vikingapocalypse

Nick Chubb 2018 Outlook

tonycpsu

[Automated message: This outlook thread for the 2018 season will be locked on 2019-01-31. Please finish any 2018 discussions here, and take any 2019 outlook discussions to the 2019 outlook thread . If one does not exist, feel free to create one. Thanks!]

Message added by tonycpsu

tonycpsu

[Thread for previous season automatically locked. Feel free to post a new thread for 2019.]

Message added by tonycpsu

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, FinsUp24 said:

 

What makes you say the upside is greater than Michels? Both have about equal speed so it can’t be the home run capability. Can’t get many more carries than Michel was. More TD opportunities for Michel. I have Chubb and I’d be happy to get on board with that statement, but I’m just not seeing it

The Browns offense is the only thing limiting his upside. Michel has White to deal with so his upside is capped. Unless the Browns involve Duke more then Chubb doesn't have that problem. What likely makes it a wash is that the Browns are nowhere near the offense of New England. Chubb's elusive rating is also very high. I think the homerun potential is greater with him than with Michel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, FitzMagic said:

The Browns offense is the only thing limiting his upside. Michel has White to deal with so his upside is capped. Unless the Browns involve Duke more then Chubb doesn't have that problem. What likely makes it a wash is that the Browns are nowhere near the offense of New England. Chubb's elusive rating is also very high. I think the homerun potential is greater with him than with Michel.

 

Not too mention Michel is hurt. And Burkhead is going to come back too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, kyoun1e said:

 

Sure. 

 

Chubb could break one at any time against any opponent. That said, the stats say that's less likely against this D.

 

Maybe this game proves Chubb is matchup proof. We will see. I'm betting on this not being the case. That's me.

 

Situation overrides talent with rb's.

Exhibit A: DJ has been in a terrible situation on the cards that his talent cant overcome

Exhibit B: Barkley gets massive opportunity with volume on an offense committed to feeding him the ball in the passing game  as well as running game so his talent can win out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, FitzMagic said:

The Browns offense is the only thing limiting his upside. Michel has White to deal with so his upside is capped. Unless the Browns involve Duke more then Chubb doesn't have that problem. What likely makes it a wash is that the Browns are nowhere near the offense of New England. Chubb's elusive rating is also very high. I think the homerun potential is greater with him than with Michel.

 

 

How is the homerun potential greater when you can stack the box against the browns because they don't have a legit filed stretcher or passing game that can punish defenses?

 I would prefer to own the NE running game with white/michel over any part of the browns running game of duke/chubb. NE has been heavily committed to the run when michel took over from burkehead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, dashoe said:

 

 

How is the homerun potential greater when you can stack the box against the browns because they don't have a legit filed stretcher or passing game that can punish defenses?

 I would prefer to own the NE running game with white/michel over any part of the browns running game of duke/chubb. NE has been heavily committed to the run when michel took over from burkehead.

I think on his limited carries prior he's proven that he can boom. Were teams not stacking the box then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, dashoe said:

 

Situation overrides talent with rb's.

Exhibit A: DJ has been in a terrible situation on the cards that his talent cant overcome

Exhibit B: Barkley gets massive opportunity with volume on an offense committed to feeding him the ball in the passing game  as well as running game so his talent can win out

 

Two data points don't prove a general rule. Barry Sanders had at best an average Oline at any given time (I think two Detroit O linemen were pro bowlers in his entire career), and a team that often otherwise floundered. And he put up much better stats than almost every other RB in the league at the time, many of whom had better lines and better teams. 

 

Situation can do a lot to counteract talent, sure. But it's not a simple rule like you're suggesting. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, FitzMagic said:

I think on his limited carries prior he's proven that he can boom. Were teams not stacking the box then?

 

 The oak game where defenses didn't focus on him because he wasnt the primary rb?

Come on dude if that's your criteria then you should trade Chubb for Crowell who has 3 runs for over 50yds

 

Chubb is talented and michel is talented but in fantasy i'll take the rb who is in the better situation every day. The talent debate is irrelevant when one offense runs the ball with ease and gets into redzone frequently and scores td's with their rb's and the other struggles to do the same.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, dashoe said:

 

Situation overrides talent with rb's.

