Caveman_Nick Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 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 I know....didn't anyone ever see Coming to America? If lovin' the lord is wrong, I don't wanna be right! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
policyvote Posted August 31, 2006 Author Share Posted August 31, 2006 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. And this is the logic, year after year. There are plenty of defenders for T. Bell, Cobbs, and even Dayne. Every member of each of those camps has a laundry list of why it's totally obvious that THEIR guy is going to be THE guy, because, welll, just look at how crappy the rest of them are! EVEN if you're right, and Bell is OBVIOUSLY "The Guy" because all the other guys suck, Shanahan probably won't see it the same way you do. God HELP you if your guy gets dinged up a bit. But ultimately, IMO, the answer is that they're all crappy, and even if one of them blows up big time it doesn't mean anything for what'll happen next year. They're all high-risk, high-reward guys that make good fliers if they're there as your late-drafted third or early-drafted fourth. End of story. Peace policy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulOttCarruth Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 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. With that in mind, BB, do you trust Shanny's statement this week that the job is still an open competition. Or do you think Bell has it locked up? I guess my question is if you had a draft this weekend, do you take Bell in the 5th round or gamble on one of the other backs later in the draft? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Last Plane Out Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 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. I thought shanny's not sure of the starter yet ...link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavinRJohnson Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 I thought shanny's not sure of the starter yet ...link This whole thread proves policy's original point....why F'n bother? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panhead55 Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 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 [/quote/] I'm in several Sportsline leagues, most are good size money leagues (2 Double Diamonds, 1 Diamond, 1 Platinum, and 2 Gold). With Sportsline they ONLY pay first place. If you want to win your league you need to hit a homerun or two. Denver RBs offer a chance to get a player who far exceeds his ADP. if you play it safe you can have a nice season and finish in the top 4 or 5. To win the league you have to take some chances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 But ultimately, IMO, the answer is that they're all crappy, and even if one of them blows up big time it doesn't mean anything for what'll happen next year. They're all high-risk, high-reward guys that make good fliers if they're there as your late-drafted third or early-drafted fourth. End of story. Peace policy I'm absolutely sure that a lot of people made the exact same comments about 6th round rookie Terrell Davis & 6th round rookie Mike Anderson, also. Right now, Mike Bell is the guy. Shanahan has waffled a bit because M Bell has gotten to tentative - but he has also shown himself to be extremely coachable and so I would expect him to settle into the job. He runs hard, explodes into holes with his one cut, and has great lean & power, getting 4 yards when T Bell would have been stopped with 1 yard. He's not a speed burner or a homerun threat, but then neither was TD. He is a chains-mover, though, and that's the meat & potatoes of the DEN O. We know T Bell isn't the guy, and Cobbs had his shot with a good running team and allegedly the best coach as far as getting the most from his players in NE and whiffed completely (check out his career best 12 carries for 27 yds vs a #31 run D in CLE when NE was the #7 run O in the NFL) - when NE was desperate for a legit RB to back up Dillon. Dayne has been hurt, as has been Nash, but in both cases M Bell beat them outright for the #1 RB position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 (edited) 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. That's not my intention at all and you know that. In fact, if you'd been on the board at all lately you'd realize that this topic has been hashed out ad nauseum. Since it is generally agreed that RB's are by far the most important position in FF, is it really such a "monster gamble" to take Mike Bell as my third RB in the 6th round? Maybe the gamble was in waiting until round 6 to grab my third, but not in who was picked. Tell me, in a twelve team