Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Denver running backs


policyvote
 Share

Recommended Posts

Some of you might have noticed that I haven't been around much lately.

 

Some of you might not care.

 

SOME OF YOU ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH DENVER RUNNING BACK WILL BE THE "STARTER".

 

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

 

Denver will have a stable of mediocre backs who will all get touches. Period. End of story. There is no fantasy gold in them thar hills. There is no diamond in the rough. There is no oasis in the desert. If you have a Denver running back on ANY of your fantasy rosters (as higher than your fourth RB), then your Fantasy Football liscense is hereby revoked.

 

Peace

policy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Some of you might have noticed that I haven't been around much lately.

 

Some of you might not care.

 

SOME OF YOU ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH DENVER RUNNING BACK WILL BE THE "STARTER".

 

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

 

Denver will have a stable of mediocre backs who will all get touches. Period. End of story. There is no fantasy gold in them thar hills. There is no diamond in the rough. There is no oasis in the desert. If you have a Denver running back on ANY of your fantasy rosters (as higher than your fourth RB), then your Fantasy Football liscense is hereby revoked.

 

Peace

policy

 

 

So, I have to somewhat disagree here.

 

I was in a draft recently in a 10 team league that allows teams to keep up to 2 players.

 

1.04 Ladainian Tomlinson (keeper)

2.07 Steve Smith

3.04 Antonio Gates

4.07 Anquan Boldin

5.04 Mike Bell

 

You can read the whole draft here.

 

In any case, after having stocked up nicely at these other positions, the RB pool was thin. It is during times like thse when you take chances on guys like Denver RBs. I don;t think you can make a blanket statement that anyone that drafts a Denver RB hoping to get some production from that player is a complete momo, because some situations call for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of you might have noticed that I haven't been around much lately.

 

Some of you might not care.

 

SOME OF YOU ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH DENVER RUNNING BACK WILL BE THE "STARTER".

 

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

 

Denver will have a stable of mediocre backs who will all get touches. Period. End of story. There is no fantasy gold in them thar hills. There is no diamond in the rough. There is no oasis in the desert. If you have a Denver running back on ANY of your fantasy rosters (as higher than your fourth RB), then your Fantasy Football liscense is hereby revoked.

 

Peace

policy

 

 

Just like last year. I mean, who needed a RB like Mike Anderson who you could have drafted in the 8th round or later of FF drafts and then have him finish as the 10th best FF RB last year? FF "eckspurts" like you should just go RB-RB-RB the first 3 rounds and let the rest of we poor suckers have to deal with RBs like Anderson later in the draft. That's surely a formula for FF championships for you.

 

:thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of you might have noticed that I haven't been around much lately.

 

Some of you might not care.

 

SOME OF YOU ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHICH DENVER RUNNING BACK WILL BE THE "STARTER".

 

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

 

Denver will have a stable of mediocre backs who will all get touches. Period. End of story. There is no fantasy gold in them thar hills. There is no diamond in the rough. There is no oasis in the desert. If you have a Denver running back on ANY of your fantasy rosters (as higher than your fourth RB), then your Fantasy Football liscense is hereby revoked.

 

Peace

policy

 

I see your point. I sure wouldn't want a back that rushes for 1000+ yards and 6+ TDs on my roster either. The previous 6 years of Den RBs have produced.

 

I'll take a flyer on a Bell if they fall to me at the right spot. I definitely will NOT have more than 1 on my roster though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's dropping something, alright. Some things never change.

 

 

:D

 

I grabbed M. Bell on Tuesday night, 12 team redraft. pick 6.11 after I already had LT and Portis (trade). If he's "only" as good as Mike Anderson, I'll take his 1,000 yards and 8-10 TD's any day of the week....and he could produce more.

 

Why to people still question Denver RB's? Bronco backs have always produced...maybe it's Skeletaur that people don't like. The list of productive backs is long and not always so distinguished. They're doing something right in Denver...just choose one and sit back and reap the benefits.

