Keep an eye on Darkwa's back injury. If he's out, that could possibly give Gallman an opportunity.Time to make Wayne active and see what he can do.
Agreed, not a Giants fan or a Gallman owner, but #### it, they need to do something.Some HCs are so damn stubborn. Maybe McAdoo gives too much autonomy to their OC or RB coach, but Gallman should've been active after game 1, IMO.
I'm not super-high on Gallman, but holy cow, they need a running game. He's got some talent. Give Gallman some touches & see what he can do.
I picked him up in dynasty after this news. Worth a swing at the price.(RotoWire) Gallman could dress for Sunday's game against the Buccaneers and factor into the Giants' offensive game plan, Tom Rock of Newsday reports.
Analysis: Gallman has been a healthy inactive for all three of the Giants' games thus far, but with the status of backups Orleans Darkwa (back) and Shane Vereen (calf) in question for Week 4, the rookie fourth-round pick has a realistic shot at making his NFL debut. Since the 22-year-old held only a minor role as a receiver out of the backfield for a deep Clemson squad last season, he'd likely make for a more natural replacement for Darkwa than Vereen, but it appears coach Ben McAdoo is comfortable deploying Gallman on both passing and running downs if starter Paul Perkins requires a breather. If at least one of Darkwa or Vereen is active Sunday, Gallman's path to ample snaps would become a little more blocked, but simply being active for the contest would give the first-year player an opportunity to stake his claim to more work in future weeks. The Giants have struggled to generate production from any of their top three running backs this season, so any spark Gallman is able to provide would likely be rewarded.
..makes me think the NYG OL isn't going to be doing him any favors. But hey, at least he won't hit the ground like Earth's gravity suddenly increased tenfold like Perkins does when he's grazed by the flailing arm of a defender.Gallman has limited instincts as an interior runner and needs lanes rather than creases, but he's physical enough to bang out tough yardage.
The past two days, Gallman estimated he received about 85 percent of the reps with the starting offense, with Vereen and Darkwa out and Perkins not given a full load in practice. Gallman could get the call, for the first time, Sunday. On Monday, he turns 23.
“That would be the best time of my life,” Gallman said. “Would be a dream come true.”
F me. I missed this post. Sigh.He took 85% of the reps with the starters this week. I'll get you a link...
http://nypost.com/2017/09/28/rookie-could-be-the-cure-for-what-ails-giants-running-game/
I did this on Friday. Hoping it pays dividends. Nice to see the kid score a touchdown in his first game--on his birthday no lessI picked up Gallman for Darkwa before the game started. Looks like he could be the starter going forward, especially with Perkins hurt.
That proved to be a really good find. Surprised he is on the wire already in my dynasty league...He took 85% of the reps with the starters this week. I'll get you a link...
http://nypost.com/2017/09/28/rookie-could-be-the-cure-for-what-ails-giants-running-game/
I might be a bit biased but as a Giants fan, but if he has no pass protect issues he should be the starting RB. Looked to be better than Perkins in all facets except appearing like you're running with a 50 pound weight on your back.Wayne Gallman rushed 11 times for 42 yards and caught both of his targets for eight yards and a touchdown in the Giants' Week 4 loss to the Bucs.
Advice: Gallman only had one carry for two yards in the first half, but he capitalized on his chance when Paul Perkins picked up an injury in the third quarter. He went for 13 yards on his first carry and got open the in flat for a four-yard touchdown to close out the drive. While his per-carry average was nothing to write home about, Gallman consistently gained positive yardage and looked infinitely better than Perkins has at any point this year. Even with Orleans Darkwa likely on the way back, the Giants have to give Gallman a shot moving forward. He will be an add in every format this week.
That's the interesting thing. I saw him in preseason and yesterday's game and was like "Hey he's not bad at pass-catching and shows ball awareness"... but his past says he's bad at it. Considering Giants want to manage Vereen's reps to prevent a repeat of last year's injuries with Vereen, he could stay in on some 3rd downs.I think the biggest takeaway - if Gallman does take over the job - is his usage in the passing game. It might not necessarily be the case that Vereen, who is showing his age, automatically comes in on 3rd downs or other obvious passing situations.
I don't know if he was bad at it - I just don't think they needed him in that role at Clemson. I could be wrong though, as I'm not a big college guy.That's the interesting thing. I saw him in preseason and yesterday's game and was like "Hey he's not bad at pass-catching and shows ball awareness"... but his past says he's bad at it. Considering Giants want to manage Vereen's reps to prevent a repeat of last year's injuries with Vereen, he could stay in on some 3rd downs.
I'm thinking it's between Latavius and Gallman, leaning towards Latavius.This guy isn't getting enough buzz considering the opportunity. Mid round rookie, looked better than any RB has on the team in half a quarter. Sure the Giants have been terrible and he's not going to average 5yds a pop. But he can get volume, TD's and catch a few passes. To me he's the #1 waiver wire add in dynasty this week, easily.
