Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Any hope for Steven Jackson this year? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter UFO
- Start date
Chase Stuart
Footballguy
Why wouldn't Jackson still be in the top 5? Great RBs on bad teams can put up terrific numbers.
David Yudkin
Footballguy
It rained today. Therefore . . . FORECAST: 365 days of rain.
You can't base much off of a single game. If so, Tom Brady will have 850 passing attempts this year and the Rams won't score all season.
You can't base much off of a single game. If so, Tom Brady will have 850 passing attempts this year and the Rams won't score all season.
Agreed on defenses...the SF/AZ game looked more like a Balt/Pitt slugfest than a good ole NFC west shootout...Seatle's D looked pretty good as well. This isn't your father's NFC West!
Just wondering if us owners should use his artificial ranking to our advantage and dump him for a decent Wr or up and coming back.
Just wondering if us owners should use his artificial ranking to our advantage and dump him for a decent Wr or up and coming back.
SSOG
Moderator
You're right. That scrub barely broke 4 ypc on a terrible team. Quick, trade for Frank Gore and his 30 yards on 22 carries, instead! Or DeAngelo Williams and his 2.6 yards per carry! Or Michael Turner and his sub-3 ypc. All of the other highly drafted RBs looked so much better than SJax this week!
supermark_28
Footballguy
It's a shame he can't play against his own defense cuz if Julius can shred them up I could only imagine what SJax would do.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not saying drop him for Mike Bell or trade him for Fred Jackson. But you better keep your ear on the ground, Tonto. He only got 2 targets playing from behind the entire game, which they'll be doing a lot.
The gong may not have rung, but the fat lady is clearing her throat backstage.
The gong may not have rung, but the fat lady is clearing her throat backstage.
fozzy fosbourne
Footballguy
I like SJax but I do think that there is an elephant in the room that no one is talking about w/ regards to him this season, albeit a small one, and that is a new head coach in StL. It's not like the Rams had a winning formula before, so it while I wouldn't count on it, it could be possible that Jackson will not be leaned on the same way he has been in the past. Not much you can do about it, but something to keep in mind if we don't see him getting the same sort of touches as he has previously.
SSOG
Moderator
Whether he was targeted or not, the bulk of any RBs value is going to come from what he does running the ball, and Jackson did far more running the ball this week than several other highly drafted RBs (Turner, Williams, Gore, Tomlinson, Slaton, and Chris Johnson, just among those that immediately come to mind).
Oh, man if you're looking at him not in a PPR league, which is what this thread is about, he better be out of the top 10, much less top 5.
Lott's Fingertip
Footballguy
Week one is where NFL teams make their adjustments. Jackson is the linchpin of the Lambs offense, he will get plenty of carries AND targets. Expect mostly solid (8-14 pts non-ppr) fantasy performances, with a couple of duds and a couple of excellent games. You know, like most fantasy RBs.This is all very true, but we both know that even in non ppr leagues, SJax has derived a good amount of value from receptions. If they're not going to dump the ball off on to him that is a huuuuge red flag.
Lott's Fingertip
Footballguy
Considering that Jackson has never averaged fewer than 2.87 catches per game since his rookie year, and not less than 3.25 catches per game since Marshall Faulk's demise, do you think that Sunday's game is more indicative of his receiving totals, or the previous 55 games?
I'm just saying they have a new coach, they ran Holt and Pace out of town, have shown nothing on offense, while the rest of his division appears to have become much stronger on defense. It's not like nothing has changed since '06.I won't stop you from living in the past, though.
SSOG
Moderator
Big time X, there. Steven Jackson was 3rd in the league in PPG last year in standard scoring. As long as he's healthy, he's an uberstud.
Who says they're not going to dump the ball off to him? Are we really making sweeping judgments based off of one week's worth of results? I suppose Tim Hightower is really going to finish the season with 50% more receptions than Fitzgerald and Boldin COMBINED, too.
I'm not overreacting here, nor am I ignoring the fact this is a new coaching staff and they may change things more than we were expecting.
It's certainly something to keep an eye on though, because in order to remain an uber stud on that ppg basis, he does need to catch a lot of passes.
It's certainly something to keep an eye on though, because in order to remain an uber stud on that ppg basis, he does need to catch a lot of passes.
