Reggie Bush (2 Viewers)

[Blackjacks]

While I agree with alot of what you say I have getting blistered on these boards for predicitng an injury to LJ last year and not liking him this year due to an injury concern again. Everyone has said how I can't predict an injury so while looking at Bush this year, according to most people, you should look at his ppg last year and project that for a full season since you should always assume a whole year out of everyone. True ppg doesn't really matter that much for last year btu it does help an outlook for this year.

Disagree... for some people, you should NEVER assume a full season. Do you assume Andre Johnson will play a full season?Reggie Bush is different, there's no reason to think he WON'T play a full season. But with some players, there's good reason to think they'll miss games - why - because they always do.

Bush didn't live up to the hype - but other "similar" RBs didn't explode on the scene in the NFL either.

Brian Westbrook took a few years to be more than a third down RB. It took Tiki a few years to be more than a kick returner. Both ended up being very good RBs.

Bush is going into this third season. I really think he's poised to break out.

I agree Switz

There was sarcasm in my voice when typing "you should treat everyone like they'll be healthy"

 

[TheFanatic]

PPG is a nice stat but misleading. He's getting me zero when he's out. Taking out the games he missed when calculating his worth is akin to saying, "yeah but if you take out that long run he would only have X.XX YPC for that game." But he had the long run. To selectively leave it out is misleading. To selectively leave out the games he misses is misleading in the opposite direction....He put up zeroes in those games. One of the basic requirements for a good FFB player is to be on the field. No way around that. The less a guy is on the field, the less chance he has to be a good football player unless of course you get rewarded at the end of the season for PPG. My league doesn't and I wouldn't play in a league that does. Take a look at Javon Walker. After two weeks last season the guy had a PPG of around 11 in non PPR leagues. He was on pace for a top 10 season (176 points to finish 9th just ahead of Marshall). That PPG and a quarter wouldn't buy you a stamp last year.

Taking out worst / best plays is completely different from saying what he actually does when he's on the field.Unless you're into projecting injuries and you think players will miss the same amount of time the next year (they usually do not), PPG is a relevant stat. Obviously you need to look further when using PPG, just like you do when using total points. But it is a good stat to start with.

Taking out the worst/best plays is exactly the same thing as skipping games he didn't play. And while you can substitute, you are looking at your 3rd and 4th option rather than your 1st or 2nd. Sometimes you catch lightning in a bottle with someone like Graham or Grant but a lot of times you grab what you think is a backup RB to the injured player and get a RBBC by the backup, the 3rd down back and the FB. Reggie didn't get hit much in college. Not behind that line. Probably not in Highschool either. Now he gets hit all the time. And usually goes down with the first hit. That tells me that he made the most in space in college but doesn't get that much space in the pros and never learned how to shirk off a hit or barrel over a secondary guy. Tough learning curve to pick up that skill in the NFL and does not bode well for the guy carrying a full load.I'm also guessing that he didn't have to play with a lot of pain in college as he didn't take many hits. That does not bode well for him staying on the field for 16 games. I think a reasonable argument can be made that Reggie won't play in 16 games this year and thus the PPG stat is misleading. It also requires that one who drafts Reggie plans on acquiring extra RB depth during a draft or offseason.

 

[switz]

I think a reasonable argument can be made that Reggie won't play in 16 games this year and thus the PPG stat is misleading.

What's the reasonable argument? That last year was the first time he missed any games in his NFL career?

 

[Jayrod]

I think a reasonable argument can be made that Reggie won't play in 16 games this year and thus the PPG stat is misleading.

What's the reasonable argument? That last year was the first time he missed any games in his NFL career?

I'd guess something like this:

Reggie didn't get hit much in college. Not behind that line. Probably not in Highschool either. Now he gets hit all the time. And usually goes down with the first hit. That tells me that he made the most in space in college but doesn't get that much space in the pros and never learned how to shirk off a hit or barrel over a secondary guy. Tough learning curve to pick up that skill in the NFL and does not bode well for the guy carrying a full load.I'm also guessing that he didn't have to play with a lot of pain in college as he didn't take many hits. That does not bode well for him staying on the field for 16 games.

 

[TheFanatic]

I think a reasonable argument can be made that Reggie won't play in 16 games this year and thus the PPG stat is misleading.

What's the reasonable argument? That last year was the first time he missed any games in his NFL career?

I'd guess something like this:

Reggie didn't get hit much in college. Not behind that line. Probably not in Highschool either. Now he gets hit all the time. And usually goes down with the first hit. That tells me that he made the most in space in college but doesn't get that much space in the pros and never learned how to shirk off a hit or barrel over a secondary guy. Tough learning curve to pick up that skill in the NFL and does not bode well for the guy carrying a full load.I'm also guessing that he didn't have to play with a lot of pain in college as he didn't take many hits. That does not bode well for him staying on the field for 16 games.

That and he never had to shoulder the load alone as a rookie and when Deuce got hurt in his second season Bush could only start 10 games. How many games do they play in a college season? Coincidence?

 

[Blackjacks]

I think a reasonable argument can be made that Reggie won't play in 16 games this year and thus the PPG stat is misleading.

What's the reasonable argument? That last year was the first time he missed any games in his NFL career?

I'd guess something like this:

Reggie didn't get hit much in college. Not behind that line. Probably not in Highschool either. Now he gets hit all the time. And usually goes down with the first hit. That tells me that he made the most in space in college but doesn't get that much space in the pros and never learned how to shirk off a hit or barrel over a secondary guy. Tough learning curve to pick up that skill in the NFL and does not bode well for the guy carrying a full load.

I'm also guessing that he didn't have to play with a lot of pain in college as he didn't take many hits. That does not bode well for him staying on the field for 16 games.

That and he never had to shoulder the load alone as a rookie and when Deuce got hurt in his second season Bush could only start 10 games. How many games do they play in a college season? Coincidence?

Just wondering something here. Since you have LT and he got hurt at the end of the year last year and is actually not going to even take a preseason rep this year, do you see him as an injury risk also?Also have you done any research on Reggie's high school career to make the comment that he didn't get hit much in high school or are you just saying that because he was a far superior athelete at the time?

Reggie has been a top ten rb (non ppr) ever since his first four weeks of his rookie year (points per a game.)

You also have to remember he was even hurt (torn PCL) and played through the pain. The kid is much tougher physically and mentally then your giving him credit for.

Are his #'s really that bad?

In 2 less than 2 years

161 catches

1159 yards recieving

312 carries

1146 yards rushing

15 total td's

So basically in less than 2 years he has avg. 1150 yards and 7 scores a year. It could be alot worse.

Fanatic, you never liked the guy and I always have so I see we're on different sides here but I will just end my arguement by saying this. If you think he has been horrible so far, which you definetly think, than you must really see him as a talent if those #'s are EXTREMELY disappointing to you.

 

[TheFanatic]

I think a reasonable argument can be made that Reggie won't play in 16 games this year and thus the PPG stat is misleading.

What's the reasonable argument? That last year was the first time he missed any games in his NFL career?

