The Todd Gurley Thread - Currently FA

[hoos89]

Looks like to me another case of owners over-valuing their players with a hint of stubbornness. If he is so "great" then why is anyone shopping him?

Anyone not contending should probably be shopping him. Also I shop players all the time, including players I like a lot...it's not like Gurley is the only player I'm shopping. I bought Gurley late 2nd in a startup this summer with the thought that I'd either hold if competing or shop if not. Given that I felt my league was undervaluing 2020 1st I ended up in a position where I'm not competing, so I'd like to move Gurley. Also generally speaking I don't like to hold RBs when I'm rebuilding...too much of their value is expended from season to season.

Is this a case of owners valuing a player more than other players in their league? Perhaps. But that doesn't mean we're overvaluing him. I'm trying to get a fringe RB1 value for him (~RB10-15 range). Other players commonly valued in that range include: Fournette (less talented, also has injury concerns, worse offense), Jacobs (rookie, bad team, game script often works against him), Gordon (who knows what his usage will be going forward given how good Ekeler looked, also has injury issues), Conner (unstable situation, hasn't looked good this year, liable to get drafted over), Montgomery (rookie...hasn't looked great), Aaron Jones (unstable situation, unreliable usage, coaching staff seems to want to put him in a committee).

[bjd5211]

It'll be interesting to watch Gurley's usage if the Rams continue to fall down the standings. It's easy to scale back on of your best weapons when you're winning. McVay's position is dependant on the W-L column at the end of the day. There isn't a coach in the league who would chose the long term health of their players over their own job.

Sure, but McVays job is secure no matter what happens this year barring some massive scandal. Sometimes it's just not your year and they could shift their priorities to next year.

[notweswelker]

I mean, this is a straight quote from notweswelker, "I love Gurley, but I'd snap accept that offer today, the knee issue seems here to stay." This is how you responded to a thread asking about Juju and Gurley. And now you're comparing him to a QB who's continued to play at an elite in his mid/late 30s. Are your concerns about his knees gone now?

I value JuJu as a top 10 dynasty pick.

So if you're offering me a top 10 dynasty players for someone closer to the ~30 range, yep I'd snap accept.
Not sure what you're trying to prove with that other than you have a lot of free time to look through my comments .

Brady
The comparison was about trade value vs real value not about Gurley playing until he was 40.... Not sure how much clearer I could be in writing that out but I guess that went over your head.

[Goddard]

I mean, this is a straight quote from notweswelker, "I love Gurley, but I'd snap accept that offer today, the knee issue seems here to stay." This is how you responded to a thread asking about Juju and Gurley. And now you're comparing him to a QB who's continued to play at an elite in his mid/late 30s. Are your concerns about his knees gone now?

I value JuJu as a top 10 dynasty pick.

So if you're offering me a top 10 dynasty players for someone closer to the ~30 range, yep I'd snap accept.
Not sure what you're trying to prove with that other than you have a lot of free time to look through my comments .

Brady
The comparison was about trade value vs real value not about Gurley playing until he was 40.... Not sure how much clearer I could be in writing that out but I guess that went over your head.

Because you admit he has knee issues that aren't going anywhere, then compare him to Brady and say that people weren't willing to buy him at age 31 and yet he's still playing today. That's not going to happen with Gurley. Terrible comparison.

[hoos89]

I mean, this is a straight quote from notweswelker, "I love Gurley, but I'd snap accept that offer today, the knee issue seems here to stay." This is how you responded to a thread asking about Juju and Gurley. And now you're comparing him to a QB who's continued to play at an elite in his mid/late 30s. Are your concerns about his knees gone now?

I value JuJu as a top 10 dynasty pick.

So if you're offering me a top 10 dynasty players for someone closer to the ~30 range, yep I'd snap accept.
Not sure what you're trying to prove with that other than you have a lot of free time to look through my comments .

Brady
The comparison was about trade value vs real value not about Gurley playing until he was 40.... Not sure how much clearer I could be in writing that out but I guess that went over your head.

Because you admit he has knee issues that aren't going anywhere, then compare him to Brady and say that people weren't willing to buy him at age 31 and yet he's still playing today. That's not going to happen with Gurley. Terrible comparison.

The rationale people give for lowering the value on each player is different (age for Brady vs knee for Gurley), but the ultimate result can be the same: that both Gurley and Brady carry more value to their owners than can be recouped in a trade.

