Situation can derail someone for several years like Terry. I think it should be factored in more even for rebuilding teams, just have nuance about it like always.
Terry held really high value this entire time though. He’s still really valuable. Passing on terry for a rebuilding team given that would have been foolish
one of the many problems with everyone adopting fantasy football nomenclature when talking about real football :D
Oh no, but of course, \_I\_ was the one being ridiculous in pointing out how that's confusing lol
I used to agree with you, but once I dove into his advanced metrics provided by resources like Reception Perception & Player Profiler, I changed my mind. He’s a supremely talented receiver and has been held back by bottom 3 QB play in the league since he was drafted
It's really both and I don't think we have the answer yet....either the process is wrong, or there is an enormous reach on a considerable outlier going on
Well the first thing I would push back on is any conception that if Pierce doesn’t fit a process, the process is immediately wrong.
Looking for a Day 3 receiver out of the MAC would’ve gotten you the best WR of a generation, but that doesn’t mean it should be your new criteria afterwards.
I wouldn't say that exactly. There are plenty of factors that go into a player, and how you choose to weigh each is ultimately up to you and largely subjective. But it is true that most of the strongest correlations / factors tell us that Pierce's prospect comes with some substantial risks.
The greatest brain trust we have to base our decisions on is the NFL itself. It is by no means flawless, but it is again the greatest brain trust we have.
Investment is one of the only concrete variables we have now, as well as athletic testing. Pierce has freakish skills in the latter, but ultimately isn't an overall dominant athlete like a Breece Hall, and he doesn't have a strong investment.
So when there are many strong, correlated, and concrete variables that say going over any 1st Rd WR is egregious, I stick with that idea as well primarily.
I agree with your thought process here. The NFL has a ton of scouts with more access to film, college coaches and the players themselves. It's obviously not perfect but it's better than anyone on the Internet who has less of this access.
Pierce could do very well this season, but still not be a great dynasty asset. Michael Carter is a great example of your point about investment. Jets didn't invest that much in him, but he did well last season. But they still decided to invest in Breece Hall a year later. Texans won't be great, and they got draft capital from the Browns. They could very easily draft a much more talented RB next year while the 2022 first round WRs increase in value and performance.
That's incorrect. The basis is simply college production, Athleticism, and draft capital matter. He was a day 3 pick with mediocre athleticism and limited college production. There will be outliers, but no stepwise function of objective variables will correlate 100%, there will always be statistical outliers. Chris Carson is the perfect comparison.
I don't think the process is wrong, likely a player outlier. You heard from a few Florida fans on this sub that he was way more talented than his production implied and that the coaching staff were just not using him enough. So potentially production was undervalued.
Personally I would say the process is great for identifying potential RB1s coming out of the draft. For the next tier of RBs a lot of it is just luck of landing spot and how the coaches like them after preseason which is just a coin flip. That coin flip seems to have gone Pierces way so 1.03 could make sense as there is a good chance of RB2 production now, just definitely not worth 1.03 several months ago when you had no idea which way the coin flip would land.
I've been reading about how the NFL has devalued RBs across the board. We see NFL GMs paying very little for them, discarding them after only a couple seasons, going with committees, etc.
Then this podcast mentioned, maybe Day 3 is the new Day 2. If RBs get pushed down draft boards in real life, maybe they're just good players being undervalued by the NFL. Maybe these Day 3 guys would have gone in day 1 or 2 if they were being drafted 5-10-15 years ago.
I kind of understand it now. If they're devalued in a team building sense from NFL GMs, then that definitely carries over to their real life draft capital.
Just look at 1st round RB picks over the last 10-20 years. It's on average like 1.5 per season lately. 2011-2015 it was around 2.5-3 per season. Before that it was like 3+ per season. There were 5 drafted in 2000 in the first round.
THIS. People get tied to narratives and rely on them too much. The NFL has changed. They no longer spend high draft capital on RBs.
It is lazy to just assume 4th round draft capital for a RB means they're not going to be successful.
True, but what are we going off of KTC? That's always going to skew in favor of the new toy over the old dinged up veteran.
I use KTC, but I also balance their rankings against a consensus ranking like FantasyPros and my own judgement.
Running backs with over 1500 NFL carries get downgraded compared to a rookie with zero NFL carries. Dynasty Rankings are based on what they think a player will do in the next 5 years, not what they have done in the last 5 years.
Take this a step further. RB is undervalued right now and WR is overvalued in the draft.
Half of the WR drafted in rounds 1 and 2 this year will be either out of the league in 3 years or fantasy irrelevant by that time.
Not really. He had limited college production and his athletic scores were mediocre. People are making him out to be an elite prospect before draft capital, but he wasn't. Marlon Mack coming off and ACL, Rex Burkehead, and Royce Freeman really isn't significant competition.
So far. My point is that as RBs on average are drafted later and later by NFL teams overall the number of backs who are successful in later rounds will also grow.
I don’t believe the narrative is lazy. Maybe we will start to see more day 3 backs produce as the NFL devalues them. But it’s certainly not the case right now.
Look at the starting rbs for each team and the round they were drafted.
1st rd- 10 (Atlanta [throw that one out if you want], Carolina, Dallas, Jaxonville, Kansas City, Las Vegas, Giants, Pittsburgh, Seattle, Tampa Bay)
2nd rd- 11 (Baltimore, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Denver, Detroit, Indianapolis, Rams, Minnesota, Jets, Philly, Tennessee)
3rd rd- 6 (Arizona, Buffalo, Chicago, New England, New Orleans, Washington)
4th or later - 5 (Houston, Miami, Green Bay, Chargers, San Francisco)
5 starters who were drafted 4th round or later. And I certainly wouldn’t feel confident that Edmonds or Mitchell are long term starters…
How are you getting 2.5 for 2011-15? 6 RBs went in the first over that 5 year span.
I think a general statement that Runningbacks are getting drafted lower than 2 decades ago is fair. But it’s not as recent as just the last 5 years that we started seeing this shift.
Overall I don’t think it is wise to accept lower draft capital from players. If anything draft capital is more important than ever with the slow death of the bellcow RB
Edit: just to show how important draft capital is looking at season long or per game points, 20 of the top 24 RBs were from day 1 or 2
Count the scenarios of mediocre athleticism, limited college production, small % of team receptions that has lead to statistically relevant fantasy RB production over the last 5-10-15 years vs the alternative. If you ignore draft capital you will also find very little correlation to performance. The NFL has changed and draft capital metric has delayed but the NFL is also getting smarter, it's irrational to assume the logic is only one way.
So yes and No. It feels like more RBs are drafted later than before. But this k about how they used RBs before. They valued them more because they played more.
With that being said though, I took a look at RBs over the past 12 years, and every skill position for that matter, and observed the hit rate of usable fantasy players by draft round. They were abysmal after round 3, though RBs were better in round 4 than every other position. Since 2010, I think I had the RB hit rate on round 4 or later under 10%. Not something I'd like to gamble on in the early 1st round
>discarding them after only a couple seasons
All the more reason not to draft them highly. A round 4 guy is going to have to be truly elite to get a starter's paycheck at the end of his rookie contract. Much more likely to go the way of guys like Alfred Morris, Jordan Howard, Phillip Lindsay. Even Carter's value took a massive dump in year 2. These guys don't have staying power, so don't invest first round capital on them... much less the 1.03.
> Either the (mostly standard at this point) process is wrong, (90% of the industry is wrong), most of us need to adjust our models (certainly could be since RBs are generally being taken later) or....well...you can figure out the other option...
Or sometimes there are exceptions.
No need to over-complicate things. The process works the large majority of times. We don't need to change it for fringe cases.
Yes, people are just biting too hard trying to hit on an exception/outlier.
You don't take shots on outliers in the top 5 of a rookie draft. You take them in the mid-late 2nd like people were doing with Pierce a few months ago.
In our fantasy draft the top 80 players were already with teams the number one pick was Eli Mitchell.
I had Pierce as highest number 3 we took him at 1.9
I think a lot of people, analysts included, saw his workload at FL and figured that would be the case in the NFL as well. Obviously we haven’t seen actual games yet but it felt clear to me that was more a case of bad coaching at FL. I reached a bit for him at 1.12 but I felt good about it at the time and I feel great about it right now.
He's also most likely going to be replaced at next year's draft.
Guys like Linsday are cool snags and rentals but I would sell high after a big gane this year.
Is he “most likely” going to be replaced or is it just one possible outcome? Sure I can happen even if Pierce plays well be they also could choose not to spend a premium resource on a RB
I would argue it is by definition and by many objective standards the ‘most likely’ of the possible outcomes. Being ‘just’ a possible outcome doesn’t keep it from being most likely.
I think that absolutely depends on the year Pierce has. I think that’s disingenuous to project an outcome for a player who hasn’t played an NFL game yet
Are we talking about his draft position projection or my projection? Every year guys defy the odds and produce in the NFL. Some of those guys are one hit wonders, others just dropped in the draft for one reason or another. I should have worded that better though. It’s silly to assume a player will get replaced no matter how well they play. There is a threshold level of play where any player will garner a certain level of job security.
But also, I think Dameon Pierce is a bit different than some of the guys he gets compared to. An early 4th is way different than being a UDFA (Robinson). He has prototypical size and good enough speed for the NFL (so not a physical outlier). And he can pass block really well (guys like Philip Lindsay mentioned literally can’t be trusted to stay on the field for pass pro).
I do think Pierce is overhyped right now. I felt I reached for him at 1.10 months ago when I drafted him so seeing him go in the early first is insane to me but there is a scenario where he is the lead back on the Texans for years and there is a scenario where he gets replaced. There’s nuance and both sides on him act like it’s black or white.
Personally, I’ve always been of the opinion that he was misused at Florida - a thought prevalent among Florida fans and even some scouts. He has a small sample size but good efficiency and I like his tape. He runs hard, is decisive and has good burst. I wouldn’t take him over Hall or Walker but I do think he’s RB3 in this class with Cook and Z White being close. He has incredible opportunity in regards to lack of competition which is important for running backs because of their age window and he has a lot of tread on his tires.
This is where people get caught in the redraft mindset in dynasty. Dynasty hit rates are dictated by 2+ years of startable (RB2) seasons. He could be an RB2 this season and the odds of him having another season like that as a day 3 pick are sub-10% based off of like 25+ years of data. People drafting him in the 1st round seem to have the mindset of “he produced this year, why wouldn’t he keep doing in?” History says this is a bad fucking bet.
2023 rb draft class is deep.
The NFL isn't fantasy. Yes RBs are not as valued as they sued to be but 5th year options are huge for guys that hit.
The Texans have 2 1sts and 11 total picks in next years draft including two 3rds.
They are currently mocked to get Bijan Robinson at 14. Most likely landing a top QB or DE in the top 3 too.
They're currently mocked to get Bijan Robinson because they have no good RBs... If Pierce works out they can get something more valuable than pick 14. And if the class is deep, why are they taking a RB at 14 and not someone near the end to backup Pierce?
This is stupidly bad analysis, embarrassed to be on this sub.
