What's new
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!

Ryan Grant (1 Viewer)

hooptd

hooptd

Footballguy
Let me start by saying that I've never had him on one of my teams (multiple dynasty teams) until I just traded Chad Johnson (Ochocinco) for him. I'm looking at another offer where I can aquire him in a package deal for Chris Johnson. I know this isn't the asst coach forum, I'm just looking for opinions/thoughts on how good Grant really is and how much of a future he has with GB and the NFL in general?

He's going to be 28 years old next year I believe which is not too old butwill Brandon Jackson (2nd round pick) start eating away at his carries?

 
hooptd said:
Let me start by saying that I've never had him on one of my teams (multiple dynasty teams) until I just traded Chad Johnson (Ochocinco) for him. I'm looking at another offer where I can aquire him in a package deal for Chris Johnson. I know this isn't the asst coach forum, I'm just looking for opinions/thoughts on how good Grant really is and how much of a future he has with GB and the NFL in general?He's going to be 28 years old next year I believe which is not too old butwill Brandon Jackson (2nd round pick) start eating away at his carries?
Click to expand...
Grant is an average RB not great, not bad but I could certainly see them drafting a guy if he fell to them. He's a risky starter IMO and there's no way I'd deal him for CJ unless I were getting a TON more than just Grant.
 
I think Grant has been highly underrated around here and he proved his worth by finishing as the #8 RB in my league. He's very consistent with over 1,200 yards rushing in each of the last two years, and had 11 TDs this year. The surrounding cast is excellent and will continue to put him in position to score. I think his job is very stable for the next several years. He'll be just 27 when the season starts next year (turned 27 in December). There's no reason to believe he'll be replaced. He's giving exactly what the team wants from their workhorse RB. Brandon Jackson should not be a concern. Ahman Green was brought in to give Grant an occasional breather rather than going with Jackson. I think that tells you what they think of Jackson.

 
Also, Grant hasn't missed a game since becoming starter in midseason 2007. He had a 4.44 YPC this year, and just one fumble all year. Teams value these things. He'll be a starter for a long time, count on that. Packers have some holes to fill with their early picks. This isn't one of them. I don't get why some fantasy football players can't accept that. Oh yeah, because he wasn't a first round pick. :hot: Either were a lot of guys, like Priest Holmes or Terrell Davis.

Brandon Jackson? Missed time from injury each of his 3 years (5, 3, 4 games). Had a fumble in 37 carries, and a 3.0 YPC in 2009. And it was Jackson's starting job in 2007 that Grant took when they went out and signed him. No way Jackson gets significant carries. Just a backup, just a guy.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Idiot Savant has this covered. Grant is a legit top twelve fantasy producer for the next few years. Green Bay does no have anyone to challenge him for the workhorse role right now. Maybe they draft someone, but with the holes on the o line, I can't see them spending an early pick here.

 
Idiot Savant said:
I think Grant has been highly underrated around here and he proved his worth by finishing as the #8 RB in my league. He's very consistent with over 1,200 yards rushing in each of the last two years, and had 11 TDs this year. The surrounding cast is excellent and will continue to put him in position to score. I think his job is very stable for the next several years. He'll be just 27 when the season starts next year (turned 27 in December). There's no reason to believe he'll be replaced. He's giving exactly what the team wants from their workhorse RB. Brandon Jackson should not be a concern. Ahman Green was brought in to give Grant an occasional breather rather than going with Jackson. I think that tells you what they think of Jackson.
Click to expand...
He just not that talented a back and that's always a risk dynasty wise. Yes he could have a couple more years in that offense but he could just as easily be replaced IMO. He's on a good offense and his value comes because he's the workhorse back and gets a lot of touches. In dynasty I build around talent, not opportunity because talent rises to the top. If I'm building around a guy and the choice is between CJ and Grant to me they aren't even in the same zip code. I think the move right now is to deal Grant after finishing #8 not deal for him. Just my 2 cents.
 
Man in the yellow hat said:
Idiot Savant has this covered. Grant is a legit top twelve fantasy producer for the next few years. Green Bay does no have anyone to challenge him for the workhorse role right now. Maybe they draft someone, but with the holes on the o line, I can't see them spending an early pick here.
Click to expand...
and I couldn't see the Cowboys spending two picks last year after locking up Barber, or the Titans spending another high pick after spending high picks the prior years, etc. It all comes down to their draft board and internal talent evaluation and if they feel that value has slipped to them they may draft a back. It happens every year.
 
He looked fantastic this year and has been steady the past few years. The knock on him, for me, was the lack of TDs, but he took care of that this year...

His age though makes me think that he's probably got another 2-3 years left, which isn't bad. But I think Brandon Jackson will steadily take away touches each year...

 
Banger said:
Idiot Savant said:
I think Grant has been highly underrated around here and he proved his worth by finishing as the #8 RB in my league. He's very consistent with over 1,200 yards rushing in each of the last two years, and had 11 TDs this year. The surrounding cast is excellent and will continue to put him in position to score. I think his job is very stable for the next several years. He'll be just 27 when the season starts next year (turned 27 in December). There's no reason to believe he'll be replaced. He's giving exactly what the team wants from their workhorse RB. Brandon Jackson should not be a concern. Ahman Green was brought in to give Grant an occasional breather rather than going with Jackson. I think that tells you what they think of Jackson.
Click to expand...
He just not that talented a back and that's always a risk dynasty wise. Yes he could have a couple more years in that offense but he could just as easily be replaced IMO. He's on a good offense and his value comes because he's the workhorse back and gets a lot of touches. In dynasty I build around talent, not opportunity because talent rises to the top. If I'm building around a guy and the choice is between CJ and Grant to me they aren't even in the same zip code. I think the move right now is to deal Grant after finishing #8 not deal for him. Just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
I have to disagree he's not that talented. You see, what fantasy football guys don't get is that talent also comes in the form of consistency, not turning the ball over, being able to be counted on in the lineup every week. NFL teams do get that. Guys sitting in their armchairs think 'talented' just means making a lot of ESPN highlights. But that highlight guy might get 2, 1, 3, 18, 0, 1, 2 yards and you only see the 18 yarder in the highlights. Players like Grant make 2nd and 3rd downs much easier by getting their 4-5 yards and keeping drives going, while the highlight guy keeps putting them in a fix after a 1 yard run on an early down (Tatum Bell ring a bell?). The Packers would be really stupid to replace Grant with some flashy but inconsistent new guy. His YPC is solid. He's good at the goal line. He is very talented. Sorry he doesn't run 4.3 in the 40. I guess if he did he'd be talented. Oh brother.I would be worrying about Johnson breaking down if I were the OP. He's not a big guy and he had a big work load in 2009. He had a career year and won't keep that up. It's him I'd be selling high right now. If I could get a solid guy like Grant and another running back or good starting wide receiver for Johnson I would jump on it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Funny i just made this exact trade i a dynasty league. i gave up grant because have I was pretty wel set at RB w Gore and R.Rice. Needed WR help.

