Michael Bush injures finger (1 Viewer)

[TeamDingo]

.

 

[mdlane]

Look at McFadden's line when he carried a full load before saying he'll average 1 ypc based on the one preseason game you saw.

Other than one big game against Kansas City his rookie year, his lines have not been impressive. His upside is probably around what he did against Houston in week 16 of 2008: 12 carries for 46 yards, 5 catches for 41 yards. His downside is what he did against the chiefs last year: 12 carries for 35 yards, 2 catches for 20 yards.

If McFadden is healthy, and gets starter carries, he will produce.

Based on what exactly? In games where McFadden has had over 10 carries, he's had one very good game (week 2 vs KC in 2008), four decent games (week 15 vs NE in 2008; week 16 vs HOU in 2008; week 1 vs SD in 2009; week 15 vs DEN in 2009) and four awful games (week 3 vs BUF in 2008; week 12 vs DEN in 2008; week 2 vs KC in 2009; week 3 vs DEN in 2009).

I think your estimate of how this will break down is really a best case scenario from the pov of someone that owns Bush on a fantasy team. Bush was being overvalued before this, and maybe now he'll come a little more reasonable.

Bush is the only NFL-caliber running back on their roster. End of story.

When I said "a full load," I was thinking along the lines of starter's carries (15-20+), not short-end-of-a-RBBC carries (10-12). McFadden carried the ball more than 12 times only once in 2009, the first game: 17/68 (4.0 ypc), 2/25 receiving (12.5 ypc). That's way better than what you or damageinc are projecting for him.In 2008, McFadden carried the ball more than 12 times only twice:week 2: 21/164, 1 TD (7.8 ypc); 1/9 receivingweek 3: 14/42 (3 ypc); 3/6 receiving.McFadden got turf toe in the 4th quarter of week 2 (before the week 3 game). Again, this is way better than what you or damageinc are projecting for him.My point is that when McFadden (1) is healthy, and (2) gets a "full load" - aka starter's touches, he produces. End of story. The problem is that McFadden has been serially injured since his rookie season and stuck in a 3-way RBBC. That will in all likelihood not be the case for the next couple weeks. I think the wise course is to keep an open mind and put out a late-round claim for McFadden.

 

[Mark Wimer]

Well, McFadden has an opportunity here. I'm not sure whether he will a) establish himself as a viable FFB option or b) make the Raiders wish Bush wasn't hurt, but for DMC owners, the good news is he will get to show which direction he's headed right away.I think you can throw out all of the numbers from prior seasons on Bush and McFadden. The Raiders passing game couldn't be any worse, it's better, the numbers will go up.. Question is.. who gets them.

Both backs were severely handicapped by Purple Drank Russell - it was super-easy to beat the Raiders by simply stacking the box and daring Russell to throw (and win the game by throwing if he could - which he couldn't). In the pros, facing 8-9 in the box for a vast majority of plays is going to shut down almost any back (Steven Jackson is one of the few who can run between the 20's in such a situation, and even he gets clogged up/shut down in the compressed area around the goal line - see his rushing TD totals for the last three years to see what I mean). Darren McFadden is not as talented as Jackson, but he is a genuine NFL-caliber back IMO. I think he'll put up much improved numbers this year and claim the starting job now that Bush is likely out of the picture for 2-3 regular season games. It is definitely McFadden's chance to grab the brass ring in Oakland, IMO.Jason Campbell isn't a Rich Gannon or Ken Stabler (in their prime), but he IS light years ahead of where JaMarcus Russell was as a starter for the Raiders.

 

[LawFitz]

Seems like best case for Bush is missing the first 2-3 games. And that's assuming he has no setbacks, which isn't at all a safe assumption, especially given that it's his lead hand.

 

[Steed]

but he is a genuine NFL-caliber back IMO. I think he'll put up much improved numbers this year and claim the starting job now that Bush is likely out of the picture for 2-3 regular season games. It is definitely McFadden's chance to grab the brass ring in Oakland, IMO.

I cant believe we're in 2010 and people are still saying this about DMC.

 

[Babu Bhatt2]

Look at McFadden's line when he carried a full load before saying he'll average 1 ypc based on the one preseason game you saw.

Other than one big game against Kansas City his rookie year, his lines have not been impressive. His upside is probably around what he did against Houston in week 16 of 2008: 12 carries for 46 yards, 5 catches for 41 yards. His downside is what he did against the chiefs last year: 12 carries for 35 yards, 2 catches for 20 yards.

If McFadden is healthy, and gets starter carries, he will produce.

Based on what exactly? In games where McFadden has had over 10 carries, he's had one very good game (week 2 vs KC in 2008), four decent games (week 15 vs NE in 2008; week 16 vs HOU in 2008; week 1 vs SD in 2009; week 15 vs DEN in 2009) and four awful games (week 3 vs BUF in 2008; week 12 vs DEN in 2008; week 2 vs KC in 2009; week 3 vs DEN in 2009).

I think your estimate of how this will break down is really a best case scenario from the pov of someone that owns Bush on a fantasy team. Bush was being overvalued before this, and maybe now he'll come a little more reasonable.

Bush is the only NFL-caliber running back on their roster. End of story.

