Release the Guice! - The Derrius Guice Discussion Thread

[XxBallMeBlazerxX]

Lol!

Why is this funny? He has a point. What a guy looks like in the gym is pretty irrelevant. Guice has had 2 straight years of knee issues, and combined with his running style, I think being concerned about injuries in his career is valid.

It's funny because the guys writes his analysis and basically states he is rooting against the guy because he traded him earlier... I mean this whole forum has become 'I have this guy so he's great' vs 'I don't own him or sold him so he will suck'. It's lame.

Back to the point, saying what a guy looks like in the gym is irrelevant doesn't make sense. You look for progress and health with guys who have been injured so I think it is very relevant that he is in the gym and looking good. What is more irrelevant is the news cycle picking up an infection story weeks after the fact and everyone reacting to that without any additional context.

I never said I was rooting against him. If it came off like that then my bad. I hope Guice makes a full recovery and returns 100%. The odds are against him though. For every one player that has come back 100% from a torn acl, there is a good handful who didn’t. I drafted Guice with the intention of keeping him and hoping for the best or trading him if I got good value. I just happened to get an offer for what I think was good value. I rather put my chips elsewhere than on an unproven rookie coming back from an acl tear and who has a history of being injured.

[FantasyFreak]

Why is this funny? He has a point. What a guy looks like in the gym is pretty irrelevant. Guice has had 2 straight years of knee issues, and combined with his running style, I think being concerned about injuries in his career is valid.

It's funny because the guys writes his analysis and basically states he is rooting against the guy because he traded him earlier... I mean this whole forum has become 'I have this guy so he's great' vs 'I don't own him or sold him so he will suck'. It's lame.

Back to the point, saying what a guy looks like in the gym is irrelevant doesn't make sense. You look for progress and health with guys who have been injured so I think it is very relevant that he is in the gym and looking good. What is more irrelevant is the news cycle picking up an infection story weeks after the fact and everyone reacting to that without any additional context.

I never said I was rooting against him. If it came off like that then my bad. I hope Guice makes a full recovery and returns 100%. The odds are against him though. For every one player that has come back 100% from a torn acl, there is a good handful who didn’t. I drafted Guice with the intention of keeping him and hoping for the best or trading him if I got good value. I just happened to get an offer for what I think was good value. I rather put my chips elsewhere than on an unproven rookie coming back from an acl tear and who has a history of being injured.

Yeah. I figured you sold because you saw a trend developing, or interpreted that as such, and made a decision. I would rather have 1.02 and a 2020 first at this point myself. I was always down on Guice more than the consensus, had him at 1.04 behind Penny and Chubb because of his desire to invite contact. I still like his situation in Washington, and I stand by my evaluation of Penny, but I hate his situation. If Guice can get back to 100 percent, he should have the workhorse role in Washington, but I too, fear he will be plagued by injuries. We all want to win at FF, but not at the expense of people suffering. We have to remember that sometimes, and it's cool that you clarified.

[DLF3000]

Like I suspected before this not-great news, he might need more time before he plays at a high level in 2019. Weeks, a few months into the season, neither would surprise me.

Lots of patience required here, which is tough when you spend such a high pick, but that's football - especially with the chaos that is RB. Still like him, still holding.

[Valhalla]

The infection doesn't impact Guice's prognosis in terms of athletic recovery, because it has no bearing on the ligament repair itself.

It could negatively impact his preparation for '19 because of the delay to starting his rehab. However, the same reporter that broke the story in the Wash Post is also reporting that Guice still plans to be ready for OTAs, so it may be much ado about nothing.

My entire family works in healthcare; my sister and mother are nurses (BSN). Staph infections after surgery are common. So long as it isn't MRSA, staph infections aren't a big deal if they're promptly treated. Guice successfully treated his with antibiotics, so evidently it wasn't MRSA.

Unless there's more unreported facts to this situation, Guice is fine and y'all don't need to worry.

Bacterial infections in the joints DO cause earlier breakdown of the cartilage...
I'm not sure which of your healthcare family members is telling you otherwise, but three months of "heavy dosage antibiotics" and a few additional (from what I can find "unidentified" or "not released to public") procedures makes me skeptical that there was no additional damage done.

Maybe not, though. Maybe the bacterial infection stayed very low grade the whole time and didn't really affect the cartilage surfaces.

[ArrylT]

http://www.wbrz.com/news/former-lsu-sta ... s-hospital

Not fantasy related - but just a nice story.

[ninotoreS]

Bacterial infections in the joints DO cause earlier breakdown of the cartilage...

If left untreated, yes. I said this.

You're talking about septic arthritis. Permanent damage if ignored, and the patient just has to recover from the infection with his or her own immune system.

It was not ignored with Guice. Dr. Andrews would be pretty sh*t at his job if it was, since Staph lives on your skin and commonly gets inside a surgery site, so it's something he monitors for and deals with literally every post-op.

I'm not sure which of your healthcare family members is telling you otherwise, but three months of "heavy dosage antibiotics" and a few additional (from what I can find "unidentified" or "not released to public") procedures makes me skeptical that there was no additional damage done.

Really? Cuz, ya know, I clearly stated which ones right there in the post.

You would be wise to defer to the knowledge of people who have jobs that directly involve monitoring the convalescence of patients post-op, instead of clumsily insinuating their incompetence on the basis of nothing but your layman assumptions.