I do however really like Ryan Grant, solid workman like player. Solid RB

 
Idiot Savant said:
Banger said:
Idiot Savant said:
I think Grant has been highly underrated around here and he proved his worth by finishing as the #8 RB in my league. He's very consistent with over 1,200 yards rushing in each of the last two years, and had 11 TDs this year. The surrounding cast is excellent and will continue to put him in position to score. I think his job is very stable for the next several years. He'll be just 27 when the season starts next year (turned 27 in December). There's no reason to believe he'll be replaced. He's giving exactly what the team wants from their workhorse RB. Brandon Jackson should not be a concern. Ahman Green was brought in to give Grant an occasional breather rather than going with Jackson. I think that tells you what they think of Jackson.
Click to expand...
He just not that talented a back and that's always a risk dynasty wise. Yes he could have a couple more years in that offense but he could just as easily be replaced IMO. He's on a good offense and his value comes because he's the workhorse back and gets a lot of touches. In dynasty I build around talent, not opportunity because talent rises to the top. If I'm building around a guy and the choice is between CJ and Grant to me they aren't even in the same zip code. I think the move right now is to deal Grant after finishing #8 not deal for him. Just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
I have to disagree he's not that talented. You see, what fantasy football guys don't get is that talent also comes in the form of consistency, not turning the ball over, being able to be counted on in the lineup every week. NFL teams do get that. Guys sitting in their armchairs think 'talented' just means making a lot of ESPN highlights. But that highlight guy might get 2, 1, 3, 18, 0, 1, 2 yards and you only see the 18 yarder in the highlights. Players like Grant make 2nd and 3rd downs much easier by getting their 4-5 yards and keeping drives going, while the highlight guy keeps putting them in a fix after a 1 yard run on an early down (Tatum Bell ring a bell?). The Packers would be really stupid to replace Grant with some flashy but inconsistent new guy. His YPC is solid. He's good at the goal line. He is very talented. Sorry he doesn't run 4.3 in the 40. I guess if he did he'd be talented. Oh brother.I would be worrying about Johnson breaking down if I were the OP. He's not a big guy and he had a big work load in 2009. He had a career year and won't keep that up. It's him I'd be selling high right now. If I could get a solid guy like Grant and another running back or good starting wide receiver for Johnson I would jump on it.
Click to expand...
I get it just fine. Not turning the ball over and staying healthy definitely has value but Grant is not a core player that I'd build around. I've had him and he's a nice consistent complimentary back. I don't know what will happen but I've been playing this game a long time and one thing I've learned and that keeps me consistent year after year is to build your core around talent and deal opportunity. People have different strategies and that's why trades happen.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Banger said:
He's on a good offense and his value comes because he's the workhorse back and gets a lot of touches.
Click to expand...
Like some others here, I think you are underrating Grant a bit. But I wanted to address this specific point.This year, Grant finished as RB8 using FBG scoring while getting 307 touches. That was the 9th most touches in the league and doesn't strike me as a particularly high workload. I suppose if you play in PPR formats where RBs get points for receptions, he would be devalued a bit, as he doesn't catch the ball a lot, but that's a different point than the one you made here. And Grant raised his ypr to a solid 7.9 this year, so perhaps he will get more opportunities in the passing game going forward.I also wanted to point out a few interesting Football Outsiders statistics:DYAR: Grant #2 in the league (Johnson #1)DVOA: Grant #10 in the league (Johnson #7)Success Rate: Grant #18 in the league (Johnson #32)That certainly emphasizes that Johnson had a great season this year. But it also shows that Grant performed a lot better than a lot of people realize. And, again, these statistics clearly refute the notion that Grant succeeded this year solely because he got a big workload.And my final thought is to point out that Grant finished the season strong, with a number of explosive runs, including 62 yard and 56 yard TD runs. So he's fast enough.
 
Grant is today's version of Roger Craig in the offense that Green Bay runs.

Every year Grant is the poster boy for "buy low" after four or five weeks as his yards tend to come on the back end of the year rather than the front end. If you draft Grant to be your starter for the whole year then your first four to five weeks you might pull your hair out however the dividends will be paid later. He is probably good with Green Bay for another couple of seasons but that may be about it. He will get 1,000+ due to durability but he will not get on ESPN every week.

 
I pretty much agree with the positives in this thread about Grant. Going into this year he was a pretty good bet to see most of his team's RB opportunities. He would have 3 or 4 more TD's on the year if it weren't for that Kuhn fellow who became a goal line vulture toward the middle of the season. I think the O-line was a problem for Grant this year as well, but he still managed to produce.

He's not going to win any games for you by himself, but he is the #1 option at RB in a pretty good offense.

 
I doubt the Pack spends a 1st on a RB this year, but I could see a 2 or a 3. It's Grant's job in 2010, but I would expect the Pack to be making other plans for beyond 2010, and if they don't a 1st rounder in 2011 is a strong possibility. Regardless I expect a lot of people panicking, thinking Grant's job is in jeopardy when another back is brought in when all the Pack will be doing is replacing the backups who are not good at their jobs.