Anthony Borbely
Footballguy
Being as they struggled, I would expect S Jax to be heavily involved in the passing game. I can't imagine the coaches trying the same thing they did last week. I'm certain they saw only two targets and no catches and will make it a point to get him more involved.I think S Jax is at the top of the buy lows this week.
bengalbuck
Footballguy
I agree with both sides of this argument.
On the one hand, Sjax is one of only 10 or so guys who gets almost all of his team's carries. In this sense, I would be less worried about him than I would be some of the other top 10 backs (CJ, Deangelo, LT). With those guys, you have worries both about the potency of their offenses and their roles in them. I think because he is the focus of the offense and has good talent, he is still a legit top 10 or 15 back.
However, I also see the other side of the argument which is that he is probably overrated as a top 5 back. Even if he gets a good percentage of the team's touchdowns, are there enough to go around? Will he still have the same number of catches in the new offense? Average YPC aside, I would probably take a lot of the guys who were drafted below him (Gore, Westbrook, maybe Portis) over him because I don't see him as having a great chance at getting up to the 12 TD mark which he would need to be a top 5 or 10 back.
On the one hand, Sjax is one of only 10 or so guys who gets almost all of his team's carries. In this sense, I would be less worried about him than I would be some of the other top 10 backs (CJ, Deangelo, LT). With those guys, you have worries both about the potency of their offenses and their roles in them. I think because he is the focus of the offense and has good talent, he is still a legit top 10 or 15 back.
However, I also see the other side of the argument which is that he is probably overrated as a top 5 back. Even if he gets a good percentage of the team's touchdowns, are there enough to go around? Will he still have the same number of catches in the new offense? Average YPC aside, I would probably take a lot of the guys who were drafted below him (Gore, Westbrook, maybe Portis) over him because I don't see him as having a great chance at getting up to the 12 TD mark which he would need to be a top 5 or 10 back.
People keep mentioning it's a new coaching staff. Do you know anything about the staff? HC = Spagnuola, a defensive minded coach who's last job was as DC of the NY Giants, who run the ball a bit. The OC is Pat Shurmur, former QB coach of Philly, an offense that certainly makes use of it's RB's in the pass game. Spags spoke all offseason about how the Offense was going to run through Sjax, and Shurmur said shortly before the season started that he envisioned using SJax like Westy.
Going on all that, I think it's safe to stop blaming the new coaching staff. The problem was Bulger, and his trying to force everything downfield. I'm confident that it'll be addressed, and we'll see SJax more involved in the coming weeks, especially in the passing game.
Going on all that, I think it's safe to stop blaming the new coaching staff. The problem was Bulger, and his trying to force everything downfield. I'm confident that it'll be addressed, and we'll see SJax more involved in the coming weeks, especially in the passing game.
karmarooster
Footballguy
So who's going to play SJAX this week, on the road against Washington and Albert Haynesworth??
Bristol
Footballguy
MCguidance
Footballguy
TheGolfBallKid
Footballguy
x4, but only because I really don't have a better option (Moreno isn't a viable alternative yet).
MCguidance
Footballguy
Even if Moreno was healthy, he is not a better option than Sjax at this point.
Tau837
Footballguy
I am, and I don't really understand why it is in question. Are there really a lot of people around here that sit their first round pick who is healthy in week 2 based on matchups?
BigTuna
Footballguy
I always get a kick out of these posts. hug me. I'm unsure about my first round pick. Sjax is just as viable as he was last year. He averaged 4.2 yards a carry against the seahawks in a game where his team was shut out. He's ranked 11 in yards in week one which makes him a first round pick in most leagues. Tighten up your purse and hold onto him for a couple weeks. Or trade him, maybe there's a shark in your league that wants to buy low.
karmarooster
Footballguy
If he couldn't get it done versus the Seahawks, how is he going to get it done against the redskins who held Brandon Jacobs and the Giants stellar o-line to less than 3.0ypc? Bradshaw had a nice 5.0ypc game, but I'd say Jackson is more similar to Jacobs than Bradshaw. And the Rams o-line doesn't have HALF the talent of the Giants. The only silver lining is that the Rams may be not be able to run up the middle, and thus will feed Jackson several screens and passes in the flat. Surely he will make his first reception of the season this week. But his first TD? I'd have to wager no. If you were smart and drafted Michael Bush very late, there's no reason he can't out-produce Jackson against a very weak Kansas City defense. (last week: Ray Rice 5.7ypc, McGahee 4.4ypc.) If Fargas continues to be troubled by the hamstring, I just may sit my 1st round pick for my 12th round pick.In the end, all that matters is who will put up more points, not who you drafted first.
karmarooster
Footballguy
What does this mean?
