DMD Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 Per tweet by Adam Schefter: Pitt RB LeVeon Bell suspended 3 games, fined additional game check for violating substance abuse policy, per league sources. He is appealing That has fantasy significance. Makes him a interesting risk to take and where he falls had to consider that he'll miss 25% of the regular fantasy season games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theirish Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 My question, will this be the year that someone who is guaranteed to miss that many games, still going to be the number one pick. I would think about it, but i think I would take him at one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turbotastic Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 I'd take him. Draft DeAngelo Williams in the late rounds. All set. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 Awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 The most immediate question is whether this should push him down the board in MFL10's. I can't see taking him over Lacy at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxBandit Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 With three less games of wear and tear, imagine how strong he will be weeks 14-17? I would also have to assume that unless the Steelers go 3-0 without Bell, they won't have wrapped anything up by Week 15, and will be playing meaningful football come Week 16, which many other RBs won't. I like knowing my stud RB is playing full-tilt through my fantasy playoffs. Be tough to pass on him with the #1 pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted April 9, 2015 Author Share Posted April 9, 2015 You are willing to use your #1 pick on someone who gives you FOUR weekly zeroes by week 12? One-third of your regular season games has no use of your best player. And for him being stronger down the stretch - perhaps. But recall his spike in production came only after Blount was gone and they had no other decent #2 RB. Do you really think his work load in those final five games that you remember will continue? Through week 10, he averaged 16 carries per game for 75 yards plus 5.5 catches for 46 yards. In the next five games he averaged 24 carries for 119 yards and 4.5 catches for 62 yards. That is what everyone wants to remember. When he played TEN, NO, CIN, ATL and KC. In those five games, he scored 8 TDs. He had 3 TDs in all other games. No way I pick him in the first round. No way. He'll be good for the 8 of 12 games he plays but not like he was for 5 games when Blount was gone and there was no other decent alternative. And someone will always try to steal DeAngelo Williams too when they waited too long on RBs. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolphin_Akie Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 (edited) I think he slides out of the first round in the re-draft leagues I'm in. Missing four of fourteen games in the regular season guaranteed for your first round pick is a lot, you'd have to be confident on hitting on guys elsewhere in the draft to weather those weeks. De'Angelo Williams will need to be drafted early as well as the handcuff so its messy. Edited April 9, 2015 by Dolphin_Akie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flemingd Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 You are willing to use your #1 pick on someone who gives you FOUR weekly zeroes by week 12? One-third of your regular season games has no use of your best player. You don't get zeros. You use your RB3 for those weeks. One of which you planned that anyway. The other three of which might have a clear-cut handcuff that no one in their right minds will overpay for. The Zero RB Theorum proves this to be a non-issue. I'm going Bell #1 all day long. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heehawks Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 You don't get zeros. You use your RB3 for those weeks. One of which you planned that anyway. The other three of which might have a clear-cut handcuff that no one in their right minds will overpay for. The Zero RB Theorum proves this to be a non-issue. I'm going Bell #1 all day long. Seems awfully foolish, this situation just reeks of bust or at least much lower production than many are anticipating. I would take Forte, Lacy or even Charles over him all day long. Especially in ppr leagues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 You don't get zeros. You use your RB3 for those weeks. One of which you planned that anyway. The other three of which might have a clear-cut handcuff that no one in their right minds will overpay for. The Zero RB Theorum ™ proves this to be a non-issue. I'm going Bell #1 all day long. Doesn't the Zero RB Theorem mean you don't draft RBs in the first or in the early rounds? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stethant Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 I'm just going to assume you people understand math and can't possibly be serious. If you do take Bell at the top of round 1 you'd better be an amazing drafter in every other round, aka lucky as honda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentastic Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I'm actually shocked that the majority would move Bell out of the 1st. Not me. I wouldn't take him #1 overall (wouldn't have before this news either) but IF I was going RB in round 1, he's still in my top 5 and I would take him in a heartbeat if he was best player on my board. I'd like some of you to walk me through your logic. Here's mine: All players risk missing a few games and I would argue most DO miss a game or two more often than not. I pretty much assume I'm getting 14 games max from all my starters when I head into a season. I can't predict the future with specifics but I know most of my players, for various reasons, will miss 1-3 games each season. In this case of Bell, we definitely know he will miss 3 games. This changes nothing regarding the projection of his PPG average. You actually gain an advantage because you know for certain he will miss weeks 1-3, which allows you to adjust your draft in favor of your RB3. In real football, players can go down without notice, after you've submitted your lineup, and give you little to no points. The unforeseen is more costly than the known. If you know ahead of time - which we do - that a player will do poorly, you have the advantage of forming a contingency plan. The other 13 games you know you'll be starting a top 5 RB. The probability of Bell missing additional time due to the unexpected does not increase, in fact, you could argue it decreases because the number of hits he will take, the wear and tear on his body etc... will be reduced by 3 games. Put in simple math terms. Bell scored 370 points in my dynasty PPR league for an avg of 23 PPG However, let's just use top 5 RB averages. If you avg the top 5 RB's PPG, you get 20 PPG If you take the PPG avg for RB's 25-48 you get about 10 PPG So, for simple math... drafting Bell and replacing him with RB 36ish for 3 weeks, you'd get [(20*13) + (10*3)]*16 = 290 points = Marshawn Lynch/Arian Foster or RB 4-5 Would you still avoid Bell in round 1 if you were targeting a top 5 RB? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentastic Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 (edited) I'm actually shocked that the majority would move Bell out of the 1st. Not me. I wouldn't take him #1 overall (wouldn't have before this news either) but IF I was going RB in round 1, he's still in my top 5 and I would take him in a heartbeat if he was best player on my board. I'd like some of you to walk me through your logic. Here's mine: All players risk missing a few games and I would argue most DO miss a game or two more often than not. I pretty much assume I'm getting 14 games max from all my starters when I head into a season. I can't predict the future with specifics but I know most of my players, for various reasons, will miss 1-3 games each season. In this case of Bell, we definitely know he will miss 3 games. This changes nothing regarding the projection of his PPG average. You actually gain an advantage because you know for certain he will miss weeks 1-3, which allows you to adjust your draft in favor of your RB3. In real football, players can go down without notice, after you've submitted your lineup, and give you little to no points. The unforeseen is more costly than the known. If you know ahead of time - which we do - that a player will do poorly, you have the advantage of forming a contingency plan. The other 13 games you know you'll be starting a top 5 RB. The probability of Bell missing additional time due to the unexpected does not increase, in fact, you could argue it decreases because the number of hits he will take, the wear and tear on his body etc... will be reduced by 3 games. Put in simple math terms. Bell scored 370 points in my dynasty PPR league for an avg of 23 PPG However, let's just use top 5 RB averages. If you avg the top 5 RB's PPG, you get 20 PPG If you take the PPG avg for RB's 25-48 you get about 10 PPG So, for simple math... drafting Bell and replacing him with RB 36ish for 3 weeks, you'd get [(20*13) + (10*3)]*16 = 290 points = Marshawn Lynch/Arian Foster or RB 4-5 Would you still avoid Bell in round 1 if you were targeting a top 5 RB? Interesting. I was just looking at those top 5 RBs from last year using my dynasty league scoring which is essentially performance .5PPR (RB)... Foster was RB 5 with 273 points and he missed 3 games (not including his bye). So Foster, even with missing 3 games, was the 5th best RB. 5 of the top 15 RBs missed between 1 and 3 games. The top 4 played all 16 games. 10 of the top 20 missed 1 or more games. Once you get past RB 15, the frequency of players who miss 1+ games increases. I'm just eyeballing this stuff in grid format. Interesting nonetheless. Edited April 10, 2015 by Brentastic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajh2 Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Not Drafting Bell here unless falls out of the 1ST round which I highly doubt will happen so no Bell for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud29 Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 In this case of Bell, we definitely know he will miss 3 games. This changes nothing regarding the projection of his PPG average. You actually gain an advantage because you know for certain he will miss weeks 1-3, which allows you to adjust your draft in favor of your RB3. In real football, players can go down without notice, after you've submitted your lineup, and give you little to no points. The unforeseen is more costly than the known. If you know ahead of time - which we do - that a player will do poorly, you have the advantage of forming a contingency plan. The other 13 games you know you'll be starting a top 5 RB. The probability of Bell missing additional time due to the unexpected does not increase, in fact, you could argue it decreases because the number of hits he will take, the wear and tear on his body etc... will be reduced by 3 games. This is true, however you'd be treading on thin ice - for that early Bell pick to be justified, he now HAS to be healthy for basically all of his games....With RB being such an injury-inherent position, that wouldn't make me very comfortable. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Off the cuff, in PPR, the players I'd take over Bell given his 3 game suspension are: Lacy, Charles, Julio, Demaryius, and possibly McCoy, Forte, Dez, OBJ and Murray. I can't see him falling out of the first, but he definitely falls into the back half or maybe even back third of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShaDynasty Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Depends where I see D-Will going, tho in my leagues a lot of guys will try to make me pay if I draft him in the first. Wouldn't take him 1st overall, but after 5 in the first I'm definitely considering it. Love it tho! Adds another wrinkle to draft day and either someone reaches or I potentially get solid value in the 2nd of 3rd (one can dream!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I'll still draft him early. Championships are won in weeks 14-17, not weeks 1-3. It is a risk. But I'll take the risk of not making the playoffs since it will mean my team will be stronger in the long haul. its only April, but this is my lean also Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heehawks Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 This is true, however you'd be treading on thin ice - for that early Bell pick to be justified, he now HAS to be healthy for basically all of his games....played B being such an injury-inherent position, that wouldn't make me very comfortable. This exactly. In all likelihood, he will miss another game or two with an ankle or knee, as many rbs do during the season. He already has a short history of missing games with injury. That could drop his total games played to 10-12. That is enough for me to stay away until early 2nd round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I'll still draft him early. Championships are won in weeks 14-17, not weeks 1-3. It is a risk. But I'll take the risk of not making the playoffs since it will mean my team will be stronger in the long haul. Certainly a viable strategy in redraft. Not so much in best ball. He has to fall out of the top spot in MFL10'S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Certainly a viable strategy in redraft. Not so much in best ball. He has to fall out of the top spot in MFL10'S. maybe more so in best ball that run the full 16 or 17 weeks. He'll miss less than 1/5 of the games there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 maybe more so in best ball that run the full 16 or 17 weeks. He'll miss less than 1/5 of the games there Yeah, but with no plauoffs, there is no potential late season payoff. You really want high season totals in that format and it will be tough for a guy to miss 3 games and still finish at the top of his position. Up until now, he has been basically the unanimous #1 overall pick. I have seen Gronk and OBJ go #1 once each, but every single other one it has been Bell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 La dee da, he's appealing. Maybe he's only gone 2 games... that change anyone's mind? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brentastic Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 La dee da, he's appealing. Maybe he's only gone 2 games... that change anyone's mind? If one game changes anyone's mind, they are doing it wrong 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.