Jonas Gray (RB - New England) (1 Viewer)

[SameSongNDance]

What is everyone arguing about , Gray slides right into Ridley role and that comes with all the ups and downs that it had earlier in the year. I absolutely hate the match-up this week though for obvious reasons (DEN's rush def + game flow). I could easily see a stat line like 7/30/0.

So do you agree it feels like a vereen game this week?

Or BB likes to try and take away the other team's best weapon. Instead of slinging it all over and getting Lafell, Vereen and Gronk 10 targets a piece, he runs the ground and pound to try and keep Peyton off the field in a day predicted to be somewhat cold, windy and possibly snow?

iirc many NFL teams have tried to beat Peyton this way going back to his days in Indy. I'm not sure where to find the stats on that, but I don't think it has been a winning formula. It might be the best option for lesser teams, but I'd be surprised if BB came out with that tired old gameplan. The Pats have more options because they can score a lot, beat you different ways, and can play some defense. FWIW, they have been really good in the snow before.

It worked for SD last year but that's all that comes to mind.

 

[rickyg]

this week's matchup with Denver screams vereen to me. Denver has been lights out at stuffing opposing running games. Ne is going to want to exploit their weakness which is the pass (good all around defense but better against the run than the pass).

I can see vereen getting a lot of usage between the 20's and gray maybe getting a shot or 2 at GL carries.

After Denver though there aren't a whole lot of prolific offenses and stifling run defenses on the schedule so I think gray will break out starting in week 11.

Huh? Other than Miami, every team they play for the rest of the season has either a prolific offense and/or a top-10 run defense.Denver-Great offense, #12 defense against runs by RB

Indy-Great offense

Detroit- #8 defense against runs by RB

Green Bay-Great offense

San Diego-Great offense, #9 defense against runs by RB

Miami- #16 against runs by RB

NYJ- #3 against runs by RB

Buffalo- #3 against runs by RB

Well I put Denver in a tier all by themselves as an offense.

Indy and gb are also great true.

 

[Bayhawks]

this week's matchup with Denver screams vereen to me. Denver has been lights out at stuffing opposing running games. Ne is going to want to exploit their weakness which is the pass (good all around defense but better against the run than the pass).

I can see vereen getting a lot of usage between the 20's and gray maybe getting a shot or 2 at GL carries.

After Denver though there aren't a whole lot of prolific offenses and stifling run defenses on the schedule so I think gray will break out starting in week 11.

Huh? Other than Miami, every team they play for the rest of the season has either a prolific offense and/or a top-10 run defense.Denver-Great offense, #12 defense against runs by RB

Indy-Great offense

Detroit- #8 defense against runs by RB

Green Bay-Great offense

San Diego-Great offense, #9 defense against runs by RB

Miami- #16 against runs by RB

NYJ- #3 against runs by RB

Buffalo- #3 against runs by RB

Well I put Denver in a tier all by themselves as an offense.

Indy and gb are also great true.

Well obviously Denver is the best. But the belief that the Pats don't face tough run D's or great offenses after this week is completely false. They only have 1 such game out of the remaining 8.

If this weren't the Pats, that would indicate that the "pound the ball, big RB" would probably see fewer touches, and the better receiving, out on the edges RB would see more. But I don't pretend to try to know what BB and the Pats are going to do.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Last year the Pats ran it 30 times against the Broncos.

 

[Bayhawks]

Last year the Pats ran it 30 times against the Broncos.

And then, the 2nd game, they ran it 14 times.

They were down big (23+ points) in each game.

The regular season game was in NE in November, the post-season game was in Denver, in January. I don't remember any snow/wind, but it was likely cold each game.

The big backs (Bolden, mainly) did well in the first game, while they sucked in the 2nd. Vereen got 90+ YFS in each game.

So we have 2 games, same opponents, similar weather, similar situations (NE down big), but two completely different plans. The only real difference I can see is that Gronk was out for the 2nd game.