I'd guess something like this:

Reggie didn't get hit much in college. Not behind that line. Probably not in Highschool either. Now he gets hit all the time. And usually goes down with the first hit. That tells me that he made the most in space in college but doesn't get that much space in the pros and never learned how to shirk off a hit or barrel over a secondary guy. Tough learning curve to pick up that skill in the NFL and does not bode well for the guy carrying a full load.

I'm also guessing that he didn't have to play with a lot of pain in college as he didn't take many hits. That does not bode well for him staying on the field for 16 games.

That and he never had to shoulder the load alone as a rookie and when Deuce got hurt in his second season Bush could only start 10 games. How many games do they play in a college season? Coincidence?

Just wondering something here. Since you have LT and he got hurt at the end of the year last year and is actually not going to even take a preseason rep this year, do you see him as an injury risk also?Also have you done any research on Reggie's high school career to make the comment that he didn't get hit much in high school or are you just saying that because he was a far superior athelete at the time?

Reggie has been a top ten rb (non ppr) ever since his first four weeks of his rookie year (points per a game.)

You also have to remember he was even hurt (torn PCL) and played through the pain. The kid is much tougher physically and mentally then your giving him credit for.

Are his #'s really that bad?

In 2 less than 2 years

161 catches

1159 yards recieving

312 carries

1146 yards rushing

15 total td's

So basically in less than 2 years he has avg. 1150 yards and 7 scores a year. It could be alot worse.

Fanatic, you never liked the guy and I always have so I see we're on different sides here but I will just end my arguement by saying this. If you think he has been horrible so far, which you definetly think, than you must really see him as a talent if those #'s are EXTREMELY disappointing to you.

LT normally doesn't take snaps in preseason. No how many he had last year? 0. 2006? 0.And let me boil down your list of stats here for Bush. The guy is a Running Back, right? One that has never gotten more than 600 yards in a single season. Hell, Marshall Faulk had better numbers in a single season that Bush had in two. His average numbers boil down to this PER YEAR:

81.5 catches

579 yards receiving

156 rushes

573 yards rushing

7.5 TD's

Yeah, those numbers are that bad. 72 total yards per game for a guy that catches 80 balls per season? Yeah. those numbers suck....

 

[Blackjacks]

I think a reasonable argument can be made that Reggie won't play in 16 games this year and thus the PPG stat is misleading.

What's the reasonable argument? That last year was the first time he missed any games in his NFL career?

I'd guess something like this:

Reggie didn't get hit much in college. Not behind that line. Probably not in Highschool either. Now he gets hit all the time. And usually goes down with the first hit. That tells me that he made the most in space in college but doesn't get that much space in the pros and never learned how to shirk off a hit or barrel over a secondary guy. Tough learning curve to pick up that skill in the NFL and does not bode well for the guy carrying a full load.

I'm also guessing that he didn't have to play with a lot of pain in college as he didn't take many hits. That does not bode well for him staying on the field for 16 games.

That and he never had to shoulder the load alone as a rookie and when Deuce got hurt in his second season Bush could only start 10 games. How many games do they play in a college season? Coincidence?

Just wondering something here. Since you have LT and he got hurt at the end of the year last year and is actually not going to even take a preseason rep this year, do you see him as an injury risk also?Also have you done any research on Reggie's high school career to make the comment that he didn't get hit much in high school or are you just saying that because he was a far superior athelete at the time?

Reggie has been a top ten rb (non ppr) ever since his first four weeks of his rookie year (points per a game.)

You also have to remember he was even hurt (torn PCL) and played through the pain. The kid is much tougher physically and mentally then your giving him credit for.

Are his #'s really that bad?

In 2 less than 2 years

161 catches

1159 yards recieving

312 carries

1146 yards rushing

15 total td's

So basically in less than 2 years he has avg. 1150 yards and 7 scores a year. It could be alot worse.

Fanatic, you never liked the guy and I always have so I see we're on different sides here but I will just end my arguement by saying this. If you think he has been horrible so far, which you definetly think, than you must really see him as a talent if those #'s are EXTREMELY disappointing to you.

LT normally doesn't take snaps in preseason. No how many he had last year? 0. 2006? 0.And let me boil down your list of stats here for Bush. The guy is a Running Back, right? One that has never gotten more than 600 yards in a single season. Hell, Marshall Faulk had better numbers in a single season that Bush had in two. His average numbers boil down to this PER YEAR:

81.5 catches

579 yards receiving

156 rushes

573 yards rushing

7.5 TD's

Yeah, those numbers are that bad. 72 total yards per game for a guy that catches 80 balls per season? Yeah. those numbers suck....

U didn't answer my question. Do you see LT as an injury risk this year due to his injury at the end of the year last year?Also Reggie hasn't even played a whole two year so let's save the "never gotten" line. You keep hating, it's okay.

As bad as those #'s are he is still avg. double digit fanatsy points per game over that span.

 

[TheFanatic]

U didn't answer my question. Do you see LT as an injury risk this year due to his injury at the end of the year last year?

I do not see LT as an Injury Risk. He has very little injury in his career while Reggie has missed significant time compared to the amount of games he could've played in. LT has played in what? 95%+ of his total games? Reggie has played in 87.5% of his possible games. Not all that good for a young RB.

Also Reggie hasn't even played a whole two year so let's save the "never gotten" line.

Why should I not use the words, "never gotten," in terms of how many yards he has gotten in a season. It's absolutely correct. He's a RB that has never gotten to 600 yards rushing. What should I say? "While Reggie hasn't quite lived up to the hype of the #2 pick his sub 600 yards rushing each of his first two seasons bode well for the seasons to come?"In two seasons he has done pretty crappy. OK, I'll give you mediocre. Crappy in terms of where he was drafted. Mediocre if that part is disregarded.

You keep hating, it's okay.

I'll keep on calling them like I see them and maybe the next time Reggie goes to a Proctologist they will find your head or at least a firm imprint of your lips on both cheeks...

As bad as those #'s are he is still avg. double digit fanatsy points per game over that span.

Performing well fantasy wise while not performing well NFL wise does not bode well for future success on the field or in fantasy terms. But don't worry, you can get let Reggie ride off into free agency after this season right about the time the Saints can start looking at going in a different direction as the need to play him because of his contract size lessens....

 

[Jedimaster21]

I think a reasonable argument can be made that Reggie won't play in 16 games this year and thus the PPG stat is misleading.

What's the reasonable argument? That last year was the first time he missed any games in his NFL career?

I'd guess something like this:

Reggie didn't get hit much in college. Not behind that line. Probably not in Highschool either. Now he gets hit all the time. And usually goes down with the first hit. That tells me that he made the most in space in college but doesn't get that much space in the pros and never learned how to shirk off a hit or barrel over a secondary guy. Tough learning curve to pick up that skill in the NFL and does not bode well for the guy carrying a full load.

I'm also guessing that he didn't have to play with a lot of pain in college as he didn't take many hits. That does not bode well for him staying on the field for 16 games.

That and he never had to shoulder the load alone as a rookie and when Deuce got hurt in his second season Bush could only start 10 games. How many games do they play in a college season? Coincidence?

Just wondering something here. Since you have LT and he got hurt at the end of the year last year and is actually not going to even take a preseason rep this year, do you see him as an injury risk also?Also have you done any research on Reggie's high school career to make the comment that he didn't get hit much in high school or are you just saying that because he was a far superior athelete at the time?