Exhibit A: DJ has been in a terrible situation on the cards that his talent cant overcome

Exhibit B: Barkley gets massive opportunity with volume on an offense committed to feeding him the ball in the passing game  as well as running game so his talent can win out

I agree with your point, but you picked a terrible Exhibit B to make your point-- Barkley has massive talent and is being fed the ball. The only thing that could make it better would be a legit pass game, a la the Rams. A better example might be TJ Yeldon, who doesn't have flashy talent but is fine and has had great opportunity, leading to him being RB 11 so far (ppg, 1/2 ppr).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could certainly be argued that Nick Chubb is already the greatest RB of all time.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, dashoe said:

 

 The oak game where defenses didn't focus on him because he wasnt the primary rb?

Come on dude if that's your criteria then you should trade Chubb for Crowell who has 3 runs for over 50yds

 

Chubb is talented and michel is talented but in fantasy i'll take the rb who is in the better situation every day. The talent debate is irrelevant when one offense runs the ball with ease and gets into redzone frequently and scores td's with their rb's and the other struggles to do the same.

Chubb's upside is limted by offensive flow only. His situation isn't limited by competition at his position anymore. Michel's upside is capped with White as the passing down back. The Browns have shown so far to not want to use Duke Johnson. Both White and Michel are valuable when both are healthy. Their upside is capped though when both are healthy. Like White is more valuable now as the feature back with Michel out. The same I believe would be true if it were White who was out and Michel being the feature. Chubb's upside is not capped by anything other than the Browns' incompetence on offense. So, that's the only thing that will keep Chubb down. If the offense is trending in a positive direction then Chubb will be fine.

Edited by FitzMagic
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Brotherbock said:

 

Two data points don't prove a general rule. Barry Sanders had at best an average Oline at any given time (I think two Detroit O linemen were pro bowlers in his entire career), and a team that often otherwise floundered. And he put up much better stats than almost every other RB in the league at the time, many of whom had better lines and better teams. 

 

Situation can do a lot to counteract talent, sure. But it's not a simple rule like you're suggesting. 

 

 They are examples dude not absolutes.

Situation trumps talent in the NFL rb position. There is a reason why teams treat the rb position as fungible

because there is talent depth in the position. Fantasy player like to focus on the 3-5 guys every season who are outliers in terms of production but the reality is the rb position is very plug and play. 

There is a reason why a gurley can go from stud to dud  to super stud in 3 seasons because his situation changed, his talent didnt change.

Seriously this is not even debateable

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, geosporin said:

I agree with your point, but you picked a terrible Exhibit B to make your point-- Barkley has massive talent and is being fed the ball. The only thing that could make it better would be a legit pass game, a la the Rams. A better example might be TJ Yeldon, who doesn't have flashy talent but is fine and has had great opportunity, leading to him being RB 11 so far (ppg, 1/2 ppr).

 

 

The point of using DJ vs barkley is that they are both considered extremely talented and DJ's situation drastically changed 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, dashoe said:

 

 

How is the homerun potential greater when you can stack the box against the browns because they don't have a legit filed stretcher or passing game that can punish defenses?

 I would prefer to own the NE running game with white/michel over any part of the browns running game of duke/chubb. NE has been heavily committed to the run when michel took over from burkehead.

The advantage of a stacked box in terms of big plays is there is really only one layer of defense. On a typical run, you have to get past the initial line, LBs, and then secondary which makes big plays very unlikely. On a stacked box, once you get past the initial line there may only be one or two guys left if not 0. A lot of big runs happen against stacked boxes.

Edited by Gohawks
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

The advantage of a stacked box in terms of big plays is there is really only one layer of defense. On a typical run, you have to get past the initial line, LBs, and then secondary which makes big plays very unlikely. On a stacked box, once you get past the initial line there may only be one or two guys left if not 0. A lot of big runs happen against stacked boxes.

