NFT: FFB talk RB edition

they wanted to run it, so trying to run more to ease pressure on Goff probably isn't going to help. Teams are still going to stack the box and dare Goff to beat them. Until he does, I don't see Gurley breaking out. With the OL help, he might see a slight uptick from his pitiful 3.2 ypa, but I don't see him being a top 6-8 RB.

And their OL help is a 35 year old Whitworth and a rapidly aging Sullivan. I'd steer clear of Gurley as I think someone will overdraft him based on his talent.

In comment 13532370 giants#1 said:

Quote:

they wanted to run it, so trying to run more to ease pressure on Goff probably isn't going to help. Teams are still going to stack the box and dare Goff to beat them. Until he does, I don't see Gurley breaking out. With the OL help, he might see a slight uptick from his pitiful 3.2 ypa, but I don't see him being a top 6-8 RB. And their OL help is a 35 year old Whitworth and a rapidly aging Sullivan. I'd steer clear of Gurley as I think someone will overdraft him based on his talent.

There were a lot of people here who wanted Whitworth despite his age

especially in keeper leagues. I think you may need patience with him like David Johnson/Chris Johnson a few years ago, because I'd guess Murray starts day 1.

He's been going in the late 4th/early 5th from mocks I've looked at if you can get him there I think he can provide good value....eventually.

He can still havd a very solid year. They have been lining him up all over the field to be able to get the ball in his hands in different ways. That is a positive. Imo, the OL will be important to watch but the main reason he will have success is if Goff takes a huge stel forward. If teams have to start worrying about hi. It loosens up the D.

I like Perkins a lot this year.

I think Cook will be the number 1 guy but I hate their offense.

Currently listed at #70 overall and the #30 RB. That puts him in the 6-7 round range, which seems about right. Though I think he'll be better than the #30 RB when the season is done.

I don't think he's a huge risk. He has an injury prone 3rd down RB and a 4th round pick behind him on the depth chart. So I can see Perkins getting 15-20 touches/game (240-320 touches for the season). Even if his average drops to 3.5 ypa (he was at 4.1 y/a last season), that's still 850 yds and probably 3-6 TDs on the low end. That's fine as your 3rd RB and he has the upside to be a #2 RB.

In comment 13532376 superspynyg said:

Quote:

In comment 13532370 giants#1 said: Quote: they wanted to run it, so trying to run more to ease pressure on Goff probably isn't going to help. Teams are still going to stack the box and dare Goff to beat them. Until he does, I don't see Gurley breaking out. With the OL help, he might see a slight uptick from his pitiful 3.2 ypa, but I don't see him being a top 6-8 RB. And their OL help is a 35 year old Whitworth and a rapidly aging Sullivan. I'd steer clear of Gurley as I think someone will overdraft him based on his talent. There were a lot of people here who wanted Whitworth despite his age

The Giants have a QB (and several WRs) that can stretch the field if given an extra 0.5 second by the LT. Big difference compared to the Rams and Goff.

In comment 13532383 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

He can still havd a very solid year. They have been lining him up all over the field to be able to get the ball in his hands in different ways. That is a positive. Imo, the OL will be important to watch but the main reason he will have success is if Goff takes a huge stel forward. If teams have to start worrying about hi. It loosens up the D. I like Perkins a lot this year. I think Cook will be the number 1 guy but I hate their offense.

Normally I'd love reading that stuff, but the one guy the D is going to account for is Gurley so even splitting him out wide is unlikely to get him favorable matchups. Especially since their only other offensive weapon is Austin and he's completely ineffective beyond 5 yards.

In comment 13532399 giants#1 said:

Quote:

In comment 13532383 robbieballs2003 said: Quote: He can still havd a very solid year. They have been lining him up all over the field to be able to get the ball in his hands in different ways. That is a positive. Imo, the OL will be important to watch but the main reason he will have success is if Goff takes a huge stel forward. If teams have to start worrying about hi. It loosens up the D. I like Perkins a lot this year. I think Cook will be the number 1 guy but I hate their offense. Normally I'd love reading that stuff, but the one guy the D is going to account for is Gurley so even splitting him out wide is unlikely to get him favorable matchups. Especially since their only other offensive weapon is Austin and he's completely ineffective beyond 5 yards.

I disagree. I like Higbee. They drafted a lot of quality players. They got Everett, Kupp, and Reynolds. They also have Austin. They have some talent besides Gurley.

but they've gotta prove it before Ds worry about them. Same thing with (the more talented) Engram. He's not going to be drawing much attention away from Beckham until he catches a few balls down the seam.

If I'm facing the Rams, I'm still playing an 8 man front and if Gurley splits out wide, I'm putting my best coverage LB on him and shading the safeties in that direction.

In comment 13532419 giants#1 said:

Quote:

but they've gotta prove it before Ds worry about them. Same thing with (the more talented) Engram. He's not going to be drawing much attention away from Beckham until he catches a few balls down the seam. If I'm facing the Rams, I'm still playing an 8 man front and if Gurley splits out wide, I'm putting my best coverage LB on him and shading the safeties in that direction.