One would think that NE would have gone run heavy with their "big backs" in the 2nd game, even after they got down. It was the plan they followed to victory in the first game, yet that's not what happened.

There's no real rhyme or reason to NE's RB usage; trying to predict one is a exercise in futility.

 

[Banger]

Last year the Pats ran it 30 times against the Broncos.

And then, the 2nd game, they ran it 14 times.

They were down big (23+ points) in each game.

The regular season game was in NE in November, the post-season game was in Denver, in January. I don't remember any snow/wind, but it was likely cold each game.

The big backs (Bolden, mainly) did well in the first game, while they sucked in the 2nd. Vereen got 90+ YFS in each game.

So we have 2 games, same opponents, similar weather, similar situations (NE down big), but two completely different plans. The only real difference I can see is that Gronk was out for the 2nd game.

One would think that NE would have gone run heavy with their "big backs" in the 2nd game, even after they got down. It was the plan they followed to victory in the first game, yet that's not what happened.

There's no real rhyme or reason to NE's RB usage; trying to predict one is a exercise in futility.

I have to think that they will TRY as much as possible to run it to limit the time/possessions that the Broncos get and keep their banged up defense off the field. The best defense is a good offense that has long, sustained drives. Whether or not they can effectively run on 1st and 2nd down will determine whether they can stick with the run. If they are in 3rd and 9 on the first couple drvies, it will certainly impact their willingness/ability to run later in the game.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Last year the Pats ran it 30 times against the Broncos.

And then, the 2nd game, they ran it 14 times.

They were down big (23+ points) in each game.

The regular season game was in NE in November, the post-season game was in Denver, in January. I don't remember any snow/wind, but it was likely cold each game.

The big backs (Bolden, mainly) did well in the first game, while they sucked in the 2nd. Vereen got 90+ YFS in each game.

So we have 2 games, same opponents, similar weather, similar situations (NE down big), but two completely different plans. The only real difference I can see is that Gronk was out for the 2nd game.

One would think that NE would have gone run heavy with their "big backs" in the 2nd game, even after they got down. It was the plan they followed to victory in the first game, yet that's not what happened.

There's no real rhyme or reason to NE's RB usage; trying to predict one is a exercise in futility.

Great post, but I will add the potential can be extreme. In the first playoff game the Pats ran it 44 times for 200+ yards and 6 rushing TDs with Blount leading the charge. Ridley and BJGE had a few 50 yard, 2 TD games as I recall. We also saw games where Ridley would go 5/17/0. And of course yes the offense is just better with Gronk. I'm not telling people to start Gray but some folks are looking at Tre Mason and Zo Taliaferro as options...

 

[Bayhawks]

Last year the Pats ran it 30 times against the Broncos.

And then, the 2nd game, they ran it 14 times.

They were down big (23+ points) in each game.

The regular season game was in NE in November, the post-season game was in Denver, in January. I don't remember any snow/wind, but it was likely cold each game.

The big backs (Bolden, mainly) did well in the first game, while they sucked in the 2nd. Vereen got 90+ YFS in each game.

So we have 2 games, same opponents, similar weather, similar situations (NE down big), but two completely different plans. The only real difference I can see is that Gronk was out for the 2nd game.

One would think that NE would have gone run heavy with their "big backs" in the 2nd game, even after they got down. It was the plan they followed to victory in the first game, yet that's not what happened.

There's no real rhyme or reason to NE's RB usage; trying to predict one is a exercise in futility.

I have to think that they will TRY as much as possible to run it to limit the time/possessions that the Broncos get and keep their banged up defense off the field. The best defense is a good offense that has long, sustained drives. Whether or not they can effectively run on 1st and 2nd down will determine whether they can stick with the run. If they are in 3rd and 9 on the first couple drvies, it will certainly impact their willingness/ability to run later in the game.

You would think that, and I would think that, but the evidence shows that they didn't do that in both games.

They didn't run the ball much or effectively in the 1st half of either game.