Grant's not great at anything, but he's not bad at anything either and he's got the strong work ethic needed to succeed for a guy who's limited talent wise like him. He's a perfect fit for the offense, and he's something that Ted Thompson loves, cost efficient.

 
I very much disagree with the general sentiment here that sees Grant having many years of top production left. Turning 28 next year, he is on the cusp of the age when RBs begin to lose it. To continue to be featured at the RB position when you are in the 28-30 range means you have to be an elite, not just a good back. I don't see Grant making elite types of plays. Moreover, the team is pretty solid and I can't see why they wouldn't use a first day pick this off season on a RB. At a minimum, I think they will draft another RB to share more carries with Grant next season, maybe one who is more capable of busting the big play.

He is the type of player that in dynasty you want to trade before the wheel falls off and he loses all value. Right now he still have very good value, but you don't project the next three years of dynasty value based on what a 27 year old RB has just done.

 
Grant is a mediocre talent at the position. He rarely makes people miss, and doesn't break many tackles. He also fights the ball on reception attempts. What he does well is read his blocks, and get the most out of what is blocked for him. He's just very solid at his job, rarely making mistakes.

Brandon Jackson has become a superb blocking RB. He's probably among the best RB's in the league at picking up the blitz. He's also come on as a receiver and shows some wiggle in the running game. I don't think he's quite good enough to be a starting RB in this league however.

I think both are in jeopardy of losing their jobs in the next two offseasons. Quite frankly the Packers need a playmaker at the position. Somebody that can make people miss, somebody that has some explosion to his game. Whether that back comes in a frame to be an every down back, or a 3rd down guy, I have no idea. The Packers do have areas of greater need, but I don't think they'd hesitate to spend a top 100 pick on a RB if they saw one they liked.

They both could be fine, or hold onto part of their current roles, but neither is an unworldly talent that isn't in jeopardy of being replaced. I wouldn't dream of trading Chris Johnson for either, unless it included a stud like Fitz or Andre Johnson or the like.

 
Kitrick Taylor said:
Quite frankly the Packers need a playmaker at the position. Somebody that can make people miss, somebody that has some explosion to his game.
Click to expand...
No they don't. They have enough "playmakers" as is. Having a Peterson type back in the back field would not help the offense at all since the offense is a pass first offense. Actually, having a Peterson type back would only infuriate that back the way the offense is run. McCarthy does not run the ball 25-30 times a game because there is no Peterson in the backfield. McCarthy does not run the ball 25-30 times a game because that is not the way he calls games. He will not change. Grant is a future Thomas Jones type back. He is very effective at what he does and that is all that is asked of him. Until those skills diminish, he will have a job, somewhere.
 
Solid but unspectacular back.

Blocks well enough...keeps healthy...does not fumble...gets what is blocked...

Nothing flashy.

I don't think he is in much jeopardy but I would not mind seeing them snag a 3rd down back as a change of pace (sorry to the Brandon Jackson fans...talk about an average guy...yes, good blocker...and decent receiver, but nothing speical).

Would not mind them getting someone who could also help in the return game.

I kind of like Noel Devine as an option. Fast...but won't cost you a 1st rounder...not even sure if he would cost a 2nd rounder.

 
az_prof said:
I very much disagree with the general sentiment here that sees Grant having many years of top production left. Turning 28 next year, he is on the cusp of the age when RBs begin to lose it. To continue to be featured at the RB position when you are in the 28-30 range means you have to be an elite, not just a good back.
Click to expand...
Just to make sure it is clear to everyone reading, he doesn't turn 28 until December 9, 2010. His 28 year old season is really 2011, not 2010.
az_prof said:
I don't see Grant making elite types of plays.
Click to expand...
1. Grant had 8 runs of 20+ yards in 281 carries... almost 3% of his carries went for 20+ yards.2. He was 7th in the league in rushing TDs.3. He was great at the goal line, with 8 TDs on 14 carries from the opponent's 5 and closer. Only 3 RBs (Turner, Hightower, McGahee) with at least 10 such carries had a better scoring rate.4. He was tied for 5th in rushing first downs.5. Through 15 games (ProFootballFocus not updated for week 17 yet), Grant was 6th in the league in yards gained after contact.6. Through 15 games (ProFootballFocus not updated for week 17 yet), Grant was 8th in the league in missed tackles (tackles either broken or avoided).If these things don't show that he makes elite plays, please define what you mean, and let's see how he compares to others.
az_prof said:
Moreover, the team is pretty solid and I can't see why they wouldn't use a first day pick this off season on a RB. At a minimum, I think they will draft another RB to share more carries with Grant next season, maybe one who is more capable of busting the big play.
Click to expand...
The team is definitely solid. But IMO they need OL help a lot more than they need another RB. I'm not a Packers homer, so I'm not sure what else they need. But I would think RB is a low enough priority that if they take one in this year's draft, it will be late enough that he will be unlikely to make an impact for a while.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Kitrick Taylor said:
He rarely makes people miss, and doesn't break many tackles... Quite frankly the Packers need a playmaker at the position. Somebody that can make people miss, somebody that has some explosion to his game.
Click to expand...
See my previous post. Through 15 games, Grant was 8th in the league in missed tackles (tackles avoided or broken) and 6th in the league in yards after contact. And he had 8 20+ yard runs... not sure where to find how that compares to others, but it doesn't sound inordinately low by any means. IMO these things seem to refute some of what you are saying here.
 
Grant is going to be a solid #2 RB over the next couple years, with the offense he is playing in.

I think the Packers appreciate Grant more than most Packer and football fans do. These people feel that the Packers need a speed guy that can break the long gain and give them more of a quick strike back. Grant is what the Packers need for a back. He gets the job done and doesnt turn the ball over, the biggest issue is that the line over the last couple years has taken time to come around. Grant is the mudder type that Ron Wolf always wanted for Dec and playoff games in GB. He is there to keep the defense honest, and move the chaings the big strikes come from the passing game in the WCO.

