Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Reggie Bush (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Jeff Pasquino
- Start date
SSOG
Moderator
A player is as valuable as the highest opinion of him. If you're in a 12-person league, and 10 of the owners think Tom Brady is worth a 22nd round pick while the 11th thinks he's worth a late first round pick, then Tom Brady is dramatically overvalued in that league, because you'd have to spend a mid-1st round pick to get him.It doesn't matter how many people are down on a player, it's just a question of how high the people who are high on him really are... and in those terms, I think Reggie Bush is OVERvalued, because there's always some fool who thinks he's worth a top-5 or top-7 pick, even in non-PPR redraft leagues.Just Win Baby said:
bicycle_seat_sniffer said:
CB I'll give you- I was on the verge of arguing that no one has an easier learning curve than RBs, DEs, and CBs, but I decided to omit CBs because they're so hard to compare. With that said, no way in hell do DTs or Gs have an easier learning curve than RBs, and Kickers/Punters? Are you KIDDING me? I ask for a position with an easier learning curve than RBs and you give me KICKERS? We're talking football players here, not players who perform one little action over and over again in what amounts to a near-complete vacuum.As to why players don't have a career year immediately and decline from there... a 20-year old or 21-year old isn't at his physical peak. RBs are stronger and more physically fit, as well as more used to the rigors of the pro season (which is far longer than the college season, and has far more practices) when they're 25 or 26 than they are when they're 21 or 22. In addition, they do learn some- just because there's virtually no learning curve between college and the pros doesn't mean there's nothing to learn for RBs, you know.A lot of it, too, is just situation. LT was in the best offense he's ever been a part of last year, running behind the best offensive line he's ever run behind. You think think maybe that had more to do with his "career year" than anything else? Priest, Faulk, and LJ all had their career years in the most RB-friendly offense this league has ever seen- you don't think that makes any difference? If any RB went to Denver, they'd probably have a career year- is that because the RB suddenly got better, or is that simply because Denver's offense kicks ###?Also, a lot of people mention Tomlinson and Walter Payton as guys who struggled as rookies and went on to be great. Sure thing, let's compare their situation. Payton's team was 4-10, and his offense ranked 24th in the NFL (out of 26 teams). His receivers were Bob Grim and Bo Rather, who combined for 67 total receptions (compared to 33 for Payton alone). Tomlinson's team was 5-11, and his offense ranked #15 in the NFL (actually better than I remembered, but his primary receivers were Curtis Conway and Jeff Graham- not exactly the kind of guys that defenses are afraid to stack the box against). Meanwhile, Reggie Bush's team was 10-6, had the #1 offense in the entire NFL, had an MVP candidate at QB, an offensive RoY candidate at WR1, and a 4-time pro bowler at WR2. Yeah, I can see how the situations were totally comparable, Reggie clearly had a lot of excuses for sucking because I'm sure Brees/Colston/Horn commanded far less attention from defenses than the Gary Huff/Bob Grim/Bo Rather trio that Payton was working with.The Scientist said:
Actually, I doubt adding his receiving stats would help any. I seem to recall reading that Reggie Bush led the league last season in receiving yards gained on 3rd down catches that didn't net a 1st down- junk yards, if you will.Christo said:
Thanks Jeff. I too thought that was a very interesting stat thrown out by Baldinger. But I'm not worried about it all. Part of it will be learning curve and part will be just his style I don't have the numbers in front of me but I used to rail on Barry Sanders for having so many "stuffs" where he saw little or negative yardage. He'll be fine.
J
J
If you're going to argue that his 2nd half stats don't indicate that his game had improved because the sample size is too small, how can we consider his 1st half stats as a large enough sample size to say it demonstrates any real deficiencies running the ball?He had 81 carries in the 1st 8 games, he had 74 carries in the 2nd 8 games which included him sitting most of week 17.Buckna said:What good did it do you the 2nd half of the season if 33% of his scoring came in 1 out of those 8 games? I'm not one to usually pitch the arguments like "take out his 1 huge run" or "subtract the 1 big game" but in this case, it seems spurious to me to see people constantly quoting a relatively meaningless end of year fantasy finish. In PPG he finished the 23rd RB, not even a half point PPG above #27 - Thomas Jones. That means he was barely a RB2 last year in non-PPR. The fact that he played all season long is why he finished where he did and ahead of some other players.I keep seeing references in the Bush threads about how the "lightbulb" turned on for him the 2nd half of the season and he did indeed average a much better ypc in the 2nd half. However, there's not a lot of data to look at either. How can we really tell if he got that much better in the 2nd half, when in 6 of those 8 games he got 10 carries or less? It's hard to tell much when he's only getting carry totals like:5 for 24 vs Atl6 for 37 vs Dal7 for 14 vs Was3 for 20 vs CarEven in his monster fantasy game against SF he had 10 carries for 37 yards.You'll get no argument from me that he's an excellent pass catcher and dangerous in space, but running the ball seems unsettled. Now that being said, NO just doesn't seem to be using him in a way where we can really tell if he's running the ball all that well (off-tackles, sweeps, etc.) I think that contributed greatly to those many negative carries the OP was talking about.Christo said:Just Win Baby said:All you have to do is look at his numbers. I own him in a Non-PPR league and he was the RB15. He scored 54 points the first eight games and 127 the last eight games. This cannot be overlooked.The guy had 1307 combined yards as a rookie and was improving as the year went on. Looking at his "Success Rate" for the year tells us nothing about how he'll do in the future. Nor does comparing his "Success Rate" to McAllister's because Deuce has much more experience than Reggie. I'd like to see what his "Success Rate" was as the year progressed-maybe broken down every four games. I'd also like to see what his "Success Rate" was if you combine his rushing and receiving stats. I have a feeling that these two statistics will tell a different story.
