentry later on.

85%+?

The game was way different then. Payton had 333 carries in 1978. Roland Harper (his teammate) had 240 that year. Can you imagine if teams ran the ball 634 times in a season like the Bears did? Fans would revolt.

Edited by Anarchy99
  • Laughing 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

The game was way different then. Payton had 333 carries in 1978. Roland Harper had 240 that year. Can you imagine if teams ran the ball 634 times in a season like the Bears did? Fans would revolt.

Right?  They used the run to set up the...  Run.  No surprise as those were the Bob Avellini days.  :bag:

From Walter’s infamous 1977 game vs. MIN:

Bob Avellini 
4/6, 33 Yds, INT :lmao:

Walter Payton 
40 Rush, 275 Yds, TD :pickle:

James Scott 
2 Rec, 22 Yds :lmao:

Edited by -X-
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:
6 hours ago, joffer said:

Didn’t Edgerrin James once get every single RB carry for the Colts in a year?

James had 387 carries. Other backs got 5. Edge also had 63 receptions. The other scrubs had 4.

That was the 2000 season. In 1999, James had 369 carries. His backup, Keith Elias, had 13. Two other backs on the roster (incl one FB, Paul Shields) got nada.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno if Gore is still available, but if he is, I would drop Montgomery and grab him, even if you have to use another waiver claim.  Your son already burned the claim, so you're back near the bottom again, right?  Gore is a worthy starter this week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, TheWinz said:

I dunno if Gore is still available, but if he is, I would drop Montgomery and grab him, even if you have to use another waiver claim.  Your son already burned the claim, so you're back near the bottom again, right?  Gore is a worthy starter this week.

Gore was picked up by someone with a higher waiver claim. We are down to 9th in the pecking order. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Uruk-Hai said:

Ravens fan here. Mahomes all day. 

I'm less concerned about the Ravens defense than I am about the weather. Expected to be heavy rain, windy, and thunderstorms all afternoon. The Ravens did a good job last year pressing Mahomes. If the ball is wet, lots of things can go wrong. And wind usually hurts QB numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Anarchy99 said:

I'm less concerned about the Ravens defense than I am about the weather. Expected to be heavy rain, windy, and thunderstorms all afternoon. The Ravens did a good job last year pressing Mahomes. If the ball is wet, lots of things can go wrong. And wind usually hurts QB numbers.

The last weather report I saw was intermittent T-storms. Mahomes threw for almost 300 yards and 4 TDs in one quarter last week. An hour or so break in the weather looks appetizing to me. The Ravens secondary is a MASH unit right now.

Go with Wilson if you want to reduce perceived risk. I'm just saying that I would not worry about what Mahomes can do today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Uruk-Hai said:

The last weather report I saw was intermittent T-storms. Mahomes threw for almost 300 yards and 4 TDs in one quarter last week. An hour or so break in the weather looks appetizing to me. The Ravens secondary is a MASH unit right now.

Go with Wilson if you want to reduce perceived risk. I'm just saying that I would not worry about what Mahomes can do today.

They just showed the stadium. You can barely see from the rain as they showed them taking the tarp off the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Anarchy99 said:

Down 26 with the other team having BCooks and the CLE defense. We have OBJ, Peterson, Zuerlein, and CHI defense. Should have stuck with my instinct to play Wilson (not that Mahomes didn’t have good numbers).

Might have a better chance trading Wilson after today's performance.

Pulling for you. :football:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

Down 26 with the other team having BCooks and the CLE defense. We have OBJ, Peterson, Zuerlein, and CHI defense. Should have stuck with my instinct to play Wilson (not that Mahomes didn’t have good numbers).

I see Evans finally blew up.

Bold strategy starting AP and CHI D since they are at odds.  Better to roll the dice with Cohen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

Would have been nice is Evans blew up while still on our roster. 

Ya you gift wrapped that for him.  Would have had a better record for sure if you didn't make the trade.  Oh well, hindsight. 

What do you need to happen now on Monday night?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Deamon said:

Ya you gift wrapped that for him.  Would have had a better record for sure if you didn't make the trade.  Oh well, hindsight. 

What do you need to happen now on Monday night?

Not sure about your first statement. Definitely would have lost last week if we still had Evans. Fitz is on pace for 96/1350/11. Other than Brown in Week 1, all the other RB's we had on the roster originally have been abysmal.

We are losing by 22.08 heading into tonight. We have either Cohen or Peterson and the Bears defense to catch up. IMO, those two backs are pretty close projection wise this week. The Bears really haven't utilized Cohen much at all. Peterson is probably 25-35% to get a goal line TD. Neither one is a great option, as I doubt either one will have a noteworthy fantasy week. We will likely need a big game from the Bears defense with a return TD to stand a chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

Not sure about your first statement. Definitely would have lost last week if we still had Evans. Fitz is on pace for 96/1350/11. Other than Brown in Week 1, all the other RB's we had on the roster originally have been abysmal.

We are losing by 22.08 heading into tonight. We have either Cohen or Peterson and the Bears defense to catch up. IMO, those two backs are pretty close projection wise this week. The Bears really haven't utilized Cohen much at all. Peterson is probably 25-35% to get a goal line TD. Neither one is a great option, as I doubt either one will have a noteworthy fantasy week. We will likely need a big game from the Bears defense with a return TD to stand a chance.

Cohen.

Assuming ppr.

Edited by BassNBrew
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Anarchy99 said:

Would have been nice is Evans blew up while still on our roster. 

Yeah no doubt. The trade did result in a H2H victory last week that wouldn't have happened otherwise. Unless some other deal had materialized at the last minute. But moving forward who knows.

AP at Chicago is unfortunate. Flip a coin between him and Cohen. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Last week if the trade hadn't happened:

Evans 10.1 Montgomery 7.0 Brown 5.7

Total 22.8 (I forget this *is* PPR no?)

Last week with the trade:

Fitzgerald 15.4

AP 11.2

Cohen 4.5

Total 31.1

With trade equals victory without trade equals loss. But that is just one week and the balance sheet comparison for this week is undoubtedly unfavorable after Evans monster game. But it is also difficult to compare post-trade box scores when you consider what other forks in the road the team may have gone if the Evans deal hadn't been made. Too many what ifs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, barackdhouse said:

Last week if the trade hadn't happened:

Evans 10.1 Montgomery 7.0 Brown 5.7

Total 22.8 (I forget this *is* PPR no?)

Last week with the trade:

Fitzgerald 15.4

AP 11.2

Cohen 4.5

Total 31.1

With trade equals victory without trade equals loss. But that is just one week and the balance sheet comparison for this week is undoubtedly unfavorable after Evans monster game. But it is also difficult to compare post-trade box scores when you consider what other forks in the road the team may have gone if the Evans deal hadn't been made. Too many what ifs. 

0.5 PPR scoring.

IMO, we would have lost with Evans last week. As you said, water under the bridge now. Still haven't gotten much scoring from RB's. We definitely aren't going to outscore the Top 3 scoring teams in any week and haven't had the luxury of playing teams that put up duds. We are Bottom 2 or 3 in team points allowed (not that we are in control of that).

If we somehow are able to win tonight, we would probably end up as the 4th highest scoring team this week. Therein lies the problem. Given the RB's on our roster, there is no way we are ever going to beat a team that scores a lot. We will be lucky to get 10 points from our 2 RB's again this week. In three games, we have been outscored at RB 80 to 30.

No one is really all that eager to trade us a reliable RB and want Mahomes of Hopkins in return. Giving up one of them for a part time back or RB3 doesn't make any sense. No one really available on waivers either.

Link to comment
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...