When I said "a full load," I was thinking along the lines of starter's carries (15-20+), not short-end-of-a-RBBC carries (10-12). McFadden carried the ball more than 12 times only once in 2009, the first game: 17/68 (4.0 ypc), 2/25 receiving (12.5 ypc). That's way better than what you or damageinc are projecting for him.In 2008, McFadden carried the ball more than 12 times only twice:week 2: 21/164, 1 TD (7.8 ypc); 1/9 receivingweek 3: 14/42 (3 ypc); 3/6 receiving.McFadden got turf toe in the 4th quarter of week 2 (before the week 3 game). Again, this is way better than what you or damageinc are projecting for him.My point is that when McFadden (1) is healthy, and (2) gets a "full load" - aka starter's touches, he produces. End of story. The problem is that McFadden has been serially injured since his rookie season and stuck in a 3-way RBBC. That will in all likelihood not be the case for the next couple weeks. I think the wise course is to keep an open mind and put out a late-round claim for McFadden.

17 carries for 68 yards isn't particularly earth shattering, but I understand why you feel the need to stretch to consider that a good game--it's the second-best game McFadden has had in his career. In my earlier post I ignored Mcfadden's 8 carries for 21 yards performances, but let's examine his whole body of work, shall we? Absent that big game against KC--one of the worst defenses in the NFL--in his rookie year, these are Darren McFadden's CUMULATIVE stats over the past two years:196 carries 692 yards (3.53 yards per carry) 4 TDs49 receptions 521 yards (10.63 yards per catch) 0 TDs6 fumbles, 3 lostOver the same time period, ON THE SAME TEAM, Michael Bush has the following stats:218 carries 1010 yards (4.6 yards per carry) 6 TDs36 receptions 267 yards (7.4 yards per catch) 0 TDs3 fumbles, 3 lostFurthermore, Justin Fargas, who is currently without a job, had superior stats to McFadden over the past two years.McFadden is nothing more than a glorified 3rd down back. He's good at catching the ball and running in space. He will never get 15-20 carries a game because he isn't good at running the ball.

 

[damageinc]

If it wasnt the money and draft position of McFadden the team would have cut him long time ago . They would have kept Fargas and cut McFadden this year. His draft position and the money he makes garentees he will get his shot until he has used up every chance. AGain he is a talent if used right. But hes not a starting caliber NFL RB by a long shot and he only startable in a PPR fantasy league. and hes borderline at that until he shows something.

 

[LawFitz]

I love DMC, but I am not convinced he can be a feature RB in this league. COP, wildcat, sure. Feature, no. The Raiders have a huge hole in their roster w/o Bush and I don't see any of their remaining RBs filling that role the same way.

Trade for Lynch or McGahee?

The McGahee option shouldn't be that far fetched. The Ravens are looking for CB help and the Raiders are stacked at that position. They already had Nnamdi, Chris Johnson and Stan Rhoutt and they drafted two rookies late who have looked very legit: Walter McFadden and Jeremy Ware.

Plus they have Michael Huff and Tyvon Branch, two speed safeties who could play CB if needed.

 

[mdlane]

17 carries for 68 yards isn't particularly earth shattering, but I understand why you feel the need to stretch to consider that a good game--it's the second-best game McFadden has had in his career. In my earlier post I ignored Mcfadden's 8 carries for 21 yards performances, but let's examine his whole body of work, shall we? Absent that big game against KC--one of the worst defenses in the NFL--in his rookie year, these are Darren McFadden's CUMULATIVE stats over the past two years:196 carries 692 yards (3.53 yards per carry) 4 TDs49 receptions 521 yards (10.63 yards per catch) 0 TDs6 fumbles, 3 lostOver the same time period, ON THE SAME TEAM, Michael Bush has the following stats:218 carries 1010 yards (4.6 yards per carry) 6 TDs36 receptions 267 yards (7.4 yards per catch) 0 TDs3 fumbles, 3 lostFurthermore, Justin Fargas, who is currently without a job, had superior stats to McFadden over the past two years.McFadden is nothing more than a glorified 3rd down back. He's good at catching the ball and running in space. He will never get 15-20 carries a game because he isn't good at running the ball.

The nice thing is, in all likelihood we'll have a clearer understanding of who is closer to the reality in 4 weeks. In the meantime, I'm planning to draft McFadden late this week.

 

[damageinc]

I will add McFadden is worth a late round gamble absolutley and especially with Bush injury , its a lottery ticket. Ya never know.

 

[Mark Wimer]

but he is a genuine NFL-caliber back IMO. I think he'll put up much improved numbers this year and claim the starting job now that Bush is likely out of the picture for 2-3 regular season games. It is definitely McFadden's chance to grab the brass ring in Oakland, IMO.

I cant believe we're in 2010 and people are still saying this about DMC.

I think it was the lack of a genuine NFL-caliber QB that hamstrung the Raiders' offense during McFadden's time there (to date). The next 3-4 weeks will give us a much better gauge of his NFL prospects, IMO. I've been rolling the dice on him all year long, and I'm certainly not going to stop now that Michael Bush is out of the picture for at least the first half of September (and probably the entire month, IMO).

 

[TheFanatic]

When I said "a full load," I was thinking along the lines of starter's carries (15-20+), not short-end-of-a-RBBC carries (10-12). McFadden carried the ball more than 12 times only once in 2009, the first game: 17/68 (4.0 ypc), 2/25 receiving (12.5 ypc). That's way better than what you or damageinc are projecting for him.In 2008, McFadden carried the ball more than 12 times only twice:week 2: 21/164, 1 TD (7.8 ypc); 1/9 receivingweek 3: 14/42 (3 ypc); 3/6 receiving.McFadden got turf toe in the 4th quarter of week 2 (before the week 3 game). Again, this is way better than what you or damageinc are projecting for him.My point is that when McFadden (1) is healthy, and (2) gets a "full load" - aka starter's touches, he produces. End of story. The problem is that McFadden has been serially injured since his rookie season and stuck in a 3-way RBBC. That will in all likelihood not be the case for the next couple weeks. I think the wise course is to keep an open mind and put out a late-round claim for McFadden.

