Antonio Gibson Rocket Ship - Round 2

[Cameron Giles]

One of them is a plodder with a 45% snap share on an ascending offense.

The other is a highly athletic lead back (65%) on one of the worst offenses in the NFL.

Moss could definitely seize more of the snap share as the season progresses, but I feel like you're glossing over the massive difference in workload at this point.

I'm not implying that Moss is a better talent by any means, I'm just saying that people are jumping the gun on Gibson's value. His breakout is already baked into his value even though he hasn't really done anything. And it's not like he's a Jonathan Taylor type of talent, where you know the breakout is coming at some point.

If someone had Moss and was trying to get Gibson, I don't understand why they would add anything enormous to fill the gap. Similar draft pedigree and the difference in athleticism could be negated by the difference in college production.

[FantasyFreak]

Why Gibson owners are excited about his NFL potential

It was a nice run, better than his TD. That was really well blocked. I went back and watched the game. Felt he missed some reads on a few other runs. Still looks raw, but looks OK. My biggest concern is how bad Haskins is. That offense has no chance at supporting a RB you feel confident starting the entire year, IMO. McKissic looked good, on top of it. Hopefully Barber is relegated to the bench, so it's down to just the 2 backs. Really hope they tank and get Fields, which would be far better for a guy like Gibson, with that read option ability.

I think we just have to give Gibson his due at this point.

Low volume in college or not, he led the WFT with a 60~% snap share in his 2nd game in the NFL. They want him to be the guy, they're giving him every opportunity to seize the job and he's not faceplanting.

No idea where he ends up long term, but he should be valued at as a starter at this point in time.

Now.. how valuable is the starter for one of the worst offenses in the NFL? That's debateable.

I am giving him his due, but no more. I roster this player. He looks OK. The offense looks terrible. I am not really super excited at this point. I'd like to see him used in the passing game, where he's better, and is more valuable to FF.

[Sriracha]

One of them is a plodder with a 45% snap share on an ascending offense.

The other is a highly athletic lead back (65%) on one of the worst offenses in the NFL.

Moss could definitely seize more of the snap share as the season progresses, but I feel like you're glossing over the massive difference in workload at this point.

I'm not implying that Moss is a better talent by any means, I'm just saying that people are jumping the gun on Gibson's value. His breakout is already baked into his value even though he hasn't really done anything. And it's not like he's a Jonathan Taylor type of talent, where you know the breakout is coming at some point.

If someone had Moss and was trying to get Gibson, I don't understand why they would add anything enormous to fill the gap. Similar draft pedigree and the difference in athleticism could be negated by the difference in college production.

I believe there’s a misunderstanding here.

My point isnt that Gibson is more talented, just that he’s technically the lead back in his offense where Moss is decidedly behind Singletary in snapshare at this point.

I know Moss is in a better offense, but right or wrong, people typically value starters with athletic upside over backups.

[CGW]

One of them is a plodder with a 45% snap share on an ascending offense.

The other is a highly athletic lead back (65%) on one of the worst offenses in the NFL.

Moss could definitely seize more of the snap share as the season progresses, but I feel like you're glossing over the massive difference in workload at this point.

I'm not implying that Moss is a better talent by any means, I'm just saying that people are jumping the gun on Gibson's value. His breakout is already baked into his value even though he hasn't really done anything. And it's not like he's a Jonathan Taylor type of talent, where you know the breakout is coming at some point.

If someone had Moss and was trying to get Gibson, I don't understand why they would add anything enormous to fill the gap. Similar draft pedigree and the difference in athleticism could be negated by the difference in college production.

I believe there’s a misunderstanding here.

My point isnt that Gibson is more talented, just that he’s technically the lead back in his offense where Moss is decidedly behind Singletary in snapshare at this point.

I know Moss is in a better offense, but right or wrong, people typically value starters with athletic upside over backups.

In dynasty, value of a player stems partially from their current production but also their future value. Gibson is getting a little bit more volume currently, but also plays on a terrible team and has an absolute ton to learn. Moss, on the other hand, is on one of the better teams in the league that will often be in positive game scripts and have scoring opportunities. Sure, he's RBBC with Singletary NOW. That doesn't mean Singletary won't get hurt or that Moss can't win the job outright at some point. Both have decent potential. Both have similar draft pedigree. Both have a path to workload. Gibson has better athleticism. Moss has better experience. Moss has a significantly better team and organization.

Why would anyone pay a ton on top of Moss to get Gibson other than pure speculation?

[The MAC Machine]

I'm not implying that Moss is a better talent by any means, I'm just saying that people are jumping the gun on Gibson's value. His breakout is already baked into his value even though he hasn't really done anything. And it's not like he's a Jonathan Taylor type of talent, where you know the breakout is coming at some point.

If someone had Moss and was trying to get Gibson, I don't understand why they would add anything enormous to fill the gap. Similar draft pedigree and the difference in athleticism could be negated by the difference in college production.

I believe there’s a misunderstanding here.