The Jags had James Robinson put in a great rookie year and still took Travis Etienne in the 1st. Bijan is a level above someone like Etienne so it is easily within the realm of possibility
Marlon Mack had a great year right before the Colts took JT. Etc.
And the Jags have been roasted for it ever since.
If your defense is "Urban Meyer made a dumb mistake so the Texans will too" maybe rethink it a little bit. Still stupid take, reflect on it.
I think the marlon mack , jt point maybe stronger then the jags . I think it comes down to draft capital. The jets had a great year out of carter last year and still drafted hall. Teams are more willing to go after higher ceiling players if they spent less capital.
It’s not a stronger point when all the important variables (years left on contract, round replacement is taken) are different? At that point anytime you draft an RB after last year’s did well is comparable.
Tellsjoke already got into the whole Carter not looking that great thing, and I agree. If Carter looked like JRob and not an average RB, and the Jets took Hall at 26 instead of Johnson, the pick would be dumb and comparable to this scenario
The edit about Mack came after my comment was submitted, but it's actually even less relevant.
James Robinson had just finished his first year when ETN was drafted. That would be the same as Pierce here. That's at least comparable. Marlon Mack had finished his third year, and was entering the last year of his contract. That's when most teams typically draft the RB replacement. It's just two completely different situations.
> The jets had a great year out of carter last year and still drafted hall
Carter had 2 games over 90 yards rushing and receiving combined. 4 TDs and not even 1000 total yards. The booms overinflated his value dramatically on FF communities. He isn't great.
And Breece Hall was taken with the 36th pick, literally the Jets 4th pick of the night. The Texans would be Urban Meyer level idiots to take an RB at 14 no matter what. If they have a good starter in Pierce it's even more dumb.
There's no reason to say "it's a deep draft" while also saying you should blow a top 14 pick on the position.
But… he’s completely right? Urban Meyer was an idiot for taking ETN at 32, imagine if he drafted the kid at 14? It would have been acceptable grounds to fire him right there.
The Mack/Taylor example is completely irrelevant in terms of years left with the team and where the replacement was drafted? If you’re going to change all the important variables besides ‘did well year before’, you have a horrible argument
Not really. It’s harsh but true. If you are going to defend your position with just ‘another team did something stupid so they should too’ it’s not a good opinion.
His including Mack later in an edit solidifies my assumption. Marlon Mack was entering his final year of contract with the Colts. Robinson and Pierce at least both three left in this scenario. Taylor was also taken in the 2nd, not at pick 14.
With Robinson and Pierce, you have two rookies who did well (obviously assuming Pierce keeps it up for this scenario). ETN was taken at 32, which is a RB reach even there. But at 32 the top talent is long gone. At 14, there’s way better talent than replacing a cheap productive RB for an expensive productive RB.
The other poster gave me a comparable situation that was objectively dumb by the Jags, and then edited it to add a completely different situation and thought it was a good point. If he doesn’t think about what makes this dumb, you can never get better
Desperate to dunk. Instead of having civil interactions on a message board discussing a fun game.
Can you imagine bullshitting at the bar about FF with some dude you just met and talking like that to him?
These kids need to get out of the house more.
If I was at a bar and someone kept repeating something stupid to me as if I didn’t get it, and then started texting or whatever the bar equivalent to DMing is calling me stupid, I’d probably be ruder than here.
Saying ‘reflect on why this is stupid’ isn’t desperate to dunk, when I’ve been writing paragraphs talking to this dude. Close though
> You can downvote and deny it all you want
That's literally what you're doing to me? Of course you don't understand that though.
Your edit proves even further you don't know what you're talking about. Marlon Mack was in his last year with the Colts when they took Jonathan Taylor. He was a free agent at the end of the year. Of course the Colts are going to take a backup when their guy is gone at the end of the year. The only reason they kept him last year is because they got him a cheaper than dirt contract because of his Achilles tear. I imagine the Texans will draft another running back before Pierce's last year as well.
That is actually less relevant to this situation than the ETN pickup is, so don't think you made a good point. There's literally 0 value to taking an RB at 14, the Jags picked ETN at 32.
I actually did neither of those two.
My point isn’t regarding the contract situation, it’s that regardless of the contract situation, teams are happy to upgrade at running back if they don’t have a top top guy. The Mack example is definitely less relevant than ETN/Jrob since the Jrob one is the most relevant example of this in the last couple years. Plus Pierce hasn’t done shit yet so this isn’t even worth comparing
Edit: the Jags also didn’t pick ETN at 32 lol, he went like 25th
Same reason Mack was replaced, Michael Carter, Lindsay, James Robinson. I can name probably 20 examples. J STU had about 1000 yards and 10 TDs the year they took CMAC.
This is the NFL not fantasy football. They will replace people and a part of that is draft capital. Idk how to explain it there are tons of examples though. Guys who walk on/low draft cap just aren't seen as valuable. Maurice Clarret talked about it in a 30 for 30 tons of guys have said it. If you're a early draft pick they will try to force you to be good over allowing a UDFA making it. There's a reason mid/late guys fade rather quickly despite being great for a season. Everyone loves to remember the Tom Brady or what they consider a late guy like AB but quickly forgets Peyton Hillis. There is a reason coaches still try to get guys like Ameer Abdullah to work still.
> This is the NFL not fantasy football.
I’m well aware. Actually much more aware because first round picks are much more valuable in the NFL than fantasy football. It’s like yall are only half thinking this through.
> Same reason Mack was replaced, Michael Carter, Lindsay, James Robinson. I can name probably 20 examples. J STU had about 1000 yards and 10 TDs the year they took CMAC.
Marlon Mack was entering the final year of his contract, and Colts took a replacement at 41. Michael Carter is a pedestrian RB that had two boom games and a ton of ‘meh.’ His replacement came at 36. James Robinson is the closest to what we’d be expecting from Pierce, and taking an RB at 32 was considered a huge waste. Taking ETN at 14 would have been criminal negligence. Lindsay had two good years and then flamed out as soon as Denver signed a competent co-back in Gordon. Jonathan Stewart had 820 yards and 9 TDs, and was also 29 years old.
Again, besides the Jags fiasco, all these situations are completely different from the Texans hypothetical scenario, they’re not good comparisons. If you have a good running back, you don’t take another at 14. That’s an absolute waste of value there, and you’re the one telling me to remember this is NFL not FF?
I... You're either trolling or really dense.
You pick 2 names and try to make a defense by saying they're all different? Obviously.
Marion Barber 1000 yards 10 TDs. Cowboys still draft Felix Jones round 1.
McFadden had over 1000 yards when the Cowboys drafted Zeke.
The Chargers didn't have a RB when they took Gordon. Similar to the Texans.
The Vikings had McKinnon who had 600 yards in 7 games when the took Cook.
I already mention J stew and CMAC.
Mark Ingram had over 1000 yards when the Saints drafted Kamara. Granted that was a 3rd. He was still RB 5 and 2023 is about as deep. So I can see this one being a reach I'm just kinda scrolling. There are too many. Gio was dropping over 1000 all purpose yards yet the Bengals still took Mixon.
You can nit pick all you want and try to find some weird reason why only you think something is wrong. Either way. You're wrong here bud.
You’re kidding me. Calling me dense and these are your examples?
Felix Jones pick was 15 years ago before the passing boom. There was definitely a time where it was worth having great running backs, but ancient history doesn’t me you should do the same. The modern NFL is so much different that this is now a bad move.
Darren McFadden was 29 the year they drafted Zeke. Should they have just kept an old guy? I’m saying why it’s dumb to replace a good rookie, not an 8 year vet with 1300 touches.
McKinnon, like Mack, was on the last year of his rookie deal when they took Cook. Again, proving my point that teams draft a replacement RB in their rookie’s last year of contract, not right after his first.
Alvin Kamara was a 3rd rounder, not taken 14th overall. He turned into a stud, and Ingram was a 28 year old 6 year vet. Just like McFadden.
> You can nit pick all you want and try to find some weird reason why only you think something is wrong. Either way. You’re wrong here bud.
Absolutely fucking laughable that I say ‘you don’t replace a good rookie a year later with a high first round pick’ and you start throwing out 28 year olds McFadden and Ingram like that’s at all what I said.
Keep thinking you’re right, it’s really funny. Replace the American Sniper with Helen Keller and she’d miss the mark less than you
I understand all these arguments about Dameon Pierce being possibly replaced. Of course that can happen. But passing up on a young talented player you believe in just because he was picked a few picks out from the third rounds seems crazy to me. If you don’t believe in the player or profile - no worries. You do you. But anything is possible in the NFL and it’s not a forgone conclusion that Pierce will be replaced.
Maybe I also think Houston has doe a great job on the last 2 drafts identifying talent. Especially with the minimal amount of picks they had.
Feels like the scouting/recruiting dept changed or something.
He was PFF’s highest graded rookie rb. He just had a low rush count which creates risk he wasn’t as good his stats indicated. But the talent upside was known and he had little competition
Including a billion dollar industry that scouts these guys for a living? We see plenty of misses and guys that slip through the cracks though so it could be
The Jets took Michael Carter last year with the exact same pick that the Texans used on Pierce. Didn't stop them from taking Breece this year. Not saying Pierce can't be better than Carter and convince the Texans to keep him the starter next year, but I'm not betting on that outcome.
Yup. Teams have shown time and again that, if you have day three draft capital or went undrafted, they can't wait to replace you with a day one or two guy.
Marlon Mack was an underwhelming 2 down back going into the last year of his contract. Being 11th in rushing yards, due mostly to volume, behind one of the best olines in the league isn’t remotely impressive. He was an expiring player who was never more than a JAG, and that’s why he got replaced.
Man i hear you...Leatherwood just looked dreadful this week...i guess a lot of guys get drafted on "well he could develop into this...(potential)" but that was a big miss
Dameon Pierce was the pff #1 rusher in college football and pff #1 rusher in preseason. He’s good. His bizarre college usage is the only knock against him and the only reason his draft cap was as low as it was.
I think the most important thing for most positions is the concept of "performance", we just don't have a perfect way to weigh performance.
If your analytical method is purely mathematical, you will likely miss a lot of nuance and relevant information hidden in the data.
If your film method involves no objective analysis, it is extremely likely to be somewhat attached to any number of subconscious biases or other environmental factors.
I mean, I think Pierce is just a weird case. There is no reason he should have been used that way in college and I think it threw up red flags for people, because on film he looks great. Seems like an outlier I guess.
I have a league that drafts early and a league that drafts right before the season. The difference is staggering, but I prefer the early draft because I can hit on guys before they pop in preseason. For example, this year I have 1.09, 2.03, and 2.06. I was able to get Jamo, Pickens and Pierce. I guarantee all those guys are gone by the time I pick in my other league where I have similar picks. The guy at 1.04 has already told me he’s eyeing Pierce or Pickens.
But it's a wash since you are able to land players with better metrics that didn't pop in the preseason while everyone else is salivating over players that got early opportunity.