They ran the ball 13 times in the 1st 1/2 of the regular season game (& 3 of those runs were right before the 1/2 when they were trying to run out the clock deep in their territory & avoid giving Denver the ball back); & they ran the ball 8 times in the 1st 1/2 of the playoff game (and one was running out the clock to end the half). So effectively 10 runs in the 1st 1/2 of the 1st game, and 7 runs in the 1st 1/2 of the 2nd game. Both games saw them down big, so "gameflow" would have been similar.

Despite these two very similar situations (same opponents, similar gameflow, down big, ineffective run game early), the Pats utilized a completely different plan in the 2nd game (despite the plan in the 1st game resulting in victory).

Again, trying to predict NE's usage of RBs is pointless.

 

[need2know]

No one has been able to run on denver yet

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

No one has been able to run on denver yet

Lynch did pretty ok, 26/88/1 with some nice receiving numbers to boot. Denver on the road.

 

[Bayhawks]

Last year the Pats ran it 30 times against the Broncos.

And then, the 2nd game, they ran it 14 times.

They were down big (23+ points) in each game.

The regular season game was in NE in November, the post-season game was in Denver, in January. I don't remember any snow/wind, but it was likely cold each game.

The big backs (Bolden, mainly) did well in the first game, while they sucked in the 2nd. Vereen got 90+ YFS in each game.

So we have 2 games, same opponents, similar weather, similar situations (NE down big), but two completely different plans. The only real difference I can see is that Gronk was out for the 2nd game.

One would think that NE would have gone run heavy with their "big backs" in the 2nd game, even after they got down. It was the plan they followed to victory in the first game, yet that's not what happened.

There's no real rhyme or reason to NE's RB usage; trying to predict one is a exercise in futility.

Great post, but I will add the potential can be extreme. In the first playoff game the Pats ran it 44 times for 200+ yards and 6 rushing TDs with Blount leading the charge. Ridley and BJGE had a few 50 yard, 2 TD games as I recall. We also saw games where Ridley would go 5/17/0. And of course yes the offense is just better with Gronk. I'm not telling people to start Gray but some folks are looking at Tre Mason and Zo Taliaferro as options...

The potential can also be extremely bad. In the 2nd playoff game, the Pats ran it 14 times for 57 yards, and 0 TDs.

I agree with you. Gray is definitely hold, but starting him is a risk. Over those guys, Sankey, A Williams, etc, I'd consider him. The point I was debating/arguing was the contention that he can be counted on for 11-12 points. While that's possible, it's just as likely (exactly as likely based on NE's RB usage the past 5 years) that he'll get you 2-3 points.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

The point I was debating/arguing was the contention that he can be counted on for 11-12 points. While that's possible, it's just as likely (exactly as likely based on NE's RB usage the past 5 years) that he'll get you 2-3 points.

If he averages 11-12ppg then it's absolutely, mathematically not true that he's as likely to get you 2-3 points as he is to get you 11-12 points.

He's (roughly) as likely to get you 20-21 points as he is to get you 2-3 points.

You're ignoring the boom side of the boom/bust equation.

 

[Bayhawks]

No one has been able to run on denver yet

As previously posted, while Denver is fairly tough against RBs, with regard to rushing numbers, they have given up the 4th most points to RBs through the air. That would indicate more potential for RBs who garner receptions, but with NE, I'm not counting on anything.

 

[zamboni]

While Vereen is obviously the pass catching back, anyone familiar with Gray's receiving ability? Just wondering to the extent that perhaps he can stay on the field sometimes beyond obvious running plays.

 

[Bayhawks]

The point I was debating/arguing was the contention that he can be counted on for 11-12 points. While that's possible, it's just as likely (exactly as likely based on NE's RB usage the past 5 years) that he'll get you 2-3 points.

If he averages 11-12ppg then it's absolutely, mathematically not true that he's as likely to get you 2-3 points as he is to get you 11-12 points.

He's (roughly) as likely to get you 20-21 points as he is to get you 2-3 points.