My point isnt that Gibson is more talented, just that he’s technically the lead back in his offense where Moss is decidedly behind Singletary in snapshare at this point.

I know Moss is in a better offense, but right or wrong, people typically value starters with athletic upside over backups.

In dynasty, value of a player stems partially from their current production but also their future value. Gibson is getting a little bit more volume currently, but also plays on a terrible team and has an absolute ton to learn. Moss, on the other hand, is on one of the better teams in the league that will often be in positive game scripts and have scoring opportunities. Sure, he's RBBC with Singletary NOW. That doesn't mean Singletary won't get hurt or that Moss can't win the job outright at some point. Both have decent potential. Both have similar draft pedigree. Both have a path to workload. Gibson has better athleticism. Moss has better experience. Moss has a significantly better team and organization.

Why would anyone pay a ton on top of Moss to get Gibson other than pure speculation?

I knew there was something I liked about you..

I’ll take this

x2

[cazzie33]

^^^
Well argued . Plenty of "IFs" on both sides before either is the full blown guy lead back. Remains to be seen how long Haskins will be allowed a learning curve. Right now that's the biggest difference as the Bills offer more scoring potential & game script to feed carries to the RB position. Rivera isn't as invested in the Haskins Project so could see a change down the road (maybe even an Alex Smith late season run ) which with experience gained by Gibson would put him ahead of Moss. Also there is no " Singeltary" roadblock in Wash to stifle Gibson's touches once they have the confidence in him to know the offense.

Moss side is he has already shown that he has RB instincts & picked up the nuances of the position that Gibson hopes to learn on the job in the NFL . Also has a QB that threatens the defenses creating space for a RB to succeed.

Purely a pick your preference for risk situation between these two. Higher floor or Higher ceiling

[Bronco Billy]

Two things that I really love about that clip of his run against AZ:

1) He doesn’t look to give up ground when confronted by opposition in front if him. It drives me nuts when I see RBs backtrack laterally trying to create a better angle or get to a corner. It can generate some big runs when it works, but it seems like 3 out of 4 times the best end result is only losing 1-2 yds of what was already gained, and there are times when it ends up being a lot more. I love that he just will not surrender yardage he’s already gained, and that is consistent on all his runs that I’ve seen.

2) He doesn’t take any unnecessary steps in making his jump cuts. It is plant, cut, and move forward. Most times guys have to slow or take a stutter step in avoiding a tackler, so that while they gain an angle they also give the D player a chance to react and grab hold of jersey or clip an ankle even though they overran the play. With Gibson, by the time the D player can gather himself, Gibson has already gone by him.

Those are 2 earmarks of some great RBs. He’s still got some learning to do, but some of the small sample he’s shown in the NFL just makes an owner lick his chops.

[FantasyFreak]

Two things that I really love about that clip of his run against AZ:

1) He doesn’t look to give up ground when confronted by opposition in front if him. It drives me nuts when I see RBs backtrack laterally trying to create a better angle or get to a corner. It can generate some big runs when it works, but it seems like 3 out of 4 times the best end result is only losing 1-2 yds of what was already gained, and there are times when it ends up being a lot more. I love that he just will not surrender yardage he’s already gained, and that is consistent on all his runs that I’ve seen.

2) He doesn’t take any unnecessary steps in making his jump cuts. It is plant, cut, and move forward. Most times guys have to slow or take a stutter step in avoiding a tackler, so that while they gain an angle they also give the D player a chance to react and grab hold of jersey or clip an ankle even though they overran the play. With Gibson, by the time the D player can gather himself, Gibson has already gone by him.

Those are 2 earmarks of some great RBs. He’s still got some learning to do, but some of the small sample he’s shown in the NFL just makes an owner lick his chops.

I'm still luke warm. Think he lacks some vision, and it's debatable how much that will improve. That offense is terrible, and one six yard run isn't really a big deal to me. He has shown some things I already knew he had, like some nice shiftiness and speed. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see that offense producing a very productive RB any time soon. Have to hope for Fields, and that RPO. Haskins has an odour to him. I've watched both games, and he's atrocious. He's going to really limit what that offence can do, and I hope Washington realizes this sooner, rather than later. Until then, it's going to be 12-15 touches a game, on an offense that produces 275 yards a game.

[CGW]

Two things that I really love about that clip of his run against AZ:

1) He doesn’t look to give up ground when confronted by opposition in front if him. It drives me nuts when I see RBs backtrack laterally trying to create a better angle or get to a corner.
...

Saquon is the king of this. It is maddening. I think it happens most from RBs who have the breakaway speed to hit home runs. They see every touch as a potential to take it to the house, but in all reality there is a big spot in the NFL for guys who can consistently get 4 yards.

[Bronco Billy]

Two things that I really love about that clip of his run against AZ:

1) He doesn’t look to give up ground when confronted by opposition in front if him. It drives me nuts when I see RBs backtrack laterally trying to create a better angle or get to a corner. It can generate some big runs when it works, but it seems like 3 out of 4 times the best end result is only losing 1-2 yds of what was already gained, and there are times when it ends up being a lot more. I love that he just will not surrender yardage he’s already gained, and that is consistent on all his runs that I’ve seen.

