Let’s talk... David Montgomery

[killer_of_giants]

- Agility/elusiveness, balance/power/tackle breaking, receiving, and explosion/burst are the Big 4 traits for me, and he is stellar in 3 of them. Explosion is not great but plenty of RBs can get by without it.

he is a complete and versatile back, good at a lot of things, i especially like his balance, but "stellar" at nothing.

[HereForTheComments]

- Agility/elusiveness, balance/power/tackle breaking, receiving, and explosion/burst are the Big 4 traits for me, and he is stellar in 3 of them. Explosion is not great but plenty of RBs can get by without it.

he is a complete and versatile back, good at a lot of things, i especially like his balance, but "stellar" at nothing.

He must be stellar at something. He broke over 100 tackles in a season... twice.... and, if what I have heard and read is correct, he is the only college running back to ever accomplish that.

Honestly, that is why I am so intrigued by him. He seems to be very elusive, he really does a great job following blocks, his vision is above average, and he has impressive balance. I have a hard time finding flaws in his tape other than home run ability. Which is why I started this thread, I want to see if there is something in his film I'm missing

[FantasyFreak]

I liked Monty for almost 2 years. I had him as my top back in this class until I watched Jacobs and Sanders. The more I watched Monty, the more I see a complete lack of burst. My issue with being a tackle breaker is that if that's his MO. what does that make him in the NFL? I struggle with seeing him being able to be a top back at the next level. I think he's going to get volume. However, I don't see a special player. YPC isn't everything, but sub 5 is a bit of an issue for me for a college back. He won''t be breaking of chunk plays very often in the NFL, if at all, so he's going to have to grind out his yards. I'm not saying he can't be successful, but I think his ceiling is limited.

The thing with breaking that many tackles, too, means you're not avoiding them. To me breaking tackles and being elusive are different things. To me, being elusive means you just make people miss. That's how I view the word. John Kelly had a similarity poor YPC in college, and was known as a tackle breaker. Monty has no second gear. His burst at the line is average at best, and he just doesn't get up to another speed that will threaten NFL secondaries or linebackers. He does not seem faster in pads than his 40 time, like some backs. I have him as the 3rd back in this class. However I think he outproduces Sanders this year on volume.

[killer_of_giants]

I want to see if there is something in his film I'm missing

apparently that's a lot that i am missing

[HereForTheComments]

I liked Monty for almost 2 years. I had him as my top back in this class until I watched Jacobs and Sanders. The more I watched Monty, the more I see a complete lack of burst. My issue with being a tackle breaker is that if that's his MO. what does that make him in the NFL? I struggle with seeing him being able to be a top back at the next level. I think he's going to get volume. However, I don't see a special player. YPC isn't everything, but sub 5 is a bit of an issue for me for a college back. He won''t be breaking of chunk plays very often in the NFL, if at all, so he's going to have to grind out his yards. I'm not saying he can't be successful, but I think his ceiling is limited.

The thing with breaking that many tackles, too, means you're not avoiding them. To me breaking tackles and being elusive are different things. To me, being elusive means you just make people miss. That's how I view the word. John Kelly had a similarity poor YPC in college, and was known as a tackle breaker. Monty has no second gear. His burst at the line is average at best, and he just doesn't get up to another speed that will threaten NFL secondaries or linebackers. He does not seem faster in pads than his 40 time, like some backs. I have him as the 3rd back in this class. However I think he outproduces Sanders this year on volume.

This is really good feedback, thank you.

[Lord_Varys]

- Agility/elusiveness, balance/power/tackle breaking, receiving, and explosion/burst are the Big 4 traits for me, and he is stellar in 3 of them. Explosion is not great but plenty of RBs can get by without it.

he is a complete and versatile back, good at a lot of things, i especially like his balance, but "stellar" at nothing.

His contact balance / power certainly is stellar. He's one of the better tackle breakers I've seen in a long time.

[Pac_Eddy]

- Agility/elusiveness, balance/power/tackle breaking, receiving, and explosion/burst are the Big 4 traits for me, and he is stellar in 3 of them. Explosion is not great but plenty of RBs can get by without it.

he is a complete and versatile back, good at a lot of things, i especially like his balance, but "stellar" at nothing.

His contact balance / power certainly is stellar. He's one of the better tackle breakers I've seen in a long time.

His vision and ability to read and follow blocking without overrunning blocks may be stellar. I love those things about him.

[FantasyFreak]

- Agility/elusiveness, balance/power/tackle breaking, receiving, and explosion/burst are the Big 4 traits for me, and he is stellar in 3 of them. Explosion is not great but plenty of RBs can get by without it.

he is a complete and versatile back, good at a lot of things, i especially like his balance, but "stellar" at nothing.

His contact balance / power certainly is stellar. He's one of the better tackle breakers I've seen in a long time.