MCguidance
Footballguy
It means he has faith in his drafting in week 2.What does this mean?
karmarooster
Footballguy
However, of course you are completely right that I am over reacting. Jackson started off slow last year but his points increased in each of the first 4 weeks, from 10.4 to 16 to 17.8 to 29.8.
Last edited by a moderator:
MCguidance
Footballguy
Seriously, he's a beast, just needs health and he will get his.
Tau837
Footballguy
When you drafted Jackson in the first round, did you expect to platoon him? If so, why didn't you draft someone else who you would be confident in starting every week? If not, why would you allow a single game to rattle you into benching the guy who you drafted first... implying you expected him to be your best player?
Lott's Fingertip
Footballguy
I apologize for using those pesky statistics to make a point.1 game vs. 4 seasons of gamesOne can argue about Jackson being in or out of the top 5 or top 10 RBs, but to suggest he will hardly be used in the passing game because he wasn't used in it this past Sunday is just silly.
karmarooster
Footballguy
I didn't expect to platoon Jackson, of course. I thought that the problems created by the Rams below-average offense and thus fewer TD opportunities for Jackson would be compensated by receptions. HC Spagnolo brought someone from the eagles with him, not sure if it is OC or RBC or someone else, but I remember reading in the summer on Joe's email reports about Jackson working on more advanced routes, taking a page from Westbrook. To see him making receptions downfield and not just on your run-of-the-mill RB screens and dumpoffs in the flat would justify Jackson as a top 5 pick. However, it didn't come to be against the Seahawks. Surely he will catch a few passes against the Redskins. But if the Skins could keep both Jacobs and Bradshaw out of the endzone, then it seems likely that Jackson won't score a TD either, esp. given that the Rams as a team put up a goose-egg last week.Just Win Baby said:
Now, Michael Bush exceeded my expectations in his first game. He scored a TD and looked to be about a 60/40 partner with DMC. Against a very week KC Defense, it seems VERY likely he will score a TD again. Consider all the success the Ravens had with their combined RBBC:
35 carries, 171 yards (4.9ypc), 2 TDs
9 receptions, 66 yards, 1 TDGive Michael Bush 40% of that total and I'd be happy. Also, Bush ran for 16 for 90 and a TD last year in KC.
It's looking like it may have been a mistake to take Jackson at 1.05 and 1.10 as I did in two leagues. If the Rams can demonstrate that they aren't the WORST offense in the NFL, then he can go back to starting. But I don't think that will happen against the Redskins.
It sucks to admit my first round pick was a mistake, but that may be the case. Can you offer a compelling argument why I SHOULD start Jackson, other than simply "never bench you stud" or first round pick?
ETA - What could one reasonably expect this week for SJax? I wouldn't count on anything more than about 70 yards, plus 4 receptions for 40 yards. No TDs. Maybe 15 points. Of course, I didn't expect him to go off last year vs. the Cowboys for 3 TDs, so anything could happen. Bush should be capable of 90 yards, 1 TD, 2 receptions, 20 yards. 19 points.
Last edited by a moderator:
Neil Beaufort Zod
Footballguy
Jackson owners can take heart in the fact that the team was shut out. If not throwing to Jackson was something they wanted to try...it obviously didn't work. I think they'll make a point to get him a number of catches in week 2. He'll probably have three or four in the first quarter.
He's the same guy we expected-- talented player on a terrible team. I think he's a legit top five RB in PPR. Forte, too.
He's the same guy we expected-- talented player on a terrible team. I think he's a legit top five RB in PPR. Forte, too.
SSOG
Moderator
Hmmm... compelling argument... compelling argument...How about the fact that Steven Jackson has finished in the top 5 in PPG for three straight seasons? Maybe the fact that Steven Jackson is easily one of the 5 best RBs in the entire NFL? Not doing it for you? How about the fact that in his "bad" week he was still a *SIGNIFICANTLY* more effective runner than Frank Gore, Michael Turner, DeAngelo Williams, LaDanian Tomlinson, Steve Slaton, and Chris Johnson. You benching all those guys for Michael Bush, too?Still need convincing? How about the fact that Production = Talent + Opportunity, and Steven Jackson absolutely dominates Mike Bush in both categories so unbelievably thoroughly that it's like they aren't even playing the same sport? How about the fact that it's patently absurd to discard 4 years worth of data because of one game's worth of results.How about the fact that Steven Jackson had a game in 2006 with 0 receptions on 0 targets... en route to a 90 reception season?How about the fact that this whole idea is so preposterous I shouldn't even have to make these arguments?