 
Just Win Baby said:
az_prof said:
I very much disagree with the general sentiment here that sees Grant having many years of top production left. Turning 28 next year, he is on the cusp of the age when RBs begin to lose it. To continue to be featured at the RB position when you are in the 28-30 range means you have to be an elite, not just a good back.
Click to expand...
Just to make sure it is clear to everyone reading, he doesn't turn 28 until December 9, 2010. His 28 year old season is really 2011, not 2010.
az_prof said:
I don't see Grant making elite types of plays.
Click to expand...
1. Grant had 8 runs of 20+ yards in 281 carries... almost 3% of his carries went for 20+ yards.2. He was 7th in the league in rushing TDs.3. He was great at the goal line, with 8 TDs on 14 carries from the opponent's 5 and closer. Only 3 RBs (Turner, Hightower, McGahee) with at least 10 such carries had a better scoring rate.4. He was tied for 5th in rushing first downs.5. Through 15 games (ProFootballFocus not updated for week 17 yet), Grant was 6th in the league in yards gained after contact.6. Through 15 games (ProFootballFocus not updated for week 17 yet), Grant was 8th in the league in missed tackles (tackles either broken or avoided).If these things don't show that he makes elite plays, please define what you mean, and let's see how he compares to others.
az_prof said:
Moreover, the team is pretty solid and I can't see why they wouldn't use a first day pick this off season on a RB. At a minimum, I think they will draft another RB to share more carries with Grant next season, maybe one who is more capable of busting the big play.
Click to expand...
The team is definitely solid. But IMO they need OL help a lot more than they need another RB. I'm not a Packers homer, so I'm not sure what else they need. But I would think RB is a low enough priority that if they take one in this year's draft, it will be late enough that he will be unlikely to make an impact for a while.
Click to expand...
1) He turns 28 in the middle of next season. Call it what you want--I call it the cusp of old age for a RB.2) How many 50 yard plus runs or receptions did he have? That's what I call being a playmaker. He is a meat and potatoes kind of guy. I am not saying he hasn't been good--I am saying that he isn't great and that he is getting to the age when good backs start to share and eventually lose their jobs. There is no way he will have that job in three years when he turns 30, and I like to gauge a player's value in dynasty on a three year time frame. More than likely he will share more carries next season and then lose the job completely the year after. If you see upside in that fine; to me he is a trade now because once they draft a young back in the 1-3 rounds his value will start to fall.
 
Just Win Baby said:
Kitrick Taylor said:
He rarely makes people miss, and doesn't break many tackles... Quite frankly the Packers need a playmaker at the position. Somebody that can make people miss, somebody that has some explosion to his game.
Click to expand...
See my previous post. Through 15 games, Grant was 8th in the league in missed tackles (tackles avoided or broken) and 6th in the league in yards after contact. And he had 8 20+ yard runs... not sure where to find how that compares to others, but it doesn't sound inordinately low by any means. IMO these things seem to refute some of what you are saying here.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I am going on what I have actually seen with my own eyes. I don't think I've missed one game in Ryan Grants' Packer career. Not sure how Pro Football Focus does their stuff, but I'm just not seeing many tackles avoided or broken. I'm not saying the guy is a bad RB. He's just pedestrian. From Bob McGinn (Excellent Packer writer) prior to the 2009 season:Described by one NFC North scout as a "straight-line, downhill, collision runner," Grant has apparent limitations. He runs into people too often. His balance and speed are about average for a starting back. And he too often just cannot make the last tackler miss.Insult was added to injury last month when Pro Football Weekly ranked Grant as the NFL's 26th best back entering 2009.
 
Grant will be on the bench, perhaps as early as this season

The packers will draft a RB, some good one's available in later rounds

I don't own him, but if I did I be selling NOW

 
Mario Kart said:
Kitrick Taylor said:
Quite frankly the Packers need a playmaker at the position. Somebody that can make people miss, somebody that has some explosion to his game.
Click to expand...
No they don't. They have enough "playmakers" as is. Having a Peterson type back in the back field would not help the offense at all since the offense is a pass first offense. Actually, having a Peterson type back would only infuriate that back the way the offense is run. McCarthy does not run the ball 25-30 times a game because there is no Peterson in the backfield. McCarthy does not run the ball 25-30 times a game because that is not the way he calls games. He will not change. Grant is a future Thomas Jones type back. He is very effective at what he does and that is all that is asked of him. Until those skills diminish, he will have a job, somewhere.
Click to expand...
I don't think you're understanding my point. I'm not saying Ryan Grant won't have a job in the NFL. I think he will, and he'll get carries. I just think he's in serious jeopardy of relinquishing some of his carries to another back. Jerious Norwood, Leon Washington and Darren Sproles all get touches because they are homerun threats. If the guy they take turns out to be closer to Chris Johnson, Ray Rice or MJD instead of a Sproles/Washington type, Grants value could take a nose dive. Are you seriously of the opinion that the Packers have too many playmakers?
 