Also according to FBG play by play data, he had 7 carries for loss and 7 carries for 0 yards in the 2nd half of the season.So, 20 of the 27 carries for loss were 1st half. And 37 of the 51 carries for 0 or loss were in the 1st half.Just Win Baby said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Dancing Bear
Footballguy
I'm not sure where Brian Baldinger got his numbers, but ...
Reggie Bush had :
25 Carries for Negative Yards
20 Carries of Zero Yards
16 Carries of One Yards
This is a total of 61 carries with 1 yard or less; out of a total of 154 Rushes on the Season
Deuce McAllister had :
22 Carries for Negative Yards
15 Carries of Zero Yards
27 Carries of One Yards
This is a total of 64 carries with 1 yard or less; out of a total of 245 Rushes on the Season
On the whole Bush had far more carries with 1 yard or less [a 40% rate] than his running mate [a 26% rate].
Additionally if you look at either RB breaking a long run.
Bush had 14 runs of 10 yards or more.
McAllister had 21 runs of 10 yards or more.
These RB's had the same ability to break one [an 8% rate]!
One final note in spite of some of his perceived late season success, his ability to read defenses and be more proficient running [more runs of greater than 1 yard] did not change dramatically. Generally he had the same 40% rate for inefficiency throughout the season. He had only 1 game against the NY Giants where he showed he could rush the ball effectively. In this game he had 6 runs of 10 yards or more; nearly half of his season total!
Reggie Bush had :
25 Carries for Negative Yards
20 Carries of Zero Yards
16 Carries of One Yards
This is a total of 61 carries with 1 yard or less; out of a total of 154 Rushes on the Season
Deuce McAllister had :
22 Carries for Negative Yards
15 Carries of Zero Yards
27 Carries of One Yards
This is a total of 64 carries with 1 yard or less; out of a total of 245 Rushes on the Season
On the whole Bush had far more carries with 1 yard or less [a 40% rate] than his running mate [a 26% rate].
Additionally if you look at either RB breaking a long run.
Bush had 14 runs of 10 yards or more.
McAllister had 21 runs of 10 yards or more.
These RB's had the same ability to break one [an 8% rate]!
One final note in spite of some of his perceived late season success, his ability to read defenses and be more proficient running [more runs of greater than 1 yard] did not change dramatically. Generally he had the same 40% rate for inefficiency throughout the season. He had only 1 game against the NY Giants where he showed he could rush the ball effectively. In this game he had 6 runs of 10 yards or more; nearly half of his season total!
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
I'm calling BS on these numbers too.
Here's how it breaks down according to FBG Data:
Weeks 1-9
1: 1 for 0, 1 for loss
2: 2 for 0, 2 for loss
3: 2 for 0, 2 for loss
4: 2 for 0, 1 for loss
5: 0 for 0, 2 for loss
6: 0 for 0, 2 for loss
8: 1 for 0, 1 for loss
9: 4 for 0, 4 for loss
Totals: 27 - 12 for 0, 15 for loss.
Weeks 10-17
10: 2 for 0, 0 for loss
11: 1 for 0, 0 for loss
12: 1 for 0, 1 for loss
13: 1 for 0, 1 for loss
14: 1 for 0, 0 for loss
15: 1 for 0, 3 for loss
16: 0 for 0, 2 for loss
17: 0 for 0, 0 for loss
Totals: 14: 7 for 0, 7 for loss
Playoffs:
Wildcard: 0 for 0, 3 for loss
Championship: 1 for 0, 0 for loss
Totals: 4: 1 for 0, 3 for loss.
So on the entire season, including playoffs, you have 45 carries for 0 or loss.
Now, this is carries. The other 7 that he came up with there passes of 0 or negative. He has 2 x 0 yard catch on the season. In weeks 4 and 19. He had 5 x negative catches on the season. Weeks 5, 8, 13, and 2 in 15.
So, first off - the stat is flawed because to come up with the 52 you have to count catches and he clearly only counted his rushing numbers by citing 155. You also have to count the playoffs, which you can't do if you're going to cite 155 carries either. In reality, on his 155 regular season carries he had 41 carries for 0 or less. And of those, 22 were for loss. More like 15%, not the ridiculous 33% number he's giving.
And as noted, in the 2nd half of the season he only had 7 carries for loss of his 74 carries. Less than 10%.
Here's how it breaks down according to FBG Data:
Weeks 1-9
1: 1 for 0, 1 for loss
2: 2 for 0, 2 for loss
3: 2 for 0, 2 for loss
4: 2 for 0, 1 for loss
5: 0 for 0, 2 for loss
6: 0 for 0, 2 for loss
8: 1 for 0, 1 for loss
9: 4 for 0, 4 for loss
Totals: 27 - 12 for 0, 15 for loss.
