There are 138 users in the forums

Remember
Not a member? Register Now!

Better Value: Spiller at 13/17 or Best at 49?

Better Value: Spiller at 13/17 or Best at 49?

Better Value: Spiller at 13/17 or Best at 49?

I think that Best is a much better value at 49. And if Spiller cannot end up being an every-down back (which some suspect), there's not real difference between the two.
I posted this yesterday, in a hijacked thread....but here goes.

Spillers seems to me like a one year wonder. Look back at his college carreer. How can this guy be rated the #1 RB coming out?!? I don't get it.

2009(his best year)
36 catches for 503 yards and 4 TD's. 216 Rushes for 1212 yards and 12 TD's. 16 Total TD

2008(mediocre at best)
34 catches for 436 yards and 3 TD's. 116 Rushes for 629 yards and 7 TD's. 10 total TD's

2007(Is this the same guy you all are calling for?)
34 catches for 271 yards and 2 TD's. 145 Rushes for 768 yards and 3 TD's. 5 total TD's

2006(a pretty solid year for a freshman, but production falls sharply for the next 2 yrs)
19 catches for 210 yards and 2 TD's. 129 Rushes for 938 and 10 TD's. 12 total TD's

I dunno, he had a solid senior year, freshman year too....but WTF happened to the middle two years? Was he injured? Was he splitting time? If he was splitting time, why? If he's so elite, why take carries away from him?

07 and 08 are "red flags" to me. Please niners....pass on spillers. We already have GORE, and RB's are easier to find than Stud OL we're sure to get with our 13 and 17.
Originally posted by JizzmasterZero:
I posted this yesterday, in a hijacked thread....but here goes.

Spillers seems to me like a one year wonder. Look back at his college carreer. How can this guy be rated the #1 RB coming out?!? I don't get it.

2009(his best year)
36 catches for 503 yards and 4 TD's. 216 Rushes for 1212 yards and 12 TD's. 16 Total TD

2008(mediocre at best)
34 catches for 436 yards and 3 TD's. 116 Rushes for 629 yards and 7 TD's. 10 total TD's

2007(Is this the same guy you all are calling for?)
34 catches for 271 yards and 2 TD's. 145 Rushes for 768 yards and 3 TD's. 5 total TD's

2006(a pretty solid year for a freshman, but production falls sharply for the next 2 yrs)
19 catches for 210 yards and 2 TD's. 129 Rushes for 938 and 10 TD's. 12 total TD's

I dunno, he had a solid senior year, freshman year too....but WTF happened to the middle two years? Was he injured? Was he splitting time? If he was splitting time, why? If he's so elite, why take carries away from him?

07 and 08 are "red flags" to me. Please niners....pass on spillers. We already have GORE, and RB's are easier to find than Stud OL we're sure to get with our 13 and 17.

Starting to be worried about Spiller as well.

Won't Best satisfy the same need as Spiller? What is the difference between the two. 1 inch and 10 pounds?
  • KRS-1
  • Hall of Fame
  • Posts: 26,986
Originally posted by JizzmasterZero:
I posted this yesterday, in a hijacked thread....but here goes.

Spillers seems to me like a one year wonder. Look back at his college carreer. How can this guy be rated the #1 RB coming out?!? I don't get it.

2009(his best year)
36 catches for 503 yards and 4 TD's. 216 Rushes for 1212 yards and 12 TD's. 16 Total TD

2008(mediocre at best)
34 catches for 436 yards and 3 TD's. 116 Rushes for 629 yards and 7 TD's. 10 total TD's

2007(Is this the same guy you all are calling for?)
34 catches for 271 yards and 2 TD's. 145 Rushes for 768 yards and 3 TD's. 5 total TD's

2006(a pretty solid year for a freshman, but production falls sharply for the next 2 yrs)
19 catches for 210 yards and 2 TD's. 129 Rushes for 938 and 10 TD's. 12 total TD's

I dunno, he had a solid senior year, freshman year too....but WTF happened to the middle two years? Was he injured? Was he splitting time? If he was splitting time, why? If he's so elite, why take carries away from him?

07 and 08 are "red flags" to me. Please niners....pass on spillers. We already have GORE, and RB's are easier to find than Stud OL we're sure to get with our 13 and 17.

His numbers in his sophomore and junior years are because he split time with James Davis who had put up some great numbers himself. He was the lightning to Davis' thunder.

James Davis' career numbers at Clemson :

YEAR ATT YDS AVG TD
2005 165 879 5.3 9
2006 203 1187 5.8 17
2007 214 1064 5.0 10
2008 171 751 4.4 11
Good info KRS.....explains alot. Good numbers from Davis....wonder why he wasn't drafted earlier? 195th overall? WFT? Looks like he was having a decent rookie season too til he tore his labrum.

Geez, with similar numbers.....wonder why teams are soooo high on spillers and they weren't on Davis...the "thunder" 06 was a crazy year at clemson for RB's. I DO like spillers ability catching the ball outta the backfield, but I wonder why clemson gave the rock to Davis more than Spillers in 07 and 08. THey must've thought Davis was better? HE certainly had the better #'s.......but got drafted in the 6th round.....hmmmmmm....
Originally posted by nickbradley:

Starting to be worried about Spiller as well.

Won't Best satisfy the same need as Spiller? What is the difference between the two. 1 inch and 10 pounds?

Spiller is far more accomplished as a returner and receiving threat out of the backfield.

Best is the better rusher... has superior vision and shiftiness on the move. Best has done well in the receiving game also, but didn't get as many looks on this as Spiller did.

If you are very concerned about the concussions to Best, then Spiller's your guy. If you are less concerned, then Best is actually > than Spiller. I would be happy if SF selected either of them at #17 overall. I don't expect Best to make it to our 2nd round pick... could happen, sure... but still.
i want Spiller @ 13
by pure value, Best is a better value at 49 than Spiller at 13 or 17.

Best is an all around back, where Spiller is a speed back/change of pace back.

Dont get me wrong, Ive been on the spiller bandwagon, but at 13 or 17 it might not be worth it, just so we use him as a change of pace and return man, rather fill bigger needs and get best at 49.
i think best at 49 would be sick but he wont be there. id be shocked if he made it out of the 1st round-top 5 in the 2nd. but spiller IMO is more dynamic so i would take spiller
Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
i think best at 49 would be sick but he wont be there. id be shocked if he made it out of the 1st round-top 5 in the 2nd. but spiller IMO is more dynamic so i would take spiller

Is it worth throwing in a 4th rounder to move up 10 - 15 slots for him?
thats a good question. im not sure. a 4th can still bring some good talent too but i dont know if whoever is in charge of the draft will be willing to trade around like scotty did.
Best at 49 is an absolute no brainer
Best!

He's a freak. I think he's going to be a stud for someone. He's a perfect #2, IMO. He can handle KO duties as well. If he's still ther in the 2nd, I hope we grab him. I wouldn't be surprised to see him slip into the 1st though. Hopefuller Spiller falls and pushes the RBs down the draft board. If someone reaches for Spiller, there will probably be an early run to scoop up Mathews and Best.
  • cupcheck
  • Info N/A
Originally posted by nickbradley:
Originally posted by hondakillerzx:
i think best at 49 would be sick but he wont be there. id be shocked if he made it out of the 1st round-top 5 in the 2nd. but spiller IMO is more dynamic so i would take spiller

Is it worth throwing in a 4th rounder to move up 10 - 15 slots for him?

You'll have to jump ahead of San Diego, and that would require a 3ed rounder, there goes the value.
How do Spiller/Best compare to Reggie Bush?