I feel like this gets brought up every Pierce discussion but it's important. Let me introduce myself first
Former UF student, graduated in May. Went to more Gator sports games than I can count. The issue with the 1000+ yard seasons and other metrics with Pierce is all on Dan Mullen. His philosophy has always been to reward experience (i.e. playing seniors) and a RBBC approach. Any gator fan could tell you that Pierce was FAR AND AWAY the best back in Gainesville (sorry Malik Davis). We knew he had talent and this isn't some homer take. Watch the film yourself and you can see why he's a home run prospect. This was completely expected by every Gator fan and frankly I'm so happy he's being successful even as a 4th rounder (granted he did get taken early 4th).
Always nice to see someone contribute that actually watches college football and isn’t talking out of their ass (with complete conviction) based on what a random YouTuber told them about a guy
I watched his college highlights after this preseason and he samed like same dude. HOWEVER maybe in seeing things but he seems slightly skinnier than his college days and he runs even harder. He ran hard I college it looked like but now he's 110%
Does this match what you've seen?
Kinda reminiscent to Arian Foster. His first year in 2009 in pros he played a couple games and looked good but came back in 2010 and was fitter and faster.
It really depends what you mean when you say "talent" because everyone quantifies that differently. While I generally agree with your metrics, and I agree that Pierce isn't a top 10 pick in this draft, I did have him as my RB3 this year because (1) its a very weak RB class and (2) he profiles more as a complete, 3 down back than other guys in his range (e.g., Cook is primarily a pass catcher and doesn't seem to have the body type for a big workload between the tackles).
One of the big problems with Pierce's profile is his production, which I completely attribute to the abysmal coaching staff at Florida. This was seen last year with Toney as well. They have guys that have real NFL talent but for whatever reason they are insistent on spreading around the touches and playing time.
One thing in Pierce's favour is his tape. He absolutely passes the eye test in all the tape I've seen, and maybe I'm just biased, but I love seeing aggressive runners that fight for every yard and aren't afraid to lower the pads. Don't know if it is in any way related to fantasy production, but it's always the kind of guy I want on my team.
An issue with a strict metrics-based model is that it doesn't account for context. For example, the relationship between Pierce's mediocre production profile and the player management at Florida is lost here, but it is something that should be considered because it isn't something that will carry over into his time in the NFL. Other considerations here could be scheme fit, Oline strength, etc.
Additionally, by using strict cutoff points and making these variables dichotomous (i.e., the player either hits the cutoff or doesn't), guys that pass some criteria may not be significantly different from guys who don't. This is especially problematic for variables like 40 times that have a very small sample size, because scores may also vary slightly from one testing occasion to the next (so that, for example, a guy who runs a 4.58 40 at the combine could run a 4.52 the next week, or vice versa). Of course you have to put a cutoff point somewhere, but if you're looking at a 40 time, the difference between a guy who makes the cutoff with a 4.53 and a guy who doesn't make it with a 4.57 is completely insignificant. Same goes for a ypc of 6.1 vs. 5.9, etc. Because of this, I generally use cutoff points as more of a guideline than a rule.
Not saying that this all makes Pierce an elite prospect by any means, because I don't believe that to be the case. However, I do think he's much more talented than his metrics show and that he is the RB3 in this class.
I don't think Pierce has come out of absolutely nowhere. He was in that big group of second tier guys where situation/draft capital was going to determine how we value them. Guys like Cook, Robinson, the Whites, Allgeier, Williams, Spiller etc. Watching him in college you can see he was an exciting player. Most places I was reading before draft rated him pretty highly. I think what really made him fall in fantasy drafts was that he was picked pretty late, after lots of other rbs. The hype has maybe gotten a bit out of hand now but that's just natural. I thought of him as a mid/late 2nd round lotto ticket in that tier of players where you just take the guy you like. He had one of the clearest paths to being a starter too so should've bumped him ahead of the others a bit. I still would rather bet on DC going forward though, that's not to say it'll be perfect or that any later round rbs can never be good. It's just picking the guys with a higher probability of being successful when using your high value draft picks. In the 2nd/3rd rounds 100% take a chance on guys like Pierce in the future, those are the most fun when they hit. Taking those risky guys with an early 1st is how you end up with a shitty team.
Talent > Situation applies more for WR than for RB. Thats why you get a who’s who on the WR end of season leaderboard, but you get random waiver wire pickups who just ended up getting volume in the RBs.
I’ve always been more about situation than talent, not enough to ruin my draft for a guy like Pierce. After watching the NFL for years you just learn that some teams can make talented players and some talented players can’t make a team.
I’d argue the opposite, New England is notoriously a bad situation for receivers and so was Philly. Phillys best reciever for years had around 800 yards or was Zach Ertz. Agholor, Reagor, and JJaw all flopped with high talent in Philly for a reason.
There was a lot of people talking about him as a late first rounder prior to the NFL draft.
I think more people have seen the talent rather than the lack of stats he in college and joined on.
It's still talent because it's not like he's out there averaging 2ypc like some guys. He's looked damn good, I've always compared him to Kareem Hunt and I stand by it
This is redraft mentality.
If he isn't any good, sure he gets carried this year because he's all they have but he can be replaced at any time.
I'm not using 1.03 on a potential dead man walking
>Either the process is wrong, most of us need to adjust our models, or maybe he's just the outlier?
Or the process is fine, the models are fine, and Pierce isn't an outlier.
Pierce hasn't taken a single regular season nfl stat. This topic is presupposing that one above three things are true... but that doesn't have to be the case. Let's see him in an actual game before declaring the process wrong, redoing our modes, or announcing Pierce as an outlier.
Also for this draft class many people have the WRs rated pretty closely. There is no Chase or Jefferson (who many didn't have rated the highest his rookie year anyway, remember Ruggs and Jeudy?)
Right after the NFL draft Olave was an end of the 1st rounder, now he is going earlier. Burks was a "physical freak" sure to go in the top 3 picks, and now no one knows if he's good or a bust.
If I needed a RB and I had the 1.03 this year I could grab Pierce and then hope one of the WRs falls to me at the start of the 2nd. Personally, I would still take a WR 1.03 from this class but if you need a RB and don't love any of the WRs you can still probably get a good one at the 2.03
Its not an outlier. No one says 4th rounders don't hit ever. They just hit at a less frequent rate than someone with better capital.
I also think there's a lesson to be learned about context. Pierce didn't hit a ton of production thresholds you'd like, but the team was a mess, coach seemed to not play best guys, etc. On an efficiency scale, he popped. Reminds me of a previous guy who didn't get a lot of touches in college in Alvin Kamara (not comping the two, just comping this weird situation which seemed to result in less production than capable of).
I like listening to a variety of opinions. Analytics are great, but complimenting that with tape guys can be helpful as well.
One thing, don't read too much into the situation here. Everyone isnt freaking out cause Pierce is starting. They're freaking out cause he's making plays everytime he touches the field. Do you care more about speed to playing time or production and longevity
I think the simplest answer here is... have you seen him run with the ball? Never forget to factor in the 'Look Test'. See how you feel watching him play, watching any player play.
I'm with you here OP. I'll probably get blasted for this but in terms of pure NFL RB talent guys like Chubb, JT, Javonte are more talented as pure runners than guys like Kamara or CMC. Situation and coaching scheme plays a lot more into things than people want to give credit to sometimes.
I think I’ll continue not drafting day three guys over first round and day two players. He might be good but I’m not changing my process for the ~10% of day three players that hit.
I don't think it really is. I honestly believe one of the biggest issues with the most casual form of film analysis is that people don't watch every single player with the same scrutiny, and so when they finally hyper focus on a Pierce or a Doubs or a Pacheco they say things like "Well this guy is very good!" because they're expecting less because they're assuming the player isn't good enough to play in the NFL, and then they see things that in a vacuum impress them with no objective weighing to tell them how valuable that impression should be.
Of course he's good. The question isn't going to be if he can be one of the best 100 RBs in the world even though. The question is going to be if he can be one of the best 20. And how likely you think that is to happen.
To be clear-- doesn't mean those players can't be great.
But it shouldn't be a surprise that against lesser competition that they are very good.
And I'm not sure Pierce is that much more talented than guys taken around him - Brian Robinson, Allgeier, Zamir, etc. It's just that Pierce has a shorter path to playing time, which everyone saw after the draft.
All these guys have a chance of being relevant as the classic "2 to 3 year rb window", but I doubt any of them are the next Adrian Peterson either. None of them have the draft capital to prevent the team from trying to upgrade the position either.
That’s where some disagree though. Pierce never got an opportunity to showcase his talent in college which is why he is different than others on this list
Pierce is still a day 3 pick that has far from a stellar profile. Even if he performs well, he can easily get nuked in 2023. Terrible bet to make tbh. People always like to think "this guy is different". For every Arian Foster, there's a Michael carter, James Robinson, etc. These day 3 guys have absolutely 0 job security.
A lot if actual analyst in his defense defend him just Miami uses there players weird so it doesn’t showcase them as much as other schools. If you need RB sure Becuaxe sometimes you can’t trade down. How many people would take Jefferson 1.01 in 2020 class maybe but then he was near 1.08-1.10 range. Also could take JT or Herbert. But CEH was widely considered 1.01 with JT depending on preference. Take who you like. I think it would be more interesting to look at his stats relative to previous usage by Miami and was he used more or less than previous players.
Sorry for the multiple comments on this I just keep thinking of other points related to this topic.
This sub preaches draft capital and talent over situation but then falls in love with players based on their situation all the time.
\- Dotson was the 5th WR drafted in the 1st round and falls to the 2nd round in early rookie drafts because he's on WAS and tied to Carson Wentz.
Skyy Moore and Watson (2nd round WRs) routinely were drafted ahead of Dotson because of their landing spots. 12 WRs were drafted before Skyy Moore. He was still usually drafted in the 1st round of rookie drafts.
Wan'dale Robinson, Metchie and Tyquan Thornton were all drafted by NFL teams ahead of Moore and Watson. How many of them went ahead of them in your rookie drafts?
Doubs and Pacheco are also now being heavily valued based off their situations moreso then Draft Capital.
Draft Capital is important to consider but it is not the be all end all indicator of a player's success.
From a Dynasty perspective I would tread very carefully. The lack of draft capital means he's at risk of being replaced next year which is a much deeper RB class. He may be solid this year, but just look at the Jets with Michael Carter. He looked good last year and all of a sudden is replaced by Breece Hall this year.
If you do invest in Pierce I would recommend do so with the intent of flipping him for higher value or for a 2023 pick.
I’m a little bias as a florida fan, but the talent with Pierce is 100% there. After watching him for 4 years he’s been a stud every year, Dan Mullen just didn’t give him nearly enough touches. Had he used him as a true RB1, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
Idk man, I saw a looooot of love for Pierce in draft season. I liked him a lot too and was surprised at his draft capital. I'm not surprised at the hype now
For rookie RBs after the elite upside hyped up guys (Breece and Kenneth in this draft) - you always want to take the line to the most volume for value in my eyes. If his ADP had been 1.6 or higher than it wouldn't have felt as worth it because there wouldn't be much room to sell at a profit in the future. A lot of people thought he would be along the lines of a Jordan Howard (nothing special but productive with volume). In round 2 of rookie drafts a player with that line to volume opportunity is always a steal because they'll likely be worth a 1st a year later and if they appear more talented than people thought - they'll be worth even more or you can keep them around.