Weeks 10-17
10: 2 for 0, 0 for loss
11: 1 for 0, 0 for loss
12: 1 for 0, 1 for loss
13: 1 for 0, 1 for loss
14: 1 for 0, 0 for loss
15: 1 for 0, 3 for loss
16: 0 for 0, 2 for loss
17: 0 for 0, 0 for loss
Totals: 14: 7 for 0, 7 for loss
Playoffs:
Wildcard: 0 for 0, 3 for loss
Championship: 1 for 0, 0 for loss
Totals: 4: 1 for 0, 3 for loss.
So on the entire season, including playoffs, you have 45 carries for 0 or loss.
Now, this is carries. The other 7 that he came up with there passes of 0 or negative. He has 2 x 0 yard catch on the season. In weeks 4 and 19. He had 5 x negative catches on the season. Weeks 5, 8, 13, and 2 in 15.
So, first off - the stat is flawed because to come up with the 52 you have to count catches and he clearly only counted his rushing numbers by citing 155. You also have to count the playoffs, which you can't do if you're going to cite 155 carries either. In reality, on his 155 regular season carries he had 41 carries for 0 or less. And of those, 22 were for loss. More like 15%, not the ridiculous 33% number he's giving.
And as noted, in the 2nd half of the season he only had 7 carries for loss of his 74 carries. Less than 10%.
My argument is that with the way NO uses him, we don't have much to go on either way (yet.)If you're going to argue that his 2nd half stats don't indicate that his game had improved because the sample size is too small, how can we consider his 1st half stats as a large enough sample size to say it demonstrates any real deficiencies running the ball?He had 81 carries in the 1st 8 games, he had 74 carries in the 2nd 8 games which included him sitting most of week 17.Buckna said:What good did it do you the 2nd half of the season if 33% of his scoring came in 1 out of those 8 games? I'm not one to usually pitch the arguments like "take out his 1 huge run" or "subtract the 1 big game" but in this case, it seems spurious to me to see people constantly quoting a relatively meaningless end of year fantasy finish. In PPG he finished the 23rd RB, not even a half point PPG above #27 - Thomas Jones. That means he was barely a RB2 last year in non-PPR. The fact that he played all season long is why he finished where he did and ahead of some other players.I keep seeing references in the Bush threads about how the "lightbulb" turned on for him the 2nd half of the season and he did indeed average a much better ypc in the 2nd half. However, there's not a lot of data to look at either. How can we really tell if he got that much better in the 2nd half, when in 6 of those 8 games he got 10 carries or less? It's hard to tell much when he's only getting carry totals like:5 for 24 vs Atl6 for 37 vs Dal7 for 14 vs Was3 for 20 vs CarEven in his monster fantasy game against SF he had 10 carries for 37 yards.You'll get no argument from me that he's an excellent pass catcher and dangerous in space, but running the ball seems unsettled. Now that being said, NO just doesn't seem to be using him in a way where we can really tell if he's running the ball all that well (off-tackles, sweeps, etc.) I think that contributed greatly to those many negative carries the OP was talking about.Christo said:Just Win Baby said:All you have to do is look at his numbers. I own him in a Non-PPR league and he was the RB15. He scored 54 points the first eight games and 127 the last eight games. This cannot be overlooked.The guy had 1307 combined yards as a rookie and was improving as the year went on. Looking at his "Success Rate" for the year tells us nothing about how he'll do in the future. Nor does comparing his "Success Rate" to McAllister's because Deuce has much more experience than Reggie. I'd like to see what his "Success Rate" was as the year progressed-maybe broken down every four games. I'd also like to see what his "Success Rate" was if you combine his rushing and receiving stats. I have a feeling that these two statistics will tell a different story.
Franchise Playa
Footballguy
Correct me if im wrong but weren't the saints the 2nd worst team in the league in record and at the bottom in statistics the year before? It's not like Reggie came into the Colts offense and struggled. They brought in a inventive minded coach, a written off pro bowl QB and got lucky with a 7th round rookie wideout. The Saints surprised everyone and how they did it is an anomaly in itself. I doubt defense's last year until about week 8 were "concerned" about Colston. They were concerned about not letting Bush get to the outside thus opening up the vaunted offense. Much like Randy Moss Bush is a guy that changes the way the D plays. Without that threat the Saints would not be as prolific as they were last year.
Weeks 1 - 9:15 carries for loss
12 carries for 0 yards
8 carries for 1 yard
35 carries of 1 or less out of 81 carries - 43%
Weeks 10 - 17:
7 carries for loss
7 carries for 0 yards
6 carries for 1 yards (3 of which were 1 yard TD runs)
20 carries of 1 or less out of 74 carries - 28%
How in the world can you possibly say that his ratio of 1 yard runs or greater didn't go up?!?! That his "inefficiency rating" didn't go down?!?!?! That's patently false. It dropped dramatically, even counting the 4% of his carries over that span that were 1 yard TD runs.
His YPC was 2.5 for that 1st half, it was 4.8 YPC for the 2nd half. Take out the Giants game, it was still 4.5 YPC for the 2nd half. There is no doubt whatsoever to anyone that looks at the stats, saw the games, whatever that Reggie Bush was a better RB in the 2nd half of the season. Unless you just choose to ignore it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Afro Samurai
Footballguy
I noticed someone already noticed the playcalling issue: Deuce gets all the inside runs while Reggie gets all the outside runs. This should have been very obvious to even the most casual observers and obviously it's going to lead to more busted run plays for Bush.