Just Win Baby said:
This year, Grant finished as RB8 using FBG scoring while getting 307 touches. That was the 9th most touches in the league and doesn't strike me as a particularly high workload. I suppose if you play in PPR formats where RBs get points for receptions, he would be devalued a bit, as he doesn't catch the ball a lot, but that's a different point than the one you made here. And Grant raised his ypr to a solid 7.9 this year, so perhaps he will get more opportunities in the passing game going forward.
Click to expand...
But, Grant was seldom used in the passing game down the stretch. He only had 2 targets over the last 5 games of the season and 0 the last 3. That's what concerns me as a PPR owner, that Jackson is used in passing situations.
 
az_prof said:
Just Win Baby said:
az_prof said:
I very much disagree with the general sentiment here that sees Grant having many years of top production left. Turning 28 next year, he is on the cusp of the age when RBs begin to lose it. To continue to be featured at the RB position when you are in the 28-30 range means you have to be an elite, not just a good back.
Click to expand...
Just to make sure it is clear to everyone reading, he doesn't turn 28 until December 9, 2010. His 28 year old season is really 2011, not 2010.
az_prof said:
I don't see Grant making elite types of plays.
Click to expand...
1. Grant had 8 runs of 20+ yards in 281 carries... almost 3% of his carries went for 20+ yards.2. He was 7th in the league in rushing TDs.3. He was great at the goal line, with 8 TDs on 14 carries from the opponent's 5 and closer. Only 3 RBs (Turner, Hightower, McGahee) with at least 10 such carries had a better scoring rate.4. He was tied for 5th in rushing first downs.5. Through 15 games (ProFootballFocus not updated for week 17 yet), Grant was 6th in the league in yards gained after contact.6. Through 15 games (ProFootballFocus not updated for week 17 yet), Grant was 8th in the league in missed tackles (tackles either broken or avoided).If these things don't show that he makes elite plays, please define what you mean, and let's see how he compares to others.
az_prof said:
Moreover, the team is pretty solid and I can't see why they wouldn't use a first day pick this off season on a RB. At a minimum, I think they will draft another RB to share more carries with Grant next season, maybe one who is more capable of busting the big play.
Click to expand...
The team is definitely solid. But IMO they need OL help a lot more than they need another RB. I'm not a Packers homer, so I'm not sure what else they need. But I would think RB is a low enough priority that if they take one in this year's draft, it will be late enough that he will be unlikely to make an impact for a while.
Click to expand...
1) He turns 28 in the middle of next season. Call it what you want--I call it the cusp of old age for a RB.2) How many 50 yard plus runs or receptions did he have? That's what I call being a playmaker. He is a meat and potatoes kind of guy. I am not saying he hasn't been good--I am saying that he isn't great and that he is getting to the age when good backs start to share and eventually lose their jobs. There is no way he will have that job in three years when he turns 30, and I like to gauge a player's value in dynasty on a three year time frame. More than likely he will share more carries next season and then lose the job completely the year after. If you see upside in that fine; to me he is a trade now because once they draft a young back in the 1-3 rounds his value will start to fall.
Click to expand...
He had 2 50+ yard runs. I wish I knew of an easy place to query/find the number of plays of a certain distance for every player, but I don't, so I'm not sure how that compares to others. My assumption is that there are very few RBs with 2 50+ yard runs, but I don't know that for certain. A quick look at the top 20 rushers seems to show:Johnson - 5Peterson - 3Williams - 3Gore - 3Rice - 3MJD - 2Forte - 2Stewart - 2Ricky Williams - 2Charles - 2Steven Jackson - 1Thomas Jones - 1Turner - 1Mendenhall - 1Harrison - 1Benson - 0Moreno - 0Barber - 0Fred Jackson - 0Maybe it's just me, but Grant doesn't stack up poorly with that list, given his 2 50+ yard TD runs. Now, you chose the 50 yard cutoff... maybe a different cutoff would show a different result, I'm not sure. :rolleyes:
 
Ryan Grant is a solid contributor but unspectacular. What he does better then a lot of RBs is maintain consistency. His ceiling isn't that high on a per game basis but his floor is higher then most. He is in one of the top passing offenses in the league and therefore maintains a lot of value. He will probably be a RB2 for the next 2 or so years and his numbers will probably be around what they were this season (especially if the packers could bring in a LT or RT in the off season who are better then what they have) ... His value is lessened in PPR leagues because the packers throw to Brandon Jackson out of the backfield more then they do Grant.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
basher said:
Ryan Grant is a solid contributor but unspectacular. What he does better then a lot of RBs is maintain consistency. His ceiling isn't that high on a per game basis but his floor is higher then most. He is in one of the top passing offenses in the league and therefore maintains a lot of value. He will probably be a RB2 for the next 2 or so years and his numbers will probably be around what they were this season (especially if the packers could bring in a LT or RT in the off season who are better then what they have) ... His value is lessened in PPR leagues because the packers throw to Brandon Jackson out of the backfield more then they do Grant.
Click to expand...
The bolded seems inconsistent to me. He was RB8 this year in non PPR. How does that equate to a RB2? Maybe we're talking about different league sizes, but I play in 14 team leagues, in which case his numbers this year made him a solid RB1... which implies if he repeats them for the next two years he will continue to be a solid RB1.And I agree that it seems the Packers will be attempting to upgrade their OL this offseason, which should only help Grant's prospects.

 
Just Win Baby said:
basher said:
Ryan Grant is a solid contributor but unspectacular. What he does better then a lot of RBs is maintain consistency. His ceiling isn't that high on a per game basis but his floor is higher then most. He is in one of the top passing offenses in the league and therefore maintains a lot of value. He will probably be a RB2 for the next 2 or so years and his numbers will probably be around what they were this season (especially if the packers could bring in a LT or RT in the off season who are better then what they have) ... His value is lessened in PPR leagues because the packers throw to Brandon Jackson out of the backfield more then they do Grant.
Click to expand...
The bolded seems inconsistent to me. He was RB8 this year in non PPR. How does that equate to a RB2? Maybe we're talking about different league sizes, but I play in 14 team leagues, in which case his numbers this year made him a solid RB1... which implies if he repeats them for the next two years he will continue to be a solid RB1.And I agree that it seems the Packers will be attempting to upgrade their OL this offseason, which should only help Grant's prospects.
Click to expand...
and last year he was 22nd and the year before 17th. He kind of reminds me of a poor mans Rudi Johnson.
 
