Buy Pacheco?

[RedzoneMonster 107]

Pacheco has looked pretty good so far, yet his rankings aren’t really reflecting it. Steadily gotten more work every game, to where it seems he’s close to a “bellcow”. Plus his schedule (especially the next few games) looks great.  I’m considering making an offer for him, but am I missing something? 

[TBayXXXVII 2,545]

If you have a spot and a need, sure, but I would never expect to start him unless I had to.

[Ray_T 753]

1 hour ago, RedzoneMonster said:

Pacheco has looked pretty good so far, yet his rankings aren’t really reflecting it. Steadily gotten more work every game, to where it seems he’s close to a “bellcow”. Plus his schedule (especially the next few games) looks great.  I’m considering making an offer for him, but am I missing something? 

when the gamescript is positive hes a borderline RB1.

when negative hes a borderline RB2/3

chiefs win most of their games so I'd treat him as a solid RB2 against all but the toughest matchups and defenses.

[weepaws 3,191]

I wouldn’t buy high, I agree with Ray, buy as a rb2/3.  

[TBayXXXVII 2,545]

Last year, Pacheco was RB24 or better only 6 times (top 16 only twice).  This year, he was RB30, RB29, RB12, and RB6... and that RB12 was a gift against the Bears.  I see him as an RB3 with "hope" that he might be an RB2 as the season progresses.  I think his ceiling is (on average), RB20 for the rest of the season.  The Chiefs just don't run the ball enough.  In that Bears game, when the score was 31-0, they still threw the ball 10 times and ran it 5 on their next 2 drives that generated 10 points... at which point, they pulled Mahomes and Pacheco.

If you think the Jets game is a sign of things to come, then buy him as an RB1 to ensure you get him.

If you think the Jets game is an anomaly, then buy him as RB2/3.

[polecatt 478]

He's more of a value fantasy RB. He should give pretty good production and not cost a lot. He's basically a flex RB with some upside.

I don't think his ceiling is very high though, but his floor is pretty good. He should get consistent production in KC's offense.

Jerrick McKinnon looks like he could eat into some of his PPR points though, especially in the red zone. Just like last season.

He's not a bad target for a trade, just don't pay too much

[Ray_T 753]

27 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Last year, Pacheco was RB24 or better only 6 times (top 16 only twice).  This year, he was RB30, RB29, RB12, and RB6... and that RB12 was a gift against the Bears.  I see him as an RB3 with "hope" that he might be an RB2 as the season progresses.  I think his ceiling is (on average), RB20 for the rest of the season.  The Chiefs just don't run the ball enough.  In that Bears game, when the score was 31-0, they still threw the ball 10 times and ran it 5 on their next 2 drives that generated 10 points... at which point, they pulled Mahomes and Pacheco.

If you think the Jets game is a sign of things to come, then buy him as an RB1 to ensure you get him.

If you think the Jets game is an anomaly, then buy him as RB2/3.

you are right.  he was RB24 or better only 6 times but he also never became the starter until week 10 so that stat is deceiving.

even then it was a somewhat shared backfield which (to some degree) has resolved itself now.

I do think he will still have his ups and downs as his value will be somewhat in the matchup and gamescript.

like I said, KC will win a lot of games so this will only affect him in a few games.  but if KC has (for argument sake) an 8-9 season Pacheco would lose a lot of his value.

This is one reason you would not be wise to pay the price of an RB1 for him.

but if you could get him for a price that says Middling RB2 or lower I'd say its a good deal.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

No you’re not missing anything. He’d be a great buy and as long as he stays healthy he’ll finish top 12-ish for sure 

[TBayXXXVII 2,545]

1 hour ago, Ray_T said:

you are right.  he was RB24 or better only 6 times but he also never became the starter until week 10 so that stat is deceiving.

even then it was a somewhat shared backfield which (to some degree) has resolved itself now.

I do think he will still have his ups and downs as his value will be somewhat in the matchup and gamescript.

like I said, KC will win a lot of games so this will only affect him in a few games.  but if KC has (for argument sake) an 8-9 season Pacheco would lose a lot of his value.

This is one reason you would not be wise to pay the price of an RB1 for him.

but if you could get him for a price that says Middling RB2 or lower I'd say its a good deal.

