UGGGGGGGH bell your killing me!

[Brees#1]

Bell and Peterson over the course of a full 16 game season who would have more fantasy points? Bell. So outside of the three games bell in theory will out produce ap. Say Peterson puts up 60 total fantasy points in those three weeks. The rb who would be started in place of bell will get you back about 30 of them? 10 a week seems realistic. So your drafting ap ahead of bell who should out produce him over the last 13 games of the season for 30 extra points?

I'm trying to look at it from all angles I'm just torn. The more I think about bell and his suspension the more I don't think it's as big a deal as many make out to believe.

Personally I think he's the best of the rest outside the top six which is the RBs Gurley, AP, Johnson and WRs Brown, ODB, Jones. Personally I am not drafting two of those listed. Now there are number 1 options ranked lower that could fill the void some first three weeks.

One is Hyde, who should do well the first two weeks if he is what he's supposed to be. MNF at home against LA who isn't known to be that great vs the run away from home and at Carolina's whose run defense has actually allowed 60+ yards to opposing RBs on the ground last year, and receiving backs have done worse against other teams. And that has the makings of a trap game too. I don't like him at all week 3 at Seattle.

Another one is Latavius. If this raiders oline is supposed to be as big and bad as they say, then why would it not help him? He actually had the yards last year, it was the TDs he didn't get. With better protection he has the chance to extend plays and take some to the house. He will be one of the raiders few options to score week 1 at NO as saints should improve their secondary(which has looked solid so far). He should benefit from Atlanta getting trounced on week 2. I don't like week 3 at titans but that could change.

And there is DeMarco. Overlooked because of the threat of Henry but Tennessee is one of the few run first teams and first three weeks they play Minnesota, @Detroit, and Oakland. Minnesota can only beaten on the ground, Detroit could be a challenge as will Oakland. However, if Detroit gets destroyed then it helps Murray.

It would seem week 3 is a tough slate. The weakest teams against the run going into the season is NO, Cleveland, and Dallas starting out. Foster plays Cleveland week 3 and Langford plays Dallas week 3, there are two fifth and sixth round options there. Unfortunately, the falcons play NO week 3 in the 10 year anniversary of the dome reopening and on MNF where the saints are currently 5-0 since 05. Not only that, Freeman is slated for round 2 and if it's a rbbc then it's not a replacement for Bell that week.

There is one more but if you think he won't be limited and that's Rawls, he's got a nice week 1 and week 3 matchup. Not so much week 2.

 

[nj_cup]

Personally I think he's the best of the rest outside the top six which is the RBs Gurley, AP, Johnson and WRs Brown, ODB, Jones. Personally I am not drafting two of those listed. Now there are number 1 options ranked lower that could fill the void some first three weeks.

One is Hyde, who should do well the first two weeks if he is what he's supposed to be. MNF at home against LA who isn't known to be that great vs the run away from home and at Carolina's whose run defense has actually allowed 60+ yards to opposing RBs on the ground last year, and receiving backs have done worse against other teams. And that has the makings of a trap game too. I don't like him at all week 3 at Seattle.

Another one is Latavius. If this raiders oline is supposed to be as big and bad as they say, then why would it not help him? He actually had the yards last year, it was the TDs he didn't get. With better protection he has the chance to extend plays and take some to the house. He will be one of the raiders few options to score week 1 at NO as saints should improve their secondary(which has looked solid so far). He should benefit from Atlanta getting trounced on week 2. I don't like week 3 at titans but that could change.

And there is DeMarco. Overlooked because of the threat of Henry but Tennessee is one of the few run first teams and first three weeks they play Minnesota, @Detroit, and Oakland. Minnesota can only beaten on the ground, Detroit could be a challenge as will Oakland. However, if Detroit gets destroyed then it helps Murray.

It would seem week 3 is a tough slate. The weakest teams against the run going into the season is NO, Cleveland, and Dallas starting out. Foster plays Cleveland week 3 and Langford plays Dallas week 3, there are two fifth and sixth round options there. Unfortunately, the falcons play NO week 3 in the 10 year anniversary of the dome reopening and on MNF where the saints are currently 5-0 since 05. Not only that, Freeman is slated for round 2 and if it's a rbbc then it's not a replacement for Bell that week.

There is one more but if you think he won't be limited and that's Rawls, he's got a nice week 1 and week 3 matchup. Not so much week 2.

so you think hes worth the price tag at #8 or #10 in a 12 person ppr. bite the bullet for the first three weeks with your rb3 that your going to draft and then you have a #1 stud for the price of #8 or 10 in the drafT?