Like I said earlier, his succes will be tied to how well Goff plays. I don't disagree with what you are saying but getting the ball in differnt situations for Gurley will only help. It is not a negative.

but I also think even aging veteran OL can help.

I watched quite a few Rams games b/c I had Gurley on my FF team.

I never, seriously no exaggeration, ever saw a RB have to beat so many defenders in the backfield as Gurley last year.

It's not like he was missing holes, he was trying to get back to the line of scrimmage most plays.

So, in general he's not one of my targeted players. I think the best thing you can say about Gurley is there is no RB competition at all.

Lance Dunbar? That ship will go down with Gurley getting his touches every week.

I get what you're saying, but some of that is also due to their piss poor QB play. D's basically dared them to throw. I don't think I've ever seen D's as aggressive against the run as they were against the Rams last year.

In comment 13532451 giants#1 said:

Quote:

I get what you're saying, but some of that is also due to their piss poor QB play. D's basically dared them to throw. I don't think I've ever seen D's as aggressive against the run as they were against the Rams last year.

yep, and I expect with Goff having another off-season, pre-season, and some good game experience, that changes too.

I'm shocked how little the Rams did to improve their skill position players though.

So I think their offense will still be bad, but better than last year.

Yeah, Gurley had defenders in the backfield before he even got the football on an absurd amount of attempts last year. It was ridiculous.

The guy is incredibly talented but when you have nowhere to run, you have nowhere to run.

In comment 13532461 pjcas18 said:

Quote:

In comment 13532451 giants#1 said: Quote: I get what you're saying, but some of that is also due to their piss poor QB play. D's basically dared them to throw. I don't think I've ever seen D's as aggressive against the run as they were against the Rams last year. yep, and I expect with Goff having another off-season, pre-season, and some good game experience, that changes too. I'm shocked how little the Rams did to improve their skill position players though. So I think their offense will still be bad, but better than last year.

What do you mean how little they did to improve their skill positions? Three of their first four picks in the draft were spent on skill positions. They got one of the best receiving TEs in the draft who some see as filling the Jordan Reed role. Then they drafted one of the most productive WRs in college history who has been getting rave reviews so far. Finally they drafted Reynolds who is a tall WR that can stretch the field which is something they needed.

How much more could they have done in one offseason without a first round pick?

In comment 13532474 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

In comment 13532461 pjcas18 said: Quote: In comment 13532451 giants#1 said: Quote: I get what you're saying, but some of that is also due to their piss poor QB play. D's basically dared them to throw. I don't think I've ever seen D's as aggressive against the run as they were against the Rams last year. yep, and I expect with Goff having another off-season, pre-season, and some good game experience, that changes too. I'm shocked how little the Rams did to improve their skill position players though. So I think their offense will still be bad, but better than last year. What do you mean how little they did to improve their skill positions? Three of their first four picks in the draft were spent on skill positions. They got one of the best receiving TEs in the draft who some see as filling the Jordan Reed role. Then they drafted one of the most productive WRs in college history who has been getting rave reviews so far. Finally they drafted Reynolds who is a tall WR that can stretch the field which is something they needed. How much more could they have done in one offseason without a first round pick?

Rookies are rookies, hate counting on them for production - especially in FF, especially early in the season, and especially non-1st rounders, I meant in FA.

Robert Woods? That's their skill position addition in FA.

You are surprised at how little they did. I don't agree with that. Thks wasn't a fantasy football comment. That was just saying they barely did anything. I don't agree with that regardless if you feel rookies don't contribute that much in fantasy.

Who were they to get in FA? Jeffery signed a one year deal in Philly. No way was he signing a one year deal in LA to have his next contract tied to Goff's success. Who else was available? It wasn't a great market for WRs.

Also, Kupl was being talked about as a first round pick after the Senior Bowl where he was tearing it up. Then he ran a poor 40 and the Rams got him in round 3. Great value. His numbers remind me of Landry. Landry ran like high 4.7s in the 40 and is one of the best WRs in the league.

Yes, Woods isn't a top player but I also don't know their cap position. They went with a vet that is serviceable. I see nothing wrong with what they did to address WR and TE.

They could use depth behind Gurley but Gurley is far from a problem. And they have plenty of other issues that need to be addressed. They felt Dunbar would be a good third down back to give Gurley some rest.

Long story short, there is only so much that can be done in one offseason. I like the moves they made and do not feel like they did little to fix it.

In comment 13532491 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

You are surprised at how little they did. I don't agree with that. Thks wasn't a fantasy football comment. That was just saying they barely did anything. I don't agree with that regardless if you feel rookies don't contribute that much in fantasy. Who were they to get in FA? Jeffery signed a one year deal in Philly. No way was he signing a one year deal in LA to have his next contract tied to Goff's success. Who else was available? It wasn't a great market for WRs. Also, Kupl was being talked about as a first round pick after the Senior Bowl where he was tearing it up. Then he ran a poor 40 and the Rams got him in round 3. Great value. His numbers remind me of Landry. Landry ran like high 4.7s in the 40 and is one of the best WRs in the league. Yes, Woods isn't a top player but I also don't know their cap position. They went with a vet that is serviceable. I see nothing wrong with what they did to address WR and TE. They could use depth behind Gurley but Gurley is far from a problem. And they have plenty of other issues that need to be addressed. They felt Dunbar would be a good third down back to give Gurley some rest. Long story short, there is only so much that can be done in one offseason. I like the moves they made and do not feel like they did little to fix it.