Aaron Jones is available in my league and I have the #1 waiver claim. Do you take Latavius, Aaron Jones or Gallman?I'm thinking it's between Latavius and Gallman, leaning towards Latavius.
I have to think Gallman has the clearest path to 3-down usage.steelers1080 said:Aaron Jones is available in my league and I have the #1 waiver claim. Do you take Latavius, Aaron Jones or Gallman?
Personally I'm going Jones, Gallman and ignoring Murray. I could see a case for Gallman ahead of Jones though.steelers1080 said:Aaron Jones is available in my league and I have the #1 waiver claim. Do you take Latavius, Aaron Jones or Gallman?
I know this is a Gallman thread, but I have some curiosity as to why you blow off Murray. Besides the ankle issue, which is a red herring, he has the clearest path to significant touches - beyond week 5 of course. Murray is who is, and that's the guy whom the Vikings gave 15 mil. Pretty sure they said he's a reliable three down back. He'll lack Cook's effectiveness but he'll be on the field almost all the time.Personally I'm going Jones, Gallman and ignoring Murray. I could see a case for Gallman ahead of Jones though.
I think he looks bad and I was never impressed with him even when he was in OAK. I think it will be a 60/40 split between him and McKinnon in his favor. I think McKinnon will work on 3rd downs/hurry up and that Murray will get work between the 20s (not all of it) and in short yardage situations. For the asking price I don't think he's worth it and what I'd be willing to bid on him would never be enough to acquire him. Plus, I even think there's a non-zero chance that C.J Ham gets mixed in a bit. This is just my opinion though and I could be wrong. This week's waiver wire, as it pertains to RBs, is one of the most muddled in recent memory.I know this is a Gallman thread, but I have some curiosity as to why you blow off Murray. Besides the ankle issue, which is a red herring, he has the clearest path to significant touches - beyond week 5 of course. Murray is who is, and that's the guy whom the Vikings gave 15 mil. Pretty sure they said he's a reliable three down back. He'll lack Cook's effectiveness but he'll be on the field almost all the time.
I would agree with this. I think Cook's productiveness is more attributed to his talent than the offense/OL. That is going to be a problem for whoever takes over. Latavius wasn't all that impressive, and it smells like the running game production from last year without Cook.I think he looks bad and I was never impressed with him even when he was in OAK. I think it will be a 60/40 split between him and McKinnon in his favor. I think McKinnon will work on 3rd downs/hurry up and that Murray will get work between the 20s (not all of it) and in short yardage situations. For the asking price I don't think he's worth it and what I'd be willing to bid on him would never be enough to acquire him. Plus, I even think there's a non-zero chance that C.J Ham gets mixed in a bit. This is just my opinion though and I could be wrong. This week's waiver wire, as it pertains to RBs, is one of the most muddled in recent memory.
But Williams could be a factor 2 weeks from now, no?I don't know about Jones being a one week guy. Wouldn't shock me to see Montgomery miss a few weeks.
I mentioned my reasoning in slightly more depth in the week 5 WW thread. This is simply a bet against Ty's health and a bet on Jones' talent. I think there's a shot Jones has better short and long-term value than either Gallman or Murray.SaintsInDome2006 said:If you don't mind my asking, don't Gallman and Murray hold the promise of season long value, while Jones has the hedge of Williams and Montgomery returning? On that basis, even if Jones is a promising back why not prioritize those two? Just curious about your thinking. Thanks.
He looked better than expected. I'd put him above Latavius Murray now.
Guys who pay attention to the Pack a lot more than me say that competition already happened and has been lopsided in Jones favor for months.But Williams could be a factor 2 weeks from now, no?I don't know about Jones being a one week guy. Wouldn't shock me to see Montgomery miss a few weeks.
And who is to say how fast Jamaal Williams himself comes back. A "knee sprain" can mean a lot of things. Guys are usually out longer than expected, not shorter.Guys who pay attention to the Pack a lot more than me say that competition already happened and has been lopsided in Jones favor for months.
Just an observation: all those teams have really good run blocking too though. Don't think we can say the same for Giants.It just occurred to me how vulnerable LAC's run defense is. Combined with the fact that they have to travel west to east and I have Gallman up there with Jones as one of the better spot start this week.
Here's what RBs have done on the ground vs. them..
Anderson 20/81/0
Charles 10/40/0
Ajayi 28/122/0
Hunt 17/172/1
Blount 16/136/0
Smallwood 10/34/1
Good god.
The Charger run D is bad. I say this as a Charger fan.Just an observation: all those teams have really good run blocking too though. Don't think we can say the same for Giants.