You're ignoring the boom side of the boom/bust equation.

I'm not ignoring the boom side of the equation. Look at my previous posts; I specifically mention the possibility that NE's big back can get you 20+ points. My point is that you can't count on NE's "big back" for 11-12 points, because they are just as likely to get much less than that. That's what has happened in 1/2 their games over the last 5 years. It doesn't seem to be based on predictable circumstances either. Strong run D's where you'd normally sit them, they go off. Weak run D's where you'd normally start them, they bomb. If you could predict the boom games, you could start him then. Since you can't, for me, the risk of 3 FF points is too great to ignore.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

No one has been able to run on denver yet

Lynch did pretty ok, 26/88/1 with some nice receiving numbers to boot. Denver on the road.

That's 3.3 ypc - not all that good, it's just that the SEA maintained the volume.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

No one has been able to run on denver yet

As previously posted, while Denver is fairly tough against RBs, with regard to rushing numbers, they have given up the 4th most points to RBs through the air. That would indicate more potential for RBs who garner receptions, but with NE, I'm not counting on anything.

While it does not take anything away from your point, necessarily - I would guess that the bolded is a function of game situation (teams playing in catch up mode) and not necessarily indicative of their defense.

 

[P Park Pimps]

Whos the better pickup, Taliaferro or Gray?

 

[P Park Pimps]

Whos the better pickup, Taliaferro or Gray?

 

[Jerry Curl]

Whos the better pickup, Taliaferro or Gray?

Whos the better pickup, Taliaferro or Gray?

 

[GoBirds]

Whos the better pickup, Taliaferro or Gray?

I dropped Gray for Taliaferro because I have Forsett too.

 

[HULLOBUDMAN]

No one has been able to run on denver yet

Lynch did pretty ok, 26/88/1 with some nice receiving numbers to boot. Denver on the road.

That's 3.3 ypc - not all that good, it's just that the SEA maintained the volume.

Seattle won that game staying committed to the run and not going down huge. Lynch has a huge fantasy day.

KC, with Knile Davis after the Charles injury, stayed committed to the run (22/79 2TD) and had a chance to tie the game on the last drive. Davis huge fantasy day.

These are the only 2 games that Denver has scored less than 30 points and two of the only three games where the final score was within 7 points. If I remember correctly the third was INDY and Indy was down big most of the game and Indy had to throw to get it within that margin. In my opinion, the whole "Denver is tough against the run" thing is a function of Denver's O, not Denver's D. If your D can get a few early holds and not let Denver score 21 in the first half, I think that is how you beat Denver.

I would not be surprised at all if the BE running game got 25 carries this game. Unfortunately, it wouldn't surprise me if they got less than 10 either.

 

[Bayhawks]

So, NE wins by 20+ points; leads by 20+ points most of the game, yet NE's "big back" only gets 12 carries (and almost 1/2 of them came on the very last drive). Despite potentially bad weather, the "smart" thinking being that NE would/should try to control TOP, etc, NE's RB usage is unpredictable.

It's hard to count on any NE RB as more than an emergency play/bye-week fill in.

 

[az_prof]

So, NE wins by 20+ points; leads by 20+ points most of the game, yet NE's "big back" only gets 12 carries (and almost 1/2 of them came on the very last drive). Despite potentially bad weather, the "smart" thinking being that NE would/should try to control TOP, etc, NE's RB usage is unpredictable.

It's hard to count on any NE RB as more than an emergency play/bye-week fill in.

Except Denver has one of the best run defenses in the NFL, maybe the best. I expect Gray will be more productive in the coming weeks where he has a better match up.

 

[Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub]

It's hard to count on any NE RB as more than an emergency play/bye-week fill in.

Perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR each week. RB17 in PPG last 4 weeks and RB22 on the season.

 

[rickyg]

We all knew that this was going to be a vereen type of game.

I sat gray in all leagues for that reason. Denver has maybe the best run stuffing defense in the league. Belicheck knew that and (smartly) attacked their weaknesses and not their strengths.