Reggie has been a top ten rb (non ppr) ever since his first four weeks of his rookie year (points per a game.)

You also have to remember he was even hurt (torn PCL) and played through the pain. The kid is much tougher physically and mentally then your giving him credit for.

Are his #'s really that bad?

In 2 less than 2 years

161 catches

1159 yards recieving

312 carries

1146 yards rushing

15 total td's

So basically in less than 2 years he has avg. 1150 yards and 7 scores a year. It could be alot worse.

Fanatic, you never liked the guy and I always have so I see we're on different sides here but I will just end my arguement by saying this. If you think he has been horrible so far, which you definetly think, than you must really see him as a talent if those #'s are EXTREMELY disappointing to you.

LT normally doesn't take snaps in preseason. No how many he had last year? 0. 2006? 0.And let me boil down your list of stats here for Bush. The guy is a Running Back, right? One that has never gotten more than 600 yards in a single season. Hell, Marshall Faulk had better numbers in a single season that Bush had in two. His average numbers boil down to this PER YEAR:

81.5 catches

579 yards receiving

156 rushes

573 yards rushing

7.5 TD's

Yeah, those numbers are that bad. 72 total yards per game for a guy that catches 80 balls per season? Yeah. those numbers suck....

The numbers are really what worries me about Bush. He hasn't produced well and has had every opportunity to be successful. I can't think of another back that had numbers like this and turned out to be an elite back. He just doesn't do much with his opportunities.

 

[Blackjacks]

U didn't answer my question. Do you see LT as an injury risk this year due to his injury at the end of the year last year?

I do not see LT as an Injury Risk. He has very little injury in his career while Reggie has missed significant time compared to the amount of games he could've played in. LT has played in what? 95%+ of his total games? Reggie has played in 87.5% of his possible games. Not all that good for a young RB. So LT and Reggie are both coming off injury and usually the younger guy recovers better.

Also Reggie hasn't even played a whole two year so let's save the "never gotten" line.

Why should I not use the words, "never gotten," in terms of how many yards he has gotten in a season. It's absolutely correct. He's a RB that has never gotten to 600 yards rushing. What should I say? You make it sound like he has been in the league for a long time. One season where he split carries and one injured season doesn't really give you a good enough opinion of a guy. I would say when using the line "never gotten" you'd have alittle more of a past to go off of, that's all.

"While Reggie hasn't quite lived up to the hype of the #2 pick his sub 600 yards rushing each of his first two seasons bode well for the seasons to come?"

In two seasons he has done pretty crappy. OK, I'll give you mediocre. Crappy in terms of where he was drafted. Mediocre if that part is disregarded.

I can live with that.

You keep hating, it's okay.

I'll keep on calling them like I see them and maybe the next time Reggie goes to a Proctologist they will find your head or at least a firm imprint of your lips on both cheeks... I JUST KEEP BELIEVING. WON'T WAIVER ON A GUY DUE TO ONE SEASON

As bad as those #'s are he is still avg. double digit fanatsy points per game over that span.

Performing well fantasy wise while not performing well NFL wise does not bode well for future success on the field or in fantasy terms. But don't worry, you can get let Reggie ride off into free agency after this season right about the time the Saints can start looking at going in a different direction as the need to play him because of his contract size lessens....

Reggie is a huge star in NO. He isn't going anywhere. Also all I care about is fantasy but I think he does other things on the field that aren't on his stat sheet. He converts alot of first downs. He causes matchup problems for other players on his team. He makes d coordinators play it safe and he is a great blocker.

 

[TheFanatic]

Reggie is a huge star in NO. He isn't going anywhere. Also all I care about is fantasy but I think he does other things on the field that aren't on his stat sheet. He converts alot of first downs. He causes matchup problems for other players on his team. He makes d coordinators play it safe and he is a great blocker.

Too bad he's a lousy RB. If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

It doesn't take long. Look at all the talk by fans wanting SJax traded this offseason after 1 down season....If Reggie falters this year it will be 3 bad seasons.

 

[switz]

Reggie is a huge star in NO. He isn't going anywhere. Also all I care about is fantasy but I think he does other things on the field that aren't on his stat sheet. He converts alot of first downs. He causes matchup problems for other players on his team. He makes d coordinators play it safe and he is a great blocker.

Too bad he's a lousy RB. If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

It doesn't take long. Look at all the talk by fans wanting SJax traded this offseason after 1 down season....If Reggie falters this year it will be 3 bad seasons.

So... did you think Marshall Faulk was a terrible RB three years into his career?

 

[TheFanatic]

Reggie is a huge star in NO. He isn't going anywhere. Also all I care about is fantasy but I think he does other things on the field that aren't on his stat sheet. He converts alot of first downs. He causes matchup problems for other players on his team. He makes d coordinators play it safe and he is a great blocker.

Too bad he's a lousy RB. If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

It doesn't take long. Look at all the talk by fans wanting SJax traded this offseason after 1 down season....If Reggie falters this year it will be 3 bad seasons.

So... did you think Marshall Faulk was a terrible RB three years into his career?

Nope....But let's compare apples to apples here. Bush has only had 2 years in. Wanna compare his first two years to Marshall Faulk's first 2 year?

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Reggie is a huge star in NO. He isn't going anywhere. Also all I care about is fantasy but I think he does other things on the field that aren't on his stat sheet. He converts alot of first downs. He causes matchup problems for other players on his team. He makes d coordinators play it safe and he is a great blocker.

Too bad he's a lousy RB. If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

It doesn't take long. Look at all the talk by fans wanting SJax traded this offseason after 1 down season....If Reggie falters this year it will be 3 bad seasons.

So... did you think Marshall Faulk was a terrible RB three years into his career?

Nope....But let's compare apples to apples here. Bush has only had 2 years in. Wanna compare his first two years to Marshall Faulk's first 2 year?

We've already done that. It's a TERRIBLE comparison. Faulk looked good to great in his first two years. Bush has looked terrible.You are absolutely right. Bush is on the cusp right now. He's been given the benefit of the doubt (or a free pass depending on how you look at it) so far for the most part. But there have been mutterings already, and it won't take long for a couple of snowballs to turn into an avalanche.

It will be very telling if Deuce (and all of the other backs on the team) look better than Bush again while running on two gimpy knees.

Something I haven't mentioned until now is the fact that when you get right down to it, journeyman/backup Stecker looked just as good if not better in very similar situations (better YPC, a longer run, more productive per target, fewer turnovers - pretty much everything). Thomas (undrafted rookie) looked a LOT better, though in a very limited data set. Deuce was vastly more effective the year he was healthy and they were both playing. At the time, everybody was claiming Deuce looked good because of the "threat" Bush represented and how the defense "keyed" on him, but frankly I think those were excuses to mask Bush's ineffectiveness even then.

 

[switz]

Reggie is a huge star in NO. He isn't going anywhere. Also all I care about is fantasy but I think he does other things on the field that aren't on his stat sheet. He converts alot of first downs. He causes matchup problems for other players on his team. He makes d coordinators play it safe and he is a great blocker.

Too bad he's a lousy RB. If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

It doesn't take long. Look at all the talk by fans wanting SJax traded this offseason after 1 down season....If Reggie falters this year it will be 3 bad seasons.