Edited by The Wolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D

 

I grabbed M. Bell on Tuesday night, 12 team redraft. pick 6.11 after I already had LT and Portis (trade). If he's "only" as good as Mike Anderson, I'll take his 1,000 yards and 8-10 TD's any day of the week....and he could produce more.

 

Why to people still question Denver RB's? Bronco backs have always produced...maybe it's Skeletaur that people don't like. The list of productive backs is long and not always so distinguished. They're doing something right in Denver...just choose one and sit back and reap the benefits.

 

 

...and he could produce less, MUCH less. It's the nature of the Shananagan beast. Yeah, you might get lucky, but most likely you will not be sitting back and reaping the benefits. If you buy into the Bronco back gamble, rather than "sitting and reaping", you'll be WDISing and planning your hit on Shanahan because he misled you. Enjoy. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...and he could produce less, MUCH less. It's the nature of the Shananagan beast. Yeah, you might get lucky, but most likely you will not be sitting back and reaping the benefits. If you buy into the Bronco back gamble, rather than "sitting and reaping", you'll be WDISing and planning your hit on Shanahan because he misled you. Enjoy. :D

 

 

I do understand your point...but name me a starting Bronco RB...starting with TD...that failed to produce 1,000 yards and 8 TD's...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, I have to somewhat disagree here.

 

<SNIP>

 

In any case, after having stocked up nicely at these other positions, the RB pool was thin. It is during times like thse when you take chances on guys like Denver RBs. I don;t think you can make a blanket statement that anyone that drafts a Denver RB hoping to get some production from that player is a complete momo, because some situations call for it.

 

 

Yes, that's right. Situations wherein you fail to draft well often call for desperate measures. :D

 

Seriously, though, what's really got me flipped is all these yahoos trying to read the tea leaves over which of the slew of completely nondescript backs in Denver's stable are going to be the #1, every-down, workhorse back. Week-by-week, day-by-day, minute-by-minute: It's Bell, it's the OTHER Bell, it's Cobb, it's Dayne, it's Anderson, it's Gary, it's Droughns . . . oh wait.

 

A late-round flier is a late-round flier. The bottom of the barrel is the bottom of the barrel. Some of the Denver running backs might do well on a spot basis. All of them will probably have an outstanding game or two. One might even end up more than their share of the work, and be a nice surprise. But you can't draft based off that. Everyone who drafts a Denver RB to start has visions of a Top 10 RB dancing in their heads, but then Denver would have three or four Top 10 RBs every year, now, wouldn't they?

 

Peace

policy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just like last year. I mean, who needed a RB like Mike Anderson who you could have drafted in the 8th round or later of FF drafts and then have him finish as the 10th best FF RB last year? FF "eckspurts" like you should just go RB-RB-RB the first 3 rounds and let the rest of we poor suckers have to deal with RBs like Anderson later in the draft. That's surely a formula for FF championships for you.

 

:thumbsup:

 

 

LOL, just the opposite. I favor big-time QBs and WRs while everyone else fights for table scraps at RB. As I said above, a late-round flier is a late-round flier. Nobody in their right mind was predicting that good of a year for Anderson, and rightly so--because you never know. EVERY YEAR, it's a total crapshoot. You may win big, you may come up snake eyes, but stop pretending like three or four carries one way or the other in the preseason is going to suddenly turn the fourth-round-draft-pick-flavor-of-the-minute into a 250-carry stud.

 

Peace

policy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just like last year. I mean, who needed a RB like Mike Anderson who you could have drafted in the 8th round or later of FF drafts and then have him finish as the 10th best FF RB last year? FF "eckspurts" like you should just go RB-RB-RB the first 3 rounds and let the rest of we poor suckers have to deal with RBs like Anderson later in the draft. That's surely a formula for FF championships for you.

 

:thumbsup:

 

 

 

you got him in the 8th because TBell was supposed to be "the man"

 

TBell owners prolly were not too happy

 

just gotta pick one and hope you get lucky

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see your point. I sure wouldn't want a back that rushes for 1000+ yards and 6+ TDs on my roster either. The previous 6 years of Den RBs have produced.

 

 

Oh, so you play with "Team RBs" in your league?