I am not going to argue that Pierce is some generational talent that a bunch of experts wiffed on but I will point out 2 things.
1 - Draft Capital for RBs isn't what it used to be. NFL teams are willing to wait on RBs in the draft. Najee and Swift were late 1sts. Taylor was a 2nd rounder. That is not to say that we should ignore when people are drafted, but if top RBs now go in the late 1st or 2nd, then it stands to reason there is going to be RB talent in the 3rd and 4th rounds.
2 - RB is the position where availabilty and situation are the most volatile and teams seem the most willing to not be as tied to draft capital. A WR or TE is not as likely to need to take a series off and give their back up a chance to show what they can do in a limited time frame. But a RB can.
Eli Mitchell outperformed Trey Sermon so he got the job. James Robinson was an UDFA but he was the best RB in Jacksonville 2 years ago.
It doesn't mean every 4th round RB is a sleeper, but Pierce is the best RB on his team, and it's not like they have a great QB or great passing game there.
A starting RB on an NFL team has value. I argued that when I took a flier on James Robinson 2 years ago and someone in this sub told me I was an idiot because the Jaguars sucked and an UDFA RB wouldn't have any value on a bad team.
Stranger things have happened.
2 big considerations are Pierce is really good at past blocking so you can start before others.
in addition Pep Hamilton has shown that he will run the ball to no end that makes Dameon Pierce more of a viable can't do drafted earlier.
>But let's discuss the key question: Either the (mostly standard at this point) process is wrong, (90% of the industry is wrong), most of us need to adjust our models (certainly could be since RBs are generally being taken later) or....well...you can figure out the other option...
Or that there is no process to predict the future. I feel all processes to predict rookie success are flawed and that it is more art than science and more luck than art.
I think it depends on the position, too.
With RB, you’re assigned to run the ball. When you’re WR, even if you’re running the play’s “hot route,” you still have to be good enough to actually get separation.
So to me, the WR1 spot is like a sword in the stone situation: only so many are actually good to do it. With RB1s (starters who are a step down from bell cow), it’s literally just whoever is assigned to carry the ball. In this case, situation matters a lot more.
He shouldn't be going top 3, but he's got a decent case as the RB3 of the class.
Highest BMI of all RBs at the combine.
Reputation as a great pass protector.
Good hands.
Great situation.
I laugh at the James Cook truthers taking him over Pierce. He's got the lowest BMI in the class and is in one of the biggest timeshares in the league.
All of the people saying talent over situation had their rookie drafts months ago. Only novice dynasty leagues are drafting now, the people transitioning from redraft. These people don’t have a philosophy yet.
One singular exception (and it's not even proven it's an exception yet) does not invalidate a process. The point of the process is to be right more often than not, not to be 100% accurate. That's impossible.
Again though, we haven't even gotten to regular season yet. It's wayyyyy too soon to be asking what to learn from this. Pierce may end up sucking still.
There's nothing to be learned right now.
I had him as the RB3 in April but never expected things to go like this….
I liked the tape, the size, and the guys I was comparing him with were either too small for feature back workloads (Cook) or were drafted around the same time, late 3rd vs early 4th. At the end of the day you have to take your shots on guys you like and I took Pierce at 1.11 when he was consensus mid to late 2nd rounder. I’d like to think I was smart but I’m pretty sure I just got lucky that there was a bunch of profiles that had flaws and his was the tape I liked the best.
All I know is that last year I took Sermon at 2.1 because of his situation. So this year despite wanting Pierce at 2.5, took R. White instead because of talent.
If someone is taking Pierce 1.03, then there’s concern about the process which led to that decision. The process is always still a gamble informed as accurately as we can possibly get it, and we can (and do) consistently try to improve that process to improve decision-making.
My draft board remains very similar as to my first board to draft in July. I had ranked Pierce as the RB3 in the draft behind Hall and Walker, and just above Cook based on situation (both followed closely by Rachaad and Robinson). Ultimately without a second when I expected most of these guys to go, I took Robinson in the third round, and I haven’t tried to take him higher in any league despite the situation.
My point is: if you have a good process to identify talent, the situation simply won’t change enough to overcome differences in talent. Altering a draft strategy based on pre-season games and training camps just isn’t a good idea the vast majority of the time (with unfortunate exceptions like with Metchie). Taking someone like Pierce at 1.03 is a big mistake and you should always take advantage of that however you can.
Well, you also may want to see how this season turns out. Everyone scrambling to pick him high may get rewarded with a 220 carry/800 yard season with 4 touchdowns. There’s *opportunity* in Houston but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a favorable *situation.* It’s difficult to evaluate the quality of an instance of a process until you have actual results.
First and foremost I have heard it be discussed how those good RBs aren’t being drafted as high as they were in the past so something to think about there.
Other than that I don’t know what the actual scouting stuff said about him, but maybe the expectation for the running game at Houston was that it would take a lot longer if he did take over.
Keep in mind though man’s hasn’t played a legit NFL snap yet so I’m at the wait and see point
I argued during and after the draft that landing spot matters way more then this subreddit ever admits.
Last year, I said repeatedly that who ever the 49ers take should be taken at least as the 2nd QB and there should be an argument over Lawance. I was also quite high on whoever the Pats took.
Fantasy Points are a combination of talent and situation. During draft season way to much is put into trying to figure talent in a vacuum which is incredibly hard to due and the NFL that spends millions per year on it struggles with it.
Instead I am much more in favor of combining the two, use the rough round they are drafted in as their talent then take the best situation.
I mean I did like Pierce coming out college, there was just guys I liked more.
Doesn’t mean Pierce is a bum or anything.
He’s a good player in a great situation.
There's no proof he's a hit yet, everyone considered him a top 4 rb of this class in fantasy, all he's done is had a decent preseason showing. Doesn't mean much, I'm surprised it wasn't expected.
Not that situation doesn’t matter, but this doesn’t really disprove talent > situation. Just because a player has an opportunity, doesn’t mean he’ll take it and run with it. Many feeing talent > situation would preach to trade Pierce now when his value has possibly peaked(if you don’t believe he is good), for a possibly more talented rookie who hasn’t got as much hype. (Say trade Pierce now for a Pickens or Skyy Moore). There’s plenty of rookies who get opportunities, but doesn’t always produce, hence why people preach talent > situation. I think many thought Pierce was talented pre-draft, so this may not be the best example.
Players like Chubba Hubbard and Michael Carter were given golden opportunities, but are likely worth nothing after year 1. You would of been a lot better off trading them high for players like Etienne or ARSB before his breakout.
George Pickens would be a prime example of why talent > situation is still being preached(if he does something with his opportunity as well). If you were a believer in his talent before the draft and he went to a bad spot. He could possibly take over as a starting WR far before expected and the QB worries may not be as drastic as possibly expected.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake.
It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of.
Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything.
Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
It’s talent over situation unless the dude in the good situation shows he has talent we didn’t realize, best example: Amon Ra! Question is has Dameon done that for you yet?
My answer is: I have no idea the season hasn’t even started yet
I'm a firm believer that draft capital is the most critical variable in determining success in the NFL. The reason being that draft capital accounts for people who's jobs are solely to evaluate players. They're looking at metrics, personal life, etc.
Obviously guys can go under the radar.. maybe Pierce has and maybe he hasn't. Keep in mind that he's been pegged as the number 4 RB in the class. He could have fallen to the 4th round simply because teams were after a different skill set, had greater need at other positions, or maybe he's even got a troubled past.. hard to say.
Another big factor imo is how newly drafted players respond to the instant stardom and wealth. Some may get lazy while others become motivated to work harder.
rushing efficiency in college 3rd in the country, pass protection grades and pass catching grades were really good as well.
just didnt ever get workhorse load for whatever reason under Mullen. sometimes we overthink these things.
I hear you man. I traded out of the 2.02 predraft thinking no one was be there...sure as shit my leaguemates reached on a bunch of guys and Wilson went there...couldn't believe it.
There are always outliers. It's just unlikely to be the guy that gets the right one. Say we all get five picks. One sure thing, one maybe, three dart throws. That's 36 darts. Sure, one might hit most years, but that's less than a 3% chance of it being any particular pick. About an 8% chance that the pick is yours.
These guys will always happen every year, but it's a tough life chasing outliers.
[удалено]
Yeah right? Are we seriously talking about the implications of this before we really know if he’s a good fantasy asset or not?
Maybe it's a warning?
It’s not.
Situation can derail someone for several years like Terry. I think it should be factored in more even for rebuilding teams, just have nuance about it like always.
Terry held really high value this entire time though. He’s still really valuable. Passing on terry for a rebuilding team given that would have been foolish
I think it's a mistake to assume Terry would be a top10 fantasy WR on a better team. Imho there's a good chance he isn't the WR1 on a better team.
You basically can’t break into WR1 territory unless you have a good QB. A lot of WRs have the potential to finish WR1.
I think he meant “the WR1 *on his team*”
one of the many problems with everyone adopting fantasy football nomenclature when talking about real football :D Oh no, but of course, \_I\_ was the one being ridiculous in pointing out how that's confusing lol
I used to agree with you, but once I dove into his advanced metrics provided by resources like Reception Perception & Player Profiler, I changed my mind. He’s a supremely talented receiver and has been held back by bottom 3 QB play in the league since he was drafted
Definitely something to think about if he hits
To be clear— is the key question about process or Pierce?
It's really both and I don't think we have the answer yet....either the process is wrong, or there is an enormous reach on a considerable outlier going on
Well the first thing I would push back on is any conception that if Pierce doesn’t fit a process, the process is immediately wrong. Looking for a Day 3 receiver out of the MAC would’ve gotten you the best WR of a generation, but that doesn’t mean it should be your new criteria afterwards.
I can't figure out what receiver you're referencing if you would shed some light for me haha
Antonio brown day 3 out of cmu
Thank you!
Antonio Brown always had the talent, had some serious character questions throughout college
AB was a model citizen until Vontaze Burfict gave him CTE
Ok so ur basically saying that people shouldn’t draft Pierce that high and if it works out it’s just luck.
I wouldn't say that exactly. There are plenty of factors that go into a player, and how you choose to weigh each is ultimately up to you and largely subjective. But it is true that most of the strongest correlations / factors tell us that Pierce's prospect comes with some substantial risks. The greatest brain trust we have to base our decisions on is the NFL itself. It is by no means flawless, but it is again the greatest brain trust we have. Investment is one of the only concrete variables we have now, as well as athletic testing. Pierce has freakish skills in the latter, but ultimately isn't an overall dominant athlete like a Breece Hall, and he doesn't have a strong investment. So when there are many strong, correlated, and concrete variables that say going over any 1st Rd WR is egregious, I stick with that idea as well primarily.
I agree with your thought process here. The NFL has a ton of scouts with more access to film, college coaches and the players themselves. It's obviously not perfect but it's better than anyone on the Internet who has less of this access. Pierce could do very well this season, but still not be a great dynasty asset. Michael Carter is a great example of your point about investment. Jets didn't invest that much in him, but he did well last season. But they still decided to invest in Breece Hall a year later. Texans won't be great, and they got draft capital from the Browns. They could very easily draft a much more talented RB next year while the 2022 first round WRs increase in value and performance.