So... did you think Marshall Faulk was a terrible RB three years into his career?

Nope....But let's compare apples to apples here. Bush has only had 2 years in. Wanna compare his first two years to Marshall Faulk's first 2 year?

Sure, why not...4.1 and 3.7 for Faulk

3.6 and 3.7 for Bush

Bush improved, albeit slightly, Faulk declined. Of course Faulk had much more of a workload. But still, if you're looking at their statistical performance, Bush is looking pretty decent next to Faulk's first two years.

 

[TheFanatic]

Reggie is a huge star in NO. He isn't going anywhere. Also all I care about is fantasy but I think he does other things on the field that aren't on his stat sheet. He converts alot of first downs. He causes matchup problems for other players on his team. He makes d coordinators play it safe and he is a great blocker.

Too bad he's a lousy RB. If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

It doesn't take long. Look at all the talk by fans wanting SJax traded this offseason after 1 down season....If Reggie falters this year it will be 3 bad seasons.

So... did you think Marshall Faulk was a terrible RB three years into his career?

Nope....But let's compare apples to apples here. Bush has only had 2 years in. Wanna compare his first two years to Marshall Faulk's first 2 year?

Sure, why not...4.1 and 3.7 for Faulk

3.6 and 3.7 for Bush

Bush improved, albeit slightly, Faulk declined. Of course Faulk had much more of a workload. But still, if you're looking at their statistical performance, Bush is looking pretty decent next to Faulk's first two years.

Faulk had 1800 total yards his rookie year and 1550 his second year. Faulk had 1200 yards rushing alone his rookie year and 1K his second year or more than DOUBLE what Bush got his first two seasons. Faulk had 12 TD's his rookie year and 14 his second year. And you pull out YPC as the stat to look at? Actually not even YPC, just that one improved and the other declined. Who's showing bias now? This is utterly ridiculous. There is but a single stat that Bush is better at, not even YPC just the fact that his went up .1 from year 1 to year two. Faulk was equal to or higher than Bush's highest YPC but his went down. Faulk gets the benefit of the doubt after those two years and even after year 3 when he had a very down year. Bush will get no such luxury.

Seriously you need to stop posting in these Bush and/or MJD threads before you burn all board cred if you haven't already....

 

[Blackjacks]

Reggie is a huge star in NO. He isn't going anywhere. Also all I care about is fantasy but I think he does other things on the field that aren't on his stat sheet. He converts alot of first downs. He causes matchup problems for other players on his team. He makes d coordinators play it safe and he is a great blocker.

Too bad he's a lousy RB. If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

It doesn't take long. Look at all the talk by fans wanting SJax traded this offseason after 1 down season....If Reggie falters this year it will be 3 bad seasons.

So... did you think Marshall Faulk was a terrible RB three years into his career?

Nope....But let's compare apples to apples here. Bush has only had 2 years in. Wanna compare his first two years to Marshall Faulk's first 2 year?

Sure, why not...4.1 and 3.7 for Faulk

3.6 and 3.7 for Bush

Bush improved, albeit slightly, Faulk declined. Of course Faulk had much more of a workload. But still, if you're looking at their statistical performance, Bush is looking pretty decent next to Faulk's first two years.

Faulk had 1800 total yards his rookie year and 1550 his second year. Faulk had 1200 yards rushing alone his rookie year and 1K his second year or more than DOUBLE what Bush got his first two seasons. Faulk had 12 TD's his rookie year and 14 his second year. And you pull out YPC as the stat to look at? Actually not even YPC, just that one improved and the other declined. Who's showing bias now? This is utterly ridiculous. There is but a single stat that Bush is better at, not even YPC just the fact that his went up .1 from year 1 to year two. Faulk was equal to or higher than Bush's highest YPC but his went down. Faulk gets the benefit of the doubt after those two years and even after year 3 when he had a very down year. Bush will get no such luxury.

Seriously you need to stop posting in these Bush and/or MJD threads before you burn all board cred if you haven't already....

Since you know all Scotty can you tell me what Bush's #'s will be at the end of the year. It seems you are the expert here on Bush and I want to hear your projections.In his thread you have him down for 1400 and 8. Is that still where you have him?

That would have him having a better third year than Faulk wouldn't it?

 

[Liquid Tension]

Going back to the OP,The reason why Bush was second-to-last in DVOA last year was because of his seven fumbles. DVOA gives huge penalties for fumbles, but it's something that Bush can work on and fix (see Tiki Barber about ten years ago), not something intrinsic about his ability.

Does someone have these rankings? fumbles should penalize a guy, but you are correct it does not take away from his potential. Keep in mind Reggie fumbled in the Championship game as well so he may have some issues.

 

[Liquid Tension]

Holy Schneikes:Thanks for your post and starting this thread. I always appreciate counterpoints to challenge my preconceptions.

Great post.For the large number of people who will trash a poster who submits a different opinion than theirs, this should be required reading.

Make your point, counter point and discuss, but do so with an open mind where each side should learn something even if they don't agree. I sum it up as discussions should lead to ME learning something and raising my eyebrows to something I was not aware of or didn't take into account...

 

[TheFanatic]

Since you know all Scotty can you tell me what Bush's #'s will be at the end of the year. It seems you are the expert here on Bush and I want to hear your projections.In his thread you have him down for 1400 and 8. Is that still where you have him?

I will have to reassess my thoughts on Bush. With Shockey there, those short, dump passes to Shockey have to come from somewhere and Shockey is Payton's guy from way back....

That would have him having a better third year than Faulk wouldn't it?

As somebody from St. Louis that watched the HOFer play many times in person and on TV you of all people should not even go here. Faulk had a down year his third year or what Bush lovers call a great season...

 

[switz]

Reggie is a huge star in NO. He isn't going anywhere. Also all I care about is fantasy but I think he does other things on the field that aren't on his stat sheet. He converts alot of first downs. He causes matchup problems for other players on his team. He makes d coordinators play it safe and he is a great blocker.

Too bad he's a lousy RB. If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

It doesn't take long. Look at all the talk by fans wanting SJax traded this offseason after 1 down season....If Reggie falters this year it will be 3 bad seasons.

So... did you think Marshall Faulk was a terrible RB three years into his career?

Nope....But let's compare apples to apples here. Bush has only had 2 years in. Wanna compare his first two years to Marshall Faulk's first 2 year?

Sure, why not...4.1 and 3.7 for Faulk

3.6 and 3.7 for Bush

Bush improved, albeit slightly, Faulk declined. Of course Faulk had much more of a workload. But still, if you're looking at their statistical performance, Bush is looking pretty decent next to Faulk's first two years.

Faulk had 1800 total yards his rookie year and 1550 his second year. Faulk had 1200 yards rushing alone his rookie year and 1K his second year or more than DOUBLE what Bush got his first two seasons. Faulk had 12 TD's his rookie year and 14 his second year. And you pull out YPC as the stat to look at? Actually not even YPC, just that one improved and the other declined. Who's showing bias now? This is utterly ridiculous. There is but a single stat that Bush is better at, not even YPC just the fact that his went up .1 from year 1 to year two. Faulk was equal to or higher than Bush's highest YPC but his went down. Faulk gets the benefit of the doubt after those two years and even after year 3 when he had a very down year. Bush will get no such luxury.