The other thing I would point out is that it's not very easy for a running back to get into a rhythm when he's only getting an average of 9 carries a game. Also the Saints offensive line, in terms of run blocking, is only average, and that's on a good day.
The other thing I would point out is that it's not very easy for a running back to get into a rhythm when he's only getting an average of 9 carries a game. Also the Saints offensive line, in terms of run blocking, is only average, and that's on a good day.
Blackjacks
Footballguy
Think what you want haters
Reggie is great
Reggie is great
blue&silver
Footballguy
We had this guy in Detroit not too long ago that was the king of runs for no or minus yards. But we waited because we knew that the big one was coming and it almost always did. And the chants would start Barry, Barry, Barry.
Reggie is one of the most gifted athletes to enter the NFL in a long time. The saints are still figuring out what they have and designing plays to take advantage of his talents. And I still believe he will be able to run through the tackles, he's just never had to due to his cutback speed and his ability to get outside. Big difference in the NFL where linebackers have the speed of corners and CBs have elite track speed.
And just because a play goes for no yards does not mean it's a waste. Some times you need to use the jab to set up the uppercut. The jab does very little damage, but when they are protecting against the jab and you hit them with the right uppercut, it's lights out.
Reggie is one of the most gifted athletes to enter the NFL in a long time. The saints are still figuring out what they have and designing plays to take advantage of his talents. And I still believe he will be able to run through the tackles, he's just never had to due to his cutback speed and his ability to get outside. Big difference in the NFL where linebackers have the speed of corners and CBs have elite track speed.
And just because a play goes for no yards does not mean it's a waste. Some times you need to use the jab to set up the uppercut. The jab does very little damage, but when they are protecting against the jab and you hit them with the right uppercut, it's lights out.
nygiants56
Footballguy
seriously??? Cinton Portis started out looking like he was Canton bound during his first two seasons in the NFL, but what has he done,lately? he's a MUCH better pure runner at the RB position, than Bush. Bush is a dancer, he's not decisive enough at finding and hitting holes.he is a great situational guy, but he's never been a #1 RB, anywhere..he's a fantastic WR, but the dancing and prancing behind the line is something to be wary of..
Deuce McAllister looked terrific behind that SAME line last season.I know Bush might have been feeling his way, and I understand that he's a rookie and all. but you can tell he's closer to Eric Metcalf V2.0, than he is to Gale Sayers or Barry Sanders..
he is NOT a great instinctive runner ala LT, Emmitt Smith, Sayers, or any of the great RBs he's been compared to..
Also, lets factor in that extremely easy N.O. schedule last season...it was a cakewalk, and he didn't produce as a runner..Now, N.O. plays a MUCH tougher schedule, so we'll see how things pan out..
SSOG
Moderator
Here are New Orleans' records for the past 7 years.10-6
3-13
8-8
8-8
9-7
7-9
10-6
One of these things is different. One of these things does not belong. In one of these seasons, the entire team had their homes destroyed by the largest natural disaster in United States history and wound up playing 16 road games. I think we should all be able to agree that the Saints deserve a mulligan for 2005, right? Well, outside of that one season, they had one losing season in 5 years. The Saints were never a bad team, they were always just a MEDIOCRE team with an above-average offense, stuck between 7-9 and 10-6. Reggie Bush went into a far better situation than either Tomlinson or Payton did.
Afro Samurai
Footballguy
Untrue.Saints' projected SOS for 2006 season was .531, 3rd toughest in the league. Projected SOS for upcoming 2007 is .484, near the bottom.nygiants56 said:
SproutDaddy
Footballguy
Can I get a bag of that stuff you're smoking, PLEASE?!!!!I agree. They'll be attending the induction of their good friend, Maurice Jones-Drew.cscmtp said:Portis AND Bush will be in Canton one day.
buck naked
Footballguy
I have not read this entire thread. But we all should remember that Bush had a bum ankle for the first half of last year. No explosion. The last half of the year was vastly different.
If healthy, he is all about speed and explosion.
Edit to add - I saw his catch and run firsthand at the NFC Championship game. That was ALL about speed. Wow.
If healthy, he is all about speed and explosion.
Edit to add - I saw his catch and run firsthand at the NFC Championship game. That was ALL about speed. Wow.
Last edited by a moderator:
Blackjacks
Footballguy
So your saying MJD didn't go into a good situation then?I agree. They'll be attending the induction of their good friend, Maurice Jones-Drew.cscmtp said:Portis AND Bush will be in Canton one day.
He was on a better team with a better offense/defense with a lesser rb to compete with and a better oline.Please let me know where Reggie had the avg. over MJD on the teams they were drafted by.
HATER
Last edited by a moderator:
Dirty Weasel
Footballguy
I love it. ComicalI agree. They'll be attending the induction of their good friend, Maurice Jones-Drew.cscmtp said:Portis AND Bush will be in Canton one day.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Height?So your saying MJD didn't go into a good situation then?I agree. They'll be attending the induction of their good friend, Maurice Jones-Drew.cscmtp said:Portis AND Bush will be in Canton one day.
He was on a better team with a better offense/defense with a lesser rb to compete with and a better oline.