Disagree. Look at the Patriots, and I hate to always use them as the counter point, but they added Cooks in a trade for a 1st round pick, but it was pick 32, would the Rams 2nd rounder have been much worse? He'd be perfect to stretch the field for the Rams. They added Chris Hogan the year before as a RFA, they traded a 4th for Dwayne Allen and a 6th. They added guys like Burkhead, etc.

when I look at the Rams depth chart today I see again a league worst offense or one among the worst.

I plan on using 3rd round keeper pick on him. Took him in the late rounds last year based on reports. Do you think he will do even better this year?

You don't agree with their approach. I don't understand the Pats analogy though. Do you think that the Rams would have gotten Cooks for a worse pick than the Pats were offering? I also don't know the Rams cap situation but I do know the Pats about have a ton and are able to pay Cooks if they want.

In comment 13532500 davek3698 said:

Quote:

I plan on using 3rd round keeper pick on him. Took him in the late rounds last year based on reports. Do you think he will do even better this year?

Melvin Gordon is tricky. He had a breakout year last year but if memory serves me correctly he had a very poor ypc. His points came on a crazy amount of TDs. They have a new coaching staff, correct? Will the new staff use him the same way? They also had a very poor OL and lost Fluker. Did they upgrade? I guess we will find out.

Here is the cap space for all 32 teams. The Rams are dead last meaning trading cost controlled rookies for higher priced vets isn't really the smart move.
Link - ( New Window )

In comment 13532508 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

You don't agree with their approach. I don't understand the Pats analogy though. Do you think that the Rams would have gotten Cooks for a worse pick than the Pats were offering? I also don't know the Rams cap situation but I do know the Pats about have a ton and are able to pay Cooks if they want.

My Patriots point was the Patriots offered pick 32 for Cooks, if the Rams offered pick 37 before the Patriots offered pick 32 would the Saints have said no (Rams wound up trading 37 to the Bills, but same point)?

I just think the Rams offense still stinks, I think they will have to be run first again, and the increase in productivity and diversity will be hard.

at least until the rookies get acclimated.

in the league but they have a new coach, young QB, and young RB. Imo, if I was the GM I would have went with the same approach. The plan shouldn't be to try to win a super bowl this year. It should be to grow a team of young players together. I really like Everett and Kupp. Right nkw they look like unproven players and that will not change until they produce. If Everett turns out to be similar to Reed with McVay in that offense then it was 100% the right move. If Kupp turns out to be like Landry who owns the middle kf the field and catches a ton of passes then it was a homerun draft regardless of how the other players perform. With their cap situation, new staff, and young talent at key positions I agree with getting the right type of people in there and from everyrhing I read they have. Guys like Whitworth, Woods, Kupp, Everett, etc. all do things the right way.

In comment 13532552 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

in the league but they have a new coach, young QB, and young RB. Imo, if I was the GM I would have went with the same approach. The plan shouldn't be to try to win a super bowl this year. It should be to grow a team of young players together. I really like Everett and Kupp. Right nkw they look like unproven players and that will not change until they produce. If Everett turns out to be similar to Reed with McVay in that offense then it was 100% the right move. If Kupp turns out to be like Landry who owns the middle kf the field and catches a ton of passes then it was a homerun draft regardless of how the other players perform. With their cap situation, new staff, and young talent at key positions I agree with getting the right type of people in there and from everyrhing I read they have. Guys like Whitworth, Woods, Kupp, Everett, etc. all do things the right way.

I don't disagree with that approach, but like I said before I'm viewing it from a fantasy football standpoint, related to Gurley specifically in 2017 specifically.

and it may be you're right the cap prohibited them from much more than Robert Woods and any other FA additions plus their draft.

When the rb fails to produce the excuses get old. Gurley was terrible last year. Oline issues qb issues whatever. Gurley didn't help. This is a big year for him.

Until a Todd Gurley or Lamar Miller (two RBs hyped in 2016 and drafted in the Top 10-15 Overall last year but finished in the 90-100 Overall range in PPR leagues) produce on a consistent basis, hard to "chase" that production and hope they bounce back this year.

If you draft either this year, you're basically drafting them because of their age and potential production if everything breaks in their favor this year.

is elite and Peterson like and he can catch.

I am keeping him and trading Ajayi away.

Fair points on Melvin Gordon ypc but I think he is elite talent as well and I don't think the touchdowns stop either but you cannot draft on td production.

on 278 attempts. You would think an elite player would have broken off a few long runs with that # of attempts. Is concerning.

but if Gurley was Peterson like he wouldn't have sucked balls last year. Maybe he was hurt. May be Fisher helped ruin him by allowing Gurley to float through last year's camp as if he was a sweet 16 birthday girl with the don't touch me red jersey but whatever the case, Gurley has been anything but Peterson like. He's been average.