If you noticed, gray got 3 or 4 carries in the first series and they were trying to run it up the gut. They had very little success. So they went to vereen.

Gray has value but not as an every week no brainer plug and play. The matchup has to be rt.

What I'm looking for to start him with confidence are opponents with weak run defenses and who are likely going to lose big to the pats.

 

[Bayhawks]

So, NE wins by 20+ points; leads by 20+ points most of the game, yet NE's "big back" only gets 12 carries (and almost 1/2 of them came on the very last drive). Despite potentially bad weather, the "smart" thinking being that NE would/should try to control TOP, etc, NE's RB usage is unpredictable.

It's hard to count on any NE RB as more than an emergency play/bye-week fill in.

Except Denver has one of the best run defenses in the NFL, maybe the best. I expect Gray will be more productive in the coming weeks where he has a better match up.

As previously posted (post 147), NE has exactly ONE game left where they don't face a great offense and/or great run defense. So, NE should either be forced to try to keep up with a high scoring offense, or face a D that is good at stopping the run. Not many good matchups on the schedule.

 

[Bayhawks]

It's hard to count on any NE RB as more than an emergency play/bye-week fill in.

Perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR each week. RB17 in PPG last 4 weeks and RB22 on the season.

I have him as RB72 in week 6, RB3 in week 7, RB37 in week 8, and RB10 in week 9. That's 2 weeks as a PPR RB1, and two weeks where he wasn't even a RB3. That's perfectly OK?

 

[Bayhawks]

We all knew that this was going to be a vereen type of game.

I sat gray in all leagues for that reason. Denver has maybe the best run stuffing defense in the league. Belicheck knew that and (smartly) attacked their weaknesses and not their strengths.

If you noticed, gray got 3 or 4 carries in the first series and they were trying to run it up the gut. They had very little success. So they went to vereen.

Gray has value but not as an every week no brainer plug and play. The matchup has to be rt.

What I'm looking for to start him with confidence are opponents with weak run defenses and who are likely going to lose big to the pats.

And how many of those games are left on the Pats schedule?

1-week 15 against Miami. Every other game features a team with a great offense and/or a great run defense.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

It's hard to count on any NE RB as more than an emergency play/bye-week fill in.

Perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR each week. RB17 in PPG last 4 weeks and RB22 on the season.

I have him as RB72 in week 6, RB3 in week 7, RB37 in week 8, and RB10 in week 9. That's 2 weeks as a PPR RB1, and two weeks where he wasn't even a RB3. That's perfectly OK?

Yep. If he scores more points than the other guys the distribution is close to 100% irrelevant.

 

[SameSongNDance]

It's hard to count on any NE RB as more than an emergency play/bye-week fill in.

Perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR each week. RB17 in PPG last 4 weeks and RB22 on the season.

I have him as RB72 in week 6, RB3 in week 7, RB37 in week 8, and RB10 in week 9. That's 2 weeks as a PPR RB1, and two weeks where he wasn't even a RB3. That's perfectly OK?

I understand you not wanting any piece of high variance players and as a Vereen owner in one league I feel like he's contributed to more of my losses than wins (even though this is anecdotal at best) but who hasn't been high variance around his production in PPR? It's kind of stupid to mention how he's been high variance without any context.

 

[Bayhawks]

It's hard to count on any NE RB as more than an emergency play/bye-week fill in.

Perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR each week. RB17 in PPG last 4 weeks and RB22 on the season.

I have him as RB72 in week 6, RB3 in week 7, RB37 in week 8, and RB10 in week 9. That's 2 weeks as a PPR RB1, and two weeks where he wasn't even a RB3. That's perfectly OK?

Yep. If he scores more points than the other guys the distribution is close to 100% irrelevant.

Okay, then the statement "Perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR each week" is false. In week 6, he didn't score more points than the other guys since (assuming 12 team league), he wasn't even a RB5. In week 8, he wasn't even a RB3.