[notweswelker]

Because you admit he has knee issues that aren't going anywhere, then compare him to Brady and say that people weren't willing to buy him at age 31 and yet he's still playing today. That's not going to happen with Gurley. Terrible comparison.

I think you might need to take some time and go outside a bit if you're not grasping basic concepts. Are you okay?

[Maintain]

So what are we saying his value is at today? In a rebuild, are you taking a late 2020 first for him?

[hoos89]

So what are we saying his value is at today? In a rebuild, are you taking a late 2020 first for him?

No why would I do that?

[Orenthal Shames]

It'll be interesting to watch Gurley's usage if the Rams continue to fall down the standings. It's easy to scale back on of your best weapons when you're winning. McVay's position is dependant on the W-L column at the end of the day. There isn't a coach in the league who would chose the long term health of their players over their own job.

Sure, but McVays job is secure no matter what happens this year barring some massive scandal. Sometimes it's just not your year and they could shift their priorities to next year.

Outside of the Hoodie, no HC job is secure.

[bjd5211]

It'll be interesting to watch Gurley's usage if the Rams continue to fall down the standings. It's easy to scale back on of your best weapons when you're winning. McVay's position is dependant on the W-L column at the end of the day. There isn't a coach in the league who would chose the long term health of their players over their own job.

Sure, but McVays job is secure no matter what happens this year barring some massive scandal. Sometimes it's just not your year and they could shift their priorities to next year.

Outside of the Hoodie, no HC job is secure.

Sure he has the most job security, but still doesn't change the fact that there is no chance of McVay losing his job after this season for on-field performance reasons. He just took them to the Super Bowl, got a new contract, instantly turned around the franchise and Goff's career from when he started and is the biggest influence over current Head Coaching hires in the league. He's not going anywhere anytime soon.

[Goddard]

I value JuJu as a top 10 dynasty pick.

So if you're offering me a top 10 dynasty players for someone closer to the ~30 range, yep I'd snap accept.
Not sure what you're trying to prove with that other than you have a lot of free time to look through my comments .

Brady
The comparison was about trade value vs real value not about Gurley playing until he was 40.... Not sure how much clearer I could be in writing that out but I guess that went over your head.

Because you admit he has knee issues that aren't going anywhere, then compare him to Brady and say that people weren't willing to buy him at age 31 and yet he's still playing today. That's not going to happen with Gurley. Terrible comparison.

The rationale people give for lowering the value on each player is different (age for Brady vs knee for Gurley), but the ultimate result can be the same: that both Gurley and Brady carry more value to their owners than can be recouped in a trade.

That makes sense, but I don't think that's the extent of the point he was trying to make. People weren't buying Brady at age 31 because he was "old," but he obviously proved everyone wrong by continuing to play at a high level for numerous years after that. I don't think that's going to be the case with Gurley. If we're just talking this year and maybe next year, sure, but that's not what he said with Brady. He then admits that Gurley has knee issues that aren't going anywhere, so that would contradict that he'll continue to play at a high level for a few more years like Brady did, even when no one was buying. He can back track and change the point he was trying to make all he wants, but I still think it's a bad example. A better example would have been someone like Ingram being worth more to their owners like Gurley because their shelf-life might be very similar. Not Brady, who continued to play for 6 years (as he stated) suggesting that Gurley would do the same. If that's not what he meant, should have been more clear.

[Goddard]

Because you admit he has knee issues that aren't going anywhere, then compare him to Brady and say that people weren't willing to buy him at age 31 and yet he's still playing today. That's not going to happen with Gurley. Terrible comparison.

I think you might need to take some time and go outside a bit if you're not grasping basic concepts. Are you okay?

I did, just went and had some lunch...it was pretty nice. Thanks for the concern. Maybe now you should do the same and make better comparisons in the future.

[hoos89]

Because you admit he has knee issues that aren't going anywhere, then compare him to Brady and say that people weren't willing to buy him at age 31 and yet he's still playing today. That's not going to happen with Gurley. Terrible comparison.

The rationale people give for lowering the value on each player is different (age for Brady vs knee for Gurley), but the ultimate result can be the same: that both Gurley and Brady carry more value to their owners than can be recouped in a trade.

That makes sense, but I don't think that's the extent of the point he was trying to make. People weren't buying Brady at age 31 because he was "old," but he obviously proved everyone wrong by continuing to play at a high level for numerous years after that. I don't think that's going to be the case with Gurley. If we're just talking this year and maybe next year, sure, but that's not what he said with Brady. He then admits that Gurley has knee issues that aren't going anywhere, so that would contradict that he'll continue to play at a high level for a few more years like Brady did, even when no one was buying. He can back track and change the point he was trying to make all he wants, but I still think it's a bad example. A better example would have been someone like Ingram being worth more to their owners like Gurley because their shelf-life might be very similar. Not Brady, who continued to play for 6 years (as he stated) suggesting that Gurley would do the same. If that's not what he meant, should have been more clear.