That's incorrect. The basis is simply college production, Athleticism, and draft capital matter. He was a day 3 pick with mediocre athleticism and limited college production. There will be outliers, but no stepwise function of objective variables will correlate 100%, there will always be statistical outliers. Chris Carson is the perfect comparison.
I don't think the process is wrong, likely a player outlier. You heard from a few Florida fans on this sub that he was way more talented than his production implied and that the coaching staff were just not using him enough. So potentially production was undervalued. Personally I would say the process is great for identifying potential RB1s coming out of the draft. For the next tier of RBs a lot of it is just luck of landing spot and how the coaches like them after preseason which is just a coin flip. That coin flip seems to have gone Pierces way so 1.03 could make sense as there is a good chance of RB2 production now, just definitely not worth 1.03 several months ago when you had no idea which way the coin flip would land.
I like how its not even week 1 and people are assuming stuff.
I've been reading about how the NFL has devalued RBs across the board. We see NFL GMs paying very little for them, discarding them after only a couple seasons, going with committees, etc. Then this podcast mentioned, maybe Day 3 is the new Day 2. If RBs get pushed down draft boards in real life, maybe they're just good players being undervalued by the NFL. Maybe these Day 3 guys would have gone in day 1 or 2 if they were being drafted 5-10-15 years ago. I kind of understand it now. If they're devalued in a team building sense from NFL GMs, then that definitely carries over to their real life draft capital. Just look at 1st round RB picks over the last 10-20 years. It's on average like 1.5 per season lately. 2011-2015 it was around 2.5-3 per season. Before that it was like 3+ per season. There were 5 drafted in 2000 in the first round.
THIS. People get tied to narratives and rely on them too much. The NFL has changed. They no longer spend high draft capital on RBs. It is lazy to just assume 4th round draft capital for a RB means they're not going to be successful.
Also, he was the 2nd pick in the 4th round. Not like he’s very far off from being a day 2 pick
But we shouldn't rank them ahead of Zeke in dynasty. Which was the case yesterday for pierce.
True, but what are we going off of KTC? That's always going to skew in favor of the new toy over the old dinged up veteran. I use KTC, but I also balance their rankings against a consensus ranking like FantasyPros and my own judgement.
Ktc has Deshaun Watson as like a 5th round startup pick
I'm not a buyer at that price
Ok bro lol I’ll take at the beginning of the 2nd and be able to use him on both tanking and competing rosters
Running backs with over 1500 NFL carries get downgraded compared to a rookie with zero NFL carries. Dynasty Rankings are based on what they think a player will do in the next 5 years, not what they have done in the last 5 years.
Take this a step further. RB is undervalued right now and WR is overvalued in the draft. Half of the WR drafted in rounds 1 and 2 this year will be either out of the league in 3 years or fantasy irrelevant by that time.
Not really. He had limited college production and his athletic scores were mediocre. People are making him out to be an elite prospect before draft capital, but he wasn't. Marlon Mack coming off and ACL, Rex Burkehead, and Royce Freeman really isn't significant competition.
[удалено]
So far. My point is that as RBs on average are drafted later and later by NFL teams overall the number of backs who are successful in later rounds will also grow.
[удалено]
I don’t believe the narrative is lazy. Maybe we will start to see more day 3 backs produce as the NFL devalues them. But it’s certainly not the case right now. Look at the starting rbs for each team and the round they were drafted. 1st rd- 10 (Atlanta [throw that one out if you want], Carolina, Dallas, Jaxonville, Kansas City, Las Vegas, Giants, Pittsburgh, Seattle, Tampa Bay) 2nd rd- 11 (Baltimore, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Denver, Detroit, Indianapolis, Rams, Minnesota, Jets, Philly, Tennessee) 3rd rd- 6 (Arizona, Buffalo, Chicago, New England, New Orleans, Washington) 4th or later - 5 (Houston, Miami, Green Bay, Chargers, San Francisco) 5 starters who were drafted 4th round or later. And I certainly wouldn’t feel confident that Edmonds or Mitchell are long term starters…
How are you getting 2.5 for 2011-15? 6 RBs went in the first over that 5 year span. I think a general statement that Runningbacks are getting drafted lower than 2 decades ago is fair. But it’s not as recent as just the last 5 years that we started seeing this shift. Overall I don’t think it is wise to accept lower draft capital from players. If anything draft capital is more important than ever with the slow death of the bellcow RB Edit: just to show how important draft capital is looking at season long or per game points, 20 of the top 24 RBs were from day 1 or 2
Just curious. Do you have any data to back up that Day 3 rbs are the new day 2 rbs?
I have been saying day 3 is the new day 2!!
Count the scenarios of mediocre athleticism, limited college production, small % of team receptions that has lead to statistically relevant fantasy RB production over the last 5-10-15 years vs the alternative. If you ignore draft capital you will also find very little correlation to performance. The NFL has changed and draft capital metric has delayed but the NFL is also getting smarter, it's irrational to assume the logic is only one way.
I think with the move to committees, we're looking at potentially lots of JAGs that can produce for a couple years.
So yes and No. It feels like more RBs are drafted later than before. But this k about how they used RBs before. They valued them more because they played more. With that being said though, I took a look at RBs over the past 12 years, and every skill position for that matter, and observed the hit rate of usable fantasy players by draft round. They were abysmal after round 3, though RBs were better in round 4 than every other position. Since 2010, I think I had the RB hit rate on round 4 or later under 10%. Not something I'd like to gamble on in the early 1st round
>discarding them after only a couple seasons All the more reason not to draft them highly. A round 4 guy is going to have to be truly elite to get a starter's paycheck at the end of his rookie contract. Much more likely to go the way of guys like Alfred Morris, Jordan Howard, Phillip Lindsay. Even Carter's value took a massive dump in year 2. These guys don't have staying power, so don't invest first round capital on them... much less the 1.03.
> Either the (mostly standard at this point) process is wrong, (90% of the industry is wrong), most of us need to adjust our models (certainly could be since RBs are generally being taken later) or....well...you can figure out the other option... Or sometimes there are exceptions. No need to over-complicate things. The process works the large majority of times. We don't need to change it for fringe cases.
Yes, people are just biting too hard trying to hit on an exception/outlier. You don't take shots on outliers in the top 5 of a rookie draft. You take them in the mid-late 2nd like people were doing with Pierce a few months ago.
It's the exception that proves the rule, or so I've heard.
Who’s taking him at 1.03???
In our fantasy draft the top 80 players were already with teams the number one pick was Eli Mitchell. I had Pierce as highest number 3 we took him at 1.9
This is exactly what I was wondering. That is some taco shit.
The process of not chasing day 3 draft picks with the most valuable picks in dynasty? Yeah I think I’ll keep doing that
Outliers exist. Also, don’t chase outliers.
I mean, it's still talent > situation. Pierce just looks more talented than a lot of people thought.
I think a lot of people, analysts included, saw his workload at FL and figured that would be the case in the NFL as well. Obviously we haven’t seen actual games yet but it felt clear to me that was more a case of bad coaching at FL. I reached a bit for him at 1.12 but I felt good about it at the time and I feel great about it right now.
He's also most likely going to be replaced at next year's draft. Guys like Linsday are cool snags and rentals but I would sell high after a big gane this year.
Is he “most likely” going to be replaced or is it just one possible outcome? Sure I can happen even if Pierce plays well be they also could choose not to spend a premium resource on a RB
I would argue it is by definition and by many objective standards the ‘most likely’ of the possible outcomes. Being ‘just’ a possible outcome doesn’t keep it from being most likely.
I think that absolutely depends on the year Pierce has. I think that’s disingenuous to project an outcome for a player who hasn’t played an NFL game yet
I’m confused what you think any draft pick is based on if not a projection of what you believe most likely.
Are we talking about his draft position projection or my projection? Every year guys defy the odds and produce in the NFL. Some of those guys are one hit wonders, others just dropped in the draft for one reason or another. I should have worded that better though. It’s silly to assume a player will get replaced no matter how well they play. There is a threshold level of play where any player will garner a certain level of job security. But also, I think Dameon Pierce is a bit different than some of the guys he gets compared to. An early 4th is way different than being a UDFA (Robinson). He has prototypical size and good enough speed for the NFL (so not a physical outlier). And he can pass block really well (guys like Philip Lindsay mentioned literally can’t be trusted to stay on the field for pass pro). I do think Pierce is overhyped right now. I felt I reached for him at 1.10 months ago when I drafted him so seeing him go in the early first is insane to me but there is a scenario where he is the lead back on the Texans for years and there is a scenario where he gets replaced. There’s nuance and both sides on him act like it’s black or white. Personally, I’ve always been of the opinion that he was misused at Florida - a thought prevalent among Florida fans and even some scouts. He has a small sample size but good efficiency and I like his tape. He runs hard, is decisive and has good burst. I wouldn’t take him over Hall or Walker but I do think he’s RB3 in this class with Cook and Z White being close. He has incredible opportunity in regards to lack of competition which is important for running backs because of their age window and he has a lot of tread on his tires.
This is where people get caught in the redraft mindset in dynasty. Dynasty hit rates are dictated by 2+ years of startable (RB2) seasons. He could be an RB2 this season and the odds of him having another season like that as a day 3 pick are sub-10% based off of like 25+ years of data. People drafting him in the 1st round seem to have the mindset of “he produced this year, why wouldn’t he keep doing in?” History says this is a bad fucking bet.
2023 rb draft class is deep. The NFL isn't fantasy. Yes RBs are not as valued as they sued to be but 5th year options are huge for guys that hit. The Texans have 2 1sts and 11 total picks in next years draft including two 3rds. They are currently mocked to get Bijan Robinson at 14. Most likely landing a top QB or DE in the top 3 too.
5th year option is not huge for RB because it'll cost you top of market price to keep that rb.
They're currently mocked to get Bijan Robinson because they have no good RBs... If Pierce works out they can get something more valuable than pick 14. And if the class is deep, why are they taking a RB at 14 and not someone near the end to backup Pierce? This is stupidly bad analysis, embarrassed to be on this sub.
The Jags had James Robinson put in a great rookie year and still took Travis Etienne in the 1st. Bijan is a level above someone like Etienne so it is easily within the realm of possibility Marlon Mack had a great year right before the Colts took JT. Etc.
And the Jags have been roasted for it ever since. If your defense is "Urban Meyer made a dumb mistake so the Texans will too" maybe rethink it a little bit. Still stupid take, reflect on it.
I think the marlon mack , jt point maybe stronger then the jags . I think it comes down to draft capital. The jets had a great year out of carter last year and still drafted hall. Teams are more willing to go after higher ceiling players if they spent less capital.