You are too funny. You're right, Faulk put up great totals. But you are the one saying Bush sucks because of his low YPC.Let's play this game...

If Bush got 314 rushes his rookie season, and kept his 3.6 YPC, he would have totalled 1,130 rush yards, along with his 742 receiving yards, giving him 1,872 yards his rookie season.

Imagine that, given the same opportunity - Bush would have put up very similar numbers as Faulk did.

Did you realize that Bush actually scored more TDs/att on the ground than Marshall Faulk did his rookie season? Did you know that Bush had more receiving TDs than Faulk did his rookie season?

Bush had LESS THAN HALF THE ATTEMPTS, AND YOU WANT TO USE TOTAL YARDS LOL - now who's comparing apples to oranges :(

On a per-touch basis, Bush has been very comparable to Faulk his first two seasons. Bush simply hasn't had the opportunity that Faulk had yet, unless somewhere in your brain you think 157 is equal to 314.

Your opinion that Faulk, who declined severely in years 2 and 3, got a benefit of the doubt that Bush (in your not-so-humble opinion) won't, in itself shows your bias.

Seriously you need to stop posting in these Bush and/or MJD threads before you burn all board cred if you haven't already....

Between the two of us, it's not me that needs to worry about board cred....

 

[switz]

Faulk had a down year his third year or what Bush lovers call a great season...

Oh I love these excuses... Faulk had a down year... he had 40+ more carries, and got 8 more yards than Bush did last season. Oh and Faulk scored 1 more TD.I love your double standard....

 

[TheFanatic]

Reggie is a huge star in NO. He isn't going anywhere. Also all I care about is fantasy but I think he does other things on the field that aren't on his stat sheet. He converts alot of first downs. He causes matchup problems for other players on his team. He makes d coordinators play it safe and he is a great blocker.

Too bad he's a lousy RB. If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

It doesn't take long. Look at all the talk by fans wanting SJax traded this offseason after 1 down season....If Reggie falters this year it will be 3 bad seasons.

So... did you think Marshall Faulk was a terrible RB three years into his career?

Nope....But let's compare apples to apples here. Bush has only had 2 years in. Wanna compare his first two years to Marshall Faulk's first 2 year?

Sure, why not...4.1 and 3.7 for Faulk

3.6 and 3.7 for Bush

Bush improved, albeit slightly, Faulk declined. Of course Faulk had much more of a workload. But still, if you're looking at their statistical performance, Bush is looking pretty decent next to Faulk's first two years.

Faulk had 1800 total yards his rookie year and 1550 his second year. Faulk had 1200 yards rushing alone his rookie year and 1K his second year or more than DOUBLE what Bush got his first two seasons. Faulk had 12 TD's his rookie year and 14 his second year. And you pull out YPC as the stat to look at? Actually not even YPC, just that one improved and the other declined. Who's showing bias now? This is utterly ridiculous. There is but a single stat that Bush is better at, not even YPC just the fact that his went up .1 from year 1 to year two. Faulk was equal to or higher than Bush's highest YPC but his went down. Faulk gets the benefit of the doubt after those two years and even after year 3 when he had a very down year. Bush will get no such luxury.

You are too funny. You're right, Faulk put up great totals. But you are the one saying Bush sucks because of his low YPC.Let's play this game...

If Bush got 314 rushes his rookie season, and kept his 3.6 YPC, he would have totalled 1,130 rush yards, along with his 742 receiving yards, giving him 1,872 yards his rookie season.

Imagine that, given the same opportunity - Bush would have put up very similar numbers as Faulk did.

Did you realize that Bush actually scored more TDs/att on the ground than Marshall Faulk did his rookie season? Did you know that Bush had more receiving TDs than Faulk did his rookie season?

Bush had LESS THAN HALF THE ATTEMPTS, AND YOU WANT TO USE TOTAL YARDS LOL - now who's comparing apples to oranges

On a per-touch basis, Bush has been very comparable to Faulk his first two seasons. Bush simply hasn't had the opportunity that Faulk had yet, unless somewhere in your brain you think 157 is equal to 314.

Your opinion that Faulk, who declined severely in years 2 and 3, got a benefit of the doubt that Bush (in your not-so-humble opinion) won't, in itself shows your bias.

Seriously you need to stop posting in these Bush and/or MJD threads before you burn all board cred if you haven't already....

Between the two of us, it's not me that needs to worry about board cred....

Hey, hotrod, where in this thread did I bring up YPC? I haven't. I brought up the fact that he hasn't broken 600 yards rushing his first two seasons. I have mentioned YPC in threads past, particularly when comparing him to MJD, but never did I mention YPC in this thread. Didn't you mock my debating skills? That's pretty funny from a guy with such poor reading comprehension.

But, hey keep on comparing Bush to Faulk. This should get intersting May even require a spin off....

 

[joffer]

 

[gianmarco]

 

[TheFanatic]

Did you realize that Bush actually scored more TDs/att on the ground than Marshall Faulk did his rookie season? Did you know that Bush had more receiving TDs than Faulk did his rookie season?

Bush had LESS THAN HALF THE ATTEMPTS, AND YOU WANT TO USE TOTAL YARDS LOL - now who's comparing apples to oranges

On a per-touch basis, Bush has been very comparable to Faulk his first two seasons. Bush simply hasn't had the opportunity that Faulk had yet, unless somewhere in your brain you think 157 is equal to 314.

This is a pretty good point. Except for one little thing. It would seem, when given the opportunity to get the bulk of the carries, like Faulk had his first two season, Bush broke down. Deuce went down. Bush did nothing with his opportunity. He continued his sorry attempt at becoming an actual running back rather than a trick play/3rd down back. So you penalize Faulk for shouldering the load but having a low YPC but praise Bush for not being able to shoulder the load and also having a low yards per carry. You say Bush did more with the opportunity he had and I say he did the exact opposite. In order to truly do so he needed to stay on the field. He needed to show he can handle the abuse of 16 games and 20 carries (just throwing numbers out, not setting this in stone as some sort of benchmark for great RB's). Bush was outplayed by just about every other RB on the team behind the same line.

Making the most of the opportunity is not 570+ yards and a sub 4.0 YPC and a total of 5 TD's. One run and one catch of more than 20 yards (22 and 25 yards respectively) for the guy who can score from anywhere? 3.7 YPC and 5.7 YPR? Yeah, I can see where you get the Faulk Comparisons....

Your mastery of logic and statistics are truly amazing...

 

[bcr8f]

Welcome to the non-Reggie Bush Bandwagon.Population: Everyone But You Up Until Now...

