2018 Running Back Report

[Servo]

There's a possibility I have the choice between Guice & Penny @ 1.03 and have no clue who to pick.

[Vcize]

Note on Chase Edmonds

edit: This particular carry epitomizes Edmonds' north-south allergy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KE79U8esI40&t=260s. Note this is from 2016, when Edmonds was fully healthy and in his peak collegiate form, and this was the only FBS level defense he faced that year (he was even worse against Army in 2017).

I could post a clip of Saquon Barkley doing nearly the exact same thing (4 minute mark for mobile users). The point being, a RB doing something once or even multiple times in college does not inherently define their NFL outlook. I saw enough to where I think he can capably run inside if he needs to in the NFL, you apparently didn't. We can agree to disagree, I'm not going to die on the Chase Edmonds hill.

On the flipside, it also further highlights a risk that comes along with Barkley that people are really overlooking.

3.55 yards created per rush inside (well below average) vs. 9.25 yards created per rush outside. When teams took away the outside, even otherwise bad defenses, Barkley had some truly miserable games running that were way beyond the pale of the way other generational RBs struggled.

[zeeshan2]

Thanks for this! What are some guys you hit on before anyone else and which ones have you missed on badly or just plain missed? Appreciate this!

[Dynasty DeLorean]

Thanks for this! What are some guys you hit on before anyone else and which ones have you missed on badly or just plain missed? Appreciate this!

Well technically I haven't "hit" or "missed" on anyone since I started this in 2015 (and have made some refinements and added some tiers since then) as it only works if you look at it from a long-term perspective. In order for a Tier 1 RB to "hit" they need 3+ 1,000 yard rushing seasons, which obviously takes some time. But to address the spirit of your question I suppose my biggest "hit" would have been David Johnson, I had him as the #2 RB in his draft class (I had Gurley #1 before eventually realizing his workout metrics were just estimates and therefor unusable). The one who has the longest to go is probably Foreman at this point because of the injury. I was preaching caution on Eddie Lacy, Doug Martin, Devonta Freeman, etc, after they had hit their 2nd 1,000 yard season. I was advocating to avoid guys like Yeldon and Abdullah early in rookie drafts. There have been some RB's that have not made the Tier 1 list that have produced a lot of fantasy points such as Melvin Gordon but he's only put up 1 thousand yard rushing season and I don't count it as a "miss" or "outlier" unless they produce 3 such seasons. Dalvin Cook looks like he could be another player along those lines that didn't make the list but might be productive, at least from a fantasy perspective. I'd rather narrow my focus on the guys that do make the list and avoid the players that don't, as it's my contention that the players who make the list hit at a much higher rate. All that said, I feel pretty comfortable with how everything is unfolding. The first year was a bit of chaos as I was having to manually input every rookie's data by hand into a spreadsheet and then manually sorting them into the tiers and all that, which you could imagine led to some missteps and inaccuracies. The past 2 years I've been buying the data which you can download in an excel file and that's really helped streamline the entire process. Sorry this was a really long response to a pretty simple question lol...

[joshb]

There's a possibility I have the choice between Guice & Penny @ 1.03 and have no clue who to pick.

I'm going to be facing that decision at 1.2. I was going with Guice before this post, now I'm a bit more conflicted.

[dynastyninja]

There's a possibility I have the choice between Guice & Penny @ 1.03 and have no clue who to pick.

I'm going to be facing that decision at 1.2. I was going with Guice before this post, now I'm a bit more conflicted.

Trust your rankings. This is a useful analysis, but it's not the gospel. And anyways, Guice qualifies in this analysis.

[FantasyFreak]

There's a possibility I have the choice between Guice & Penny @ 1.03 and have no clue who to pick.

I'm going to be facing that decision at 1.2. I was going with Guice before this post, now I'm a bit more conflicted.

Trust your rankings. This is a useful analysis, but it's not the gospel. And anyways, Guice qualifies in this analysis.

I think as amateur scouts we need to be open to professional analysis as well, and how the draft went, however. If you had Guice and Penny close in your pre-drafft rankings, you need to consider taking Penny ahead of him. It's not like Penny was taken just ahead of Guice, positionally speaking. There were at least 4 backs taken after Penny before Guice went off the board. Remember a few years when Ajayi was a top 5ish rookie pick in the FF community pre-draft? Somtimes players are overvalued because we aren't in the loop of the professional game. If it wasn't even close in your rankings, and Guice was way ahead, stick with that. Ultimately it's your Fantasy Team, and it's better to be wrong about a guy that you wanted, than to be wrong with a guy someone else said was better, and you passed on a guy you wanted for him.

[dynastyninja]

I'm going to be facing that decision at 1.2. I was going with Guice before this post, now I'm a bit more conflicted.

Trust your rankings. This is a useful analysis, but it's not the gospel. And anyways, Guice qualifies in this analysis.