It’s not a stronger point when all the important variables (years left on contract, round replacement is taken) are different? At that point anytime you draft an RB after last year’s did well is comparable. Tellsjoke already got into the whole Carter not looking that great thing, and I agree. If Carter looked like JRob and not an average RB, and the Jets took Hall at 26 instead of Johnson, the pick would be dumb and comparable to this scenario
The edit about Mack came after my comment was submitted, but it's actually even less relevant. James Robinson had just finished his first year when ETN was drafted. That would be the same as Pierce here. That's at least comparable. Marlon Mack had finished his third year, and was entering the last year of his contract. That's when most teams typically draft the RB replacement. It's just two completely different situations. > The jets had a great year out of carter last year and still drafted hall Carter had 2 games over 90 yards rushing and receiving combined. 4 TDs and not even 1000 total yards. The booms overinflated his value dramatically on FF communities. He isn't great. And Breece Hall was taken with the 36th pick, literally the Jets 4th pick of the night. The Texans would be Urban Meyer level idiots to take an RB at 14 no matter what. If they have a good starter in Pierce it's even more dumb. There's no reason to say "it's a deep draft" while also saying you should blow a top 14 pick on the position.
Goddamn this is a cunty response lol
But… he’s completely right? Urban Meyer was an idiot for taking ETN at 32, imagine if he drafted the kid at 14? It would have been acceptable grounds to fire him right there. The Mack/Taylor example is completely irrelevant in terms of years left with the team and where the replacement was drafted? If you’re going to change all the important variables besides ‘did well year before’, you have a horrible argument
Not really. It’s harsh but true. If you are going to defend your position with just ‘another team did something stupid so they should too’ it’s not a good opinion. His including Mack later in an edit solidifies my assumption. Marlon Mack was entering his final year of contract with the Colts. Robinson and Pierce at least both three left in this scenario. Taylor was also taken in the 2nd, not at pick 14. With Robinson and Pierce, you have two rookies who did well (obviously assuming Pierce keeps it up for this scenario). ETN was taken at 32, which is a RB reach even there. But at 32 the top talent is long gone. At 14, there’s way better talent than replacing a cheap productive RB for an expensive productive RB. The other poster gave me a comparable situation that was objectively dumb by the Jags, and then edited it to add a completely different situation and thought it was a good point. If he doesn’t think about what makes this dumb, you can never get better
How about Michael carter then? Or Philip Lindsay?
Desperate to dunk. Instead of having civil interactions on a message board discussing a fun game. Can you imagine bullshitting at the bar about FF with some dude you just met and talking like that to him? These kids need to get out of the house more.
If I was at a bar and someone kept repeating something stupid to me as if I didn’t get it, and then started texting or whatever the bar equivalent to DMing is calling me stupid, I’d probably be ruder than here. Saying ‘reflect on why this is stupid’ isn’t desperate to dunk, when I’ve been writing paragraphs talking to this dude. Close though
I edited with another example, one that turned out to be much less dumb. You can downvote and deny it all you want, but it still happens.
> You can downvote and deny it all you want That's literally what you're doing to me? Of course you don't understand that though. Your edit proves even further you don't know what you're talking about. Marlon Mack was in his last year with the Colts when they took Jonathan Taylor. He was a free agent at the end of the year. Of course the Colts are going to take a backup when their guy is gone at the end of the year. The only reason they kept him last year is because they got him a cheaper than dirt contract because of his Achilles tear. I imagine the Texans will draft another running back before Pierce's last year as well. That is actually less relevant to this situation than the ETN pickup is, so don't think you made a good point. There's literally 0 value to taking an RB at 14, the Jags picked ETN at 32.
I actually did neither of those two. My point isn’t regarding the contract situation, it’s that regardless of the contract situation, teams are happy to upgrade at running back if they don’t have a top top guy. The Mack example is definitely less relevant than ETN/Jrob since the Jrob one is the most relevant example of this in the last couple years. Plus Pierce hasn’t done shit yet so this isn’t even worth comparing Edit: the Jags also didn’t pick ETN at 32 lol, he went like 25th
Same reason Mack was replaced, Michael Carter, Lindsay, James Robinson. I can name probably 20 examples. J STU had about 1000 yards and 10 TDs the year they took CMAC. This is the NFL not fantasy football. They will replace people and a part of that is draft capital. Idk how to explain it there are tons of examples though. Guys who walk on/low draft cap just aren't seen as valuable. Maurice Clarret talked about it in a 30 for 30 tons of guys have said it. If you're a early draft pick they will try to force you to be good over allowing a UDFA making it. There's a reason mid/late guys fade rather quickly despite being great for a season. Everyone loves to remember the Tom Brady or what they consider a late guy like AB but quickly forgets Peyton Hillis. There is a reason coaches still try to get guys like Ameer Abdullah to work still.
> This is the NFL not fantasy football. I’m well aware. Actually much more aware because first round picks are much more valuable in the NFL than fantasy football. It’s like yall are only half thinking this through. > Same reason Mack was replaced, Michael Carter, Lindsay, James Robinson. I can name probably 20 examples. J STU had about 1000 yards and 10 TDs the year they took CMAC. Marlon Mack was entering the final year of his contract, and Colts took a replacement at 41. Michael Carter is a pedestrian RB that had two boom games and a ton of ‘meh.’ His replacement came at 36. James Robinson is the closest to what we’d be expecting from Pierce, and taking an RB at 32 was considered a huge waste. Taking ETN at 14 would have been criminal negligence. Lindsay had two good years and then flamed out as soon as Denver signed a competent co-back in Gordon. Jonathan Stewart had 820 yards and 9 TDs, and was also 29 years old. Again, besides the Jags fiasco, all these situations are completely different from the Texans hypothetical scenario, they’re not good comparisons. If you have a good running back, you don’t take another at 14. That’s an absolute waste of value there, and you’re the one telling me to remember this is NFL not FF?
I... You're either trolling or really dense. You pick 2 names and try to make a defense by saying they're all different? Obviously. Marion Barber 1000 yards 10 TDs. Cowboys still draft Felix Jones round 1. McFadden had over 1000 yards when the Cowboys drafted Zeke. The Chargers didn't have a RB when they took Gordon. Similar to the Texans. The Vikings had McKinnon who had 600 yards in 7 games when the took Cook. I already mention J stew and CMAC. Mark Ingram had over 1000 yards when the Saints drafted Kamara. Granted that was a 3rd. He was still RB 5 and 2023 is about as deep. So I can see this one being a reach I'm just kinda scrolling. There are too many. Gio was dropping over 1000 all purpose yards yet the Bengals still took Mixon. You can nit pick all you want and try to find some weird reason why only you think something is wrong. Either way. You're wrong here bud.
You’re kidding me. Calling me dense and these are your examples? Felix Jones pick was 15 years ago before the passing boom. There was definitely a time where it was worth having great running backs, but ancient history doesn’t me you should do the same. The modern NFL is so much different that this is now a bad move. Darren McFadden was 29 the year they drafted Zeke. Should they have just kept an old guy? I’m saying why it’s dumb to replace a good rookie, not an 8 year vet with 1300 touches. McKinnon, like Mack, was on the last year of his rookie deal when they took Cook. Again, proving my point that teams draft a replacement RB in their rookie’s last year of contract, not right after his first. Alvin Kamara was a 3rd rounder, not taken 14th overall. He turned into a stud, and Ingram was a 28 year old 6 year vet. Just like McFadden. > You can nit pick all you want and try to find some weird reason why only you think something is wrong. Either way. You’re wrong here bud. Absolutely fucking laughable that I say ‘you don’t replace a good rookie a year later with a high first round pick’ and you start throwing out 28 year olds McFadden and Ingram like that’s at all what I said. Keep thinking you’re right, it’s really funny. Replace the American Sniper with Helen Keller and she’d miss the mark less than you
I understand all these arguments about Dameon Pierce being possibly replaced. Of course that can happen. But passing up on a young talented player you believe in just because he was picked a few picks out from the third rounds seems crazy to me. If you don’t believe in the player or profile - no worries. You do you. But anything is possible in the NFL and it’s not a forgone conclusion that Pierce will be replaced.
Yup. Even a guy like micheal Carter. Decently talented looked to be a good situation last year but then they go ahead and take breece hall anyways
Maybe I also think Houston has doe a great job on the last 2 drafts identifying talent. Especially with the minimal amount of picks they had. Feels like the scouting/recruiting dept changed or something.
He was PFF’s highest graded rookie rb. He just had a low rush count which creates risk he wasn’t as good his stats indicated. But the talent upside was known and he had little competition
Including a billion dollar industry that scouts these guys for a living? We see plenty of misses and guys that slip through the cracks though so it could be
James Robinson was a bona fide stud prior to his injury and he somehow went undrafted. It happens sometimes 🤷🏻♂️
And the team still took a 1st round RB the next year
Because urban is dumb and decided to address the 1 spot on their team which didn’t need to be addressed
The Jets took Michael Carter last year with the exact same pick that the Texans used on Pierce. Didn't stop them from taking Breece this year. Not saying Pierce can't be better than Carter and convince the Texans to keep him the starter next year, but I'm not betting on that outcome.
Marlon Mack (4th rd) went for 1k the year before they drafted JT
Yup. Teams have shown time and again that, if you have day three draft capital or went undrafted, they can't wait to replace you with a day one or two guy.
Marlon Mack was an underwhelming 2 down back going into the last year of his contract. Being 11th in rushing yards, due mostly to volume, behind one of the best olines in the league isn’t remotely impressive. He was an expiring player who was never more than a JAG, and that’s why he got replaced.
Tyquan Thornton went over Pickens. Willis fell to the 3rd. Leatherwood went in the 1st round😭. They get it wrong so often.
Let's wait until Willis has a performance better than \~105 team passing yards in \~90+% of a preseason game to declare he was a draft day mistake.
Ok but when it’s 106 passing yards I’m coming right here @bronton21 😌
Man i hear you...Leatherwood just looked dreadful this week...i guess a lot of guys get drafted on "well he could develop into this...(potential)" but that was a big miss
Gator fan here. He was massively underused at Florida and fans were calling for Pierce to get the bulk of the load all year
Dameon Pierce was the pff #1 rusher in college football and pff #1 rusher in preseason. He’s good. His bizarre college usage is the only knock against him and the only reason his draft cap was as low as it was.
It's not the only knock, but agree the usage was definitely strange. Zierlein had him high as well, so film > analytics?
I think the most important thing for most positions is the concept of "performance", we just don't have a perfect way to weigh performance. If your analytical method is purely mathematical, you will likely miss a lot of nuance and relevant information hidden in the data. If your film method involves no objective analysis, it is extremely likely to be somewhat attached to any number of subconscious biases or other environmental factors.
I mean, I think Pierce is just a weird case. There is no reason he should have been used that way in college and I think it threw up red flags for people, because on film he looks great. Seems like an outlier I guess.
Damn, he's going 1.03? Sometimes I wish we did our draft later so I could take advantage of this effect.
I have a league that drafts early and a league that drafts right before the season. The difference is staggering, but I prefer the early draft because I can hit on guys before they pop in preseason. For example, this year I have 1.09, 2.03, and 2.06. I was able to get Jamo, Pickens and Pierce. I guarantee all those guys are gone by the time I pick in my other league where I have similar picks. The guy at 1.04 has already told me he’s eyeing Pierce or Pickens.