The fact that he has a 5.2 YPG over the three games he had over 12 carries doesn't hold a lot of water with me. In those three games he had a 50 yard carry. Now normally I don't believe in taking away one long run from someone and say, "well if you take out his long run then he only had X YPC," because guys will get long runs every now and again and it will it should be counted as part of their total for YPC. But the guy has only two carries over 20 yards. One for 50 yards and one for 28 yards. In fact, the guy has only two runs longer than 15 yards in his career. Of his 217 career carries he has exactly 2 over 15 yards. Take out his one 50 yarder and he goes from 5.2 to 4.4. One carry drops the guy almost a yard per carry.Also, the three games you cite are all in the first three weeks of both of his seasons. After week 11 in both 2008 and 2009 he only had one game over 3.8 YPC. Normally one would say that this is due to him being used to college in his rookie season and being tired, but in both seasons he missed at least three whole games prior to week 11. The guy is going the wrong direction. 4.4 YPC in 2008 and 3.4 in 2009.

 

[kd1]

how has nary a "...and Michael Bennett has a Bush Fracture" joke been made???

 

[Clifford]

Well this is it. This is D.Mac's opportunity to be the "guy".It's now or never.

Yep. He's run out of excuses. You either become a RB now or start working on your return skills. This is the final dividing line between a less effective Westbrook or a less effective Reggie Bush.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

I got in a question to Raiders beat writer Jerry Mac in his noon chat: I got a telling opinion of the Bush situation.

12:02 [Comment From Raiderfan Raiderfan: ]

How long will Bush realistically be out? I don’t believe Cable’s spin.

Wednesday September 1, 2010 12:02 Raiderfan

12:03 jerrymac: I'm thinking at least a month from the time of the injury on Aug. 28. That would put him back on the field for Week 3 or 4. He's a left-handed player, it's a left-handed injury . . . with ball secruity, pass receiving, blocking . . . maybe I'm being too conservative but I think he's out for the first two games at least. Wednesday September 1, 2010 12:03 jerrymac

http://www.ibabuzz.com/oaklandraiders/2010...oday-at-noon-5/

 

[Bayhawks]

When I said "a full load," I was thinking along the lines of starter's carries (15-20+), not short-end-of-a-RBBC carries (10-12).

McFadden carried the ball more than 12 times only once in 2009, the first game:

17/68 (4.0 ypc), 2/25 receiving (12.5 ypc).

That's way better than what you or damageinc are projecting for him.

In 2008, McFadden carried the ball more than 12 times only twice:

week 2: 21/164, 1 TD (7.8 ypc); 1/9 receiving

week 3: 14/42 (3 ypc); 3/6 receiving.

McFadden got turf toe in the 4th quarter of week 2 (before the week 3 game). Again, this is way better than what you or damageinc are projecting for him.

My point is that when McFadden (1) is healthy, and (2) gets a "full load" - aka starter's touches, he produces. End of story. The problem is that McFadden has been serially injured since his rookie season and stuck in a 3-way RBBC. That will in all likelihood not be the case for the next couple weeks. I think the wise course is to keep an open mind and put out a late-round claim for McFadden.

OK, I'll play. What has changed that will prevent him from getting "serially injured" IF he is allowed to carry a "full load" when he hasn't been able to do so in the past two years?

 

[LawFitz]

12:03 jerrymac: I'm thinking at least a month from the time of the injury on Aug. 28. That would put him back on the field for Week 3 or 4. He's a left-handed player, it's a left-handed injury . . . with ball secruity, pass receiving, blocking . . . maybe I'm being too conservative but I think he's out for the first two games at least. Wednesday September 1, 2010 12:03 jerrymac

sounds familiar ;-)

 

[JamesTheScot]

Let's keep it on topic, folks.As mentioned in other Bush/McFadden threads, there's no way to spin it from being bad news for Bush's fantasy prospects. Bush has been the better RB over McFadden by a fair stretch, but this injury gives team brass a real chance to see what McFadden can do as the feature back. The only hope for Bush owners/supporters is that McFadden continues to struggle and gives Bush a chance to claim the starting role when he returns. Otherwise, if McFadden does well, Bush may be a true non-factor this year, except maybe as the short-yardage guy.

Team brass has always had a real chance to see what McFadden can do. All they had to do was give him the touches. Bush doesn't have a measurables, draft pedigree or coach-loyalty advantage over McFadden. In fact, it's been the other way around. Bush hasn't kept McFadden from getting a chance to be the bellcow, McFadden has.It's a thumb injury. You uptick McFadden's projections a bit to reflect limited touches for Bush in the first couple of weeks of the season. But I think the weeks 4-17 picture still looks the same as it did before this injury. RBBC with an advantge to Bush in terms of carries.

 

[zamboni]

Let's keep it on topic, folks.As mentioned in other Bush/McFadden threads, there's no way to spin it from being bad news for Bush's fantasy prospects. Bush has been the better RB over McFadden by a fair stretch, but this injury gives team brass a real chance to see what McFadden can do as the feature back. The only hope for Bush owners/supporters is that McFadden continues to struggle and gives Bush a chance to claim the starting role when he returns. Otherwise, if McFadden does well, Bush may be a true non-factor this year, except maybe as the short-yardage guy.