 

Peace

policy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:D

 

I grabbed M. Bell on Tuesday night, 12 team redraft. pick 6.11 after I already had LT and Portis (trade). If he's "only" as good as Mike Anderson, I'll take his 1,000 yards and 8-10 TD's any day of the week....and he could produce more.

 

Why to people still question Denver RB's? Bronco backs have always produced...maybe it's Skeletaur that people don't like. The list of productive backs is long and not always so distinguished. They're doing something right in Denver...just choose one and sit back and reap the benefits.

 

 

Yeah, just like last year, when all those chose Tatum Bell, the Next Clinton Portis, and reaped the benefits of having Mike Anderson . . . oh, wait, that's right, NO.

 

Mike Bell could be a Top 10 back or completely worthless. You passed on plenty of players with a much higher floor to take a swipe at a third stud RB. That's a HUGE gamble! It's a very slim chance at having a very huge payoff--the most likely outcome is that Bell produces in the same league as all the other RBBC backs, or that he lights it up for a couple games and you trade off one of your studs for an upgrade at another position and you're left holding the bag when he comes back to earth.

 

If you want to take that monster gamble, fine, but don't act like you're making the smart play while everyone else is clueless.

 

Peace

policy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel the Tatum is too good not to get the job inside of week 5 and run away with it

 

 

Tatum has not been able to take the starting job in over two years...this is his third season! Mike Anderson and Ron Dayne have been bashed in this forum and yet TBell could never over take them as the unquestioned #1. Why? It's because the coaching staff does not feel he can handle it. A staff so arrogant as to their ability to turn waterboys into 1,000 yard backs, does not feel that this kid can produce.

 

So, who else is there in Denver? Cobbs? Dayne? Nope. it's Mike Bell and it's gonna be Mike Bell.

 

I am not predicting the second coming of TD but 1,000 yards and 8-10 TD's is not out of the question...and that's not too shabby for a #3 back, even a #2 on some teams.

 

Tatum will still get his touches, for sure, as he produced IN HIS ROLE last year.

Edited by The Wolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And if that's drafting wrong I don't want to be right!

 

 

The winky face was to indicate that I agreed with your overall drafting strategy, but I would have probably taken another back with a higher floor and lower ceiling--i.e., NOT a Denver RB.

 

Peace

policy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike Bell could be a Top 10 back or completely worthless. You passed on plenty of players with a much higher floor to take a swipe at a third stud RB. That's a HUGE gamble! It's a very slim chance at having a very huge payoff--the most likely outcome is that Bell produces in the same league as all the other RBBC backs, or that he lights it up for a couple games and you trade off one of your studs for an upgrade at another position and you're left holding the bag when he comes back to earth.

 

 

In general I agree with what you are saying. That whole thread is there to make the point you are making, with Frank Gore as the guy with the target on his head.

 

What you aren't allowing for is people drafting solidly in the forst several rounds and then taking a stab. Why is Mike Bell more of a stab than DeShaun Foster, Lawrence Maroney, Domanic Rhodes, some mid tier TE, or a guy like Mushin Muhammed? They are all stabs and all have bust factors. Draft well early and pick your spots with where you want to take bust risks, and you should do well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you got him in the 8th because TBell was supposed to be "the man"

 

TBell owners prolly were not too happy

 

just gotta pick one and hope you get lucky

 

 

There was no luck involved. Shanahan said M Anderson was tha starting RB, I believed him, and I picked up Anderson in the 9th round.

 

The only luck involved was bad luck for the T Bell owner when he apparently convinced himself in his own mind despite what Shanahan said outright that T Bell was going to be the featured RB. That's his fault, not anyone else's including Shanahan's.

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, so you play with "Team RBs" in your league?

 

Peace

policy

 

 

LOL! I disagree with your drafting philosophy, and you wanna think I'm simple.

 

If it came down to Fraud Taylor and Mike Bell as my #3, I'm going Bell. At that point you're looking at high risk starters, RBBC, rooks, or upside players. I'd rather take a chance on potential than get burned again on injuries or play the WDIS game with 2-3 RBBCs.

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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information