So, if the statement was "perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR EVERY OTHER week," it would have been accurate, but that's with the benefit of hindsight. Without that benefit, NE's RB usage isn't nearly that predictable.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

So, if the statement was "perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR EVERY OTHER week," it would have been accurate, but that's with the benefit of hindsight. Without that benefit, NE's RB usage isn't nearly that predictable.

Vereen is #20 in terms of ppg in the first league I opened just now.

How he scored those points does not matter. So there are 19 guys you'd rather have, but a guy who scores fewer points will lose you games over time -- even if he scores them more consistently.

 

[SameSongNDance]

It's hard to count on any NE RB as more than an emergency play/bye-week fill in.

Perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR each week. RB17 in PPG last 4 weeks and RB22 on the season.

I have him as RB72 in week 6, RB3 in week 7, RB37 in week 8, and RB10 in week 9. That's 2 weeks as a PPR RB1, and two weeks where he wasn't even a RB3. That's perfectly OK?

Yep. If he scores more points than the other guys the distribution is close to 100% irrelevant.

Okay, then the statement "Perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR each week" is false. In week 6, he didn't score more points than the other guys since (assuming 12 team league), he wasn't even a RB5. In week 8, he wasn't even a RB3.

So, if the statement was "perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR EVERY OTHER week," it would have been accurate, but that's with the benefit of hindsight. Without that benefit, NE's RB usage isn't nearly that predictable.

Again, which low-end RB2 puts up exactly low-end RB2 #'s on a weekly basis? How is your point not completely arbitrary without context?

 

[Bayhawks]

It's hard to count on any NE RB as more than an emergency play/bye-week fill in.

Perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR each week. RB17 in PPG last 4 weeks and RB22 on the season.

I have him as RB72 in week 6, RB3 in week 7, RB37 in week 8, and RB10 in week 9. That's 2 weeks as a PPR RB1, and two weeks where he wasn't even a RB3. That's perfectly OK?

I understand you not wanting any piece of high variance players and as a Vereen owner in one league I feel like he's contributed to more of my losses than wins (even though this is anecdotal at best) but who hasn't been high variance around his production in PPR? It's kind of stupid to mention how he's been high variance without any context.

That's a good point. If I have time later I'll take a look at that. At first glance, I think you might be right, that a number of RBs in that range are high variance guys & maybe I have a bit of bias towards NE RBs.

 

[Bayhawks]

So, if the statement was "perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR EVERY OTHER week," it would have been accurate, but that's with the benefit of hindsight. Without that benefit, NE's RB usage isn't nearly that predictable.

Vereen is #20 in terms of ppg in the first league I opened just now.

How he scored those points does not matter. So there are 19 guys you'd rather have, but a guy who scores fewer points will lose you games over time -- even if he scores them more consistently.

How may not matter, but when certainly does.

Matt Asiata, for example.

He's currently RB 22 in PPR, right ahead of Vereen. It's doubtful anyone started him week 1, when ADP was around. But from week 2 on, if you had him in your lineup, he got you 19, 10, 31, 7, 2, 4, 6, & 27 points. He might have won you 2-3 games, but he almost certainly would have lost you 3-4, and yet he is a RB2 in PPR.

I'd rather have the guy who doesn't blow up for the 31 and 27 point games, but also doesn't have the 2, 4, 6, or 7 point games either.

As has been pointed out, though, perhaps it's a common "flaw" of RBs in this range, and maybe I'm biased by NE's RB usage.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

It's hard to count on any NE RB as more than an emergency play/bye-week fill in.

Perfectly ok trotting out Vereen as RB2 in PPR each week. RB17 in PPG last 4 weeks and RB22 on the season.

PPR: Agreed. Take the good with the bad like you do with all non-elite RBs. Roll with him as RB2 and fine with it.

He's a PPR RB1 in games started since Ridley went down.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I was really hoping or expecting at least a carry or two near the goalline. Nope.