People don't typically shy away from early 30s QBs...is that a thing that people did 10 years ago? We were talking about 37 year old Brady...I think that's reasonably comparable to Gurley today (in that people thought Brady might hang it up within a couple seasons). Yeah Brady played longer than we expected at the time, but that doesn't make the comparison bad. Also, RBs don't need to play for as long as QBs to have value. We expect elite QBs to have very long careers, and we expect RBs to have relatively very short careers. That is priced into the relative values of the positions. So 6 seasons in QB years might be 3 or 4 in RB years, and Gurley could realistically last 3 or 4 for more years at reduced workload.

Given that we price players like Conner and Jones as high RB2s/fringe RB1s even though there's a pretty good chance they won't be a lead back anywhere 2 years from now, I think it's reasonable to say that the market considers 2 seasons of fringe RB1 production to be pretty valuable.

[Goddard]

The rationale people give for lowering the value on each player is different (age for Brady vs knee for Gurley), but the ultimate result can be the same: that both Gurley and Brady carry more value to their owners than can be recouped in a trade.

That makes sense, but I don't think that's the extent of the point he was trying to make. People weren't buying Brady at age 31 because he was "old," but he obviously proved everyone wrong by continuing to play at a high level for numerous years after that. I don't think that's going to be the case with Gurley. If we're just talking this year and maybe next year, sure, but that's not what he said with Brady. He then admits that Gurley has knee issues that aren't going anywhere, so that would contradict that he'll continue to play at a high level for a few more years like Brady did, even when no one was buying. He can back track and change the point he was trying to make all he wants, but I still think it's a bad example. A better example would have been someone like Ingram being worth more to their owners like Gurley because their shelf-life might be very similar. Not Brady, who continued to play for 6 years (as he stated) suggesting that Gurley would do the same. If that's not what he meant, should have been more clear.

People don't typically shy away from early 30s QBs...is that a thing that people did 10 years ago? We were talking about 37 year old Brady...I think that's reasonably comparable to Gurley today (in that people thought Brady might hang it up within a couple seasons). Yeah Brady played longer than we expected at the time, but that doesn't make the comparison bad. Also, RBs don't need to play for as long as QBs to have value. We expect elite QBs to have very long careers, and we expect RBs to have relatively very short careers. That is priced into the relative values of the positions. So 6 seasons in QB years might be 3 or 4 in RB years, and Gurley could realistically last 3 or 4 for more years at reduced workload.

Given that we price players like Conner and Jones as high RB2s/fringe RB1s even though there's a pretty good chance they won't be a lead back anywhere 2 years from now, I think it's reasonable to say that the market considers 2 seasons of fringe RB1 production to be pretty valuable.

This was part of his initial quote: "At no point in time did his trade value reflect that he would be the overall QB3/QB4 for the past 6 years."

To me, he's talking about Brady when he was in his early 30s if we're going back 6 years. So if we're saying 6 years ago people were sleeping on Brady because they thought he was old, but proved them wrong because he continued to be the QB3/4, what's he suggesting about Gurley now? A rational person would interpret that as people are sleeping on Gurley now and that he'll continue being a high end RB for the next several years. Even though he had already admitted that Gurley has knee issues. So what are we saying here? Is Gurley a good RB to have right now? Sure. Is he going to play at a high level for numerous more years like Brady when people began doubting Brady 6 years ago? Highly doubt it. That's all I've been trying to say this whole time in response to Welker's comment. If I'm misinterpreting his comment about Brady being devalued 6 years ago and still being a stud, and comparing that to Gurley's current situation, then that's my bad. But that's how it was written and that's why I think it's a terrible comparison. If we're comparing Brady of the last couple of years to Gurley this year and next, then sure, I get what you're saying at least. That's not how it was worded though.

Also, I don't remember how QBs were valued 10 years ago, but I'm guessing most of them didn't play at a high level once they hit their mid 30s like some of the recent QBs are.

[hoos89]

Tom Brady is 42. 6 years ago he was 36, not 31.

I do think it's generally a fair comparison to make between Gurley and any older player because we're essentially seeing him valued as if he's 29 (or 36 in QB years).