I traded him a few months ago. Is selling him for $1 selling high? It was possibly double his value.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Faulk vs Bush year 1:

1282 yards rushing vs 565 yards rushing Faulk crushes Bush

Longest rush 52 yards vs 18 yards (wow) Faulk crushes Bush

YPC 4.1 (a mark Bush has never hit yet) vs 3.6 Faulk crushes Bush

52 receptions vs 88 receptions, uhoh - Bush crushes Faulk BUT

a 10.0 yards per reception vs 8.4 - Faulk significantly better than bush

longest reception 85 yards vs 74 - advantage Faulk

12 total TDs vs 8 total TDs- big advantage Faulk

Faulk vs Bush year 2

1078 yards (2nd year over 1000) yards rushing vs 581 yards rushing Faulk crushes Bush again

Longest rush 40 yards vs 22 yards (wow) Faulk crushes Bush again

YPC 3.7 vs 3.7 even

56 receptions vs 73 receptions, uhoh - Bush crushes Faulk BUT

a 8.5 yards per reception vs a dismal 5.7 - Faulk crushes Bush

longest reception 34 yards vs 25 - advantage Faulk

14 total TDs vs 6 total TDs- Faulk crushes Bush

Other than that, yeah, there should be exactly the same level of optimism for these guys at that point in the careers.

stats according to pro-football-reference.com

 

[Blackjacks]

Faulk had a down year his third year or what Bush lovers call a great season...

Oh I love these excuses... Faulk had a down year... he had 40+ more carries, and got 8 more yards than Bush did last season. Oh and Faulk scored 1 more TD.I love your double standard....

Just let them keep thinking what they want Switz. They can grab MJD in the early 2nd and we'll get the steal of the draft with Reggie in the early 3rd.

 

[Blackjacks]

Since you know all Scotty can you tell me what Bush's #'s will be at the end of the year. It seems you are the expert here on Bush and I want to hear your projections.

In his thread you have him down for 1400 and 8. Is that still where you have him?

I will have to reassess my thoughts on Bush. With Shockey there, those short, dump passes to Shockey have to come from somewhere and Shockey is Payton's guy from way back....

That would have him having a better third year than Faulk wouldn't it?

As somebody from St. Louis that watched the HOFer play many times in person and on TV you of all people should not even go here.

Faulk had a down year his third year or what Bush lovers call a great season...

I think comparing Faulk and Bush is a compliment to the future HOF. No one loved to watch Faulk more than I did but I just see a lot of similarity in their games. I should say to you that you shouldn't hate on Reggie due to not seeing him as much. You have in the past really jumped on Reggie's back due to his low ypc in other thread's so I agree where Switz was coming from but if you go off stats right now there is no comparisons between the two. However, I think your going to see Reggie explode this year.

 

[switz]

Hey, hotrod, where in this thread did I bring up YPC? I haven't. I brought up the fact that he hasn't broken 600 yards rushing his first two seasons. I have mentioned YPC in threads past, particularly when comparing him to MJD, but never did I mention YPC in this thread.

Didn't you mock my debating skills? That's pretty funny from a guy with such poor reading comprehension.

Really

Too bad he's a lousy RB.

If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

Man Fanatic, you needed a longer rest to recuperate from your vacation apparently.

 

[switz]

Did you realize that Bush actually scored more TDs/att on the ground than Marshall Faulk did his rookie season? Did you know that Bush had more receiving TDs than Faulk did his rookie season?

Bush had LESS THAN HALF THE ATTEMPTS, AND YOU WANT TO USE TOTAL YARDS LOL - now who's comparing apples to oranges

On a per-touch basis, Bush has been very comparable to Faulk his first two seasons. Bush simply hasn't had the opportunity that Faulk had yet, unless somewhere in your brain you think 157 is equal to 314.

This is a pretty good point. Except for one little thing. It would seem, when given the opportunity to get the bulk of the carries, like Faulk had his first two season, Bush broke down. Deuce went down. Bush did nothing with his opportunity. He continued his sorry attempt at becoming an actual running back rather than a trick play/3rd down back.

Ahhhh.... so now that your one argument can't hold water, you're turning to the "injury prone" argument. Yeah, a sprained MCL is "breaking down." Bush did "nothing" with his opportunity - he was just on par, per rushing opportunity, with Marshall Faulk's second year.

So you penalize Faulk for shouldering the load but having a low YPC but praise Bush for not being able to shoulder the load and also having a low yards per carry. You say Bush did more with the opportunity he had and I say he did the exact opposite. In order to truly do so he needed to stay on the field. He needed to show he can handle the abuse of 16 games and 20 carries (just throwing numbers out, not setting this in stone as some sort of benchmark for great RB's).

You do realize that Marshall Faulk suffered an injury his third year, right? Does that mean he broke down? He couldn't shoulder the load?See the problem is, with Bush you are quick to make sweeping, broad conclusions, with very little sample. With Faulk, we've seen his entire career now, so it's easy to say - you know what, it was a freak injury. He didn't break down.

Bush should be given the same benefit of the doubt. Especially as he played on the injury for a few weeks before missing games.

You say Bush did more with the opportunity he had and I say he did the exact opposite.

Really? Where did I say that?You do realize "on-par" and "comparable" do not mean better... right?

Making the most of the opportunity is not 570+ yards and a sub 4.0 YPC and a total of 5 TD's. One run and one catch of more than 20 yards (22 and 25 yards respectively) for the guy who can score from anywhere? 3.7 YPC and 5.7 YPR? Yeah, I can see where you get the Faulk Comparisons....

And in Faulk's second season he averaged 3.7YPC and 8.5YPR. Also, Bush had 6, not 5 TDs.

Your mastery of logic and statistics are truly amazing...

There you go sinking to personal attacks again because you can't make a point. Except that there is nothing wrong with my logic, or statistics.

 

[switz]

HS, I really thought you were above cherry picking stats...

Faulk vs Bush year 1:

1282 yards rushing vs 565 yards rushing Faulk crushes Bush 314 rush opps vs. 155

Longest rush 52 yards vs 18 yards (wow) Faulk crushes Bush meaningless stat, really

YPC 4.1 (a mark Bush has never hit yet) vs 3.6 Faulk crushes Bush weeks 2 & 9 severely skew Reggie's YPC, he did have 7 games with 4.5+ YPC

52 receptions vs 88 receptions, uhoh - Bush crushes Faulk BUT yep

a 10.0 yards per reception vs 8.4 - Faulk significantly better than bush hahaha, you claim that more opps is a plus for Faulk, but now it's a negative for Bush

longest reception 85 yards vs 74 - advantage Faulk yeah, one got the ball 11 yards further from the end zone, meaningless

12 total TDs vs 8 total TDs- big advantage Faulk Bush had a higher TD/att than Faulk

Faulk vs Bush year 2

1078 yards (2nd year over 1000) yards rushing vs 581 yards rushing Faulk crushes Bush again 289 rush opps vs. 157

Longest rush 40 yards vs 22 yards (wow) Faulk crushes Bush again meaningless stat, really

YPC 3.7 vs 3.7 even

56 receptions vs 73 receptions, uhoh - Bush crushes Faulk BUT again, more opps is a plus for Faulk, but a negative for Bush

a 8.5 yards per reception vs a dismal 5.7 - Faulk crushes Bush 5.7 is dismal? does 0.5 make it HOF worthy then? Like when Faulk averaged 6.2 YPR in '04?

longest reception 34 yards vs 25 - advantage Faulk meaningless stat, really

14 total TDs vs 6 total TDs- Faulk crushes Bush

Other than that, yeah, there should be exactly the same level of optimism for these guys at that point in the careers.