I don't disagree.  I just think that you can't really predict a game script with Kansas City.  I'm willing to bet that there was a 0% chance that Andy Reid went into that Jets game saying, "Ok, we're going to really attack them with the run game".  Now, I do think he was open to being more balanced against the Jets who are a bottom 10 team against the run, but I think it's safe to say that if the run didn't work early, he was going to abandon it.  Why do I say that?  The Bears aren't that good against the run either and the Chiefs never committed to trying to run the ball... even when they were up 31-0.

So, I don't disagree with anything you're saying really, the problem for me with Pacheco is that if you start him, you're always playing with fire.  Even though he may be an RB2... I'd treat him like a 2nd flex option until I see KC commit more to running.  Now, if someone thinks they well, I'm certainly not going to tell them they're wrong... I'd encourage them to take the route they believe.  Just that I wouldn't see it that way.  He might too... we saw it in Philly with Westbrook and McCoy, but we haven't seen it yet in KC.  My guess is because Mahomes is a much better passer than McNabb was.

[weepaws 3,191]

1 hour ago, IGotWorms said:

No you’re not missing anything. He’d be a great buy and as long as he stays healthy he’ll finish top 12-ish for sure 

Rb2 at the absolute best.  

[Ray_T 753]

1 hour ago, TBayXXXVII said:

the problem for me with Pacheco is that if you start him, you're always playing with fire. 

well, I can see where you come from on this.

I own him in one league and he was firmly on my bench in week 1.  I figured the game script was not gonna be great with the team playing without Kelce and what looked like an injured Toney (who was supposed to be the teams WR1)    Detroit being a pretty good team I figured the game script might be negative. (and it was)

Pacheco also had a pre season injury which may have played into week 1 and 2 (though  maybe not.   hard to say these days)

My dobbins injury forced me to play Pacheco in week 2 so I really had no choice at the time as I hadnt seen enough of Kyren Williams to trust him at that point. 

week 3 and 4 he was solid against two teams I expected some garbage time love for Pacheco.

so the dud I expected may happen in week 1 was somewhat predictable for me.   week 2 was not....but week 3 and 4 were largely as expected for me and he has 5 straight matchups that are looking good.    what I dont like is he has Buffalo and New England in week 14 and 15 and those wont likely be pretty.

but I do think the next 4-5 weeks look good (assuming good health)

[IGotWorms 4,058]

1 hour ago, weepaws said:

Rb2 at the absolute best.  

Seems unlikely to me. He’s a top end RB2/low end RB1 right now. You expect he’ll tail off substantially?

[Ray_T 753]

6 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Seems unlikely to me. He’s a top end RB2/low end RB1 right now. You expect he’ll tail off substantially?

I think when the matchup is right thats where he is.

he lacks the consistency of a true RB1.   TBay is right in his analysis with respect to this part of his production.

he wont be a true RB1 until the consistency is there.    Keep in mind the difference between a high end RB2 and Low end RB1 isnt all that huge.

we dont differ by all that much.

[IGotWorms 4,058]

19 minutes ago, Ray_T said:

I think when the matchup is right thats where he is.

he lacks the consistency of a true RB1.   TBay is right in his analysis with respect to this part of his production.

he wont be a true RB1 until the consistency is there.    Keep in mind the difference between a high end RB2 and Low end RB1 isnt all that huge.

we dont differ by all that much.

Sure I don’t disagree, but people here are saying RB3 which just seems silly to me 

[polecatt 478]

2 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

we saw it in Philly with Westbrook and McCoy, but we haven't seen it yet in KC.  My guess is because Mahomes is a much better passer than McNabb was.

While I certainly agree that Mahomes is a much better passer and QB than McNabb, don't forget that he had Jamaal Charles his first couple of seaons in KC.

In fact, Charles best season of his career was the first season Reid was there.

I think more than anything, Westbrook, McCoy, and Charles are just much more talented than all the other RBs he's had in Philly or KC.

That comes to Pacheco. He's a good RB, in a good situation in KC. However, I just don't think he's on the same talent level as Westbrook, McCoy, or Charles. I just don't see that kind of production from him.

[TBayXXXVII 2,545]

6 minutes ago, polecatt said:

While I certainly agree that Mahomes is a much better passer and QB than McNabb, don't forget that he had Jamaal Charles his first couple of seaons in KC.