league, with all other owners hoarding up RB's, who, after 70 players have been picked, is not a gamble? Ahman Green? Travis Henry? Don't you think guys like Westbroke and J. Lewis and Lundy and TBELL, all of whom were drafted before MBell are gambles as well? Of course they are. Seems to me you're trying to act like the smart play is yours while mine is clueless. Only time will tell my friend. Peace, Wolf Edited August 31, 2006 by The Wolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 This whole thread proves policy's original point....why F'n bother? Because Denver backs produce. If you want to win, you have to take a chance on getting the right one. Some people feel Mike Bell is the right one, others don't. Only time will tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 With that in mind, BB, do you trust Shanny's statement this week that the job is still an open competition. Or do you think Bell has it locked up? I guess my question is if you had a draft this weekend, do you take Bell in the 5th round or gamble on one of the other backs later in the draft? I can do both. I took M Bell in the 4th round this past Tuesday as my #2 RB. I'd do it again today. I backed him up with 8th rounder D McAllister, 10th rounder G Jones, and 14th rounder W Lundy. This year, McAllister seems to be the real steal. I can easily see him posting M Anderson numbers from last year. So I've built a RB corps that has the potential to have at least 2 top 10 RBs by taking some chances early & backing it up with solid under-the-radar picks late, even with G Jones hurt already. There are some tremendous potentially solid RBs available late this year - McAllister, F Taylor, A Green as well as some young flyers that are starting to make noise: Lundy & Norwood for example - so why not take a shot at the RB who Shanahan named his #1 RB 3 weeks ago, given the history of DEN's #1 RB, even in a RBBC last year? That would suggest it's still M Bell's job to lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
policyvote Posted August 31, 2006 Author Share Posted August 31, 2006 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. Because many don't seem to realize that they're taking a stab, see our friend The Wolf above. Many have SEEN THE LIGHT and KNOW that DENVER RUNNING BACK X will get 15-20 touches a game, every game, all year, and be highly effective. No matter how well you've drafted, if you're sitting there with one QB, one WR, one RB and one more RB or WR, and you're looking at "taking a stab" at a Denver RB you're taking a big risk IMO. There will almost certainly be a #2 WR, #2 RB or #1 TE that will produce more points for you, week-in, week-out. At least with Foster, Maroney, or Rhodes, you know that they have a legit shot at a starting job that actually exists. There IS NO such thing as "the starting RB in Denver", not until they acquire a back with true starting skills and talent, the kind of back that would be an every down starter anywhere else. It hasn't happened since Portis and IMO it won't happen as long as Shanny is the coach and he believes that his running game will work with any old back. Peace policy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
policyvote Posted August 31, 2006 Author Share Posted August 31, 2006 With that in mind, BB, do you trust Shanny's statement Uhhhhhhhhhhhh. By now, anyone on this board who "trusts" or "believes" Shanahan in ANYTHING he says when it comes to RBs should have his or her head Roto-Rooted. Peace policy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 With that in mind, BB, do you trust Shanny's statement this week that the job is still an open competition. Or do you think Bell has it locked up? I guess my question is if you had a draft this weekend, do you take Bell in the 5th round or gamble on one of the other backs later in the draft? I think it's M Bell's job to lose. In other words, he'll have to step on his dick tonight, and even if he does, Cobbs will have to run against the AZ 1st string D effectively - which I don't think he's capable of. The guy I would see as the main threat would be Dayne, since he running with the first team before M Bell took his job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish247 Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 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. +1 i generally avoid the Denver situation but I found myself with T.Bell as a keeper that cost me a late round pick. at draft time, it's the middle rounds. i'm sitting there looking at junk like Drew Bennett, Amani Toomer, Muhsin, Isaac Bruce, Mark Clayton, Cedric Houston, Michael Clayton. Hell, even some kickers and DST started coming off the board. so i think, why not snag M.Bell. so i have both Bells, I've got an almost sure shot at least a share in the RBBC like last year. one of them might make a decent RB2 or nice fill-in RB3 and great trade bait for an owner struggling at RB. OR one of them ends up with the lion's share and I have a top 10 RB. and all it cost me was the scrubs i passed on above. I like the ESPN series on rules for FF... the rule the other day was 'avoid Denver RBs at all cost.' avoiding it is just stupid, especially when considering the garbage that often falls to the middle rounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexgaddis Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 All Shanahan has to do is name "Bell" his starter for the entire season... