Rookie Draft: Decisions Decisions @ 1.02 & 1.05

[TurkMatt]

So I'm going into the 3rd year of my 1st ever dynasty league and I'm ramping up my research and getting ready for the rookie draft. I just acquired the 1.02 pick from a leaguemate of mine who is hoping to rebuild after having a terrible one last year. I recently traded him Julio Jones for his 1.02 + Marvin Jones Jr. as well as swapped 2nd rd picks so i now have 1.02/1.05/2.01 at my disposal. I feel like I got a good return on an aging Julio Jones. Draft is set for the 26th and I'm trying to get a good idea on who to draft w my 1st rd picks.

RB is DEF a position I'd like to shore up as I'm not the most confident in my current roster construction at that position. This year's class is so highly touted and deep I feel like I'm in a decent position to land one of the top if not two diff top RB's but after the Guice/Penny injuries and landing situations of some of the RBs drafted I'm a bit hesitant of making a mistake and not getting the right guy(s). My current strategy as of now is to draft Penny w the 2nd pick and if Guice still is there at 5th then snag him up then but I got to say I have other guys that I like that are moving up my boards currently (Kerryon & Freeman). I'm in a bit of a win now mode so I want to have guys who can help me out this year. So much is being made out of Chris Carson leading the backfield in Seattle but I know SEA didnt just waste a 1st rd-er on Penny to not play him. Penny hurting his finger and not getting more preseason work is kind of a bummer but still confident he can win that job and be an asset this yr in fantasy, especially in PPR hence why I have him locked in at the 1.02 over Guice. At 1.05 tho I'm more concerned. Should I target Guice (if he's there) or should I focus on a diff back like Kerryon or Freeman who may prove useful this yr as well as for the future w their respective landing situations? Something about Guice doesn't appeal to me and now him being hurt (apparently not his first knee injury either) scares me.

I'm no guru on these guys and everyone and their mama's seem to have him ranked 2nd in their rookie mocks so I don't wanna pass on a potential stud even if it means he sits a year. I do like his landing spot in WAS so that is one positive for me w him. A guy like Chubb is someone who I'm considering also at 1.05 while he may not be hurt he does look like he may have to wait a year (don't think Hyde is back next yr) and CLE is looking like a team on the rise so I'm intrigued. TBH this is probably the toughest rookie draft I've faced since I started dynasty FF.

Anyways I'm hoping to hear some of your perspectives on who you'd take in my position. New to this forum site but wanted to create my first ever post and get a little feedback (I know there are similar related posts on this but wanted to contribute. Don't sue me! lol).

[ninotoreS]

This should be in Advice, shouldn't it?

I had your pick slots. I went with Guice and Kerryon.

I feel that KJ gets a big upgrade in PPR. His basketball background and arm-length are rare in a running-back, and because of it I think he'll eventually be a 50-60+ receptions kind of leadback for Detroit.

If you decide to go Penny, I think that's fine. He's certainly a more conventional RB prospect, and thus safer. I just think Kerryon's unusual combination of traits makes for a more intriguing profile, one that perhaps has a hidden ceiling.

As for Guice, so far as I'm concerned he's money in the bank. I thought Guice's LSU tape was very similar to Todd Gurley's at Georgia. Might have been better than Gurley's.

Final note. Guice and KJ are very young. Young enough that they might not be finished physically developing yet. That's an exciting thought.

[kadun2]

This should be in Advice, shouldn't it?

I had your pick slots. I went with Guice and Kerryon.

I feel that KJ gets a big upgrade in PPR. His basketball background and arm-length are rare in a running-back, and because of it I think he'll eventually be a 50-60+ receptions kind of leadback for Detroit.

If you decide to go Penny, I think that's fine. He's certainly a more conventional RB prospect, and thus safer. I just think Kerryon's unusual combination of traits makes for a more intriguing profile, one that perhaps has a hidden ceiling.

As for Guice, so far as I'm concerned he's money in the bank. I thought Guice's LSU tape was very similar to Todd Gurley's at Georgia. Might have been better than Gurley's.

Final note. Guice and KJ are very young. Young enough that they might not be finished physically developing yet. That's an exciting thought.