He has some traits that Arian Foster had, including lack of athleticism. He can win with guile and smarts, and he'll have to. I love the qualities he has on tape, but the lack of athleticism is very noticeable. There is just no burst and 2nd gear. He is shifty, though. I really hope he succeeds. I was on him very early, years ago, but ended up not getting him because of his draft position. I went with Jacobs when I had the opportunity.

[Sriracha]

David Montgomery is my 1.01 of this class.
- Agility/elusiveness, balance/power/tackle breaking, receiving, and explosion/burst are the Big 4 traits for me, and he is stellar in 3 of them. Explosion is not great but plenty of RBs can get by without it.
- Unlike Jacobs, Monty has already proven that he can handle a big workload.
- He is in a great offensive system, on a team that should be facing good game scripts. And frankly, a brusing RB in cold Chicago weather is going to be even stronger come fantasy playoffs.

40-yard dash is the least important metric for running backs. I don't even look at it unless it is way higher or slower than I expected. Holyfield lost a lot of ground based on his, but Monty's was sufficient. If you are running in wide open space then the defense did something wrong, or you did something great to get there.

I can see the argument for Jacobs since he should get more volume, but he has a red flag in that we have no clue how he'll hold up to the volume.

I *can't* see why people don't see how people still don't see it with Monty.

Mind citing some data here? Because weight adjusted 40 times have the highest correlation with NFL success of any athletic metric.

[Hottoddies]

David Montgomery is my 1.01 of this class.
- Agility/elusiveness, balance/power/tackle breaking, receiving, and explosion/burst are the Big 4 traits for me, and he is stellar in 3 of them. Explosion is not great but plenty of RBs can get by without it.
- Unlike Jacobs, Monty has already proven that he can handle a big workload.
- He is in a great offensive system, on a team that should be facing good game scripts. And frankly, a brusing RB in cold Chicago weather is going to be even stronger come fantasy playoffs.

40-yard dash is the least important metric for running backs. I don't even look at it unless it is way higher or slower than I expected. Holyfield lost a lot of ground based on his, but Monty's was sufficient. If you are running in wide open space then the defense did something wrong, or you did something great to get there.

I can see the argument for Jacobs since he should get more volume, but he has a red flag in that we have no clue how he'll hold up to the volume.

I *can't* see why people don't see how people still don't see it with Monty.

Mind citing some data here? Because weight adjusted 40 times have the highest correlation with NFL success of any athletic metric.

To say that the 40 time is the least important metric for RBs is probably a gross exaggeration. I don't have any hard data, but I do believe there have been plenty of successful RBs with subpar 40 times and a good number of speedsters who have failed. If memory serves me correct, the University of Tennessee did a study 3 years ago that found that the combine metric with the highest correlation to NFL success was actually hand size. So much for the underwear olympics.

[Lumps]

David Montgomery is my 1.01 of this class.
- Agility/elusiveness, balance/power/tackle breaking, receiving, and explosion/burst are the Big 4 traits for me, and he is stellar in 3 of them. Explosion is not great but plenty of RBs can get by without it.
- Unlike Jacobs, Monty has already proven that he can handle a big workload.
- He is in a great offensive system, on a team that should be facing good game scripts. And frankly, a brusing RB in cold Chicago weather is going to be even stronger come fantasy playoffs.

40-yard dash is the least important metric for running backs. I don't even look at it unless it is way higher or slower than I expected. Holyfield lost a lot of ground based on his, but Monty's was sufficient. If you are running in wide open space then the defense did something wrong, or you did something great to get there.

I can see the argument for Jacobs since he should get more volume, but he has a red flag in that we have no clue how he'll hold up to the volume.

I *can't* see why people don't see how people still don't see it with Monty.

Mind citing some data here? Because weight adjusted 40 times have the highest correlation with NFL success of any athletic metric.

To say that the 40 time is the least important metric for RBs is probably a gross exaggeration. I don't have any hard data, but I do believe there have been plenty of successful RBs with subpar 40 times and a good number of speedsters who have failed. If memory serves me correct, the University of Tennessee did a study 3 years ago that found that the combine metric with the highest correlation to NFL success was actually hand size. So much for the underwear olympics.

Pretty quick googling.

I think the recent changes towards satellite backs and more passing game focused versions skew the data? Depending how far you go back could alter results that might be definitive with a cut off to account for that.

https://www.rotoworld.com/article/numbe ... alytics-rb

[Pac_Eddy]

He has some traits that Arian Foster had, including lack of athleticism. He can win with guile and smarts, and he'll have to. I love the qualities he has on tape, but the lack of athleticism is very noticeable. There is just no burst and 2nd gear. He is shifty, though. I really hope he succeeds. I was on him very early, years ago, but ended up not getting him because of his draft position. I went with Jacobs when I had the opportunity.