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavinRJohnson Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 +1 i generally avoid the Denver situation but I found myself with T.Bell as a keeper that cost me a late round pick. at draft time, it's the middle rounds. i'm sitting there looking at junk like Drew Bennett, Amani Toomer, Muhsin, Isaac Bruce, Mark Clayton, Cedric Houston, Michael Clayton. Hell, even some kickers and DST started coming off the board. so i think, why not snag M.Bell. so i have both Bells, I've got an almost sure shot at least a share in the RBBC like last year. one of them might make a decent RB2 or nice fill-in RB3 and great trade bait for an owner struggling at RB. OR one of them ends up with the lion's share and I have a top 10 RB. and all it cost me was the scrubs i passed on above. I like the ESPN series on rules for FF... the rule the other day was 'avoid Denver RBs at all cost.' avoiding it is just stupid, especially when considering the garbage that often falls to the middle rounds. So, 40% of your RBs are from the Denver RBBC. And you're happy with that why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
policyvote Posted August 31, 2006 Author Share Posted August 31, 2006 With that in mind, BB, do you trust Shanny's statement Uhhhhhhhhhhhh. By now, anyone on this board who "trusts" or "believes" Shanahan in ANYTHING he says when it comes to RBs should have his or her head Roto-Rooted. Peace policy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathrow20 Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 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. This is the exact situation that everyone is going to face, gamble on an injury prone starter who just lost his main TD volture, or gamble on a possible RBBC that has two young possible studs in Bell and Bell. What is comes down to is your own personal level of risk taking. If you're in a redraft league, or a keeper/dynasty league with a real chance at winning this year maybe you go with the Fraud. If you're in the keeper/dynasty league and either rebuilding or not sporting a strong cast of players, why not roll the dice on one of the Bells??? Either way, there's no right or wrong decision that will completely cover every situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
policyvote Posted August 31, 2006 Author Share Posted August 31, 2006 I can do both. I took M Bell in the 4th round this past Tuesday as my #2 RB. I'd do it again today. I backed him up with 8th rounder D McAllister, 10th rounder G Jones, and 14th rounder W Lundy. This year, McAllister seems to be the real steal. I can easily see him posting M Anderson numbers from last year. So I've built a RB corps that has the potential to have at least 2 top 10 RBs by taking some chances early & backing it up with solid under-the-radar picks late, even with G Jones hurt already. There are some tremendous potentially solid RBs available late this year - McAllister, F Taylor, A Green as well as some young flyers that are starting to make noise: Lundy & Norwood for example - so why not take a shot at the RB who Shanahan named his #1 RB 3 weeks ago, given the history of DEN's #1 RB, even in a RBBC last year? That would suggest it's still M Bell's job to lose. Because like as not, the RB who Shanahan named as the #1 RB a month before the season started and "DEN's #1 RB" when the season is over are not the same guy. Either way, you know as well as I that Denver's most productive fantasy back at the end of the year is hardly ever a "#1 RB" in the true sense of the term--the guy at the top of the depth chart from wire-to-wire, getting 15-20 touches a game. That post above is filled with all sorts of good logic, right up until that bolded statement. There are tons of good sleepers who are either already real starters, or may have to split carries with one guy . . . so why not burn a high draft pick on one guy out of a five-man RBBC because Skeletor promised? A lot of people are using the "RBs = good so let's take a flyer on inconsistent sleeper