^ this is very solid advice OP. I too am intrigued with how Kerryon will develop given he has already shown great instincts.

[FantasyFreak]

Penny at 1.02, and Chubb or Royce at 1.05 for me. If Guice falls, I'd consider him at 1.05.

[FantasyFreak]

This should be in Advice, shouldn't it?

I had your pick slots. I went with Guice and Kerryon.

I feel that KJ gets a big upgrade in PPR. His basketball background and arm-length are rare in a running-back, and because of it I think he'll eventually be a 50-60+ receptions kind of leadback for Detroit.

If you decide to go Penny, I think that's fine. He's certainly a more conventional RB prospect, and thus safer. I just think Kerryon's unusual combination of traits makes for a more intriguing profile, one that perhaps has a hidden ceiling.

As for Guice, so far as I'm concerned he's money in the bank. I thought Guice's LSU tape was very similar to Todd Gurley's at Georgia. Might have been better than Gurley's.

Final note. Guice and KJ are very young. Young enough that they might not be finished physically developing yet. That's an exciting thought.

I didn't even think it was close to as good as Gurley's. I don't think they are in the same ballpark of talent. Guice is a very good prospect, Gurley was an elite prospect. I can't see Guice doing what Gurley does in the passing game, either. Also concerned he's had 2 straight years of knee problems. I'd still take him in the mid first, but not sure I'd take him at 1.04, which is where I had him pre injury. Luckily I don't have to make that decision.

[ninotoreS]

I know your opinion on Guice. Your assessment seems alien to what the '16 tape showed me in no uncertain terms.

There's a reason Marshawn Lynch was far and away the most popular comparison for both Gurley and Guice by professional analysts. And it's objectively impossible to reason that Guice's demolition of SEC defenses in 2016 was any less dominant than what Gurley did at Georgia in between his injuries. They both enjoyed annual top 5 O-lines in the nation in Adjusted Line Yards, so arguing against one or the other on those terms is a wash.

[FantasyFreak]

I know your opinion on Guice. Your assessment seems alien to what the '16 tape showed me in no uncertain terms.

There's a reason Marshawn Lynch was the most popular comparison for both Gurley and Guice by professional analysts.

Guice's 16 tape was better, but there was a reason the professional analysts had Gurley as a top 10 pick and the best RB prospect since AP, and Guice as a late first, early 2nd pick. The comparison was more their running style than talent levels, as nobody had Guice on par with Gurley in that matter.

I think Guice is a good back, just overrated around here. He's a 2 down back that can catch, but won't be needed on 3rd down passing situations, because there are better options for that. Guice can still rush for 1200 yards IMO, but he isn't going to have 800 receiving yards like Bell and Gurley and DJ etc.

[ninotoreS]

Guice's 16 tape was better, but there was a reason the professional analysts had Gurley as a top 10 pick and the best RB prospect since AP, and Guice as a late first, early 2nd pick.

Some inaccuracies there.

- You've forgotten: Gurley was considered a slight reach at #10 because of his significant durability concerns. He was widely rated a mid-1st, and most mocks had him going to the Chargers at #15. Google fu will back this up.

- Guice wasn't "a late first, early 2nd pick" before he bombed his interviews. He was rated a 1st, period. Teams like the Ravens and Patriots hosted him for visits and were considering him with their first pick.


As we all know and has been discussed to death already, Guice fell because of the said interview bombing (with a dash of out-of-touch Boomer character smearing -- "oh no, he plays Fortnite too much!") and because the elite depth of this RB class made it reasonable for teams with need to fade Guice on their boards. Why risk a 1st round pick on a rumored problem-child when Penny/Michel/Chubb/Jones/Johnson were almost or equally as well graded and would definitely be available early Day 2?

He didn't fall because his tape warranted the fall. That's baloney.

[FantasyFreak]

Guice's 16 tape was better, but there was a reason the professional analysts had Gurley as a top 10 pick and the best RB prospect since AP, and Guice as a late first, early 2nd pick.

Some inaccuracies there.

- You've forgotten: Gurley was considered a slight reach at #10 because of his significant durability concerns. He was widely rated a mid-1st, and most mocks had him going to the Chargers at #15. Google fu will back this up.