I think as amateur scouts we need to be open to professional analysis as well, and how the draft went, however. If you had Guice and Penny close in your pre-drafft rankings, you need to consider taking Penny ahead of him. It's not like Penny was taken just ahead of Guice, positionally speaking. There were at least 4 backs taken after Penny before Guice went off the board. If it wasn't even close in your rankings, and Guice was way ahead, stick with that. Ultimately it's your Fantasy Team, and it's better to be wrong about a guy that you wanted, than to be wrong with a guy someone else said was better, and you passed on a guy you wanted for him.

Definitely understand where you're coming from. Especially when one is limited in terms of time.

That said, is this actually "professional" analysis? DD produces a nice report that I thoroughly enjoy reading, but this is only the 4th year (I think). We still really have no idea. I'd prefer a sample size of a decade (preferably more) to see how accurate it is and really trust the findings. A decade may sound unreasonable, but, to me, trusting a report over my own scouting sounds even more unreasonable.

So far, DJ, Henry, and Foreman are the players who weren't consensus studs. DJ was a great call, but we have no idea about the others because it's still too early to tell.

I also agree with the "your guy" portion and think that is a good reason to go with your analysis. Makes the hobby much more fun when you called the guy.

[FantasyFreak]

Trust your rankings. This is a useful analysis, but it's not the gospel. And anyways, Guice qualifies in this analysis.

I think as amateur scouts we need to be open to professional analysis as well, and how the draft went, however. If you had Guice and Penny close in your pre-drafft rankings, you need to consider taking Penny ahead of him. It's not like Penny was taken just ahead of Guice, positionally speaking. There were at least 4 backs taken after Penny before Guice went off the board. If it wasn't even close in your rankings, and Guice was way ahead, stick with that. Ultimately it's your Fantasy Team, and it's better to be wrong about a guy that you wanted, than to be wrong with a guy someone else said was better, and you passed on a guy you wanted for him.

Definitely understand where you're coming from. Especially when one is limited in terms of time.

That said, is this actually "professional" analysis? DD produces a nice report that I thoroughly enjoy reading, but this is only the 4th year (I think). We still really have no idea. I'd prefer a sample size of a decade (preferably more) to see how accurate it is and really trust the findings. A decade may sound unreasonable, but, to me, trusting a report over my own scouting sounds even more unreasonable.

So far, DJ, Henry, and Foreman are the players who weren't consensus studs. DJ was a great call, but we have no idea about the others because it's still too early to tell.

I also agree with the "your guy" portion and think that is a good reason to go with your analysis. Makes the hobby much more fun when you called the guy.

I may have misspoken. My intention was not to take away from DD AT ALL. What I meant was, professional realities. The analysis done by NFL teams scouting departments and the results of that. Penny going a full round ahead of Guice and the 2nd RB compared to the 7th? RB should absolutely make you re-evaluate things a bit. I am also an amateur film watcher, and loved Penny's tape, as well as Guice's. My issue was comparing level of competition. I had them very close pre-draft, but as an amateur scout I was curious to see how the NFL evaluated the two. Penny showed exceptionally well vs Stanford and at the Senior Bowl, but it's tough with a small sample size. FWIW I have a decent track record with RB's (I pegged Hunt as a Sophomore to be an NFL starter) and had Lev Bell as my RB1 in dynasty after his rookie year (although I got him as the 6th RB off the board) for example. I think Guice and Penny are both really good, but win in completely different ways. They should both be successful NFL backs.

[dynastyninja]

I think as amateur scouts we need to be open to professional analysis as well, and how the draft went, however. If you had Guice and Penny close in your pre-drafft rankings, you need to consider taking Penny ahead of him. It's not like Penny was taken just ahead of Guice, positionally speaking. There were at least 4 backs taken after Penny before Guice went off the board. If it wasn't even close in your rankings, and Guice was way ahead, stick with that. Ultimately it's your Fantasy Team, and it's better to be wrong about a guy that you wanted, than to be wrong with a guy someone else said was better, and you passed on a guy you wanted for him.

Definitely understand where you're coming from. Especially when one is limited in terms of time.

That said, is this actually "professional" analysis? DD produces a nice report that I thoroughly enjoy reading, but this is only the 4th year (I think). We still really have no idea. I'd prefer a sample size of a decade (preferably more) to see how accurate it is and really trust the findings. A decade may sound unreasonable, but, to me, trusting a report over my own scouting sounds even more unreasonable.

So far, DJ, Henry, and Foreman are the players who weren't consensus studs. DJ was a great call, but we have no idea about the others because it's still too early to tell.

I also agree with the "your guy" portion and think that is a good reason to go with your analysis. Makes the hobby much more fun when you called the guy.