Just Win Baby said:
basher said:
Ryan Grant is a solid contributor but unspectacular. What he does better then a lot of RBs is maintain consistency. His ceiling isn't that high on a per game basis but his floor is higher then most. He is in one of the top passing offenses in the league and therefore maintains a lot of value. He will probably be a RB2 for the next 2 or so years and his numbers will probably be around what they were this season (especially if the packers could bring in a LT or RT in the off season who are better then what they have) ... His value is lessened in PPR leagues because the packers throw to Brandon Jackson out of the backfield more then they do Grant.
Click to expand...
The bolded seems inconsistent to me. He was RB8 this year in non PPR. How does that equate to a RB2? Maybe we're talking about different league sizes, but I play in 14 team leagues, in which case his numbers this year made him a solid RB1... which implies if he repeats them for the next two years he will continue to be a solid RB1.And I agree that it seems the Packers will be attempting to upgrade their OL this offseason, which should only help Grant's prospects.
Click to expand...
last year he was what the 15th or 16th best RB in standard scoring ... I really don't think RB2 is "inconsistent" ... he benefited from more TDs this year and a few players getting injured ahead of him. Also, I bet the packers look for either another running back next season (more of a home run hitter type ... Spiller, Joe McKnight, Best, etc...) or give Jackson more looks. I really would caution getting carried away with thinking he is an RB1
 
Banger said:
Just Win Baby said:
basher said:
Ryan Grant is a solid contributor but unspectacular. What he does better then a lot of RBs is maintain consistency. His ceiling isn't that high on a per game basis but his floor is higher then most. He is in one of the top passing offenses in the league and therefore maintains a lot of value. He will probably be a RB2 for the next 2 or so years and his numbers will probably be around what they were this season (especially if the packers could bring in a LT or RT in the off season who are better then what they have) ... His value is lessened in PPR leagues because the packers throw to Brandon Jackson out of the backfield more then they do Grant.
Click to expand...
The bolded seems inconsistent to me. He was RB8 this year in non PPR. How does that equate to a RB2? Maybe we're talking about different league sizes, but I play in 14 team leagues, in which case his numbers this year made him a solid RB1... which implies if he repeats them for the next two years he will continue to be a solid RB1.And I agree that it seems the Packers will be attempting to upgrade their OL this offseason, which should only help Grant's prospects.
Click to expand...
and last year he was 22nd and the year before 17th. He kind of reminds me of a poor mans Rudi Johnson.
Click to expand...
True, but last year he missed training camp and preseason time and played through a leg injury, and the year before he was 17th but only had 6 carries in the first 6 games, so obviously his performance was a lot stronger than RB17.I think this year's performance is much more indicative of what to expect than last year's. It is a middle ground between his 10 game performance in 2007 and his injury-affected performance last season.

 
Just a question for some of you. This is a big assumption, but let's assume that Ryan Grant scored 9 rushing TDs last year instead of 4 TDs. We all know that TDs are variable. He's shown he can easily be a goalline back. So, let's say he rushed for 9 TDs instead of 4 TDs. What would you think of the following #'s?

2007 -- 956 rushing yards/8 TDs (in 10 games)

2008 -- 1203 rushing yds/10 TDs

2009 -- 1253 rushing yds/11 TDs

The ONLY # I tweaked was his TDs from last year which were, IMO, abnormally low for his goal line status and yards he's rushed for.

 
gianmarco said:
Just a question for some of you. This is a big assumption, but let's assume that Ryan Grant scored 9 rushing TDs last year instead of 4 TDs. We all know that TDs are variable. He's shown he can easily be a goalline back. So, let's say he rushed for 9 TDs instead of 4 TDs. What would you think of the following #'s?2007 -- 956 rushing yards/8 TDs (in 10 games)2008 -- 1203 rushing yds/10 TDs2009 -- 1253 rushing yds/11 TDsThe ONLY # I tweaked was his TDs from last year which were, IMO, abnormally low for his goal line status and yards he's rushed for.
Click to expand...
like I said poor mans Rudi Johnson.
 
These are the RBs with the most rushing yds from 2007-2009 (minimum 2500 rushing yards). Keep in mind he only started in 10 games in 2007.

NAME POS YRs G RSH RSHYD YD/RSH RSHTD FANT PT 1 Adrian Peterson rb 2007--2009 46 916 4490 4.9 40 777.92 Thomas Jones rb 2007--2009 48 932 3833 4.11 28 617.53 Steven Jackson rb 2007--2009 39 816 3469 4.25 16 556.44 Ryan Grant rb 2007--2009 47 782 3412 4.36 23 531.25 DeAngelo Williams rb 2007--2009 45 634 3352 5.29 29 582.26 LaDainian Tomlinson rb 2007--2009 46 830 3314 3.99 38 694.757 Frank Gore rb 2007--2009 43 729 3258 4.47 21 609.38 Clinton Portis rb 2007--2009 40 791 3243 4.1 21 528.459 Chris Johnson rb 2008--2009 31 609 3234 5.31 23 555.710 Maurice Jones-Drew rb 2007--2009 47 676 2983 4.41 36 666.911 Brandon Jacobs rb 2007--2009 39 644 2935 4.56 24 494.912 Michael Turner rb 2007--2009 43 626 2886 4.61 28 465.813 Jamal Lewis rb 2007--2009 40 720 2806 3.9 13 42214 Marion Barber rb 2007--2009 46 656 2792 4.26 24 539.215 Cedric Benson rb 2007--2009 36 712 2676 3.76 12 381.516 Marshawn Lynch rb 2007--2009 41 650 2601 4 17 439.817 Brian Westbrook rb 2007--2009 37 572 2543 4.45 17 557.7He's 4th overall on the list and in only 42 games started. He has a 4.4 ypc average for his career. I'm just saying........

 
Last edited by a moderator:
gianmarco said:
These are the RBs with the most rushing yds from 2007-2009 (minimum 2500 rushing yards). Keep in mind he only started in 10 games in 2007.