2) He doesn’t take any unnecessary steps in making his jump cuts. It is plant, cut, and move forward. Most times guys have to slow or take a stutter step in avoiding a tackler, so that while they gain an angle they also give the D player a chance to react and grab hold of jersey or clip an ankle even though they overran the play. With Gibson, by the time the D player can gather himself, Gibson has already gone by him.

Those are 2 earmarks of some great RBs. He’s still got some learning to do, but some of the small sample he’s shown in the NFL just makes an owner lick his chops.

I'm still luke warm. Think he lacks some vision, and it's debatable how much that will improve. That offense is terrible, and one six yard run isn't really a big deal to me. He has shown some things I already knew he had, like some nice shiftiness and speed. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see that offense producing a very productive RB any time soon. Have to hope for Fields, and that RPO. Haskins has an odour to him. I've watched both games, and he's atrocious. He's going to really limit what that offence can do, and I hope Washington realizes this sooner, rather than later. Until then, it's going to be 12-15 touches a game, on an offense that produces 275 yards a game.

I still have hope for you, my friend. Hell, we managed to persuade you enough to get Gibson on your roster. We’ve got you on around step 3. Only 9 more to go...

[FantasyFreak]

Two things that I really love about that clip of his run against AZ:

1) He doesn’t look to give up ground when confronted by opposition in front if him. It drives me nuts when I see RBs backtrack laterally trying to create a better angle or get to a corner. It can generate some big runs when it works, but it seems like 3 out of 4 times the best end result is only losing 1-2 yds of what was already gained, and there are times when it ends up being a lot more. I love that he just will not surrender yardage he’s already gained, and that is consistent on all his runs that I’ve seen.

2) He doesn’t take any unnecessary steps in making his jump cuts. It is plant, cut, and move forward. Most times guys have to slow or take a stutter step in avoiding a tackler, so that while they gain an angle they also give the D player a chance to react and grab hold of jersey or clip an ankle even though they overran the play. With Gibson, by the time the D player can gather himself, Gibson has already gone by him.

Those are 2 earmarks of some great RBs. He’s still got some learning to do, but some of the small sample he’s shown in the NFL just makes an owner lick his chops.

I'm still luke warm. Think he lacks some vision, and it's debatable how much that will improve. That offense is terrible, and one six yard run isn't really a big deal to me. He has shown some things I already knew he had, like some nice shiftiness and speed. I hope I'm wrong, but I don't see that offense producing a very productive RB any time soon. Have to hope for Fields, and that RPO. Haskins has an odour to him. I've watched both games, and he's atrocious. He's going to really limit what that offence can do, and I hope Washington realizes this sooner, rather than later. Until then, it's going to be 12-15 touches a game, on an offense that produces 275 yards a game.

I still have hope for you, my friend. Hell, we managed to persuade you enough to get Gibson on your roster. We’ve got you on around step 3. Only 9 more to go...

I always liked the player. Just never fell into a range where I could draft him, except 1 league, and I went Bryan Edwards, who I believed (and still do) is the better prospect. I don't expect Gibson to ever be a true workhorse back, as I said, I don't think that's his likely outcome. However, my concern is, even with what I feel he should be (a 15 touch a game player), I see a terrible offense, with a terrible QB, and can only hope that they can get a QB on the roster, and actually use Gibson more as a pass catcher. If they do that, he can be a top 18 Fantasy back, but until then, I'm not overly excited. I like to be realistic with my expectations, and a Haskins led offense for a RB is no bueno. Hopefully they upgrade the position, because I'm starting to think not only is the offense limited in their ability to move the ball due to him, but also limited in the imagination of play calls they can use due to his skill set, or lack thereof.

[Lord_Varys]

I think part of the reason Haskins looks bad is that he has less time to throw than any other QB. 2nd OC in as many years and a bottom-5 OL so I'll give him some time to settle in.

[FantasyFreak]

I think part of the reason Haskins looks bad is that he has less time to throw than any other QB. 2nd OC in as many years and a bottom-5 OL so I'll give him some time to settle in.

I see a QB who misses reads consistently, and even when he does have time, he's inaccurate. He's not good. Not an NFL caliber starter IMO. I'd be glad to be wrong, I have McLaurin in a lot of leagues.

[Ice]

I think part of the reason Haskins looks bad is that he has less time to throw than any other QB. 2nd OC in as many years and a bottom-5 OL so I'll give him some time to settle in.

The reason Haskins looks bad is because he is bad.

[FantasyFreak]

I think part of the reason Haskins looks bad is that he has less time to throw than any other QB. 2nd OC in as many years and a bottom-5 OL so I'll give him some time to settle in.

The reason Haskins looks bad is because he is bad.

That is the correct analysis, yes.