RBs" logic. Well, "RBs = good" ONLY because true starting RBs get the ball fifteen, twenty, thirty times a game, week-in, week-out. RBs who only get 5-10 touches a game are no better than decent #2 WRs. Some days they might get 80 yards, and a score. Some days they might not get a sniff. But no matter how clear your crystal ball is on the subject of Denver RBs, ALL of them have a much higher chance of being a part-timer than almost any other back available to you for your second starting RB. Peace policy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish247 Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 So, 40% of your RBs are from the Denver RBBC. And you're happy with that why? i thought it was pretty clear why. i'm more than happy. (see eg. Mike Andersen last year) i would NOT have been happy drafting a 4th WR, backup QB, bottom tier TE, kicker or DST in the 8th and 9th rounds. here's a copy and paste from the rounds I took the Bells... Round 8 85 Jason Witten (TE DAL) 86 DST Panthers (DST CAR) 87 Kellen Winslow (TE CLE) 88 Ben Roethlisberger (QB PIT) 89 L.J. Smith (TE PHI) 90 DST Redskins (DST WAS) 91 Cedric Benson (RB CHI) 92 Drew Bennett (WR TEN) 93 Tatum Bell (RB DEN) ME, keeper 94 Amani Toomer (WR NYG) 95 Muhsin Muhammad (WR CHI) 96 Laurence Maroney (RB NE) Round 9 97 Kurt Warner (QB ARI) 98 Isaac Bruce (WR STL) 99 Duce Staley (RB PIT) 100 Mike Bell (RB DEN) ME 101 Marion Barber (RB DAL) 102 Mark Clayton (WR BAL) 103 Cedric Houston (RB NYJ) 104 Neil Rackers (K ARI) 105 T.J. Duckett (RB ATL) 106 Jake Plummer (QB DEN) 107 Anquan Boldin (WR ARI) 108 Kevin Curtis (WR STL) you'd be happy with any of the above??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
policyvote Posted August 31, 2006 Author Share Posted August 31, 2006 Again, when you're talking about super-late fliers? Grabbing an RB with big upside in the eighth or ninth round is smart, when you're thinking to yourself "Hey, Denver RB, you never know, I may have just won the lottery!" Burning a fourth or fifth rounder to build your team around the 1-2 punch of a legit #1 and one of the Denver RBs, thinking to yourself "Ohhh, yeah, I got the inside dope on (Denver RB), he's going to be the starter!" is dain bramaged. Peace policy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NavinRJohnson Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 you'd be happy with any of the above??? First off, I'm not saying I wouldn't have picked M. Bell in your situation. You probably had to take him because you already had T. Bell. You were already sentenced to 5 months in Denver RB Hell. I'm just saying I would not be happy about it. Obviously, you are happy with it. I wish you luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 hopefuly he doesn't fumble away his chance.......again he had 2 fumbles in one game and I don't believe he fumbled again... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wolf Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 i thought it was pretty clear why. i'm more than happy. (see eg. Mike Andersen last year) i would NOT have been happy drafting a 4th WR, backup QB, bottom tier TE, kicker or DST in the 8th and 9th rounds. here's a copy and paste from the rounds I took the Bells... Round 8 85 Jason Witten (TE DAL) 86 DST Panthers (DST CAR) 87 Kellen Winslow (TE CLE) 88 Ben Roethlisberger (QB PIT) 89 L.J. Smith (TE PHI) 90 DST Redskins (DST WAS) 91 Cedric Benson (RB CHI) 92 Drew Bennett (WR TEN) 93 Tatum Bell (RB DEN) ME, keeper 94 Amani Toomer (WR NYG) 95 Muhsin Muhammad (WR CHI) 96 Laurence Maroney (RB NE) Round 9 97 Kurt Warner (QB ARI) 98 Isaac Bruce (WR STL) 99 Duce Staley (RB PIT) 100 Mike Bell (RB DEN) ME 101 Marion Barber (RB DAL) 102 Mark Clayton (WR BAL) 103 Cedric Houston (RB NYJ) 104 Neil Rackers (K ARI) 105 T.J. Duckett (RB ATL) 106 Jake Plummer (QB DEN) 107 Anquan Boldin (WR ARI) 108 Kevin Curtis (WR STL) you'd be happy with any of the above??? I like Maroney at #96 and Boldin at #107. They were long gone when I drafted MBell the other night. How did they stay around so long, esp Boldin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish247 Posted August 31, 2006 Share Posted August 31, 2006 (edited) I like Maroney at #96 and Boldin at #107. They were long gone when I drafted MBell the other night. How did they stay around so long, esp Boldin? apologies, Boldin was another team's keeper. I could've taken Maroney in the 7th I suppose but I took DeAngelo in the 7th. I'm weary of the Belichick/Dillon/Maroney situation. In some respects, Belichick is just as bad as Shanahan. T.Bell was my keeper pick just before Maroney went so I essentially didn't have a draft pick in the 8th. Edited August 31, 2006 by kingfish247 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.