Arian Foster is a good comparison. Curtis Martin is another than comes to mind. Not saying he'll have that production, but as a guy who doesn't test well but looks right on the field.

[Lord_Varys]

David Montgomery is my 1.01 of this class.
- Agility/elusiveness, balance/power/tackle breaking, receiving, and explosion/burst are the Big 4 traits for me, and he is stellar in 3 of them. Explosion is not great but plenty of RBs can get by without it.
- Unlike Jacobs, Monty has already proven that he can handle a big workload.
- He is in a great offensive system, on a team that should be facing good game scripts. And frankly, a brusing RB in cold Chicago weather is going to be even stronger come fantasy playoffs.

40-yard dash is the least important metric for running backs. I don't even look at it unless it is way higher or slower than I expected. Holyfield lost a lot of ground based on his, but Monty's was sufficient. If you are running in wide open space then the defense did something wrong, or you did something great to get there.

I can see the argument for Jacobs since he should get more volume, but he has a red flag in that we have no clue how he'll hold up to the volume.

I *can't* see why people don't see how people still don't see it with Monty.

Mind citing some data here? Because weight adjusted 40 times have the highest correlation with NFL success of any athletic metric.

To say that the 40 time is the least important metric for RBs is probably a gross exaggeration. I don't have any hard data, but I do believe there have been plenty of successful RBs with subpar 40 times and a good number of speedsters who have failed. If memory serves me correct, the University of Tennessee did a study 3 years ago that found that the combine metric with the highest correlation to NFL success was actually hand size. So much for the underwear olympics.

Exaggeration, sure. I have no data behind it. But look, Lev Bell was a 4.60. You see plenty of RBs run in the 4.5s 4.6s range. I understand that weight adjusted speed scores are good correlators, and yet I know and see that all the things a RB does to have success in the NFL and to put up fantasy points has very little to do with breakaway speed.

I want to know your size / contact balance / power combination -- do you go down to arm tackles or do you punish defenders? Lamar Miller has a great 40 but he fails in this area and that's why he's a JAG. I think this is what size-adjusted-speed scores correlate more with than anything. F=M*A ... there's your speed score. Bigger faster objects are harder to bring down.

I want to see if you are elusive and agile. You can be a bulldozer but if you can't move then you're a JAG. Guys like Blount come to mind.

I want to see your vision. You can be agile and have power but if you're not finding the holes and at least getting what's blocked then you're not going to make it. See Trent Richardson.

I want to see that you can pass protect and run basic routes and don't have hands of stone.

If the seas part and you have wide open green grass... that's not really supposed to happen. It's a nice bonus if you can out-sprint defenders and take it to the house. I want all those other little things that boost your success rate and keep chains moving and wear down a defense. Consistent singles and doubles are more important to the RB position than slugging home runs. That's what I mean when I say 40-yd-dash is the least important thing to me.

Unless you get a guy like Holyfield who runs a 4.78, or if you get a 5'11 220lb back running a 4.42, I'm really not watching the 40 too close. A 4.63 isn't explosive, no, but I say "oh well." Montgomery excels in all the other areas, the important areas. And he's proven he can carry a load. Ultimately would I prefer him in the 4.5s, and see him get around the edge and make more explosive plays? Hell yeah. If he did that, he'd be a 1st round NFL draft pick. But I know what I'm getting with this guy and it doesn't need to be an elite fantasy RB1 for me to feel 100pc confident in his prospects as a pro.

[djeternal2]

Exaggeration, sure. I have no data behind it. But look, Lev Bell was a 4.60. You see plenty of RBs run in the 4.5s 4.6s range. I understand that weight adjusted speed scores are good correlators, and yet I know and see that all the things a RB does to have success in the NFL and to put up fantasy points has very little to do with breakaway speed.

Bell is the worst example to bring up in this conversation since he dropped 20 lbs from his rookie year to his second year which ultimately allowed him to be faster & more agile on the field. If he had never lost that 20 lbs I doubt we would have ever seen the top 5-10 RB we see in Bell now.

[HereForTheComments]

Exaggeration, sure. I have no data behind it. But look, Lev Bell was a 4.60. You see plenty of RBs run in the 4.5s 4.6s range. I understand that weight adjusted speed scores are good correlators, and yet I know and see that all the things a RB does to have success in the NFL and to put up fantasy points has very little to do with breakaway speed.

Bell is the worst example to bring up in this conversation since he dropped 20 lbs from his rookie year to his second year which ultimately allowed him to be faster & more agile on the field. If he had never lost that 20 lbs I doubt we would have ever seen the top 5-10 RB we see in Bell now.

Unless he gained a ton of weight after the combine, there is no way he lost 20 lbs. His playing weight is 225 and he weighed 230 at the combine.