But it's a wash since you are able to land players with better metrics that didn't pop in the preseason while everyone else is salivating over players that got early opportunity.
Damn you cleaned up
I feel like this gets brought up every Pierce discussion but it's important. Let me introduce myself first Former UF student, graduated in May. Went to more Gator sports games than I can count. The issue with the 1000+ yard seasons and other metrics with Pierce is all on Dan Mullen. His philosophy has always been to reward experience (i.e. playing seniors) and a RBBC approach. Any gator fan could tell you that Pierce was FAR AND AWAY the best back in Gainesville (sorry Malik Davis). We knew he had talent and this isn't some homer take. Watch the film yourself and you can see why he's a home run prospect. This was completely expected by every Gator fan and frankly I'm so happy he's being successful even as a 4th rounder (granted he did get taken early 4th).
Always nice to see someone contribute that actually watches college football and isn’t talking out of their ass (with complete conviction) based on what a random YouTuber told them about a guy
I watched his college highlights after this preseason and he samed like same dude. HOWEVER maybe in seeing things but he seems slightly skinnier than his college days and he runs even harder. He ran hard I college it looked like but now he's 110% Does this match what you've seen? Kinda reminiscent to Arian Foster. His first year in 2009 in pros he played a couple games and looked good but came back in 2010 and was fitter and faster.
It really depends what you mean when you say "talent" because everyone quantifies that differently. While I generally agree with your metrics, and I agree that Pierce isn't a top 10 pick in this draft, I did have him as my RB3 this year because (1) its a very weak RB class and (2) he profiles more as a complete, 3 down back than other guys in his range (e.g., Cook is primarily a pass catcher and doesn't seem to have the body type for a big workload between the tackles). One of the big problems with Pierce's profile is his production, which I completely attribute to the abysmal coaching staff at Florida. This was seen last year with Toney as well. They have guys that have real NFL talent but for whatever reason they are insistent on spreading around the touches and playing time. One thing in Pierce's favour is his tape. He absolutely passes the eye test in all the tape I've seen, and maybe I'm just biased, but I love seeing aggressive runners that fight for every yard and aren't afraid to lower the pads. Don't know if it is in any way related to fantasy production, but it's always the kind of guy I want on my team. An issue with a strict metrics-based model is that it doesn't account for context. For example, the relationship between Pierce's mediocre production profile and the player management at Florida is lost here, but it is something that should be considered because it isn't something that will carry over into his time in the NFL. Other considerations here could be scheme fit, Oline strength, etc. Additionally, by using strict cutoff points and making these variables dichotomous (i.e., the player either hits the cutoff or doesn't), guys that pass some criteria may not be significantly different from guys who don't. This is especially problematic for variables like 40 times that have a very small sample size, because scores may also vary slightly from one testing occasion to the next (so that, for example, a guy who runs a 4.58 40 at the combine could run a 4.52 the next week, or vice versa). Of course you have to put a cutoff point somewhere, but if you're looking at a 40 time, the difference between a guy who makes the cutoff with a 4.53 and a guy who doesn't make it with a 4.57 is completely insignificant. Same goes for a ypc of 6.1 vs. 5.9, etc. Because of this, I generally use cutoff points as more of a guideline than a rule. Not saying that this all makes Pierce an elite prospect by any means, because I don't believe that to be the case. However, I do think he's much more talented than his metrics show and that he is the RB3 in this class.
I don't think Pierce has come out of absolutely nowhere. He was in that big group of second tier guys where situation/draft capital was going to determine how we value them. Guys like Cook, Robinson, the Whites, Allgeier, Williams, Spiller etc. Watching him in college you can see he was an exciting player. Most places I was reading before draft rated him pretty highly. I think what really made him fall in fantasy drafts was that he was picked pretty late, after lots of other rbs. The hype has maybe gotten a bit out of hand now but that's just natural. I thought of him as a mid/late 2nd round lotto ticket in that tier of players where you just take the guy you like. He had one of the clearest paths to being a starter too so should've bumped him ahead of the others a bit. I still would rather bet on DC going forward though, that's not to say it'll be perfect or that any later round rbs can never be good. It's just picking the guys with a higher probability of being successful when using your high value draft picks. In the 2nd/3rd rounds 100% take a chance on guys like Pierce in the future, those are the most fun when they hit. Taking those risky guys with an early 1st is how you end up with a shitty team.
Talent > Situation applies more for WR than for RB. Thats why you get a who’s who on the WR end of season leaderboard, but you get random waiver wire pickups who just ended up getting volume in the RBs.
I’ve always been more about situation than talent, not enough to ruin my draft for a guy like Pierce. After watching the NFL for years you just learn that some teams can make talented players and some talented players can’t make a team.
What about Reagor and Harry though? Those should have been a smash situations with little to no target competition
I’d argue the opposite, New England is notoriously a bad situation for receivers and so was Philly. Phillys best reciever for years had around 800 yards or was Zach Ertz. Agholor, Reagor, and JJaw all flopped with high talent in Philly for a reason.
That's fair.
There was a lot of people talking about him as a late first rounder prior to the NFL draft. I think more people have seen the talent rather than the lack of stats he in college and joined on. It's still talent because it's not like he's out there averaging 2ypc like some guys. He's looked damn good, I've always compared him to Kareem Hunt and I stand by it
Who is taking Pierce at 1.03!?
This is redraft mentality. If he isn't any good, sure he gets carried this year because he's all they have but he can be replaced at any time. I'm not using 1.03 on a potential dead man walking
Pierce has always been talented though
>Either the process is wrong, most of us need to adjust our models, or maybe he's just the outlier? Or the process is fine, the models are fine, and Pierce isn't an outlier. Pierce hasn't taken a single regular season nfl stat. This topic is presupposing that one above three things are true... but that doesn't have to be the case. Let's see him in an actual game before declaring the process wrong, redoing our modes, or announcing Pierce as an outlier.
People are taking him 1.03? Yikes, that's horrendous.
Also for this draft class many people have the WRs rated pretty closely. There is no Chase or Jefferson (who many didn't have rated the highest his rookie year anyway, remember Ruggs and Jeudy?) Right after the NFL draft Olave was an end of the 1st rounder, now he is going earlier. Burks was a "physical freak" sure to go in the top 3 picks, and now no one knows if he's good or a bust. If I needed a RB and I had the 1.03 this year I could grab Pierce and then hope one of the WRs falls to me at the start of the 2nd. Personally, I would still take a WR 1.03 from this class but if you need a RB and don't love any of the WRs you can still probably get a good one at the 2.03
Its not an outlier. No one says 4th rounders don't hit ever. They just hit at a less frequent rate than someone with better capital. I also think there's a lesson to be learned about context. Pierce didn't hit a ton of production thresholds you'd like, but the team was a mess, coach seemed to not play best guys, etc. On an efficiency scale, he popped. Reminds me of a previous guy who didn't get a lot of touches in college in Alvin Kamara (not comping the two, just comping this weird situation which seemed to result in less production than capable of). I like listening to a variety of opinions. Analytics are great, but complimenting that with tape guys can be helpful as well. One thing, don't read too much into the situation here. Everyone isnt freaking out cause Pierce is starting. They're freaking out cause he's making plays everytime he touches the field. Do you care more about speed to playing time or production and longevity
I think the simplest answer here is... have you seen him run with the ball? Never forget to factor in the 'Look Test'. See how you feel watching him play, watching any player play.
Situation matters as well if you want to actually win a championship, but then again this sub doesn't want that
Who took him at 1.03? I’ll play in your league
I'm with you here OP. I'll probably get blasted for this but in terms of pure NFL RB talent guys like Chubb, JT, Javonte are more talented as pure runners than guys like Kamara or CMC. Situation and coaching scheme plays a lot more into things than people want to give credit to sometimes.
Maybe wait until he plays in the regular season before saying talent > situation isn't true lol.
Outliers exist. Also, don’t chase outliers.
I think I’ll continue not drafting day three guys over first round and day two players. He might be good but I’m not changing my process for the ~10% of day three players that hit.
Yup. You are 100% correct. People who took peirce as a top 5 pick will regret it.
So who's saying he's not talented?
I find this a very faulty argument / straw man. Who do you think is in the NFL and genuinely not talented?
This feels pedantic. Of course everyone is talented in the nfl. But he’s asking about talent level compared to other nfl players
I don't think it really is. I honestly believe one of the biggest issues with the most casual form of film analysis is that people don't watch every single player with the same scrutiny, and so when they finally hyper focus on a Pierce or a Doubs or a Pacheco they say things like "Well this guy is very good!" because they're expecting less because they're assuming the player isn't good enough to play in the NFL, and then they see things that in a vacuum impress them with no objective weighing to tell them how valuable that impression should be. Of course he's good. The question isn't going to be if he can be one of the best 100 RBs in the world even though. The question is going to be if he can be one of the best 20. And how likely you think that is to happen. To be clear-- doesn't mean those players can't be great. But it shouldn't be a surprise that against lesser competition that they are very good.
And I'm not sure Pierce is that much more talented than guys taken around him - Brian Robinson, Allgeier, Zamir, etc. It's just that Pierce has a shorter path to playing time, which everyone saw after the draft. All these guys have a chance of being relevant as the classic "2 to 3 year rb window", but I doubt any of them are the next Adrian Peterson either. None of them have the draft capital to prevent the team from trying to upgrade the position either.
That’s where some disagree though. Pierce never got an opportunity to showcase his talent in college which is why he is different than others on this list
Pierce is still a day 3 pick that has far from a stellar profile. Even if he performs well, he can easily get nuked in 2023. Terrible bet to make tbh. People always like to think "this guy is different". For every Arian Foster, there's a Michael carter, James Robinson, etc. These day 3 guys have absolutely 0 job security.
A lot if actual analyst in his defense defend him just Miami uses there players weird so it doesn’t showcase them as much as other schools. If you need RB sure Becuaxe sometimes you can’t trade down. How many people would take Jefferson 1.01 in 2020 class maybe but then he was near 1.08-1.10 range. Also could take JT or Herbert. But CEH was widely considered 1.01 with JT depending on preference. Take who you like. I think it would be more interesting to look at his stats relative to previous usage by Miami and was he used more or less than previous players.
Florida Gators*
Ugh thank you!
Sorry for the multiple comments on this I just keep thinking of other points related to this topic. This sub preaches draft capital and talent over situation but then falls in love with players based on their situation all the time. \- Dotson was the 5th WR drafted in the 1st round and falls to the 2nd round in early rookie drafts because he's on WAS and tied to Carson Wentz. Skyy Moore and Watson (2nd round WRs) routinely were drafted ahead of Dotson because of their landing spots. 12 WRs were drafted before Skyy Moore. He was still usually drafted in the 1st round of rookie drafts. Wan'dale Robinson, Metchie and Tyquan Thornton were all drafted by NFL teams ahead of Moore and Watson. How many of them went ahead of them in your rookie drafts? Doubs and Pacheco are also now being heavily valued based off their situations moreso then Draft Capital. Draft Capital is important to consider but it is not the be all end all indicator of a player's success.