 

[SameSongNDance]

I stated it a while back in the Vereen thread, but NE's schedule of DEN/IND/DET/GB was more conducive to Vereen's success than whoever was going to be filling the Ridley role.

Really what we have here is a less predictable SJax albeit with a slightly higher ceiling. In PPR specifically, that's definitely not someone I want to lean on. I think Gray is going to have a 20/100/1 type game somewhere down the line but trying to guess when is super risky.

 

[NajehHejan]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Although it is a very dicey roll play week 11 when trying to make a push for the playoffs, I may be hitching my wagon to Mr. Jonas Gray [/SIZE]at FLEX. New England is on the road at Indy versus a high flying offense. I could see them trying to establish a running game, grind it out on the ground and chew up clock and keep Luck on the sidelines. Sure Billy Belicheck could dial up all pass plays and Vereen could see all the snaps. Or Bolden could carry the load. Or White would carry the load. But when alternative options are just as dicey, revving up Jonas Gray may pay off. No one cares about my team, but I’m looking at very little in terms of appealing upside elsewhere - a gimpy Lamar Miller who saw limited snaps and was part of a 3 headed RBBC and is now coming off a short week, pick up a dime a dozen crap shoot WR4 type like Brian Hartline, or a TE2 type sitting around like Scott Chandler.

[SIZE=10.5pt]Sometimes you just can’t ignore that voice in your head:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Get Jonas active…..[/SIZE]

 

[Warpig]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Sometimes you just can’t ignore that voice in your head:[/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]Get Jonas active…..[/SIZE]

Unfortunately, Belicheck can hear that voice in your head too and he will do something totally against that plan. Hell, you might as well start someone like Andre Brown. Wouldn't surprise me to see Belicheck pick up a street FA and have that player be the bellcow in a game.

Moral is, you can't start any Pats player not named Brady or Gronkowski with any sort of confidence.

 

[Run It Up]

Moral is, you can't start any Pats player not named Brady or Gronkowski with any sort of confidence.

I can, the trick is to not expect to be right 100% of the time.

 

[Warpig]

Moral is, you can't start any Pats player not named Brady or Gronkowski with any sort of confidence.

I can, the trick is to not expect to be right 100% of the time.

Well yeah, I guess you can...If you want to score 2 - 6 pts from those guys. I prefer to score at least 10 pts from a starter...and that's not asking much.

IDP players not included.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Moral is, you can't start any Pats player not named Brady or Gronkowski with any sort of confidence.

I can, the trick is to not expect to be right 100% of the time.

Well yeah, I guess you can...If you want to score 2 - 6 pts from those guys. I prefer to score at least 10 pts from a starter...and that's not asking much.

IDP players not included.

In PPR or standard?

In standard only 22 WRs, 19RBs and 4 TEs average 10+ PPG. Of course, that number increases greatly if we're talking PPR. If we are talking PPR however, Lafell averages 14.7, Edelman 14.1 and Vereen 12.4.

Either your arbitrary standards are hilariously high (standard) or you're clueless (PPR).

 

[Warpig]

Moral is, you can't start any Pats player not named Brady or Gronkowski with any sort of confidence.

I can, the trick is to not expect to be right 100% of the time.

Well yeah, I guess you can...If you want to score 2 - 6 pts from those guys. I prefer to score at least 10 pts from a starter...and that's not asking much.

IDP players not included.

In PPR or standard?

In standard only 22 WRs, 19RBs and 4 TEs average 10+ PPG. Of course, that number increases greatly if we're talking PPR. If we are talking PPR however, Lafell averages 14.7, Edelman 14.1 and Vereen 12.4.

Either your arbitrary standards are hilariously high (standard) or you're clueless (PPR).

If you are stuck having to start a NE RB then you are in serious doo-doo. Who wants to chase the points and rack your brain trying to figure out who to start? And often, it doesn't matter who you start...you aren't going to get starter points. Unless you are in the deepest of leagues a NE RB is not worth starting. I'm in a 32 team ppr league with deep rosters, I have Vereen and even he has been a disappointment. Behind the likes of Matt Asiata, Chris Ivory, Jeremy Hill, and Lamar Miller.