Team brass has always had a real chance to see what McFadden can do.

Not entirely, as he's been hurt a lot. Of course, therein lies on the knocks against him.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Let's keep it on topic, folks.As mentioned in other Bush/McFadden threads, there's no way to spin it from being bad news for Bush's fantasy prospects. Bush has been the better RB over McFadden by a fair stretch, but this injury gives team brass a real chance to see what McFadden can do as the feature back. The only hope for Bush owners/supporters is that McFadden continues to struggle and gives Bush a chance to claim the starting role when he returns. Otherwise, if McFadden does well, Bush may be a true non-factor this year, except maybe as the short-yardage guy.

Team brass has always had a real chance to see what McFadden can do. All they had to do was give him the touches. Bush doesn't have a measurables, draft pedigree or coach-loyalty advantage over McFadden. In fact, it's been the other way around. Bush hasn't kept McFadden from getting a chance to be the bellcow, McFadden has.It's a thumb injury. You uptick McFadden's projections a bit to reflect limited touches for Bush in the first couple of weeks of the season. But I think the weeks 4-17 picture still looks the same as it did before this injury. RBBC with an advantge to Bush in terms of carries.

Wrong.Bush always had the measureables. He was a heisman candidate at Louisville and has superb speed and power. He is in every way a prototypical NFL RB, and McFadden's game hasn't translated to the NFL, and I honestly doubt it will. He runs too upright, has terrible peripherial vision, gets armtackled, and is an injury waiting to happen. I am done waiting for him to breakout. I'd like to see what Bennett can do but the coaching staff is going to force DMC to be the lead guy.

 

[cr8f]

Seems like best case for Bush is missing the first 2-3 games. And that's assuming he has no setbacks, which isn't at all a safe assumption, especially given that it's his lead hand.

Lead hand?No best case is he misses no time because it is his left hand. You may not agree but no time missed is the best case.

 

[mdlane]

When I said "a full load," I was thinking along the lines of starter's carries (15-20+), not short-end-of-a-RBBC carries (10-12). McFadden carried the ball more than 12 times only once in 2009, the first game: 17/68 (4.0 ypc), 2/25 receiving (12.5 ypc). That's way better than what you or damageinc are projecting for him.In 2008, McFadden carried the ball more than 12 times only twice:week 2: 21/164, 1 TD (7.8 ypc); 1/9 receivingweek 3: 14/42 (3 ypc); 3/6 receiving.McFadden got turf toe in the 4th quarter of week 2 (before the week 3 game). Again, this is way better than what you or damageinc are projecting for him.My point is that when McFadden (1) is healthy, and (2) gets a "full load" - aka starter's touches, he produces. End of story. The problem is that McFadden has been serially injured since his rookie season and stuck in a 3-way RBBC. That will in all likelihood not be the case for the next couple weeks. I think the wise course is to keep an open mind and put out a late-round claim for McFadden.

The fact that he has a 5.2 YPG over the three games he had over 12 carries doesn't hold a lot of water with me. In those three games he had a 50 yard carry. Now normally I don't believe in taking away one long run from someone and say, "well if you take out his long run then he only had X YPC," because guys will get long runs every now and again and it will it should be counted as part of their total for YPC. But the guy has only two carries over 20 yards. One for 50 yards and one for 28 yards. In fact, the guy has only two runs longer than 15 yards in his career. Of his 217 career carries he has exactly 2 over 15 yards. Take out his one 50 yarder and he goes from 5.2 to 4.4. One carry drops the guy almost a yard per carry.Also, the three games you cite are all in the first three weeks of both of his seasons. After week 11 in both 2008 and 2009 he only had one game over 3.8 YPC. Normally one would say that this is due to him being used to college in his rookie season and being tired, but in both seasons he missed at least three whole games prior to week 11. The guy is going the wrong direction. 4.4 YPC in 2008 and 3.4 in 2009.

Those three 15+ carry games are all in the first three weeks of both seasons because those were the only weeks where McFadden was (1) healthy and (2) the starter.I'm not trying to pump up McFadden or skew his stats. I'm saying that from my POV, as someone that has followed him locally since he came into the league, McFadden has been injured early and often, and the injuries show up in his rushing stats. His first season, he got a turf toe injury IN THE SECOND WEEK. Four or so games later, he got a turf toe injury IN THE OTHER FOOT, AS WELL. The guy was rushing with turf toe injuries in both feet during 2008. Last year, in 2009, he had another injury early in the season, followed by surgery for a torn meniscus.Anyway, yes, given his college production and his NFL production when not injured, I absolutely think he is a different, better RB when he is healthy.I attribute his sub-par YPC to his health more than QB issues or running style or lack of vision or anything else, really. I don't see how any Raiders fan can disagree with me that injury has been the #1 factor with McFadden. I understand why people are sick of McFadden, but let's be real, here.A secondary factor is the number of touches he gets. He needs to get the ball often, and the Raiders need to swallow the negative yards and/or 3 yard ankle tackles, in order for him to bust out for some long gains. I can't say I'm basing this on game tape (because I'm not - I'm just going by recollection), but I think it's legitimate to say that some RBs need lots of touches to produce. As a side note, I saw the preseason game that everyone is grumbling about, and seriously - the two negative yardage tackles were the result of the greatest LB in the game, SF's own Patrick Willis, rushing through the line untouched and almost getting to the handoff before McFadden. McFadden did get ankle tackled at the line, but other than that, he was fighting fairly hard for his 3 yards through piles.I think he can surprise. The only questions, for me, are (1) whether he can stay healthy for two weeks, and (2) whether the Raiders have given up on him like seemingly everyone else here has. I'm comfortable enough with those risks to take a late flier on him - and given how much people seem to despise McFadden, I will get him very late and very, very cheap.

