Skip to main content
MissedTakes
Menu

Chris Welsh· Aug 9, 2025

Welsh pushes back on the Hubbard fade, arguing that at his low-RB2 draft cost Hubbard is a value who should at least deliver a solid floor.

I think, based on what we know what his upside is, which we saw last year it being a top twelve running back to where he's being drafted, I kind of see him as a value.

said on air or in an interview · The Herd with Colin Cowherd (podcast) · read the original →

The page this came from has changed since we captured it on Aug 5, 2026. The quote and evidence above are from our capture, not from what the page says today.

One checkable claim, graded on its own against what actually happened.

It names 2 players and teams, each linked to their own record.

The call scored 0 out of 100, against 100 for a naive guess at the same calls.

Where do you stand? Pick this and every open claim on Picks →

Who this take is about

1 checkable claim in this take

Each one is scored on its own against the published methodology. A pundit naming several outcomes is graded on each, not on all-or-nothing.

  • Chuba Hubbard to outplay his draft cost (low RB two)

    he's already been drafted as kind of a low RB two... I kind of see him as a value

    Miss · 0Scored 0a naive guess scored 100-200 skill
    How this was scored
    call:
    sleeper
    cost:
    low RB two
    naive:
    he repeats last season
    skill:
    -200
    player:
    Chuba Hubbard
    season:
    2025
    correct:
    no
    accuracy:
    0
    baseline:
    100
    position:
    RB
    had to beat:
    RB13
    difficulty:
    2
    weeks in the season:
    18
    actual finish:
    RB42
    weeks left when called:
    18
    measured against:
    the source named no cost — measured against his own 2024 finish

    Think this is wrong?

What others said about the same people

More sleeper calls

The same kind of call, about other players and teams.

Discussed alongside these

We summarize what a pundit said and quote a short span of it for attribution — we never republish their article. If we have misread you, tell us and we will look at it.