Code: 
NAME 	POS 	YRs 	G 	RSH 	RSHYD 	YD/RSH 	RSHTD 	FANT PT	1	Adrian Peterson	rb	2007--2009	46	916	4490	4.9	40	777.92	Thomas Jones	rb	2007--2009	48	932	3833	4.11	28	617.53	Steven Jackson	rb	2007--2009	39	816	3469	4.25	16	556.44	Ryan Grant	rb	2007--2009	47	782	3412	4.36	23	531.25	DeAngelo Williams	rb	2007--2009	45	634	3352	5.29	29	582.26	LaDainian Tomlinson	rb	2007--2009	46	830	3314	3.99	38	694.757	Frank Gore	rb	2007--2009	43	729	3258	4.47	21	609.38	Clinton Portis	rb	2007--2009	40	791	3243	4.1	21	528.459	Chris Johnson	rb	2008--2009	31	609	3234	5.31	23	555.710	Maurice Jones-Drew	rb	2007--2009	47	676	2983	4.41	36	666.911	Brandon Jacobs	rb	2007--2009	39	644	2935	4.56	24	494.912	Michael Turner	rb	2007--2009	43	626	2886	4.61	28	465.813	Jamal Lewis	rb	2007--2009	40	720	2806	3.9	13	42214	Marion Barber	rb	2007--2009	46	656	2792	4.26	24	539.215	Cedric Benson	rb	2007--2009	36	712	2676	3.76	12	381.516	Marshawn Lynch	rb	2007--2009	41	650	2601	4	17	439.817	Brian Westbrook	rb	2007--2009	37	572	2543	4.45	17	557.7
He's 4th overall on the list and in only 42 games started. He has a 4.4 ypc average for his career. I'm just saying........
Click to expand...
good stuff but still doesn't alter my opinion of him.
 
Kitrick Taylor said:
Just Win Baby said:
Kitrick Taylor said:
He rarely makes people miss, and doesn't break many tackles... Quite frankly the Packers need a playmaker at the position. Somebody that can make people miss, somebody that has some explosion to his game.
Click to expand...
See my previous post. Through 15 games, Grant was 8th in the league in missed tackles (tackles avoided or broken) and 6th in the league in yards after contact. And he had 8 20+ yard runs... not sure where to find how that compares to others, but it doesn't sound inordinately low by any means. IMO these things seem to refute some of what you are saying here.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I am going on what I have actually seen with my own eyes. I don't think I've missed one game in Ryan Grants' Packer career. Not sure how Pro Football Focus does their stuff, but I'm just not seeing many tackles avoided or broken. I'm not saying the guy is a bad RB. He's just pedestrian. From Bob McGinn (Excellent Packer writer) prior to the 2009 season:Described by one NFC North scout as a "straight-line, downhill, collision runner," Grant has apparent limitations. He runs into people too often. His balance and speed are about average for a starting back. And he too often just cannot make the last tackler miss.Insult was added to injury last month when Pro Football Weekly ranked Grant as the NFL's 26th best back entering 2009.
Click to expand...
Hate to burst your bubble but Bob McGinn is one of the top hack writers running around that covers the Packers. Him, Mike V ( GB Press Gazette) and Jason Wilde (Madison) find every fault with the Packers. McGinn posts more bad comments from scouts than good ones. He has it in for TT and the new regime since they got rid of Favre. Only worse clown out there is Chris Havel you lost his cash cow when Brett left. Ever think that reason he runs into people is that the blocking was lacking like it was earlier in the year.Take what you want from Pro Football weekly it use to be a great read but in the last 5 years it has lost its credibilty. I also it is believed to be a Chicago based publication.Grant might be an average back but that means he is better than half the starters in the NFL. The offense is not built for a RB to be the #1 weapon so getting a numbers like a top RB is not going to happen.
 
hauser42 said:
Kitrick Taylor said:
Just Win Baby said:
Kitrick Taylor said:
He rarely makes people miss, and doesn't break many tackles... Quite frankly the Packers need a playmaker at the position. Somebody that can make people miss, somebody that has some explosion to his game.
Click to expand...
See my previous post. Through 15 games, Grant was 8th in the league in missed tackles (tackles avoided or broken) and 6th in the league in yards after contact. And he had 8 20+ yard runs... not sure where to find how that compares to others, but it doesn't sound inordinately low by any means. IMO these things seem to refute some of what you are saying here.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I am going on what I have actually seen with my own eyes. I don't think I've missed one game in Ryan Grants' Packer career. Not sure how Pro Football Focus does their stuff, but I'm just not seeing many tackles avoided or broken. I'm not saying the guy is a bad RB. He's just pedestrian. From Bob McGinn (Excellent Packer writer) prior to the 2009 season:

Described by one NFC North scout as a "straight-line, downhill, collision runner," Grant has apparent limitations. He runs into people too often. His balance and speed are about average for a starting back. And he too often just cannot make the last tackler miss.

Insult was added to injury last month when Pro Football Weekly ranked Grant as the NFL's 26th best back entering 2009.
Click to expand...
Hate to burst your bubble but Bob McGinn is one of the top hack writers running around that covers the Packers. Him, Mike V ( GB Press Gazette) and Jason Wilde (Madison) find every fault with the Packers. McGinn posts more bad comments from scouts than good ones. He has it in for TT and the new regime since they got rid of Favre. Only worse clown out there is Chris Havel you lost his cash cow when Brett left. Ever think that reason he runs into people is that the blocking was lacking like it was earlier in the year.Take what you want from Pro Football weekly it use to be a great read but in the last 5 years it has lost its credibilty. I also it is believed to be a Chicago based publication.

Grant might be an average back but that means he is better than half the starters in the NFL. The offense is not built for a RB to be the #1 weapon so getting a numbers like a top RB is not going to happen.
Click to expand...
Let's also mention that no one now really cares what writers were saying about him going into 2009. What were they saying about Miles Austin? Jermichael Finley? Jamaal Charles? Pretty pointless points by Kitrick IMO.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would not call McGinn a hack writer totally.