 

[Babu Bhatt2]

I think it's probable that bush misses one or two games. I'm not debating that. But I don't think it's likely that McFadden's carries increase much. He'll get 10-12 per game, 5 catches or so, and that's it. The excess will go to Bennett and Cartwright.

Cable wants to win games so he needs to give carries to a real running back.

 

[ItsOnlytheRiver]

Let's keep it on topic, folks.As mentioned in other Bush/McFadden threads, there's no way to spin it from being bad news for Bush's fantasy prospects. Bush has been the better RB over McFadden by a fair stretch, but this injury gives team brass a real chance to see what McFadden can do as the feature back. The only hope for Bush owners/supporters is that McFadden continues to struggle and gives Bush a chance to claim the starting role when he returns. Otherwise, if McFadden does well, Bush may be a true non-factor this year, except maybe as the short-yardage guy.

Team brass has always had a real chance to see what McFadden can do. All they had to do was give him the touches. Bush doesn't have a measurables, draft pedigree or coach-loyalty advantage over McFadden. In fact, it's been the other way around. Bush hasn't kept McFadden from getting a chance to be the bellcow, McFadden has.It's a thumb injury. You uptick McFadden's projections a bit to reflect limited touches for Bush in the first couple of weeks of the season. But I think the weeks 4-17 picture still looks the same as it did before this injury. RBBC with an advantge to Bush in terms of carries.

Wrong.Bush always had the measureables. He was a heisman candidate at Louisville and has superb speed and power. He is in every way a prototypical NFL RB, and McFadden's game hasn't translated to the NFL, and I honestly doubt it will. He runs too upright, has terrible peripherial vision, gets armtackled, and is an injury waiting to happen. I am done waiting for him to breakout. I'd like to see what Bennett can do but the coaching staff is going to force DMC to be the lead guy.

You are ready to give up on a guy going into his 3rd year so you can see what a 32 year old career back up can do? I'm in agreement with the coaching staff here.

 

[mdlane]

I got in a question to Raiders beat writer Jerry Mac in his noon chat: I got a telling opinion of the Bush situation.

12:02 [Comment From Raiderfan Raiderfan: ]

How long will Bush realistically be out? I don’t believe Cable’s spin.

Wednesday September 1, 2010 12:02 Raiderfan

12:03 jerrymac: I'm thinking at least a month from the time of the injury on Aug. 28. That would put him back on the field for Week 3 or 4. He's a left-handed player, it's a left-handed injury . . . with ball secruity, pass receiving, blocking . . . maybe I'm being too conservative but I think he's out for the first two games at least. Wednesday September 1, 2010 12:03 jerrymac

http://www.ibabuzz.com/oaklandraiders/2010...oday-at-noon-5/

Thanks for the information, that's very helpful.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

I got in a question to Raiders beat writer Jerry Mac in his noon chat: I got a telling opinion of the Bush situation.

12:02 [Comment From Raiderfan Raiderfan: ]

How long will Bush realistically be out? I don’t believe Cable’s spin.

Wednesday September 1, 2010 12:02 Raiderfan

12:03 jerrymac: I'm thinking at least a month from the time of the injury on Aug. 28. That would put him back on the field for Week 3 or 4. He's a left-handed player, it's a left-handed injury . . . with ball secruity, pass receiving, blocking . . . maybe I'm being too conservative but I think he's out for the first two games at least. Wednesday September 1, 2010 12:03 jerrymac

http://www.ibabuzz.com/oaklandraiders/2010...oday-at-noon-5/

Thanks for the information, that's very helpful.

 

[LawFitz]

Seems like best case for Bush is missing the first 2-3 games. And that's assuming he has no setbacks, which isn't at all a safe assumption, especially given that it's his lead hand.

Lead hand?

No best case is he misses no time because it is his left hand. You may not agree but no time missed is the best case.

He is left handed. It's his "lead" hand.If this is indeed a "bennett" fracture as Bush described it himself there is no way he'll be back week one or two. Week three of the season would be four weeks after the injury and even that might be a stretch considering this is a 4-6 week injury if everything goes right and there are no setbacks.

So yeah, best case it seems as of right now is Bush missing up to the first three games, then coming back 100%. Problem there is that the chance of complication is high with this injury (and I'm sure it's even higher when you are an NFL RB with this injury).

I think a lot of people are underestimating this as "just" a broken finger.

 

[DoubleG]

Seems like best case for Bush is missing the first 2-3 games. And that's assuming he has no setbacks, which isn't at all a safe assumption, especially given that it's his lead hand.

Lead hand?No best case is he misses no time because it is his left hand. You may not agree but no time missed is the best case.