Anyway. I'm a paramedic. I deal with the near-term. So admittedly this is second hand knowledge for me, too. I think my second-hand source represents a little bit more objective value than your armchair skepticism, though. Hope this helps.

[juke05]

has there been a rookie who's had a worse string of bad luck to start their career? first, he falls in the draft because of some alleged argument during an interview with the Eagles (which appears to be not actually true), then tears his ACL in preseason, and now this infection...really rooting for him because a) he's on my fantasy team, but b) he genuinely seems like a good dude

[Reljac]

Try to find an owner who's worried. Certainly worth any risk if you can buy low.

[ninotoreS]

has there been a rookie who's had a worse string of bad luck to start their career? first, he falls in the draft because of some alleged argument during an interview with the Eagles (which appears to be not actually true)

His draft fall is overstated. We're still talking about an RB taken in the 2nd round of a very deep RB class for a pro league that devalues the RB position.

NFL history is very optimistic regarding RBs drafted at age 20 in the 2nd round or earlier.

[juke05]

has there been a rookie who's had a worse string of bad luck to start their career? first, he falls in the draft because of some alleged argument during an interview with the Eagles (which appears to be not actually true)

His draft fall is overstated. We're still talking about an RB taken in the 2nd round of a very deep RB class for a pro league that devalues the RB position.

NFL history is very optimistic regarding RBs drafted at age 20 in the 2nd round or earlier.

Rashaad Penny's contract is worth over $10 million...Guice's is $4.5 million. If that happened to me over some B/S made-up argument, I would be pretty salty

[FantasyFreak]

has there been a rookie who's had a worse string of bad luck to start their career? first, he falls in the draft because of some alleged argument during an interview with the Eagles (which appears to be not actually true)

His draft fall is overstated. We're still talking about an RB taken in the 2nd round of a very deep RB class for a pro league that devalues the RB position.

NFL history is very optimistic regarding RBs drafted at age 20 in the 2nd round or earlier.

Rashaad Penny's contract is worth over $10 million...Guice's is $4.5 million. If that happened to me over some B/S made-up argument, I would be pretty salty

Except that it's very rarely BS. There were also some teams who didn't have Guice as high as draft pundits. There is so much that goes into the draft process, and so much we don't know, to say it was contrived, is a bit ignorant. We simply don't know what teams dug up in their independent research of a player.

[ninotoreS]

Except that it's very rarely BS.

Is it? Quantify that assertion.

Players falling in the draft over nebulous character concerns who turn out to be bargains because of it is something that seems to happen a lot more often than "very rarely."

And again, we're not talking a huge fall for Guice. He went from maybe a late 1st round pick to just the 2nd round. I mean. This isn't exactly a HALO jump.

Rashaad Penny's contract is worth over $10 million...Guice's is $4.5 million. If that happened to me over some B/S made-up argument, I would be pretty salty

Fair point. I was speaking relatively. It wasn't anything like a calamitous fall in that context.

I think the media and fans make too much of "Player X was the *number* *insert position here* selected in the draft". It's something people love to bring up in hindsight, i.e. "my favorite team could have had this guy instead of this guy, our coach/GM/front-office is so stupid!". It's low hanging fruit.

[juke05]

Except that it's very rarely BS. There were also some teams who didn't have Guice as high as draft pundits. There is so much that goes into the draft process, and so much we don't know, to say it was contrived, is a bit ignorant. We simply don't know what teams dug up in their independent research of a player.

Both the eagles and Guice eventually denied that it happened. Obviously none of us know what actually happened but my point is that *if* it was made up, it's an unfortunate break for him that cost him a lot of money and was just the first of several bad breaks that went his way to start his career. Seems like every year right around the draft, dirt on players gets brought up (like the Tunsil thing or someone's old racist tweets or something) and it seems to scare certain teams away. Whether the dirt is true or not, if a team has a close grade on two players but one has some "dirt" or negative news surrounding them and the other doesn't, which player do you think they would draft?

[XxBallMeBlazerxX]

His draft fall is overstated. We're still talking about an RB taken in the 2nd round of a very deep RB class for a pro league that devalues the RB position.

NFL history is very optimistic regarding RBs drafted at age 20 in the 2nd round or earlier.

Rashaad Penny's contract is worth over $10 million...Guice's is $4.5 million. If that happened to me over some B/S made-up argument, I would be pretty salty

Except that it's very rarely BS. There were also some teams who didn't have Guice as high as draft pundits. There is so much that goes into the draft process, and so much we don't know, to say it was contrived, is a bit ignorant. We simply don't know what teams dug up in their independent research of a player.

Didn’t Guice admit to lying about what caused the argument? I know he backtracked on something and basically admitted he lied. Maturity and his family issues were definitely a concern. Plus I believe some questioned his work ethics.

[XxBallMeBlazerxX]

Try to find an owner who's worried. Certainly worth any risk if you can buy low.

If you can get a top 3 pick for him then I would consider making a trade. It just depends how you feel about him and if you’re willing to take the risk. If you can get more then I would probably jump at the trade offer. If you can get a proven player in a good situation, I would probably jump at the offer. As far as trading for Guice, I would buy for a mid 1st or later. The talent is there, he just needs to show he can stay healthy and that he can be effective on the field.