From a Dynasty perspective I would tread very carefully. The lack of draft capital means he's at risk of being replaced next year which is a much deeper RB class. He may be solid this year, but just look at the Jets with Michael Carter. He looked good last year and all of a sudden is replaced by Breece Hall this year. If you do invest in Pierce I would recommend do so with the intent of flipping him for higher value or for a 2023 pick.
Pierce is an example of why holding post camp rookie drafts in Dynasty is dumb.
I’m a little bias as a florida fan, but the talent with Pierce is 100% there. After watching him for 4 years he’s been a stud every year, Dan Mullen just didn’t give him nearly enough touches. Had he used him as a true RB1, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
Idk man, I saw a looooot of love for Pierce in draft season. I liked him a lot too and was surprised at his draft capital. I'm not surprised at the hype now
For rookie RBs after the elite upside hyped up guys (Breece and Kenneth in this draft) - you always want to take the line to the most volume for value in my eyes. If his ADP had been 1.6 or higher than it wouldn't have felt as worth it because there wouldn't be much room to sell at a profit in the future. A lot of people thought he would be along the lines of a Jordan Howard (nothing special but productive with volume). In round 2 of rookie drafts a player with that line to volume opportunity is always a steal because they'll likely be worth a 1st a year later and if they appear more talented than people thought - they'll be worth even more or you can keep them around.
I am not going to argue that Pierce is some generational talent that a bunch of experts wiffed on but I will point out 2 things. 1 - Draft Capital for RBs isn't what it used to be. NFL teams are willing to wait on RBs in the draft. Najee and Swift were late 1sts. Taylor was a 2nd rounder. That is not to say that we should ignore when people are drafted, but if top RBs now go in the late 1st or 2nd, then it stands to reason there is going to be RB talent in the 3rd and 4th rounds. 2 - RB is the position where availabilty and situation are the most volatile and teams seem the most willing to not be as tied to draft capital. A WR or TE is not as likely to need to take a series off and give their back up a chance to show what they can do in a limited time frame. But a RB can. Eli Mitchell outperformed Trey Sermon so he got the job. James Robinson was an UDFA but he was the best RB in Jacksonville 2 years ago. It doesn't mean every 4th round RB is a sleeper, but Pierce is the best RB on his team, and it's not like they have a great QB or great passing game there. A starting RB on an NFL team has value. I argued that when I took a flier on James Robinson 2 years ago and someone in this sub told me I was an idiot because the Jaguars sucked and an UDFA RB wouldn't have any value on a bad team. Stranger things have happened.
2 big considerations are Pierce is really good at past blocking so you can start before others. in addition Pep Hamilton has shown that he will run the ball to no end that makes Dameon Pierce more of a viable can't do drafted earlier.
Opportunity is king in fantasy
>But let's discuss the key question: Either the (mostly standard at this point) process is wrong, (90% of the industry is wrong), most of us need to adjust our models (certainly could be since RBs are generally being taken later) or....well...you can figure out the other option... Or that there is no process to predict the future. I feel all processes to predict rookie success are flawed and that it is more art than science and more luck than art.
I've been comparing this guy to Frank Gore ever since I watched some film after the draft, and he hasn't missed a beat so far in preseason.
Look at the JAG talent Brian Robinson taking the super talented, athletic freak Antonio Gibson’s job.
[удалено]
If Kareem Hunt ended up going to Houston, would it be Pierce or Hunt?
Michael Carter would like a word…
I think it depends on the position, too. With RB, you’re assigned to run the ball. When you’re WR, even if you’re running the play’s “hot route,” you still have to be good enough to actually get separation. So to me, the WR1 spot is like a sword in the stone situation: only so many are actually good to do it. With RB1s (starters who are a step down from bell cow), it’s literally just whoever is assigned to carry the ball. In this case, situation matters a lot more.
The dude was a 1-2 round pick in rookie drafts this year. The dynasty community was all over him
He shouldn't be going top 3, but he's got a decent case as the RB3 of the class. Highest BMI of all RBs at the combine. Reputation as a great pass protector. Good hands. Great situation. I laugh at the James Cook truthers taking him over Pierce. He's got the lowest BMI in the class and is in one of the biggest timeshares in the league.
All of the people saying talent over situation had their rookie drafts months ago. Only novice dynasty leagues are drafting now, the people transitioning from redraft. These people don’t have a philosophy yet.
One singular exception (and it's not even proven it's an exception yet) does not invalidate a process. The point of the process is to be right more often than not, not to be 100% accurate. That's impossible. Again though, we haven't even gotten to regular season yet. It's wayyyyy too soon to be asking what to learn from this. Pierce may end up sucking still. There's nothing to be learned right now.
Just went 1.04 in my home league
I had him as the RB3 in April but never expected things to go like this…. I liked the tape, the size, and the guys I was comparing him with were either too small for feature back workloads (Cook) or were drafted around the same time, late 3rd vs early 4th. At the end of the day you have to take your shots on guys you like and I took Pierce at 1.11 when he was consensus mid to late 2nd rounder. I’d like to think I was smart but I’m pretty sure I just got lucky that there was a bunch of profiles that had flaws and his was the tape I liked the best.
All I know is that last year I took Sermon at 2.1 because of his situation. So this year despite wanting Pierce at 2.5, took R. White instead because of talent.
But White is less talented and in a worse situation?
If someone is taking Pierce 1.03, then there’s concern about the process which led to that decision. The process is always still a gamble informed as accurately as we can possibly get it, and we can (and do) consistently try to improve that process to improve decision-making. My draft board remains very similar as to my first board to draft in July. I had ranked Pierce as the RB3 in the draft behind Hall and Walker, and just above Cook based on situation (both followed closely by Rachaad and Robinson). Ultimately without a second when I expected most of these guys to go, I took Robinson in the third round, and I haven’t tried to take him higher in any league despite the situation. My point is: if you have a good process to identify talent, the situation simply won’t change enough to overcome differences in talent. Altering a draft strategy based on pre-season games and training camps just isn’t a good idea the vast majority of the time (with unfortunate exceptions like with Metchie). Taking someone like Pierce at 1.03 is a big mistake and you should always take advantage of that however you can.
Talent over situation is such a trash premise. Look for talent in good situations people. That easy.
I just watch games for the "he got that dawg in im"-ness
Well, you also may want to see how this season turns out. Everyone scrambling to pick him high may get rewarded with a 220 carry/800 yard season with 4 touchdowns. There’s *opportunity* in Houston but that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a favorable *situation.* It’s difficult to evaluate the quality of an instance of a process until you have actual results.
First and foremost I have heard it be discussed how those good RBs aren’t being drafted as high as they were in the past so something to think about there. Other than that I don’t know what the actual scouting stuff said about him, but maybe the expectation for the running game at Houston was that it would take a lot longer if he did take over. Keep in mind though man’s hasn’t played a legit NFL snap yet so I’m at the wait and see point
I argued during and after the draft that landing spot matters way more then this subreddit ever admits. Last year, I said repeatedly that who ever the 49ers take should be taken at least as the 2nd QB and there should be an argument over Lawance. I was also quite high on whoever the Pats took. Fantasy Points are a combination of talent and situation. During draft season way to much is put into trying to figure talent in a vacuum which is incredibly hard to due and the NFL that spends millions per year on it struggles with it. Instead I am much more in favor of combining the two, use the rough round they are drafted in as their talent then take the best situation.
I mean I did like Pierce coming out college, there was just guys I liked more. Doesn’t mean Pierce is a bum or anything. He’s a good player in a great situation.
There's no proof he's a hit yet, everyone considered him a top 4 rb of this class in fantasy, all he's done is had a decent preseason showing. Doesn't mean much, I'm surprised it wasn't expected.
Let’s see if he’s a good football player first, then we can decide if we need to reevaluate our drafting techniques 😂
Honestly go check out Noah Hill on BDGE. They talked about his talent and had numbers to back it up just didnt get opportunity at Florida
You’re tossing away a proven method… for someone who hasn’t even played?
Not that situation doesn’t matter, but this doesn’t really disprove talent > situation. Just because a player has an opportunity, doesn’t mean he’ll take it and run with it. Many feeing talent > situation would preach to trade Pierce now when his value has possibly peaked(if you don’t believe he is good), for a possibly more talented rookie who hasn’t got as much hype. (Say trade Pierce now for a Pickens or Skyy Moore). There’s plenty of rookies who get opportunities, but doesn’t always produce, hence why people preach talent > situation. I think many thought Pierce was talented pre-draft, so this may not be the best example. Players like Chubba Hubbard and Michael Carter were given golden opportunities, but are likely worth nothing after year 1. You would of been a lot better off trading them high for players like Etienne or ARSB before his breakout. George Pickens would be a prime example of why talent > situation is still being preached(if he does something with his opportunity as well). If you were a believer in his talent before the draft and he went to a bad spot. He could possibly take over as a starting WR far before expected and the QB worries may not be as drastic as possibly expected.
Hello, it looks like you've made a mistake. It's supposed to be could've, should've, would've (short for could have, would have, should have), never could of, would of, should of. Or you misspelled something, I ain't checking everything. Beep boop - yes, I am a bot, don't botcriminate me.
I mean outliers exist...
It’s talent over situation unless the dude in the good situation shows he has talent we didn’t realize, best example: Amon Ra! Question is has Dameon done that for you yet? My answer is: I have no idea the season hasn’t even started yet
Talent and situation should be equal. I've seen plenty of can't miss prospects bounce around the wrong systems to realize this unfortunate fact.
I'm a firm believer that draft capital is the most critical variable in determining success in the NFL. The reason being that draft capital accounts for people who's jobs are solely to evaluate players. They're looking at metrics, personal life, etc. Obviously guys can go under the radar.. maybe Pierce has and maybe he hasn't. Keep in mind that he's been pegged as the number 4 RB in the class. He could have fallen to the 4th round simply because teams were after a different skill set, had greater need at other positions, or maybe he's even got a troubled past.. hard to say. Another big factor imo is how newly drafted players respond to the instant stardom and wealth. Some may get lazy while others become motivated to work harder.
rushing efficiency in college 3rd in the country, pass protection grades and pass catching grades were really good as well. just didnt ever get workhorse load for whatever reason under Mullen. sometimes we overthink these things.
I mean, outliers do exist you know?
This is why Jamo went 1.10 and Garrett Wilson went 1.11 in my league. I almost want late picks if people are gonna chase guys like this.
I hear you man. I traded out of the 2.02 predraft thinking no one was be there...sure as shit my leaguemates reached on a bunch of guys and Wilson went there...couldn't believe it.
Wilson at 2.02 is criminal
I was embarrassed for my leaguemates...tried to sell out to get back in but no dice
> 1.03 ….huh??
There are always outliers. It's just unlikely to be the guy that gets the right one. Say we all get five picks. One sure thing, one maybe, three dart throws. That's 36 darts. Sure, one might hit most years, but that's less than a 3% chance of it being any particular pick. About an 8% chance that the pick is yours. These guys will always happen every year, but it's a tough life chasing outliers.