He's left handed, hence "lead hand"

 

[LawFitz]

So it seems that most people haven't yet fully realized the ramifications of Michael Bush's thumb on the Raiders. This is a HUGE blow for this team.

a. The injury is pretty serious - the "bennett" fracture requires 4-6 weeks of healing time, meaning Bush may miss as many as 3-5 games.

b. The risk of complication is high - this is probably even more of a risk for an NFL RB; especially if they rush him back, which I have no doubt about given the rest of the puzzle.

c. The injury is to his left hand. Good news, right? Wrong. He's left handed.

d. The Raiders have no other competent full size RBs. DMC is a glorified scat, COP, wildcat (and they don't even use him right in those roles) and Michael Bennett/Rock Cartwright are laughable.

e. This team's strengths are/were supposed to be defense and a ball control offense based on a sound running game. Take the running part out and all of a sudden this D is likely to be put in very compromising positions each game.

f. The team is chock full of young guys with tons of talent but a very shaky psyche given the struggles of the past decade. As much as a fast start could've boosted these guys to outperform their experience/age, a slow start may just as intensely cause them to underperform all season.

It's hard to imagine one guy going down causing so much angst, but I think this could cause a major domino effect on this team unless they find a way to adequately replace those running yards.

With an effective/healthy Michael Bush, I thought the raiders would win 8-10 games. Without him, I think they're lucky to win 5. Momentum and psyche are probably the most underrated components of this game. And I think this situation is ripe to reflect the power of these two forces.

 

[nysportsfan]

So it seems that most people haven't yet fully realized the ramifications of Michael Bush's thumb on the Raiders. This is a HUGE blow for this team. a. The injury is pretty serious - the "bennett" fracture requires 4-6 weeks of healing time, meaning Bush may miss as many as 3-5 games. b. The risk of complication is high - this is probably even more of a risk for an NFL RB; especially if they rush him back, which I have no doubt about given the rest of the puzzle.c. The injury is to his left hand. Good news, right? Wrong. He's left handed.d. The Raiders have no other competent full size RBs. DMC is a glorified scat, COP, wildcat (and they don't even use him right in those roles) and Michael Bennett/Rock Cartwright are laughable.e. This team's strengths are/were supposed to be defense and a ball control offense based on a sound running game. Take the running part out and all of a sudden this D is likely to be put in very compromising positions each game.f. The team is chock full of young guys with tons of talent but a very shaky psyche given the struggles of the past decade. As much as a fast start could've boosted these guys to outperform their experience/age, a slow start may just as intensely cause them to underperform all season.It's hard to imagine one guy going down causing so much angst, but I think this could cause a major domino effect on this team unless they find a way to adequately replace those running yards.With an effective/healthy Michael Bush, I thought the raiders would win 8-10 games. Without him, I think they're lucky to win 5. Momentum and psyche are probably the most underrated components of this game. And I think this situation is ripe to reflect the power of these two forces.

Great points. But it all comes down to letter A. If he misses fewer games, the rest of the problems are mitigated.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

With an effective/healthy Michael Bush, I thought the raiders would win 8-10 games. Without him, I think they're lucky to win 5. Momentum and psyche are probably the most underrated components of this game. And I think this situation is ripe to reflect the power of these two forces.

calm down there....One guy does not make a difference of 5 wins in a season. Peton Manning is probably worth 2 wins, and I choose him because that is the extreme example.The Raiders have a lot of good things going for them. The starting defense has been good and hasn't even played with Seymour yet. The much mailigned offensive line has allowed 7 sacks in 3 games, about half what they averaged last year. Guys like DHB and Murphy have had excellent camps. Gradkowski has proven to be a great backup QB, and the offense didn't miss a beat when Campbell went down.Yes, the last game was a buzzkill. Injuries to Campbell and Bush were big. But they aren't out for the year. I'll admit, the Titans game will be a real test, but after that the Raiders face the rookie QB Sam Bradford led Rams and the journeyman QB led Cardinals. I think that worse case, the Raiders will get to 2-1 and Bush will be back and ready to go. So please pipe down this talk of another 5 win season. You are seriously overreacting here.Raiders will be fine.

 

[JamesTheScot]

Let's keep it on topic, folks.As mentioned in other Bush/McFadden threads, there's no way to spin it from being bad news for Bush's fantasy prospects. Bush has been the better RB over McFadden by a fair stretch, but this injury gives team brass a real chance to see what McFadden can do as the feature back. The only hope for Bush owners/supporters is that McFadden continues to struggle and gives Bush a chance to claim the starting role when he returns. Otherwise, if McFadden does well, Bush may be a true non-factor this year, except maybe as the short-yardage guy.

Team brass has always had a real chance to see what McFadden can do. All they had to do was give him the touches. Bush doesn't have a measurables, draft pedigree or coach-loyalty advantage over McFadden. In fact, it's been the other way around. Bush hasn't kept McFadden from getting a chance to be the bellcow, McFadden has.It's a thumb injury. You uptick McFadden's projections a bit to reflect limited touches for Bush in the first couple of weeks of the season. But I think the weeks 4-17 picture still looks the same as it did before this injury. RBBC with an advantge to Bush in terms of carries.

Wrong.Bush always had the measureables. He was a heisman candidate at Louisville and has superb speed and power. He is in every way a prototypical NFL RB, and McFadden's game hasn't translated to the NFL, and I honestly doubt it will. He runs too upright, has terrible peripherial vision, gets armtackled, and is an injury waiting to happen. I am done waiting for him to breakout. I'd like to see what Bennett can do but the coaching staff is going to force DMC to be the lead guy.