Perhaps not the same level of optimism, but certainly Bush shouldn't be viewed as pessimistically as some on these boards would have it.And as someone who has been a lifelong Colts fan, Marshall Faulk was not very well viewed at all after his second and third seasons. Those doubts proved unfounded, and Bush should be given the same leeway.

I don't think Bush will EVER be as good as Faulk was... but my point is, there was a time when people thought Marshall Faulk would never be as good as Faulk became.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Does anyone really think he will ever be a RB who gets 15-18 carries a game consistently?

Is he really a big play threat, what is his career long run?

I know he catches alot of passes, but does anyone really think the Saints will continue to throw as many times as they did last year?

Will he catch 80+ passes now that the Saints actually have a legit #2 pass catcher?

Will bush ever be given goalline carries?

I was as high on Bush as anyone after he got drafted, but came to the conclusion halfway through last season that he will never be a dependable FF RB in non-PPR leagues. I traded him this offseason for Jay Cutler and Anthony Gonzalez while his name still carries some value.

 

[switz]

Does anyone really think he will ever be a RB who gets 15-18 carries a game consistently?

Not really. But neither did Marshall Faulk (97 of his 176 career games had 15+ carries, 55%). Nor does Brian Westbrook (32 of his 85 career games, 38%). Bush has seen 15+ carries in 25% of his games so far. Interestingly, of his 3 highest carry games, 2 of them are among his top-4 in YPC. 20-6.3 YPC, 19-5.1 YPC.

Is he really a big play threat, what is his career long run?

His longest runs are 22, 20, 18, 18 going by memory. He hasn't really broken a long run form a handoff. He has had a 74 yard dumpoff and run for a TD.

I know he catches alot of passes, but does anyone really think the Saints will continue to throw as many times as they did last year?

Yes, they are a passing team. Bush actually saw more receptions as a rookie than last season.

Will he catch 80+ passes now that the Saints actually have a legit #2 pass catcher?

He's only had 80+ receptions once. But I believe he will continue to get 70 receptions.

Will bush ever be given goalline carries?

He has been given them already.

I was as high on Bush as anyone after he got drafted, but came to the conclusion halfway through last season that he will never be a dependable FF RB in non-PPR leagues. I traded him this offseason for Jay Cutler and Anthony Gonzalez while his name still carries some value.

His value in PPR is definitely higher than in on-PPR. However, I do believe he will hold value as a #1 RB in any 12 team league. He is #9-11 RB in my books.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Will bush ever be given goalline carries?

He has been given them already.

Do you think he will be used in the future as a goalline back?

 

[Coeur de Lion]

The Bush/Faulk comparisons are absolutely absurd, as are the Bush/Barber and Bush/Westbrook comparisons.

Faulk outproduced Bush over their first two years by just about every conceivable metric, despite playing in a poor offense that finished 27th and 22nd in the NFL. The Saints have finished 1st and 4th in Bush's first two years. Faulk was the sole focus of opposing defenses, while Bush has had a great passing attack to take the pressure off.

Barber and Westbrook didn't produce at first due to lack of opportunity. Bush has had plenty of opportunity and has looked flat out terrible. He has also been outplayed by virtually every other RB on the Saints' roster during his brief career.

Reggie Bush has received the opportunity that he has because of where he was drafted and how much $$$ he makes. Teams always give players they invest heavily in more chances than those that they don't, but that generally doesn't last forever. If Bush doesn't improve pretty dramatically this year, his role will shrink moving forward. The Saints are a playoff team and can't afford to continue to force touches to a guy who averages 3.7/5.7 and is noticably less effective than his backups. He'll be on the bench no matter what they are paying him eventually if he doesn't start making some big plays.

Saying that he could/should improve is one thing. I have my doubts, but at least it is a viable argument. Saying that he hasn't sucked for his first two years is something entirely different, and really isn't all that defensible a position. He has been brutal.

 

[switz]

Will bush ever be given goalline carries?

He has been given them already.

Do you think he will be used in the future as a goalline back?

In a dedicated role? No. Do I think they will have a dedicated GL RB? No.

 

[TheFanatic]

Hey, hotrod, where in this thread did I bring up YPC? I haven't. I brought up the fact that he hasn't broken 600 yards rushing his first two seasons. I have mentioned YPC in threads past, particularly when comparing him to MJD, but never did I mention YPC in this thread.

Didn't you mock my debating skills? That's pretty funny from a guy with such poor reading comprehension.

Really

Too bad he's a lousy RB.

If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

Man Fanatic, you needed a longer rest to recuperate from your vacation apparently.

Uh, that was a future scenario. Just explaining how the guy that everyone in NO has a crush on now will be ridden out of town when he doesn't produce and everyone looks past the PR and the commercials and the large contract and sees a joke of a RB. Never did I bash his YPC in this thread from 2006 or 2007. Do you understand past, present and future tense? You may want to look into this

 

[switz]

Hey, hotrod, where in this thread did I bring up YPC? I haven't. I brought up the fact that he hasn't broken 600 yards rushing his first two seasons. I have mentioned YPC in threads past, particularly when comparing him to MJD, but never did I mention YPC in this thread.

Didn't you mock my debating skills? That's pretty funny from a guy with such poor reading comprehension.

Really

Too bad he's a lousy RB.

If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

Man Fanatic, you needed a longer rest to recuperate from your vacation apparently.

Uh, that was a future scenario. Just explaining how the guy that everyone in NO has a crush on now will be ridden out of town when he doesn't produce and everyone looks past the PR and the commercials and the large contract and sees a joke of a RB. Never did I bash his YPC in this thread from 2006 or 2007. Do you understand past, present and future tense? You may want to look into this

Nice try.... but you clearly were using your opinion of past performance as a basis for your future example. The implication of your first sentence is that his performance per opportunity has been subpar, and in the NFL, performance per rushing opportunity is called YPC.

Then you predict 3.2 YPC for a game, which would be absurd if you didn't think it likely based on previous statistics in the first place, and you use that as why the fans will think he sucks.

Yes, you clearly brought up YPC first.

I'm done with you. You can't even stick to an argument.

 

[TheFanatic]

Since you know all Scotty can you tell me what Bush's #'s will be at the end of the year. It seems you are the expert here on Bush and I want to hear your projections.

In his thread you have him down for 1400 and 8. Is that still where you have him?

I will have to reassess my thoughts on Bush. With Shockey there, those short, dump passes to Shockey have to come from somewhere and Shockey is Payton's guy from way back....

That would have him having a better third year than Faulk wouldn't it?

As somebody from St. Louis that watched the HOFer play many times in person and on TV you of all people should not even go here.

Faulk had a down year his third year or what Bush lovers call a great season...

I think comparing Faulk and Bush is a compliment to the future HOF.

No one loved to watch Faulk more than I did but I just see a lot of similarity in their games. I should say to you that you shouldn't hate on Reggie due to not seeing him as much. You have in the past really jumped on Reggie's back due to his low ypc in other thread's so I agree where Switz was coming from but if you go off stats right now there is no comparisons between the two. However, I think your going to see Reggie explode this year.

No it's a slap in the face to Faulk. To say that Faulk was mediocre in his first two seasons and so was Reggie is a joke. Faulk played well. Reggie has sucked. And you should no better...