In fact, Charles best season of his career was the first season Reid was there.

I think more than anything, Westbrook, McCoy, and Charles are just much more talented than all the other RBs he's had in Philly or KC.

That comes to Pacheco. He's a good RB, in a good situation in KC. However, I just don't think he's on the same talent level as Westbrook, McCoy, or Charles. I just don't see that kind of production from him.

Jamaal Charles never played on the team with Mahomes.  Charles' last year in KC was in 2016, Mahomes was drafted the following year.  Yes, Charles, like McCoy & Westbrook played with QB's who weren't that great of passers... they were "solid", Mahomes is great.

Agreed with your last statement, which is part of the reason for my stance on Pacheco.

 

[weepaws 3,191]

33 minutes ago, IGotWorms said:

Sure I don’t disagree, but people here are saying RB3 which just seems silly to me 

Didn’t say rb3, I said rb2 at the very best.  

[Ray_T 753]

one conclusion and I think this thread proves it.....

market value isnt finite.   it is a range of value.     your job as a buyer is to find the lowest price within that range that your trading partner will accept.    As a seller, your job is to get the highest price within that range.

somewhere along the way negotiating skill will play a role but in the end you have to be happy with the deal you make.

this has been a fun discussion and the best part is that nobody got angry we all said what we had to say.

see.   we can have a civil conversation about players values.

[kcBlitzkrieg 29]

18 hours ago, TBayXXXVII said:

Jamaal Charles never played on the team with Mahomes.  Charles' last year in KC was in 2016, Mahomes was drafted the following year.  Yes, Charles, like McCoy & Westbrook played with QB's who weren't that great of passers... they were "solid", Mahomes is great.

Agreed with your last statement, which is part of the reason for my stance on Pacheco.

 

wow   

[WhiteWonder 2,734]

first of all, the time to buy low on Pacheco has already passed. 

2nd, the guy was a 7th round rookie out of Rutgers who became a starter for the world champion chiefs last year. He was better for them in real life than he was for fantasy but based on his cost last season (undrafted) he helped people in fantasy as well. Looking at how many times he was an RB2 or better in fantasy last year is short sighted, imho. He still has room to grow in the offense at 24 years old. I think its amazing how little respect he gets in a league where it's hard to find workhorse backs. Sure, the Chiefs are going to default to Mahomes more often than not but last I checked, Pacheco is still averaging almost 5 YPC and slowly chipping in just a bit in the pass game too. On pace for 40+ receptions isn't too shabby. His touches this year? 12 < 13 < 17 < 23.  He is RB13 in PPR formats and RB17 on a ppg basis. 

yes, I would want to view him as an RB2 but depending on your teams make up, he could be a 1A/1B if paired with the likes of a Mixon/Etienne/Robinson.

[weepaws 3,191]

Yea rb2/3.  

[Ray_T 753]

10 hours ago, WhiteWonder said:

first of all, the time to buy low on Pacheco has already passed. 

2nd, the guy was a 7th round rookie out of Rutgers who became a starter for the world champion chiefs last year. He was better for them in real life than he was for fantasy but based on his cost last season (undrafted) he helped people in fantasy as well. Looking at how many times he was an RB2 or better in fantasy last year is short sighted, imho. He still has room to grow in the offense at 24 years old. I think its amazing how little respect he gets in a league where it's hard to find workhorse backs. Sure, the Chiefs are going to default to Mahomes more often than not but last I checked, Pacheco is still averaging almost 5 YPC and slowly chipping in just a bit in the pass game too. On pace for 40+ receptions isn't too shabby. His touches this year? 12 < 13 < 17 < 23.  He is RB13 in PPR formats and RB17 on a ppg basis. 

yes, I would want to view him as an RB2 but depending on your teams make up, he could be a 1A/1B if paired with the likes of a Mixon/Etienne/Robinson.

I fully agree. 

his skillset makes him a somewhat gamescript dependant player, but hes also playing for the Chiefs, so that concern isnt what it would be if he was playing on a different team.

the only difference between a high end RB2 and a Low end RB1 is consistency and/or possibly high end ability.    I think he could possibly develop the consistency this year but we wont know until mid season for sure.  but I think hes getting close.

like I said, earlier. if you can get him for the price of a mid range RB2 or lower thats a buy.  100%.  do not negotiate just hit accept.