Is Gillislee a sell high?

[IMMensaMind 459]

Sell high? Isn't this why people drafted Mikey G? To replace Blount and soak up those tds? He is who we thought he was.

Well - back on Planet Real - he was drafted anywhere from the 6th to the 10th round because no one really knew if he actually was going to emulate the Blount role.

 

Now we (ostensibly) do. And - as such - many people would have drafted him round 4-5...at the latest. That, again, is simply new perceived value. His real value is probably somewhere in the middle, so I'd attempt to trade him for a 5th rounder, but it depends upon what you need.

 

Someone like Ty Montgomery comes to mind, for one. I think he's a good target because people still have doubts, but I view him as underrated. I think it's a good move to protect against the natural volatility that comes with a NE RB. I do think that Gillislee is better than Blount - that's not hard to see - but I also see three other capable backs, and I've seen game plans change dramatically based upon Hoodie's abilit to outmaneuver what the opposing coach is going to do about the prior week's success.

 

So: would I want to leverage Gillislee's hot first week by attempting to trade for another back with high potential to provide a combination of more weekly scoring stability combined with the potential of hitting a home run before the batter steps to the plate?

 

Yes. Yes I would. Either move, though, is understandable - and that's why I'm posting. I'm finding criticism of the idea of trading high ridiculous.

[cousinal111 57]

Okay, I kept Gillislee in my PPR league & so far (1 game) it has paid off. I like the idea of having the Patriots goalline back as my flex.

 

Who do you "trade high now" guys think is good value in return for Gillislee in PPR? I saw Montgomery mentioned on previous post & that's a pretty good one, but who else?

[Mike Nice 40]

Well - back on Planet Real - he was drafted anywhere from the 6th to the 10th round because no one really knew if he actually was going to emulate the Blount role.

Now we (ostensibly) do. And - as such - many people would have drafted him round 4-5...at the latest. That, again, is simply new perceived value. His real value is probably somewhere in the middle, so I'd attempt to trade him for a 5th rounder, but it depends upon what you need.

Someone like Ty Montgomery comes to mind, for one. I think he's a good target because people still have doubts, but I view him as underrated. I think it's a good move to protect against the natural volatility that comes with a NE RB. I do think that Gillislee is better than Blount - that's not hard to see - but I also see three other capable backs, and I've seen game plans change dramatically based upon Hoodie's abilit to outmaneuver what the opposing coach is going to do about the prior week's success.

So: would I want to leverage Gillislee's hot first week by attempting to trade for another back with high potential to provide a combination of more weekly scoring stability combined with the potential of hitting a home run before the batter steps to the plate?

Yes. Yes I would. Either move, though, is understandable - and that's why I'm posting. I'm finding criticism of the idea of trading high ridiculous.

It was well known he was going to be the goal line back. I think people are just saying you aren't going to get much more then what you would of got before last night. Stuffed on two 4 and 1 as well.