I may have misspoken. My intention was not to take away from DD AT ALL. What I meant was, professional realities. The analysis done by NFL teams scouting departments and the results of that. Penny going a full round ahead of Guice and the 2nd RB compared to the 7th? RB should absolutely make you re-evaluate things a bit.

I think I just misread. Same with me re: DD. The report is extremely impressive and something that almost no one else in the fantasy community would be able to produce.

Different teams have different styles and different players that fit those styles. I wouldn't look too far into the draft order unless it's something like a 1st rounder versus a 4th rounder.

[FantasyFreak]

Definitely understand where you're coming from. Especially when one is limited in terms of time.

That said, is this actually "professional" analysis? DD produces a nice report that I thoroughly enjoy reading, but this is only the 4th year (I think). We still really have no idea. I'd prefer a sample size of a decade (preferably more) to see how accurate it is and really trust the findings. A decade may sound unreasonable, but, to me, trusting a report over my own scouting sounds even more unreasonable.

So far, DJ, Henry, and Foreman are the players who weren't consensus studs. DJ was a great call, but we have no idea about the others because it's still too early to tell.

I also agree with the "your guy" portion and think that is a good reason to go with your analysis. Makes the hobby much more fun when you called the guy.

I may have misspoken. My intention was not to take away from DD AT ALL. What I meant was, professional realities. The analysis done by NFL teams scouting departments and the results of that. Penny going a full round ahead of Guice and the 2nd RB compared to the 7th? RB should absolutely make you re-evaluate things a bit.

I think I just misread. Same with me re: DD. The report is extremely impressive and something that almost no one else in the fantasy community would be able to produce.

Different teams have different styles and different players that fit those styles. I wouldn't look too far into the draft order unless it's something like a 1st rounder versus a 4th rounder.

Cool. I just added to my initial comment above. BTW. I implore DD to keep this up, I thoroughly enjoy it, and he has done a great job. DJ was a great one, although he was not alone in that belief after the combine results he put out. My point was that there were a lot backs taken between the two, despite it being only a round of difference. It remains to be seen how it will go, but because I had them so close pre-draft, that does affect my ranking somewhat.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

Yeah I had them close pre-draft as well which is why I went with Penny. If you had Guice significantly ahead I would just stick with Guice. If both the Seahawks and Washington have their way and both players are good, I think Penny’s upside is higher. The Seahawks think he’s their David Johnson... now whether or not that is actually the case is an entirely different story. In terms of “safety,” the younger player from a more proven conference is possibly the better bet. At this point it seems like splitting hairs, although once the season starts it’ll likely seem obvious haha.

[dynastyninja]

Yeah I had them close pre-draft as well which is why I went with Penny. If you had Guice significantly ahead I would just stick with Guice. If both the Seahawks and Washington have their way and both players are good, I think Penny’s upside is higher. The Seahawks think he’s their David Johnson... now whether or not that is actually the case is an entirely different story. In terms of “safety,” the younger player from a more proven conference is possibly the better bet. At this point it seems like splitting hairs, although once the season starts it’ll likely seem obvious haha.

Props to you for this report. One post and you can change how the entire forum values a player (see: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=160892)

[WhatWouldDitkaDo]

Yeah I had them close pre-draft as well which is why I went with Penny. If you had Guice significantly ahead I would just stick with Guice. If both the Seahawks and Washington have their way and both players are good, I think Penny’s upside is higher. The Seahawks think he’s their David Johnson... now whether or not that is actually the case is an entirely different story. In terms of “safety,” the younger player from a more proven conference is possibly the better bet. At this point it seems like splitting hairs, although once the season starts it’ll likely seem obvious haha.

Props to you for this report. One post and you can change how the entire forum values a player (see: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=160892)

@Dynasty DeLorean: Solid read DD. Very nicely done.

@dynastyninja: To be fair though, Penny is a consensus top-3 rookie RB, so I don't know that the love in that poll is from DD's report haha.

[dynastyninja]

Yeah I had them close pre-draft as well which is why I went with Penny. If you had Guice significantly ahead I would just stick with Guice. If both the Seahawks and Washington have their way and both players are good, I think Penny’s upside is higher. The Seahawks think he’s their David Johnson... now whether or not that is actually the case is an entirely different story. In terms of “safety,” the younger player from a more proven conference is possibly the better bet. At this point it seems like splitting hairs, although once the season starts it’ll likely seem obvious haha.

Props to you for this report. One post and you can change how the entire forum values a player (see: viewtopic.php?f=6&t=160892)

@Dynasty DeLorean: Solid read DD. Very nicely done.

@dynastyninja: To be fair though, Penny is a consensus top-3 rookie RB, so I don't know that the love in that poll is from DD's report haha.

It's possible I just see it differently so I'm assuming everyone else does, too, but I didn't think Penny was top 3. After Guice it was extremely muddled.