 

[TheFanatic]

Hey, hotrod, where in this thread did I bring up YPC? I haven't. I brought up the fact that he hasn't broken 600 yards rushing his first two seasons. I have mentioned YPC in threads past, particularly when comparing him to MJD, but never did I mention YPC in this thread.

Didn't you mock my debating skills? That's pretty funny from a guy with such poor reading comprehension.

Really

Too bad he's a lousy RB.

If he doesn't make more out of the opportunities given him this year it will be the beginning of the end for Reggie in NO. First, a columnist will talk about how the Reggie hasn't lived up to the hype or the salary. Then the talk shows will start to talk about it. Then a few boos when he gets hit behind the line of scrimmage. ESPN will pick up the story. Then more boos a few weeks later when he only gets 2 yards. No more highlights on ESPN for the one great spin move on a 14 yard carry while only getting 3.2 YPC for the game. Then pretty soon he's getting booed whenever he touches the ball as the media and the fan base is in a frenzy to get the guy off the Saints.

Man Fanatic, you needed a longer rest to recuperate from your vacation apparently.

Uh, that was a future scenario. Just explaining how the guy that everyone in NO has a crush on now will be ridden out of town when he doesn't produce and everyone looks past the PR and the commercials and the large contract and sees a joke of a RB. Never did I bash his YPC in this thread from 2006 or 2007. Do you understand past, present and future tense? You may want to look into this

Nice try.... but you clearly were using your opinion of past performance as a basis for your future example. The implication of your first sentence is that his performance per opportunity has been subpar, and in the NFL, performance per rushing opportunity is called YPC.

Then you predict 3.2 YPC for a game, which would be absurd if you didn't think it likely based on previous statistics in the first place, and you use that as why the fans will think he sucks.

Yes, you clearly brought up YPC first.

I'm done with you. You can't even stick to an argument.

I was talking about a scenario in which the city and fans can turn on the guy. That does not imply that I am making an absolute comment on his YPC in the past. I just threw out a 10,000 foot view of how a guy so beloved can be sent out of town on a rail. In this scenario in a single game he got a 3.2 YPC. Doesn't mean that's what his YPC is for the season or have any tie to the past. You are making that inference. Not me. But if you weren't so touchy about how low it is and everyone tagging the guy about it you may have seen that. I have tagged him in the past on it but not in this thread. Nice try.

 

[TheFanatic]

The Bush/Faulk comparisons are absolutely absurd, as are the Bush/Barber and Bush/Westbrook comparisons.Faulk outproduced Bush over their first two years by just about every conceivable metric, despite playing in a poor offense that finished 27th and 22nd in the NFL. The Saints have finished 1st and 4th in Bush's first two years. Faulk was the sole focus of opposing defenses, while Bush has had a great passing attack to take the pressure off.Barber and Westbrook didn't produce at first due to lack of opportunity. Bush has had plenty of opportunity and has looked flat out terrible. He has also been outplayed by virtually every other RB on the Saints' roster during his brief career.Reggie Bush has received the opportunity that he has because of where he was drafted and how much $$$ he makes. Teams always give players they invest heavily in more chances than those that they don't, but that generally doesn't last forever. If Bush doesn't improve pretty dramatically this year, his role will shrink moving forward. The Saints are a playoff team and can't afford to continue to force touches to a guy who averages 3.7/5.7 and is noticably less effective than his backups. He'll be on the bench no matter what they are paying him eventually if he doesn't start making some big plays.Saying that he could/should improve is one thing. I have my doubts, but at least it is a viable argument. Saying that he hasn't sucked for his first two years is something entirely different, and really isn't all that defensible a position. He has been brutal.

Uh, Switz, care to comment or are you fighting the Blackjacks to get a better angle to plant your lips on Reggie's butt right now?

 

[TheFanatic]

So you penalize Faulk for shouldering the load but having a low YPC but praise Bush for not being able to shoulder the load and also having a low yards per carry. You say Bush did more with the opportunity he had and I say he did the exact opposite. In order to truly do so he needed to stay on the field. He needed to show he can handle the abuse of 16 games and 20 carries (just throwing numbers out, not setting this in stone as some sort of benchmark for great RB's).

You do realize that Marshall Faulk suffered an injury his third year, right? Does that mean he broke down? He couldn't shoulder the load?See the problem is, with Bush you are quick to make sweeping, broad conclusions, with very little sample. With Faulk, we've seen his entire career now, so it's easy to say - you know what, it was a freak injury. He didn't break down.

Bush should be given the same benefit of the doubt. Especially as he played on the injury for a few weeks before missing games.

Obviously he could shoulder the load. He did so for 2 seasons before getting injured in year 3. Considering they had no other offense, he was getting clobbered every game. Reggie on the other hand was unable to be the starter for more than, what, 10 games? And in those 10 games he just plain didn't run the ball well. He caught the ball well. Many balls. Just couldn't shake the linebacker or the secondary guys.

I used to say he was a hella receiver. I need to amend that to he has hella hands. But being a good receiver requires more than just catching the ball.

 

[travdogg]

Reggie has been a top ten rb (non ppr) ever since his first four weeks of his rookie year (points per a game.)

Umm... I play in a standard scoring(non-ppr) league and Bush hasn't finished higher than 20th in either of his 1st 2 years.

 

[Ripleys]

can you girls take a time out? your constant quoting of each other is getting old...seriously. We all know Bush is great, as is MJD. Case closed. Thank you, goodnight.

 

[renesauz]

He takes to many hits and they are HARD because there's an animosity against Reggie Bush in the NFL because he's the 2nd highest paid player from endorsements in ANY sport (2nd or 3rd I think... top 5 for sure... Tiger is #1 of course).... for some reason this motivates defenders to really wallop him...

Great theory, but NFL defenders wallop the crap out of any player they can. Generally speaking, if a player was holding back, he'd be benched or released in preseason.

 

[Blackjacks]

Reggie has been a top ten rb (non ppr) ever since his first four weeks of his rookie year (points per a game.)

Umm... I play in a standard scoring(non-ppr) league and Bush hasn't finished higher than 20th in either of his 1st 2 years.

Look at the points per a game and he is. Take his weeks 5-16 his first year and then last year until he got hurt and he is the #8 rb over that span.

 

[renesauz]

I'm sorry I've read this whole thread, hoping for something usefull.

The bottom line is that Bush has been dissapointing in his first couple of seasons by almost any measuring stick, BUT has shown enough that NO isn't ready to write him off, and many FF owners aren't ready to either.

To me, he's a very safe pick in redraft as it's likely he'll have enough opportunities to at least justify his ADP, plus has enough upside to have a chance to do better. He's especially attractive in PPR.

He's a lot tougher in dynasty, because if he doesn't improve his YPA/C, his opportunities will surely decrease. The reason the debate is so hot is because he's so unconventional in how he gets his yards/fantasy points that the traditional measuring sticks don't seem very adequate, particularly given how he's used and the injury he played through last year.

I can't fault anyone steering clear, nor can I fault anyone who's targetting him. This is one of those guys we are not likely to ever get a clear consesus on. Personally, I like him as an RB2 in PPR dynasty, and will buy at that price, or sell at low RB1.