Last year, Adrian Peterson went against the Saints in week 5.
He had 21 attempts for 32 yards. His long run went for 7. 1 reception for 9 yards, no touchdowns.
He finished as the #3 rb on the year.
The fact of the matter is, ALL rb's have bad games. Heck, Turner has quite a few clunkers last year, yet he managed to finish as the #2 rb. If SJax blew up his first week and then had some down games, people wouldn't worry quite as much. If he's still done nothing come week 6 then I'll drive the panic wagon. After one week? It's certainly something to keep an eye on but there's no reason to panic or do anything drastic like keep him out of your lineup.
He had 21 attempts for 32 yards. His long run went for 7. 1 reception for 9 yards, no touchdowns.
He finished as the #3 rb on the year.
The fact of the matter is, ALL rb's have bad games. Heck, Turner has quite a few clunkers last year, yet he managed to finish as the #2 rb. If SJax blew up his first week and then had some down games, people wouldn't worry quite as much. If he's still done nothing come week 6 then I'll drive the panic wagon. After one week? It's certainly something to keep an eye on but there's no reason to panic or do anything drastic like keep him out of your lineup.
Last edited by a moderator:
karmarooster
Footballguy
Thanks for the input... that's a very compelling argument, and that's why I drafted him! Ya! Back on the Sjax train! I'll find a starting roster spot for Michael Bush somewhere else.
Last edited by a moderator:
MCguidance
Footballguy
This is good stuff, thanks SSOG.
This coupled with SSOG's inputs and the fact that its the first game of the season should be enough not to overreact. Give the team and the dude sometime. It takes time for a team to come together under a new coach. Especially when that team is the as bad as the Rams were. I just traded for him in my longest running dynasty league and held him in another 3 keeper league I play in. Spagnulo has been consistently good and so has Shurmer. I may be biased by my Eagles 
but I did spend time reviewing Shurmer's record when I traded for Jax this off season. He is a good coach and I don't think he would have left the Eagles if he didn't believe they would become successful in St Louis.On top of all that watch him play. The man runs hard. He is fast. He is big. He is strong. I only saw bits and pieces of the game but there was one play where Jackson was basically caught in the backfield but managed to gain 8- 10 yards. He stiffed armed the defender into the ground and then blew by him and the other defenders. It may have been called back but even so how many other backs in the league have a chance of making that play? Only highlight of Jackson I could find is him bouncing a play back against the grain and running away from the defenders around the corner.
sho nuff
Footballguy
A lot of promise...but some tough defenses he will face.
Washington this week can play some D on the run.
GB so far looks improved and shut down Forte
SF looked pretty good
MN...nothing needed to be said there
Jax
Indy...better here
Detroit...nice again
NO...decent though they could easily be down a lot early in this one.
Ari...decent
SEA...not good if it goes like it did game 1
CHI...ouch
TN...ouch
HOU...yippeee week 15
ARI...again decent in week 16.
Next few weeks don't look great for his schedule...so might be a great buy low for those middle weeks if you want to hold off for a week or 2.
Washington this week can play some D on the run.
GB so far looks improved and shut down Forte
SF looked pretty good
MN...nothing needed to be said there
Jax
Indy...better here
Detroit...nice again
NO...decent though they could easily be down a lot early in this one.
Ari...decent
SEA...not good if it goes like it did game 1
CHI...ouch
TN...ouch
HOU...yippeee week 15
ARI...again decent in week 16.
Next few weeks don't look great for his schedule...so might be a great buy low for those middle weeks if you want to hold off for a week or 2.
I'd say there's a few things in week 1 that aren't exactly representative of team's plans for the season (thx Delhomme).
Seattle has an underrated run defense, as well. Their stats dont look very good because teams were hitting garbage time against them by the third quarter last year. There's a lot of talent on their defensive line that I think showed this weekend.
Seattle has an underrated run defense, as well. Their stats dont look very good because teams were hitting garbage time against them by the third quarter last year. There's a lot of talent on their defensive line that I think showed this weekend.
Last edited by a moderator:
ScoobyDoo
Footballguy
Agreed. It's over.
Similar threads