 

[SteelersPride]

so you think hes worth the price tag at #8 or #10 in a 12 person ppr. bite the bullet for the first three weeks with your rb3 that your going to draft and then you have a #1 stud for the price of #8 or 10 in the drafT?

his opinion changes with the wind, read some threads

 

[TKOSpikes]

so you think hes worth the price tag at #8 or #10 in a 12 person ppr. bite the bullet for the first three weeks with your rb3 that your going to draft and then you have a #1 stud for the price of #8 or 10 in the drafT?

It's definitely how I feel.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

My thinking is if you feel you can get nab DeAnglo Williams for a decent value later in the draft, then why not grab Bell in the first at the 8 spot. It would be a good move IMO. Course the danger is someone may try to screw you by over drafting Williams, but in that case be sure to find someone adequate for 3 games. Maybe someone like Gore or Matthews.

 

[TKOSpikes]

My thinking is if you feel you can get nab DeAnglo Williams for a decent value later in the draft, then why not grab Bell in the first at the 8 spot. It would be a good move IMO. Course the danger is someone may try to screw you by over drafting Williams, but in that case be sure to find someone adequate for 3 games. Maybe someone like Gore or Matthews.

Exactly! But Gore for me is fine as an RB2, so it's really not a problem in my eyes. I wouldn't feel the need to reach for DWill.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Exactly! But Gore for me is fine as an RB2, so it's really not a problem in my eyes. I wouldn't feel the need to reach for DWill.

True, true, but Gore may go higher then you anticipated, RBs being so slim in supply, you can't be sure of getting him in the spot you like either. That's the risk in needing a RB to fill in. However if you fail to land that fill in RB in the draft, you can try trading for him.

 

[TKOSpikes]

True, true, but Gore may go higher then you anticipated, RBs being so slim in supply, you can't be sure of getting him in the spot you like either. That's the risk in needing a RB to fill in. However if you fail to land that fill in RB in the draft, you can try trading for him.

Unless you're like me and go heavy RB. Not many drafts I won't have 3 RB after five picks.

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Unless you're like me and go heavy RB. Not many drafts I won't have 3 RB after five picks.

I like having 3 RBs for sure, always try to land 3 good ones.

 

[Brees#1]

his opinion changes with the wind, read some threads

Not really it is being influenced by people here. My strategy has been RB and Bell but people here want something else.

 

[Brees#1]

Exactly! But Gore for me is fine as an RB2, so it's really not a problem in my eyes. I wouldn't feel the need to reach for DWill.

Christine is going lower than Gore. Jennings and Langford are up and down. Those are better options.

 

[TKOSpikes]

Christine is going lower than Gore. Jennings and Langford are up and down. Those are better options.

In your opinion. Not mine.

 

[TREFF]

Christine is going lower than Gore. Jennings and Langford are up and down. Those are better options.

Christian Micheal. .the guy who's annually teased everyone, the guy who is still second fiddle to Rawls..is going lower than Gore?? Say it ain't so!

 

[HaroldSeattle]

Christine is going lower than Gore. Jennings and Langford are up and down. Those are better options.

Christine Michaels is a better option? See that's not what you should get from the preseason. He's going be a back up at best. There's a good reason he's been handed around the NFL. Seems like he seen the light, but don't count on it lasting, at least until he does for a full season.

 

[SteelersPride]

Christine Michaels is a better option? See that's not what you should get from the preseason. He's going be a back up at best. There's a good reason he's been handed around the NFL. Seems like he seen the light, but don't count on it lasting, at least until he does for a full season.

let him believe

 

[Brees#1]

Did you guys see what he was doing in December last year? I understand no one likes him as a starter but as someone you can get in the ninth round why not. The seahawks are doing a RBBC I read. Michael will take carries away from Rawls.

 

[Brees#1]

Christian Micheal. .the guy who's annually teased everyone, the guy who is still second fiddle to Rawls..is going lower than Gore?? Say it ain't so!

If the colts so much as get anyone else involved in that backfield Gore will no be consistent. Gore to me has become matchup dependent. He's not someone I am taking and I am seeing Gordon is doing great in preseason. I would rather have him, Jennings, or Langford over him. Even Abdullah. So far in first team snaps in preseason Gore is not getting all the carries.

 

[SteelersPride]

Unless you're like me and go heavy RB. Not many drafts I won't have 3 RB after five picks.

yes!

 

[TREFF]

If the colts so much as get anyone else involved in that backfield Gore will no be consistent. Gore to me has become matchup dependent. He's not someone I am taking and I am seeing Gordon is doing great in preseason. I would rather have him, Jennings, or Langford over him. Even Abdullah. So far in first team snaps in preseason Gore is not getting all the carries.

When someone actually showed that they can, get back to me. Till than, there's no threat, and none of that make C MIKE an option like you think he might be

 

[Sam Sportboy]

Did you guys see what he was doing in December last year? I understand no one likes him as a starter but as someone you can get in the ninth round why not. The seahawks are doing a RBBC I read. Michael will take carries away from Rawls.