Wrong. Bush was projected to be a high pick prior to his broken leg, in a shallow RB draft class. He was seen as a big, power back with good speed FOR HIS SIZE. He doesn't and never did have "superb speed". He was also a below average blocker, which, given his size, was bad. And he never had the elite measurables that McFadden did because he was never measured. He didn't run at the combine and, IIRC, he had to cancel his pro day workout because he required a second procedure on his leg. He looked overweight when he did make appearances.As for the Heisman, since when is that an indicator of NFL success? Kenny Irons and Jamaal Charles (headed into his sophmore year) were ranked higher by some headed into 2006. Garrette Wolfe got some buzz as a preseason Heisman contender. Steve Slaton, Darius Walker and Mike Hart were all getting Heisman buzz before the 2006 season was over. Oh, and who was a 2006 Heisman finalist, as a sophmore? Darren McFadden.With the leg break, Bush's draft stock plummeted, as it should have, because no one knew if he would completely recover from that gruesome break and they didn't have a chance to take objective measurables on him. His draft pedigree is what it is, not what it would have been if he hadn't broken his leg. If the leg break wasn't a big deal, he wouldn't have slipped like he did. So what do you think looks worse for the Raiders? McFadden not panning out or Bush not panning out? Obviously it's McFadden. That's the difference in the two. That said, I agree with everything you said about McFadden. That's why I said McFadden is responsible for his current quasi-bust status. If he were as good as his draft pedigree predicted, he wouldn't be where he is today.

 

[JamesTheScot]

With an effective/healthy Michael Bush, I thought the raiders would win 8-10 games. Without him, I think they're lucky to win 5. Momentum and psyche are probably the most underrated components of this game. And I think this situation is ripe to reflect the power of these two forces.

calm down there....One guy does not make a difference of 5 wins in a season. Peton Manning is probably worth 2 wins, and I choose him because that is the extreme example.

Now that's just crazy talk.

 

[WOW6616]

Beat writer Jerry McDonald suggests Michael Bush (thumb surgery) could miss "up to a quarter of the season or more."

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/38983785/ns/...ts-player_news/

 

[Raiderfan32904]

From Raider's Beat Writer Jerry Mac:

jerrymac: Posted on the blog a little while ago Michael Bush will be out for awhile. Could miss as much as a quarter of the season, based on information I gave to an orthopedic surgeon (brother of a loyal reader of this blog who is a team doctor for Hofstra University, New York Islanders and New Jersey Dragons of AFL) . . . Four to six weeks is the BEST case scenario, he believes.

If 4 to 6 is the BEST case scenario, why not keep both Cartwright and Bennet and benefit from the added roster spot?

 

[damageinc]

Not looking good.

Report: Michael Bush could be out one month

Michael Bush - RB - OAK - Sep. 2 - 9:58 p.m. ET

Beat writer Jerry McDonald suggests Michael Bush (thumb surgery) could miss "up to a quarter of the season or more."

The Raiders aren't providing a timetable. McDonald, after consulting with an orthopedic surgeon, believes Bush is "highly unlikely" to be ready to play in the opener. The doctor advised that 4-6 weeks would be a "best case scenario" for a return from "Bennett's fracture" surgery. As Bush is a running back, it's unlikely that he'll be able to play with a "club" over his hand. Darren McFadden will enter the season as the starter with Michael Bennett as the backup.

Source: Oakland Tribune

 

[Judge Smails]

If he comes back healthy I'm OK with him missing the first 3-4 weeks. If you drafted Michael Bush as anything other than a RB3/4/5 you are in trouble anyway (12 team league or smaller). The byes start in earnest week 4 - then it gets tougher. Until then you can probably risk storing him on most rosters. Plus, it gives more time for DMC to tank and become an afterthought. He just needs to come back healthy. 6 weeks? Then we have a problem..

 

[xenith]

Week4-5, I'll hold and wait. Just as smails says, as long as bush is RB3/4 on your roster, he's worth being patient for, cause I sure don't expect much to change regarding my opinion of McF as a COP/3rd down/hopin for a big play guy, and little more.

If he comes back sooner, it's a nice bonus. Injuries happen, don't panic...this is why you should have depth. If you don't, good luck!

 

[LawFitz]

I cut him. Not enough room on my bench for a Raider with a bad lead hand who will likely miss the first quarter of the season and then come back to a team that has lost 1-2 more games than they should have because they couldn't run the ball and were too stubborn to trade for a McGahee or Lynch.

Add to that the clear OL issues I've seen and read about so far this preseason and it made this decision easy.

 

[mdlane]

I think you hold Bush at least until you see if McFadden can stay healthy for 3 consecutive games with 18-20 touches, and re-evaluate then. I also think you should set aside whatever stubborn feelings you have and pick up McFadden. You are not going to be able to trade McFadden because he's built up too much ill-will, but if you truly see him as lowly as some of the people in this thread do, he will absolutely surprise you if he stays healthy. And McFadden could still be on your waiver wire

 

[gandalas]

Not looking good.Report: Michael Bush could be out one monthMichael Bush - RB - OAK - Sep. 2 - 9:58 p.m. ETBeat writer Jerry McDonald suggests Michael Bush (thumb surgery) could miss "up to a quarter of the season or more."The Raiders aren't providing a timetable. McDonald, after consulting with an orthopedic surgeon, believes Bush is "highly unlikely" to be ready to play in the opener. The doctor advised that 4-6 weeks would be a "best case scenario" for a return from "Bennett's fracture" surgery. As Bush is a running back, it's unlikely that he'll be able to play with a "club" over his hand. Darren McFadden will enter the season as the starter with Michael Bennett as the backup. Source: Oakland Tribune

I don't know why there were 3 or 4 different reports above, ALL based on the same statement from this McDonald guy. Beat-writer or not, I am not sure that he is exactly in the know. He even admits that he has no knowledge of Bush's situation, but just basically talked to a Doctor he knows and asked for his best guess as compared with a typical case. In other words, step away from the cliff...

