Trade, give Chubb to get Conner?

I understand that LB is coming back soon, but I’m not sure they will completely phase out Conner. Thoughts? Do you guys this is a fair trade? If not should I give Mack and Chubb to get Conner?

I think both are reasonable gambles for Conner but clearly gambles regardless. I think fair for each side overall.

thanks! yeah, I need to make such gamble seeing that I drafted terribly.

Only thing is it’s kind of a serious gamble for you at this point in the season with RB’s unless your league somehow has guys who get plenty of touches available on waiver wire. Otherwise, you’re ditching two RB’s who are locked in to get a good share every game. I think Conner is awesome and the Steelers would be fine even without Bell, but he’s supposed to come back and if he does there’s no way he doesn’t get any use/cut into Conner’s share significantly. There’s prob a 30% chance IMO that Conner is able to be this type of producer ROS.

agreed, at this point I’m looking to trade either Mack or Chubb for Conner but not both. I think with LB back in the picture this might end up like Kamara/Ingram situation. I have Mixon and Hunt, so I figure that Conner might be a good flex option. The problem with my roster is that I have too many boom or busts guys, Kenny G, Brown, etc. So I’m trying to get some sort of consistency with Conner.

I have Conner, and unfortunately I don’t think he’s going to be consistent once Bell comes back.

Nah keep Chubb. He’s the locked in starter. Same with mack (assuming he stays healthy).

As good as conner is, just don’t see him getting the start and Bell being a backup. Don’t even see 60/40. I see like 80/20 or 75/25.

any chance they trade LB away before the deadline?

No, the deadline is a few days away and I don’t see Bell signing before then.

No. They never really had a chance of trading Bell because no team is going to give up a 2nd rounder for someone who can walk in FA to the highest bidder. It’s just bad business.

I think this would be a great trade, I do not think Bell will get his snaps back to the same amount he had the past years.

What’s to say the Steelers don’t just bench him anyway? Seems like the players have all rallied behind Conner and Bell’s worn out his welcome…

1 Like

Exactly why would they bench Conner for all he has done, he is producing at a great rate. Stick with the hot hand, not the guy who hasn’t played at all due to money.

If they view Conner as their future back, their incentive is to protect that fella from injury risk by limiting/ eliminating his hits

1 Like

Even you don’t think they would “completely” phase out Conner, that’s still a long way from Conner being startable in fantasy. I personally don’t think Conner will be startable once LB comes back. If Pitt has no interest in resigning Bell next year, or don’t think there’s any chance he’d return, then their incentive would be to play the best player as much as possible and protect Conner from injury so he’s ready for next year. At least if the locker room dynamics can be smoothed over

1 Like

Very Fair points, but I do not see his value disappearing a whole bunch, I do think in a 16 man league minded way so a lot of guys have hidden value to me but NFL stand point you are right they may try to protect him but I do not see his reps diminishing all that much.

Ok, he’d be more valuable in a 16 team league.

If you don’t think they would cut back his reps by much, how do you see them protecting him? He’s getting all the reps right now! : )

1 Like

By not giving him the same amount of reps of course, he would split reps with Bell. So his workload will not be the same, but he still will have a workload they are not just gonna go away from him, no way.

with news of browns cleaning house, I’m not sure how stable that situation will be. I mean Duke Johnson was the guy last year. And Conner is established, maybe he’ll go from 25 carries to 18 carries. I feel like LB is just going to be the backup.

lol. Good one.