Please let me know where Reggie had the avg. over MJD on the teams they were drafted by.
HATER
Franchise Playa
Footballguy
Above average? With Aaron Brooks as your QB? They were a mediocre team on PAPER with Aaron Brooks, and they were below mediocre when they hit the field that year. And 7 years of records and even the Hurricane is a moot point...I said Reggie went to a bad team and they were a bad team when he got there regardless of what did or didn't make them bad. Their defense overachived last year and they STILL are considered suspect....again Reggie brought a new dimension to the offense that allows for the explosiveness you saw on Sundays. And comparing running back situations when the running back styles, and their impact on the games are so different it shouldn't be done. Each went to a poor team when they were drafted because in the NFL good teams don't get to pick in the top 5....they were usually a bad team the year before to earn that spot.SSOG said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Dancing Bear
Footballguy
DrJ,
My assessment was based on the full season, including the Playoffs.
If you want to split the season into sections then Bush had a
43.75% chance of a carry resulting in 1 yard or less throughout the first 8 games.
27.03% chance of a carry resulting in 1 yard or less throughout the last 8 games.
37.50% chance of a carry resulting in 1 yard or less in the playoffs.
As you have astutely noted, his probability did improve over the last 8 games of the regular season, but you have left off a significant portion of his performance. Notice that his propensity to produce a bad carry regressed in the playoffs!
Also please note that his running mate had the following progression throughout the season against the same opponents.
27.03% chance of a carry resulting in 1 yard or less throughout the first 8 games.
20.15% chance of a carry resulting in 1 yard or less throughout the last 8 games.
11.11% chance of a carry resulting in 1 yard or less in the playoffs.
I see no need in taking out the Giants game as you have done ... This was not my point about the Giants game. The point for the Giants comment was intended only to show that a significant portion of his long runs were in one game out of 18 ...
I see no reason for you to believe that I think Bush is a "bust" this is not my intention or thesis. It is just to make sure that folks do not induct him into the HoF based on his hype and marketing prowess.
My assessment was based on the full season, including the Playoffs.
If you want to split the season into sections then Bush had a
43.75% chance of a carry resulting in 1 yard or less throughout the first 8 games.
27.03% chance of a carry resulting in 1 yard or less throughout the last 8 games.
37.50% chance of a carry resulting in 1 yard or less in the playoffs.
As you have astutely noted, his probability did improve over the last 8 games of the regular season, but you have left off a significant portion of his performance. Notice that his propensity to produce a bad carry regressed in the playoffs!
Also please note that his running mate had the following progression throughout the season against the same opponents.
27.03% chance of a carry resulting in 1 yard or less throughout the first 8 games.
20.15% chance of a carry resulting in 1 yard or less throughout the last 8 games.
11.11% chance of a carry resulting in 1 yard or less in the playoffs.
I see no need in taking out the Giants game as you have done ... This was not my point about the Giants game. The point for the Giants comment was intended only to show that a significant portion of his long runs were in one game out of 18 ...
I see no reason for you to believe that I think Bush is a "bust" this is not my intention or thesis. It is just to make sure that folks do not induct him into the HoF based on his hype and marketing prowess.
I think he was reacting to your overstatement quoted below:"One final note in spite of some of his perceived late season success, his ability to read defenses and be more proficient running [more runs of greater than 1 yard] did not change dramatically. Generally he had the same 40% rate for inefficiency throughout the season. "
Your own breakdown shows that Bush improved significantly in the last half of the regular season. Your statement seems to be discounting that fact because Bush allegedly regressed during the two playoff games after the regular season. I guess you are entitled to interpret the numbers however you want, but Bush only got an average of eight carries each of those games. Two games averaging eight carries each game is a tiny, statistically insignificant sample size IMO. If you combine his playoff numbers into the aggregate numbers of the second half of the season, you will see that Bush is well below your 40% rate for that period.
He also played against two pretty decent Ds in the playoffs.
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
wned:
Last edited by a moderator:
SSOG
Moderator
Jacksonville was a better team than New Orleans? Jacksonville had a better offense than New Orleans? Fred Taylor is a lesser RB than Deuce McAllister? Might want to start backing up these claims.So your saying MJD didn't go into a good situation then?I agree. They'll be attending the induction of their good friend, Maurice Jones-Drew.Portis AND Bush will be in Canton one day.
Please let me know where Reggie had the avg. over MJD on the teams they were drafted by.
HATER
crimsonrebel
Footballguy
As a Saints fan, i watched every game last year. The problem was that Bush was trying to juke everyone out of their jock on every single play like this was a college game against (insert WAC college name here). He did START to correct that during the last month of the season, whether or not his stats reflected it. I would have to think that is the #1 thing coach Payton will be drilling into his skull this year. Run forward, not sideways or backwards. Another thing that has to be taken into account was that dispite being a rookie RB who wasn't putting up tremendous rushing #s, defenses were keying in on him because of all the hype that surrounded him. IMO, thats a big reason the Saints were so successful last year. Bush was PERCIEVED as the offenses biggest threat, and many defenses gameplan was "We're not going to be beaten by Bush." Payton took advantage of that to spread the ball around. I mean seriously, how else do you explain a FB not named Alstott having three touchdowns in one game?