 

[Routilla]

Not looking good.Report: Michael Bush could be out one monthMichael Bush - RB - OAK - Sep. 2 - 9:58 p.m. ETBeat writer Jerry McDonald suggests Michael Bush (thumb surgery) could miss "up to a quarter of the season or more."The Raiders aren't providing a timetable. McDonald, after consulting with an orthopedic surgeon, believes Bush is "highly unlikely" to be ready to play in the opener. The doctor advised that 4-6 weeks would be a "best case scenario" for a return from "Bennett's fracture" surgery. As Bush is a running back, it's unlikely that he'll be able to play with a "club" over his hand. Darren McFadden will enter the season as the starter with Michael Bennett as the backup. Source: Oakland Tribune

I don't know why there were 3 or 4 different reports above, ALL based on the same statement from this McDonald guy. Beat-writer or not, I am not sure that he is exactly in the know. He even admits that he has no knowledge of Bush's situation, but just basically talked to a Doctor he knows and asked for his best guess as compared with a typical case. In other words, step away from the cliff...

Agrred. McDonald isn't a doctor but he talked to one and blah blah blah. No story here unless he is out for 6 or more weeks. He would not play until the byes kick in for most teams. If he was one of your starters then you should just pay your league dues and start mocking for next year.

 

[eaglezzz]

just let Bush go and picked up F. Jackson off waivers. He was my RB3 with MJD and Best ahead of him.

One messed up hand RB for another. We get points for Return yards so thought Jackson was good value. I think Bush sits out at least 4 games as well.

 

[yellowdog]

I heard Michael Bush on Moving the Chains today. He may have been BSing, but he sure sounded like someone that is planning to play opening weekend.

 

[damageinc]

Yeah he said hes playing and I am positive he want to be in there BUT the coaching staff and team doctors will be the ones to determine this. Players always want to get out there.

 

[cvnpoka]

With an effective/healthy Michael Bush, I thought the raiders would win 8-10 games. Without him, I think they're lucky to win 5. Momentum and psyche are probably the most underrated components of this game. And I think this situation is ripe to reflect the power of these two forces.

wow so you think bush is one of the most valuable players in the league.

 

[Babu Bhatt2]

With an effective/healthy Michael Bush, I thought the raiders would win 8-10 games. Without him, I think they're lucky to win 5. Momentum and psyche are probably the most underrated components of this game. And I think this situation is ripe to reflect the power of these two forces.

wow so you think bush is one of the most valuable players in the league.

I tend to agree, actually. Bush is the only NFL-caliber back on that team, and Campbell depends on the play action pass.

 

[richn]

I heard Michael Bush on Moving the Chains today. He may have been BSing, but he sure sounded like someone that is planning to play opening weekend.

I heard this as well, and I was very confused?? Any new news?? Is DMC worth a start VS Tenn.....or wait and see????

 

[damageinc]

The lastes I can find , nothing new really on Bush but they are keeping 4 RB's on the roster so that tells me that Bush they have dubts hat Bush can be in there week 1. . And Cable is talking up Bennet Saying he will have have a bigger role . So I have a feeling he will share time with McFadden to get bye until Bush comes back.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../SPHD1F8FHC.DTL

"Wise, old' backup back is ready to step in

Vittorio Tafur, Chronicle Staff Writer

Saturday, September 4, 2010

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...L#ixzz0yZi2NV00

Bush had screws inserted into his left thumb as part of a surgery Monday, which could prevent him from making it back onto the field for the season opener in Tennessee on Sept. 12.

The Raiders aren't saying, but they are planning to keep both backup running backs, Michael Bennett and Rock Cartwright, when they cut the roster to 53 players today.

Darren McFadden, who missed two preseason games with a tight hamstring, got the night off and Bennett the start in Thursday's 27-24 win over Seattle. He carried 25 times for 92 yards, finishing the preseason with 54 carries for 236 yards.

Bennett wishes Bush a speedy recovery and thinks the injury underscored Oakland's need for four backs.

"Hopefully, everything heals right for him because he's what they call the bell cow," Bennett said. "He's a big, strong, physical back. ... But to have four of us to be able to go out there and pick up if somebody else is down is definitely key in this league, because it's a week-to-week league."

Bennett, 32 and on his fourth team in five years, calls himself "a wise, old veteran." If you squint your eyes, he at times still looks like the guy who ran for 1,296 yards for Minnesota in 2002.

"Explosive," Raiders coach Tom Cable said. "He's got nice, quick feet in the hole. He seems to be a more physical guy in the game than you feel from him in practice. And that's a good thing. He's a tremendously focused guy on game day.

"He's been impressive."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?...L#ixzz0yZhv6kk3

 

[Steed]

Did you guys know that McFadden was born with a minor deformity of the feet? It's true, google it. Some of his toes rest on other toes on both feet. Why do I bring this up? On top of his skinny legs that are less than ideal for an NFL RB (I know, i know, it's been discussed ad nauseum), he has less than normal function out of his feet. I'm no podiatrist or sports physiologist, but common sense tells me these are not traits necessary for a strong base an NFL RB would require. I dont know he got this past the MDs at the Combine.

This Michael Bush injury is setting the table for DMC's last spectacular crash-n-burn.