 

I understand the theory

 but he's on the BROWNS just like Gurley faced stacked boxes on the Rams the majority of every down 2yrs ago and he couldnt produce whereas now he faces a stacked box on 9% of his carries and he is a fantasy monster because defenses can't afford to stack the box on the Rams.  

It still boils down to situation over talent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why talk about Sonny? Chubb has been featured in ONE game and looked pretty good! If not for the idiot who called a QB sneak it would obviously had a chance to look much better. I think he will catch his fair share of passes and  run like a bull. All that was missing was opportunity and that has been rectified. Why not give him a few games to make his mark and see if he can actually be good or not. The prob with Sonny is when hes in the game its to run. not block or catch balls. It is way to obvious and easy to defense just ask the Bears who smothered him..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, dashoe said:

 

I understand the theory

 but he's on the BROWNS just like Gurley faced stacked boxes on the Rams the majority of every down 2yrs ago and he couldnt produce whereas now he faces a stacked box on 9% of his carries and he is a fantasy monster because defenses can't afford to stack the box on the Rams.  

It still boils down to situation over talent

Same team, same general personnel, different coaching. Rams were historically bad due to play calling. Cleveland is not historically bad so the comparison doesn’t really match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea im sorry but using extreme outliers like Barry Sanders to validate an assertion is complete bullocks. Once-in-a-lifetime kind of deal there. The common theme throughout the past couple of decades is that even an above-average talent running back could get overshadowed by a terrible o-line and shoddy quarterback play. Case and point : Todd Gurley, David Johnson, etc... list goes on and on.

 

With that being said, this Browns offensive roster is definitely talented enough to keep Chubb relevant. Mayfield is a competent pass catcher and you cant just simply stack the box and think you'll get away with it without getting picked apart. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Fantasy Gooroo said:

Same team, same general personnel, different coaching. Rams were historically bad due to play calling. Cleveland is not historically bad so the comparison doesn’t really match.

 

Do you really believe what you just posted or are u just taking the pizz with us?

Did you not just see the recent interview where Hue says he wants to get involved in the offense, same HC for team that went 1-32-1 over 2 yrs? 

Come on dude you have to keep up if you are going to follow or roster browns players :lol:

 

"I feel like I have to and I want to [be more involved]. That's what I know. I'm not going to continue watching something that I know how to do. That's just the truth. Nothing against anybody in our building. That's what I do and I think I need to be a little more involved...I'm not trying to create any issue here. I think if the offense is not playing well, and we have not over a period of time, being a head coach and an offensive guy who has done this, I think I have every right as a head coach to jump in here and see if I can help and assist to see if I can get this thing where it needs to be. We need to be better on offense. If that is my specialty then I need to be involved more and I will be," the coach explained.

"I have been respectful [of Haley's job]. That's why you bring guys in and make them the coordinator. There are some things that we have to fix fast to get this thing back to where it needs to be...I'm the head coach of the football team. Period. Period. There is nothing else that needs to be said. Nothing. That's the way it works. I'm the head coach of the football team. It's not going to be about butting heads. I am the head coach of this football team. I will do what I feel I need to do to get this team where it needs to be."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, dashoe said:

 

Do you really believe what you just posted or are u just taking the pizz with us?

Did you not just see the recent interview where Hue says he wants to get involved in the offense, same HC for team that went 1-32-1 over 2 yrs? 

Come on dude you have to keep up if you are going to follow or roster browns players :lol:

 

"I feel like I have to and I want to [be more involved]. That's what I know. I'm not going to continue watching something that I know how to do. That's just the truth. Nothing against anybody in our building. That's what I do and I think I need to be a little more involved...I'm not trying to create any issue here. I think if the offense is not playing well, and we have not over a period of time, being a head coach and an offensive guy who has done this, I think I have every right as a head coach to jump in here and see if I can help and assist to see if I can get this thing where it needs to be. We need to be better on offense. If that is my specialty then I need to be involved more and I will be," the coach explained.

"I have been respectful [of Haley's job]. That's why you bring guys in and make them the coordinator. There are some things that we have to fix fast to get this thing back to where it needs to be...I'm the head coach of the football team. Period. Period. There is nothing else that needs to be said. Nothing. That's the way it works. I'm the head coach of the football team. It's not going to be about butting heads. I am the head coach of this football team. I will do what I feel I need to do to get this team where it needs to be."