Bush landed with the #1 offense in the league. One of the best QBs in the league. One of the best offensive minds in the league. JAX fired Carl Smith because of the amazing offense he put together? Uh, no.So your saying MJD didn't go into a good situation then?I agree. They'll be attending the induction of their good friend, Maurice Jones-Drew.Portis AND Bush will be in Canton one day.
He was on a better team with a better offense/defense with a lesser rb to compete with and a better oline.
Please let me know where Reggie had the avg. over MJD on the teams they were drafted by.
HATER
Better team goes 8-8, and the lesser team goes to the playoffs with a bye?
If anything, Bush was a product of a great offensive scheme; MJD was in a horrible offensive scheme (OC fired) and carried the offense.
Thanks for playing.
CLUELESS
Phlash
Footballguy
Indy down?I don't think that you can honestly say that talent-wise, Indy was considered outclassed by the Saints before the season started...Bush landed with the #1 offense in the league.So your saying MJD didn't go into a good situation then?I agree. They'll be attending the induction of their good friend, Maurice Jones-Drew.Portis AND Bush will be in Canton one day.
Please let me know where Reggie had the avg. over MJD on the teams they were drafted by.
HATER
FreeBaGeL
Footballguy
Because some of us actually watched the games? I've said it before and I'll say it again...I cannot think of another player that made the visual improvements over the course of the season that Bush did in 2006. Watching him the first half of the year and watching him the second of the year was like watching two different players.
It's always nice to twist statistics in a manner that makes it look great for you, but some of us know the whole story. New Orleans had a great offense indeed, but their run-blocking unit was not good. Deuce's ypc did not increase a millimeter in this offense over what it had done in past offenses.On the contrary, not only was Bush not ignored early on in the season, but he received some of the most obvious attention from defenses any of us have seen (especially towards a rookie). This could not have been more easily color-coated for the deaf and blind who were watching.
Better offense? Nah. Better rushing system? Absolutely.As mentioned above, Deuce stayed right on his career average in ypc. Meanwhile, Fred Taylor went for a career high in YPC just before turning the ripe old age of 31. Not often you see a RB at his peak at the age of 31, maybe there was something else going on here? Something like one of the best, and most underrated run blocking lines in the league.
This basically references the same thing above, but I just wanted to point out how unwilling some are to actually look at the whole story behind things. Jax didn't make the playoffs so obviously their rushing system is awful, which explains how Fred Taylor went for his career high YPC at age 31? Yeah, that makes sense
All of this is kind of moot anyway, since the stats that are the basis for this thread appear to be incorrect. Bush is just always going to be hated because of the hype he has received, even if he has a faulk-like career.
Last edited by a moderator:
Franchise Playa
Footballguy
That part about sums up most of the Reggie Bush threads around here....logic and facts be damned.Because some of us actually watched the games? I've said it before and I'll say it again...I cannot think of another player that made the visual improvements over the course of the season that Bush did in 2006. Watching him the first half of the year and watching him the second of the year was like watching two different players.It's always nice to twist statistics in a manner that makes it look great for you, but some of us know the whole story. New Orleans had a great offense indeed, but their run-blocking unit was not good. Deuce's ypc did not increase a millimeter in this offense over what it had done in past offenses.On the contrary, not only was Bush not ignored early on in the season, but he received some of the most obvious attention from defenses any of us have seen (especially towards a rookie). This could not have been more easily color-coated for the deaf and blind who were watching.
Better offense? Nah. Better rushing system? Absolutely.As mentioned above, Deuce stayed right on his career average in ypc. Meanwhile, Fred Taylor went for a career high in YPC just before turning the ripe old age of 31. Not often you see a RB at his peak at the age of 31, maybe there was something else going on here? Something like one of the best, and most underrated run blocking lines in the league.
This basically references the same thing above, but I just wanted to point out how unwilling some are to actually look at the whole story behind things. Jax didn't make the playoffs so obviously their rushing system is awful, which explains how Fred Taylor went for his career high YPC at age 31? Yeah, that makes sense
Frenchy Fuqua
Footballguy
Suprise, suprise. Looks like Baldy was a bit off:http://snap.stats.com/stats/nflinfo/leader...5&Submit=Go
Last edited by a moderator:
ImTheScientist
Footballguy
http://snap.stats.com/stats/nflinfo/leader...5&Submit=Go
Last edited by a moderator:
Blackjacks
Footballguy
Yes I believe that prior to last year Jax was a better team as well as a better offense, again prior to last year and Fred Taylor is a much lesser rb than Deuce. How bout you back up the claims that I'm making. Just because NO was the #2 seed in the NFC last year doesn't make them a better team than Jax it just means that the AFC was far dominant. Reggie made that offense what it was. Don't get me wrong Brees was a huge addition and so was Colston and Payton was a great coach but you take Reggie out and that offense just wouldn't have clicked. So what I said before I will stay with. Drew went into a better situation with a lesser rb to share carries with.Jacksonville was a better team than New Orleans? Jacksonville had a better offense than New Orleans? Fred Taylor is a lesser RB than Deuce McAllister? Might want to start backing up these claims.So your saying MJD didn't go into a good situation then?I agree. They'll be attending the induction of their good friend, Maurice Jones-Drew.Portis AND Bush will be in Canton one day.
He was on a better team with a better offense/defense with a lesser rb to compete with and a better oline.