Though, he does seem to rely on scouts too much...and will generally just fine scouts that believe as he does and forget the others.

 
sho nuff said:
I would not call McGinn a hack writer totally.Though, he does seem to rely on scouts too much...and will generally just fine scouts that believe as he does and forget the others.
Click to expand...
Nuff, being a cheeser maybe you can clear somethin up that hasn;t been addressed. Towards the end of the year - last 6 games or so - it seemed like Jackson was getting more playing time and in the red zone (and I am not refering to the game he had 3 tds - I am talking about other games while they were still close). Is there anything to that?
 
The Dude said:
sho nuff said:
I would not call McGinn a hack writer totally.Though, he does seem to rely on scouts too much...and will generally just fine scouts that believe as he does and forget the others.
Click to expand...
Nuff, being a cheeser maybe you can clear somethin up that hasn;t been addressed. Towards the end of the year - last 6 games or so - it seemed like Jackson was getting more playing time and in the red zone (and I am not refering to the game he had 3 tds - I am talking about other games while they were still close). Is there anything to that?
Click to expand...
Jackson has really impressed this coaching staff this season with his development. Right now he is the RB in passing downs, as he has become excellent at picking up the blitz. He has shown a knack of sliding out of the backfield as a safety valve also. Reason he has played more in the red zone is that the team still struggles at running the ball in the red zone and Jackson is getting a chance to improve this. Teams think pass when he is in the backfield so that loosen ups the defense and gives the running game more room if they go that route. Until the OL gets better at the short running game, they will have to try different ways to score.
 
sho nuff said:
I would not call McGinn a hack writer totally.Though, he does seem to rely on scouts too much...and will generally just fine scouts that believe as he does and forget the others.
Click to expand...
My main complaint with the writers is that they dont put all teh facts into stories that they write. Right now a huge story is why has Collins not been given a contract. Have read articles from all 3 guys I mentioned before. They rag on the TT for not getting this contract done in backup Collins side with all his stats and play. There is no doubt Collins has shown he can play in the new system and deserves a contract. BUI the reason he is not at this point is the CBA. Without the CBA in place Collins is restricted and doesnt have leverage, all the cards are in the Packers hands. This is not fair but the players union agreed to this contract.These writers do a poor a job of informing the general public what is going on. The fan that follows footall indepth knows about CBA and other things that are going on around the NFL. Other fans read and article about the Collins issue and get a paragraph that states MAYBE the Packers are waiting for the CBA to get done before they move on. One little paragraph to the biggest reason a player is not getting signed. That to me is hack journalism.
 
McGinn's one of the best NFL beat writers in the business and has been for over two decades now. But I've never agreed with his thoughts about Grant. Grant's not a superstar but he's a good running back. He can get you short-yardage, he has enough burst to make big plays when he hits the second level and he's a competent receiver. I've believed he was vastly under-appreciated by a lot of Packer fans after a down 2008 season that was caused in large part by his contract holdout.

I like the Thomas Jones comparison. Jones also got a late start on being a primary ballcarrier and therefore doesn't appear to be slowing down despite hitting 30. I could see Grant doing the same.

From a fantasy perspective, I think Grant will continue to be undervalued because he's not a sexy pick. He lacks the flash and the youth that many fantasy owners crave. But that makes him all the more valuable in my eyes. If you go WR-WR, for example, you can grab Grant in the third round and I think you'll be in great shape. Or if you get him as a RB2 your depth will be strong.

Bottom line - he's a guy the Packers can win with and fantasy owners can win with too.

 
The Dude said:
sho nuff said:
I would not call McGinn a hack writer totally.Though, he does seem to rely on scouts too much...and will generally just fine scouts that believe as he does and forget the others.
Click to expand...
Nuff, being a cheeser maybe you can clear somethin up that hasn;t been addressed. Towards the end of the year - last 6 games or so - it seemed like Jackson was getting more playing time and in the red zone (and I am not refering to the game he had 3 tds - I am talking about other games while they were still close). Is there anything to that?
Click to expand...
I think its a combo of things. The coaches do like him...and maybe he is developing more (he did come out of college early so it is possible).Add in wanting to make sure you keep Grant as fresh as possible for the postseason and stretch run as well.How many times did he run in the redzone would be my question. Or is he brought in more when they throw down there (which they do a lot).
 
I hope those of you down on Grant have been watching today's playoff game. Here are his carries today so far:

run - 10 yards

run - 0 yards

reception - 9 yards

run - 1 yard

run - 10 yards

run - 0 yards but defense penalized 15 yards for horse collar tackle

run - 20 yards

run - 2 yards

reception - 9 yards

run - 7 yards

run - 4 yards

run - 6 yards

That's 12 touches for 78 yards, not including the penalty yards, with 9 of the 12 touches being successful touches. And I have witnessed him getting yards after contact and forcing missed tackles on these runs today.

It's too bad the Packers got down by a large margin so early, or Grant would likely have more touches at this point. He is playing really well.

 
Just Win Baby said:
I hope those of you down on Grant have been watching today's playoff game. Here are his carries today so far:run - 10 yardsrun - 0 yardsreception - 9 yardsrun - 1 yardrun - 10 yardsrun - 0 yards but defense penalized 15 yards for horse collar tacklerun - 20 yardsrun - 2 yardsreception - 9 yardsrun - 7 yardsrun - 4 yardsrun - 6 yardsThat's 12 touches for 78 yards, not including the penalty yards, with 9 of the 12 touches being successful touches. And I have witnessed him getting yards after contact and forcing missed tackles on these runs today.It's too bad the Packers got down by a large margin so early, or Grant would likely have more touches at this point. He is playing really well.
Click to expand...
:lmao:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

EBF
2025 Rookie Thoughts
2
Replies
57
Views
5K
EBF
EBF
ChiefD
Had A Thought Last Night.......
Replies
42
Views
1K
Ministry of Pain
Ministry of Pain
B
Bryce Oliver Titans WR
Replies
24
Views
776
greenmountaingoat
greenmountaingoat

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top