Ridley had two games this year where he notched over 20 carries. Week 2 (or 3) and 5 I believe. Since then, each RB has been sprinkled in a little.

It's not worth it just so you can come on here and say: "I started such and such NE RB this week and he scored 18 points! I told you so."

It's a total crapshoot and only worth it if you have zero other options.

Most people in here are in what...10 to 12 team leagues? LaFell, Edelman, and any NE RB probably aren't even in starting lineups in those types of leagues. UNLESS you have deep starting lineups.

For example, in my 12 team redraft with basic PPR scoring (not a lot of variables), out of Vereen, Lafell, Edelman, and Gray, ONLY Lafell is rostered and he's on the bench.

I don't have access to any of my standard scoring leagues at the moment, but I would bet that the outcome would be the same.

But seems to me you'd be pretty "clueless" if you did start them.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Moral is, you can't start any Pats player not named Brady or Gronkowski with any sort of confidence.

I can, the trick is to not expect to be right 100% of the time.

Well yeah, I guess you can...If you want to score 2 - 6 pts from those guys. I prefer to score at least 10 pts from a starter...and that's not asking much.

IDP players not included.

In PPR or standard?

In standard only 22 WRs, 19RBs and 4 TEs average 10+ PPG. Of course, that number increases greatly if we're talking PPR. If we are talking PPR however, Lafell averages 14.7, Edelman 14.1 and Vereen 12.4.

Either your arbitrary standards are hilariously high (standard) or you're clueless (PPR).

If you are stuck having to start a NE RB then you are in serious doo-doo. Who wants to chase the points and rack your brain trying to figure out who to start? And often, it doesn't matter who you start...you aren't going to get starter points. Unless you are in the deepest of leagues a NE RB is not worth starting. I'm in a 32 team ppr league with deep rosters, I have Vereen and even he has been a disappointment. Behind the likes of Matt Asiata, Chris Ivory, Jeremy Hill, and Lamar Miller.

Ridley had two games this year where he notched over 20 carries. Week 2 (or 3) and 5 I believe. Since then, each RB has been sprinkled in a little.

It's not worth it just so you can come on here and say: "I started such and such NE RB this week and he scored 18 points! I told you so."

It's a total crapshoot and only worth it if you have zero other options.

Most people in here are in what...10 to 12 team leagues? LaFell, Edelman, and any NE RB probably aren't even in starting lineups in those types of leagues. UNLESS you have deep starting lineups.

For example, in my 12 team redraft with basic PPR scoring (not a lot of variables), out of Vereen, Lafell, Edelman, and Gray, ONLY Lafell is rostered and he's on the bench.

I don't have access to any of my standard scoring leagues at the moment, but I would bet that the outcome would be the same.

But seems to me you'd be pretty "clueless" if you did start them.

I was just commenting on the arbitrary threshold you created to differentiate between fantasy starters, using anecdotes from your casual league doesn't really help your case. The fact that your league is in fact PPR proves my point (they all score 10+ PPG in PPR). LaFell is WR22, Edelman is WR28 and Vereen is RB20 on a PPG basis in PPR. All deserve serious start consideration on a week to week basis in most leagues. In fact, there have only been 5 better WRs than LaFell over the past 3 weeks. Whoever has LaFell rostered but decided to sit him in your league missed out on WR1 production.

The Ridley role in this offense is indeed a crapshoot, I never stated otherwise, but to assert that the only startable options on the 3rd most scoring offense in the league are just Brady and Gronk is beyond asinine.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Once again... a guy who scores 5 points on odd weeks and 19 points on even weeks (12ppg) will win you more games than the guy who scores 11ppg every single week.

No matter how uncomfortable the first guy makes you, 12 is more than 11.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Thump.

 

[dgr81]

picked him up a few hours ago,

 

[SameSongNDance]

How good does he looks I just turned on the game.