Please let me know where Reggie had the avg. over MJD on the teams they were drafted by.
HATER
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
FWIW
Eric Metcalf 1989 21 1 16 187 633 3.39 6 54 397 7.35 4 163.00
Reggie Bush 2006 21 1 16 155 565 3.65 6 88 742 8.43 2 177.70
Eric Metcalf 1989 21 1 16 187 633 3.39 6 54 397 7.35 4 163.00
Reggie Bush 2006 21 1 16 155 565 3.65 6 88 742 8.43 2 177.70
Blackjacks
Footballguy
Bush landed made NO the #1 offense in the league. One of the best QBs in the league. One of the best offensive minds in the league. JAX fired Carl Smith because of the amazing offense he put together? Uh, no.So your saying MJD didn't go into a good situation then?I agree. They'll be attending the induction of their good friend, Maurice Jones-Drew.Portis AND Bush will be in Canton one day.
Please let me know where Reggie had the avg. over MJD on the teams they were drafted by.
HATER
Better team goes 8-8 in the better AFC, and the lesser team goes to the playoffs with a bye? again prior to last year was the arguement
If anything, Bush was a product of a great offensive scheme; MJD was in a horrible offensive scheme (OC fired) and carried the offense.
might be the more ignorant comment I've ever heard
Thanks for playing.
CLUELESS
Last edited by a moderator:
40+60+100?
SproutDaddy
Footballguy
No one expected Brees to perform as well as he did, except Payton and co. Bush help to make that offense what it was along with his teammates!Which part of it is confusing you?40+60+100?
duaneok66
Footballguy
just go read up at footballoutsiders.com or buy a Pro Football Prospectus . . .consider it time/money well spent . . .40+60+100?
SSOG
Moderator
Prior to last year? Prior to last year, Peyton Manning was a choker who could never win the big game. Prior to last year, New Orleans hadn't played a home game in over a year. Funny how a year changes things. I suppose Jacksonville has a better offense because New Orleans really sucked in the '80s, too, right?Fred Taylor's career yards per game = 84.93Deuce McAllister's career yards per game = 68.96Fred Taylor's career ypc = 4.6Deuce McAllister's career ypc = 4.3By the way, your claims that Reggie Bush was the most important piece in New Orleans offense last year is absolutely ludicrous. Reggie Bush was no more than the 4th-most important person AT BEST (I'd argue 5th most, personally). Colston, Brees, and Peyton were all clearly a bigger part of NO's success than Reggie Bush, and McAllister was arguably more important, too. Claiming that Reggie Bush, a rookie RB who averaged 3.6 yards per carry, was more important than MVP Candidate Drew Brees is simply ludicrous.As for Freebagel's argument that Fred Taylor set career highs in ypc in Jax, so their OLine must have been a great run-blocking unit... here are Taylor's year-by-year ypcs for every year where he played 10 or more games: 4.6, 4.6, 4.8, 4.6, 4.6, 4.7, 4.1, 5.0. Yeah, that 5.0 value was clearly way out of line with his career averages, Jax's offensive line must have been a dramatic improvement over where it was in the past.
Taylor did set a career high in ypc, but he was essentially just as effective as he always was. And besides, even if we do think that Jax's offensive line was worth .4 more yards per carry last year than they have been in the past, Jones-Drew averaged FIVE POINT SEVEN yards per carry. That is more than two full yards more per carry than Reggie Bush. Bush could have played on the Cardinals and Jones-Drew on the mid-90s Cowboys and the difference in lines still wouldn't explain away more than two full yards per carry.
It makes perfect sense if you think about it. The goal of the offense is to move the chains, and the way to do that is to progress towards a first down. Any play on 3rd down that doesn't get all of the necessary yardage is an unsuccessful play on the assumption that you're going to punt it away (you can get 20 yards, and if it's 3rd and 47, it doesn't matter). Obviously you need a larger chunk of the yards on 2nd down to be successful than you did on 1st, because you have fewer plays after that- for instance, 8 yards on 1st and 20 would be very helpful, but on 2nd-and-20 would be essentially meaningless (leaving you with a still difficult 3rd-and-12).40+60+100?
Blackjacks
Footballguy
There is another thread for comparing MJD and RB. I was just making a statement that MJD went to a better situation which I'll still stand by. I believe that RB opened up things for Brees and Colston and allowed Payton to call the plays he called. Don't just look at #'s SSOG, look at when Reggie is on the field their are always 2 players on him which opens up alot for others. I've never on this board said MJD wasn't any good. All I've been saying is I think he went over his ceiling and was in a good spot to do what he did. The difference, in my opininon. Reggie still has alot to learn don't get me wrong. However I think in 2 years he will be the best offensive weapon in the league. Just my 2 cents and you your right to yours.Wouldn't you agree last years Saints team was very different all around than the Saints teams from the past?Prior to last year? Prior to last year, Peyton Manning was a choker who could never win the big game. Prior to last year, New Orleans hadn't played a home game in over a year. Funny how a year changes things especially when you have new people. I suppose Jacksonville has a better offense because New Orleans really sucked in the '80s, too, right?Fred Taylor's career yards per game = 84.93
Deuce McAllister's career yards per game = 68.96
Fred Taylor's career ypc = 4.6
Deuce McAllister's career ypc = 4.3
By the way, your claims that Reggie Bush was the most important piece in New Orleans offense last year is absolutely ludicrous. Reggie Bush was no more than the 4th-most important person AT BEST (I'd argue 5th most, personally). Colston, Brees, and Peyton were all clearly a bigger part of NO's success than Reggie Bush, and McAllister was arguably more important, too. Claiming that Reggie Bush, a rookie RB who averaged 3.6 yards per carry, was more important than MVP Candidate Drew Brees is simply ludicrous.