- Guice wasn't "a late first, early 2nd pick" before he bombed his interviews. He was rated a 1st, period.


As we all know and has been discussed to death already, Guice fell because of the said interview bombing and because the elite depth of this RB class made it reasonable for teams with need to fade Guice on their boards.

He didn't fall because his tape warranted the fall. That's baloney.

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/derrius-g ... cb76f248b4

Done before the draft interviews. Clearly says rounds 1-2. Right there in black and white. Lance Zierlien. Also, some reports were that some teams passed on him because he wasn't that high on their boards. I heard people on major networks who talked with teams about Guice, and that was stated, character concerns, and some teams just didn't have him as high. You can say it's baloney all you want, but it doesn't prove anything. You can't prove the only reason he fell was because of character concerns, you simply don't know. Regardless, there is no debating that he wasn't as highly rated a prospect as Gurley, which was my main point, originally.

[Bot101]

Yeah I recall reading in multiple places that Guice was viewed as a mid round 1st and only 1 time did I catch that someone didnt view him as a 1st rnd talent. I sifted through blurbs from his great 2016 season and several times he was being viewed in the same category as Barkley. Now obviously he isnt as talented as Barkley. But he is very fast, explosive with good (not great vision) and he is much better in the passing game than showcased in an ancient offensive system.

And what happened as soon as he landed in Washington? The other RBs began their valiant, yet futile attempts to keep up with Guice. Videos surfaced here and there of Guice looking incredible. The kid is the second most talented RB in this class and up till now all that he did was re-separate himself from the pack for me.

When I took Guice at 1.02 my league mates thought I made a mistake and should have taken Penny or Michel because they were the next drafted guys in the class. Well pretty much everyone changed their mind right before his injury, including the Seahawks homer in my league. Guice is really freaking good. And its really depressing he didnt get to showcase his talent to anyone thinking hes overrated.

[ninotoreS]

Done before the draft interviews.

Show me the publication date.

[FantasyFreak]

Yeah I recall reading in multiple places that Guice was viewed as a mid round 1st and only 1 time did I catch that someone didnt view him as a 1st rnd talent. I sifted through blurbs from his great 2016 season and several times he was being viewed in the same category as Barkley. Now obviously he isnt as talented as Barkley. But he is very fast, explosive with good (not great vision) and he is much better in the passing game than showcased in an ancient offensive system.

And what happened as soon as he landed in Washington? The other RBs began their valiant, yet futile attempts to keep up with Guice. Videos surfaced here and there of Guice looking incredible. The kid is the second most talented RB in this class and up till now all that he did was re-separate himself from the pack for me.

When I took Guice at 1.02 my league mates thought I made a mistake and should have taken Penny or Michel because they were the next drafted guys in the class. Well pretty much everyone changed their mind right before his injury, including the Seahawks homer in my league. Guice is really freaking good. And its really depressing he didnt get to showcase his talent to anyone thinking hes overrated.

1200 yards rushing I've predicted, I just think he's overrated vs the rest of his class, that's all. Specifically in the FF community.

[FantasyFreak]

Done before the draft interviews.

Show me the publication date.

LOL. Nothing in the bio about character concerns, don't you think that would be mentioned if it was after? I'm not wasting further time, you want the publication date, you find it.

[ninotoreS]

Regardless, NFL.com's profile for Gurley had a score for him only slightly better than the score there for Guice, and had exactly the same player comp.

So you're aiding my point. http://www.nfl.com/draft/2011/profiles/ ... id=2552475.

And that 6.13 Guice has is indeed the second best score they gave an RB in the '18 class. By a ways (RoJo is third at 6.01, iirc).

[FantasyFreak]

Regardless, NFL.com's profile for Gurley had a score for him only slightly better than the score there for Guice, and had exactly the same player comp.

So you're aiding my point. http://www.nfl.com/draft/2011/profiles/ ... id=2552475.

And that 6.13 Guice has is indeed the second best score they gave an RB in the '18 class. By a ways (RoJo is third at 6.01, iirc).

I'm not actually sure what your point is, to be honest. Not even sure what we are arguing about at this point, my argument was Gurley was a better prospect than Guice coming out, by the Draft community and there's no debate about that, so what is it your argument?