 

i like hue jackson from an offensive perspective...i know haley was good in pitt but i think on offense this team could be better....the rookie of course will hold them back a bit but they need to do more with chubb or even duke with the passing game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Power-O said:

 

i like hue jackson from an offensive perspective...i know haley was good in pitt but i think on offense this team could be better....the rookie of course will hold them back a bit but they need to do more with chubb or even duke with the passing game

 

To your point Hue has been saying for weeks to the media he wants Duke more involved which i took as his non-confrontational way of telling Haley to use Duke more.Duke excelled when Hue was the play caller.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duke Johnson is not going to negatively effect Chubb. Chubb will get 20 or so touches a game. The browns offense is good enough to give sufficient scoring opportunities to Chubb. This is really all you need to know. 

Edited by griffin727
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, griffin727 said:

Duke Johnson is not going to negatively effect Chubb. Chubb will get 20 or so touches a game. The browns offense is good enough to give sufficient scoring opportunities to Chubb. This is really all you need to know. 

 

 Duke+chubb complement each other if they were used properly

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dashoe said:

 

 Duke+chubb complement each other if they were used properly

Cleveland should be putting him out wide since they lack receiving threats. He played out of the slot last year which is why he had a good season. With Landry there he wouldn't go back there but they definitely have not used him like they should. One of their best weapons rotting away on their bench for most plays.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dashoe said:

 

 They are examples dude not absolutes.

Situation trumps talent in the NFL rb position. There is a reason why teams treat the rb position as fungible

because there is talent depth in the position. Fantasy player like to focus on the 3-5 guys every season who are outliers in terms of production but the reality is the rb position is very plug and play. 

There is a reason why a gurley can go from stud to dud  to super stud in 3 seasons because his situation changed, his talent didnt change.

Seriously this is not even debateable

 

No, it really is dabatable, because you haven't given a conclusive argument. You've given a couple of examples. I've given a counter-example. That's called debating. 

 

When you say 'situation trumps talent', are you saying always and for every player that situation is going to be a bigger determining factor in their performance than talent is? If that's your claim, then Barry Sanders is already proof that your claim is incorrect. There are plenty of other players, a league full of them, who were not able to capitalize on good situations because of their poor talent--and when the backup stepped into the same situation, he blew up. Every single year, we FF players are holding some backup RB, waiting for the lead guy to go down, because the lead guy 'sucks' and the backup will do, we think, soooo much better...in the same situation. Peterson leaves NOLA...and Kamara explodes. Would David Johnson have done better than Chris Johnson in 2015 with the Cards, in the same situation? Many people were of that opinion.

 

Now if you mean "situation is also a very important factor in performance, as well as talent", you're making perfect sense. But you have actually produced no argument to show why talent is less important than situation. Why not say they are equally as important? What's your argument, your evidence?

 

Not trying to be a jerk, I think this is an interesting discussion, that's why I'm having it. But it very much is debatable, and you haven't provided more than just a claim and a couple of examples.

Edited by Brotherbock

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, J Boogie said:

Yea im sorry but using extreme outliers like Barry Sanders to validate an assertion is complete bullocks. Once-in-a-lifetime kind of deal there. The common theme throughout the past couple of decades is that even an above-average talent running back could get overshadowed by a terrible o-line and shoddy quarterback play. Case and point : Todd Gurley, David Johnson, etc... list goes on and on.

 

 

If you want to talk about 'common themes', that's one thing. I was responding to someone who certainly sounded like he was stating an absolute rule. And so Sanders works perfectly well as a counter-example to that rule. Hardly 'complete bullocks' there, chap. 

 

If you want to say "situation often plays an important role", clearly you're right. But a blanket statement like 'situations is more important than talent' isn't very supportable. There are tons of players we think would do better in the same situation as someone else--one RB who is struggling, and we think 'if only' the backup was playing, or 'if only' it was this same player years younger, etc. Of course there are times then the situation has a bigger impact. But it's absurd to say that it always does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.