As for Freebagel's argument that Fred Taylor set career highs in ypc in Jax, so their OLine must have been a great run-blocking unit... here are Taylor's year-by-year ypcs for every year where he played 10 or more games: 4.6, 4.6, 4.8, 4.6, 4.6, 4.7, 4.1, 5.0. Yeah, that 5.0 value was clearly way out of line with his career averages, Jax's offensive line must have been a dramatic improvement over where it was in the past.
Taylor did set a career high in ypc, but he was essentially just as effective as he always was. And besides, even if we do think that Jax's offensive line was worth .4 more yards per carry last year than they have been in the past, Jones-Drew averaged FIVE POINT SEVEN yards per carry. That is more than two full yards more per carry than Reggie Bush. Bush could have played on the Cardinals and Jones-Drew on the mid-90s Cowboys and the difference in lines still wouldn't explain away more than two full yards per carry.
It makes perfect sense if you think about it. The goal of the offense is to move the chains, and the way to do that is to progress towards a first down. Any play on 3rd down that doesn't get all of the necessary yardage is an unsuccessful play on the assumption that you're going to punt it away (you can get 20 yards, and if it's 3rd and 47, it doesn't matter). Obviously you need a larger chunk of the yards on 2nd down to be successful than you did on 1st, because you have fewer plays after that- for instance, 8 yards on 1st and 20 would be very helpful, but on 2nd-and-20 would be essentially meaningless (leaving you with a still difficult 3rd-and-12).40+60+100?
Don't just look at the numbers?2005 NO 17 rushing TDs2005 JAX 18 rushing TDsAnd NO lost their RB1 with a torn ACL! *lol* Stecker? Really? Leftwich/Garrad vs BreesCarl Smith vs PaytonColston vs Reggie WilliamsSeriously? Carl Smith got FIRED. I thought JAX was far better off? Such a better offense? They fired the OC. The offense was a MESS. MJD went over his ceiling. *lol* You need to look up the word ceiling. In his rookie year, MJD maxed himself out, had a career year, now it's all down hill. Bush struggled, on a potent offense, but he's learning the NFL game.Blackjacks said:
Franchise Playa
Footballguy
wow. you must somehow read this forum in braile cause you must be blind and not get to see any games...SSOG said:Prior to last year? Prior to last year, Peyton Manning was a choker who could never win the big game. Prior to last year, New Orleans hadn't played a home game in over a year. Funny how a year changes things. I suppose Jacksonville has a better offense because New Orleans really sucked in the '80s, too, right?Fred Taylor's career yards per game = 84.93Blackjacks said:
Deuce McAllister's career yards per game = 68.96
Fred Taylor's career ypc = 4.6
Deuce McAllister's career ypc = 4.3
By the way, your claims that Reggie Bush was the most important piece in New Orleans offense last year is absolutely ludicrous. Reggie Bush was no more than the 4th-most important person AT BEST (I'd argue 5th most, personally). Colston, Brees, and Peyton were all clearly a bigger part of NO's success than Reggie Bush, and McAllister was arguably more important, too. Claiming that Reggie Bush, a rookie RB who averaged 3.6 yards per carry, was more important than MVP Candidate Drew Brees is simply ludicrous.
As for Freebagel's argument that Fred Taylor set career highs in ypc in Jax, so their OLine must have been a great run-blocking unit... here are Taylor's year-by-year ypcs for every year where he played 10 or more games: 4.6, 4.6, 4.8, 4.6, 4.6, 4.7, 4.1, 5.0. Yeah, that 5.0 value was clearly way out of line with his career averages, Jax's offensive line must have been a dramatic improvement over where it was in the past.
Taylor did set a career high in ypc, but he was essentially just as effective as he always was. And besides, even if we do think that Jax's offensive line was worth .4 more yards per carry last year than they have been in the past, Jones-Drew averaged FIVE POINT SEVEN yards per carry. That is more than two full yards more per carry than Reggie Bush. Bush could have played on the Cardinals and Jones-Drew on the mid-90s Cowboys and the difference in lines still wouldn't explain away more than two full yards per carry.
It makes perfect sense if you think about it. The goal of the offense is to move the chains, and the way to do that is to progress towards a first down. Any play on 3rd down that doesn't get all of the necessary yardage is an unsuccessful play on the assumption that you're going to punt it away (you can get 20 yards, and if it's 3rd and 47, it doesn't matter). Obviously you need a larger chunk of the yards on 2nd down to be successful than you did on 1st, because you have fewer plays after that- for instance, 8 yards on 1st and 20 would be very helpful, but on 2nd-and-20 would be essentially meaningless (leaving you with a still difficult 3rd-and-12).Bri said:40+60+100?
Im not going to say he is more important than Brees but seriously stop sipping the hateraid.
Last edited by a moderator:
