Sinrj
Footballguy
Something tell me you'll be dissapointed too.Redraft dissapointment, but I'm buying in dynasty.
Something tell me you'll be dissapointed too.Redraft dissapointment, but I'm buying in dynasty.
So you expect tiny Sproles or Mr Glass Pierre Thomas to stay healthy? It only takes one to go down for him to be relevant this season. Regardless, he's going to continue to gain trust from Payton. The guy gets tough yards, the guy converts, he's going to be very good in dynasty formats.Something tell me you'll be dissapointed too.Redraft dissapointment, but I'm buying in dynasty.
You're talking about a guy on pace for about 800 yards in his rookie season in a 3-way time share. But yeah, bust of the century about sums it up.Bust of the century, or bust of the millennium?
He is average 43 rushing yards/game by my count (46 yards/game if you count receiving yards), which is closer to 700 yards, and still pretty much fantasy irrelevant. Absolute bust for most who drafted him.You're talking about a guy on pace for about 800 yards in his rookie season in a 3-way time share. But yeah, bust of the century about sums it up.Bust of the century, or bust of the millennium?
If you took him in redraft and expected him to be a stud immediately in a 3 or 4-way timeshare, you weren't paying attention. If you took him in dynasty and you're already dumping him, you're an idiot.I mean the universal "you" not you personally.He is average 43 rushing yards/game by my count (46 yards/game if you count receiving yards), which is closer to 700 yards, and still pretty much fantasy irrelevant. Absolute bust for most who drafted him.You're talking about a guy on pace for about 800 yards in his rookie season in a 3-way time share. But yeah, bust of the century about sums it up.Bust of the century, or bust of the millennium?
Paying attention to what? The experts on this site had him as a 4th, possible 3rd round reach with a projected floor of 250 carries.If you took him in redraft and expected him to be a stud immediately in a 3 or 4-way timeshare, you weren't paying attention. If you took him in dynasty and you're already dumping him, you're an idiot.I mean the universal "you" not you personally.He is average 43 rushing yards/game by my count (46 yards/game if you count receiving yards), which is closer to 700 yards, and still pretty much fantasy irrelevant. Absolute bust for most who drafted him.You're talking about a guy on pace for about 800 yards in his rookie season in a 3-way time share. But yeah, bust of the century about sums it up.Bust of the century, or bust of the millennium?
Try third, possibly a late second round reach.Paying attention to what? The experts on this site had him as a 4th, possible 3rd round reach with a projected floor of 250 carries.If you took him in redraft and expected him to be a stud immediately in a 3 or 4-way timeshare, you weren't paying attention. If you took him in dynasty and you're already dumping him, you're an idiot.I mean the universal "you" not you personally.He is average 43 rushing yards/game by my count (46 yards/game if you count receiving yards), which is closer to 700 yards, and still pretty much fantasy irrelevant. Absolute bust for most who drafted him.You're talking about a guy on pace for about 800 yards in his rookie season in a 3-way time share. But yeah, bust of the century about sums it up.Bust of the century, or bust of the millennium?
Maybe he plays in a dynasty league.'AmosMoses said:Why did Payton draft him? It seems so odd that he'd give up so much to draft a guy that is so replaceable in that offense. There is nothing that Ingram has done in 5 weeks that PT/Sproles (Payton thinks) couldn't do.
The party is going down in year two.I can't blame Peyton. He doesn't seem the type to trust a season in the hands of a rookie. Ingram will get there.Maybe he plays in a dynasty league.'AmosMoses said:Why did Payton draft him? It seems so odd that he'd give up so much to draft a guy that is so replaceable in that offense. There is nothing that Ingram has done in 5 weeks that PT/Sproles (Payton thinks) couldn't do.
This is my problem - It was basically drilled into our brains that Ingram's floor was very low. I'm a paid subscriber and not a happy customer right now. I pay for the thoughts and insights of the staff - I don't really care about data dominator or any of the tools.For me this is a huge let down. There is still time but right now big sad face.............Try third, possibly a late second round reach.Paying attention to what? The experts on this site had him as a 4th, possible 3rd round reach with a projected floor of 250 carries.If you took him in redraft and expected him to be a stud immediately in a 3 or 4-way timeshare, you weren't paying attention. If you took him in dynasty and you're already dumping him, you're an idiot.I mean the universal "you" not you personally.He is average 43 rushing yards/game by my count (46 yards/game if you count receiving yards), which is closer to 700 yards, and still pretty much fantasy irrelevant. Absolute bust for most who drafted him.You're talking about a guy on pace for about 800 yards in his rookie season in a 3-way time share. But yeah, bust of the century about sums it up.Bust of the century, or bust of the millennium?
Your first mistake is paying money for fantasy advice of any kind. The best thing about this site is the message board. You have to sort through the knucklehead commentary, but the best info is on the forum. The projections from Footballguys arent better than any free sites out there. Dodds put up a post about this in the Summer. Footballguys weekly ranking last year were good: they ranked #2 last year for all fantasy sites. But the #1 rankings were by a free site.For Ingram, he's doing almost exactly what I expected him to do. I read a lot of posts on him this summer, and everyone reasonable felt that he was going to be around a 800-1200 yards and around 10 TDs. His stats are right around that pace after 5 games. If Thomas or Sproles get injured he's instantly a starting fantasy player. Likewise, if he goes down Thomas is instantly a starter. Looks just about right to me.This is my problem - It was basically drilled into our brains that Ingram's floor was very low. I'm a paid subscriber and not a happy customer right now. I pay for the thoughts and insights of the staff - I don't really care about data dominator or any of the tools.For me this is a huge let down. There is still time but right now big sad face.............Try third, possibly a late second round reach.Paying attention to what? The experts on this site had him as a 4th, possible 3rd round reach with a projected floor of 250 carries.If you took him in redraft and expected him to be a stud immediately in a 3 or 4-way timeshare, you weren't paying attention. If you took him in dynasty and you're already dumping him, you're an idiot.I mean the universal "you" not you personally.He is average 43 rushing yards/game by my count (46 yards/game if you count receiving yards), which is closer to 700 yards, and still pretty much fantasy irrelevant. Absolute bust for most who drafted him.You're talking about a guy on pace for about 800 yards in his rookie season in a 3-way time share. But yeah, bust of the century about sums it up.Bust of the century, or bust of the millennium?
Not everyone.From the player spotlight thread. Some other posters made excellent points about the mess of a situation and Sproles:Your first mistake is paying money for fantasy advice of any kind. The best thing about this site is the message board. You have to sort through the knucklehead commentary, but the best info is on the forum. The projections from Footballguys arent better than any free sites out there. Dodds put up a post about this in the Summer. Footballguys weekly ranking last year were good: they ranked #2 last year for all fantasy sites. But the #1 rankings were by a free site.For Ingram, he's doing almost exactly what I expected him to do. I read a lot of posts on him this summer, and everyone reasonable felt that he was going to be around a 800-1200 yards and around 10 TDs. His stats are right around that pace after 5 games. If Thomas or Sproles get injured he's instantly a starting fantasy player. Likewise, if he goes down Thomas is instantly a starter. Looks just about right to me.This is my problem - It was basically drilled into our brains that Ingram's floor was very low. I'm a paid subscriber and not a happy customer right now. I pay for the thoughts and insights of the staff - I don't really care about data dominator or any of the tools.For me this is a huge let down. There is still time but right now big sad face.............Try third, possibly a late second round reach.Paying attention to what? The experts on this site had him as a 4th, possible 3rd round reach with a projected floor of 250 carries.If you took him in redraft and expected him to be a stud immediately in a 3 or 4-way timeshare, you weren't paying attention. If you took him in dynasty and you're already dumping him, you're an idiot.I mean the universal "you" not you personally.He is average 43 rushing yards/game by my count (46 yards/game if you count receiving yards), which is closer to 700 yards, and still pretty much fantasy irrelevant. Absolute bust for most who drafted him.You're talking about a guy on pace for about 800 yards in his rookie season in a 3-way time share. But yeah, bust of the century about sums it up.Bust of the century, or bust of the millennium?
'griff321 said:I don't think he's AD like.
Remember how Matthews was pimped on these boards! Do not trust a rookie RB!
14 games, 150 carries, 660 yards, 5tds- 22 rec. 178 yards 3tds.
'griff321 said:I think he'll put up stats as well, but when is my concern. I just don't feel confident that Payton will give him much opportunity in year one. It seems that when rookies do get opportunity from Payton it's as a result of injury. With Ingram's skyrocketing value it's hard for me to rely on injury. Ingram just seems to hold too much risk and not enough reward for what he's being valued at right now.
A lot of rookie threads get biased feelings based on dynasty owners and while it's right for them to covet someone like Ingram, it isn't right for a redrafter to take him at the inflated cost because dynasty leagues drove up ADPs.
The average of the FBG expert ranking for Ingram was pick 32, the median was 34. Thats end of the 3rd round.Dodds ranked him at 38, 4th round. Ingram's ADP was 52, so in most redraft leagues you could have got him in the 4th no problem. Dodds had him as RB19, to week 3 he performed as RB40, he'll be a little better after this week. Thats hardly epic failure, and the season is far from over.This is my problem - It was basically drilled into our brains that Ingram's floor was very low. I'm a paid subscriber and not a happy customer right now. I pay for the thoughts and insights of the staff - I don't really care about data dominator or any of the tools.For me this is a huge let down. There is still time but right now big sad face.............Try third, possibly a late second round reach.Paying attention to what? The experts on this site had him as a 4th, possible 3rd round reach with a projected floor of 250 carries.If you took him in redraft and expected him to be a stud immediately in a 3 or 4-way timeshare, you weren't paying attention. If you took him in dynasty and you're already dumping him, you're an idiot.I mean the universal "you" not you personally.He is average 43 rushing yards/game by my count (46 yards/game if you count receiving yards), which is closer to 700 yards, and still pretty much fantasy irrelevant. Absolute bust for most who drafted him.You're talking about a guy on pace for about 800 yards in his rookie season in a 3-way time share. But yeah, bust of the century about sums it up.Bust of the century, or bust of the millennium?
I see this point brought up quite a bit.I rarely see anyone consider that that one cuts both ways -- Ingram could just as easily get hurt, and lose whatever value he still has.So you expect tiny Sproles or Mr Glass Pierre Thomas to stay healthy? It only takes one to go down for him to be relevant this season.
Thats cool too: If you drafted Ingram then you should also have drafted Thomas. In the Saints games I've watched this year, Thomas has outplayed Ingram anyway.I can't imaging a scenario where someone would draft Ingram relatively early and not take Thomas. If your league has short benches then you should have rated Ingram far lower on your draft board. He was never poised to be a #1 guy without an injury to Thomas/Sproles. It was a similar situation to San Diego's tandem of Mathews and Tolbert this offseason. Plan on taking both if you want to draft either one.I see this point brought up quite a bit.I rarely see anyone consider that that one cuts both ways -- Ingram could just as easily get hurt, and lose whatever value he still has.So you expect tiny Sproles or Mr Glass Pierre Thomas to stay healthy? It only takes one to go down for him to be relevant this season.
Precisely why I don't get why the "experts" on this site have stubbornly pounded the pavement on Ingram since July. I foolishly listened but figured that they gave me some good ones last year like Nicks and Blount, who helped me win my league. The 3rd RB in a 3 ring Circus was not the RB to hang their hats on this season.Thats cool too: If you drafted Ingram then you should also have drafted Thomas. In the Saints games I've watched this year, Thomas has outplayed Ingram anyway.I can't imaging a scenario where someone would draft Ingram relatively early and not take Thomas. If your league has short benches then you should have rated Ingram far lower on your draft board. He was never poised to be a #1 guy without an injury to Thomas/Sproles. It was a similar situation to San Diego's tandem of Mathews and Tolbert this offseason. Plan on taking both if you want to draft either one.I see this point brought up quite a bit.I rarely see anyone consider that that one cuts both ways -- Ingram could just as easily get hurt, and lose whatever value he still has.So you expect tiny Sproles or Mr Glass Pierre Thomas to stay healthy? It only takes one to go down for him to be relevant this season.
He wasn't supposed to need an injury to be relevant. Now he does. He was supposed to carry the load. Now he is part of a rbbc each week. He was supposed to get the goal line touch. He doesn't get most of them.So you expect tiny Sproles or Mr Glass Pierre Thomas to stay healthy? It only takes one to go down for him to be relevant this season. Regardless, he's going to continue to gain trust from Payton. The guy gets tough yards, the guy converts, he's going to be very good in dynasty formats.Something tell me you'll be dissapointed too.Redraft dissapointment, but I'm buying in dynasty.
Buy after Beeks gets raped by the gorilla.I feel like Eddie Murphy and Dan Aykroyd in trading places. Standing around as the panic ensues and the stock keeps dipping lower and lower just waiting for the appropriate moment to scream, "BUY!"Are we there yet?
Ingram isn't unique. He could have gotten another guy just like him next year, and without overpaying.Maybe he plays in a dynasty league.'AmosMoses said:Why did Payton draft him? It seems so odd that he'd give up so much to draft a guy that is so replaceable in that offense. There is nothing that Ingram has done in 5 weeks that PT/Sproles (Payton thinks) couldn't do.
I won't disagree with you, but obviously Payton felt differently.Ingram isn't unique. He could have gotten another guy just like him next year, and without overpaying.Maybe he plays in a dynasty league.'AmosMoses said:Why did Payton draft him? It seems so odd that he'd give up so much to draft a guy that is so replaceable in that offense. There is nothing that Ingram has done in 5 weeks that PT/Sproles (Payton thinks) couldn't do.
No offense, but what the hell made you think Ingram was going to be anything more than part of a 3-way rotation? You have to know the situation he's in.He wasn't supposed to need an injury to be relevant. Now he does. He was supposed to carry the load. Now he is part of a rbbc each week. He was supposed to get the goal line touch. He doesn't get most of them.
He's actually doing pretty well considering the 3-way split in New Orleans. I figured he'd have this kind of production until someone gets injured, and that was without Sproles going lights-out. Considering how great Sproles has been playing I'm actually a bit impressed with Ingram's production. The Saints running game looks great this year compared to the Saints rushing stats the last few years.No offense, but what the hell made you think Ingram was going to be anything more than part of a 3-way rotation? You have to know the situation he's in.He wasn't supposed to need an injury to be relevant. Now he does. He was supposed to carry the load. Now he is part of a rbbc each week. He was supposed to get the goal line touch. He doesn't get most of them.
Yeah, I just had no idea I was this much smarter than Payton at football. Pretty proud of myself right now.I won't disagree with you, but obviously Payton felt differently.Ingram isn't unique. He could have gotten another guy just like him next year, and without overpaying.Maybe he plays in a dynasty league.'AmosMoses said:Why did Payton draft him? It seems so odd that he'd give up so much to draft a guy that is so replaceable in that offense. There is nothing that Ingram has done in 5 weeks that PT/Sproles (Payton thinks) couldn't do.
Dude, can I get a link to that message board you're referring to?Your first mistake is paying money for fantasy advice of any kind. The best thing about this site is the message board. You have to sort through the knucklehead commentary, but the best info is on the forum. The projections from Footballguys arent better than any free sites out there. Dodds put up a post about this in the Summer. Footballguys weekly ranking last year were good: they ranked #2 last year for all fantasy sites. But the #1 rankings were by a free site.
The good part of the message board is for paying customers onlyDude, can I get a link to that message board you're referring to?Your first mistake is paying money for fantasy advice of any kind. The best thing about this site is the message board. You have to sort through the knucklehead commentary, but the best info is on the forum. The projections from Footballguys arent better than any free sites out there. Dodds put up a post about this in the Summer. Footballguys weekly ranking last year were good: they ranked #2 last year for all fantasy sites. But the #1 rankings were by a free site.
When Dodds posted about how reliable FBGs rankings are in comparison to his competitors, he's letting you know you're getting you're money's worth in that area in addition to everything else that FBG's offers. He's also letting you know that FBGs rankings are, in fact, better than just "any" old free site out there. However, I don't personally subscribe for the weekly rankings.Draft dominator, the preseason and in-season articles/subscriber materials, and the subscriber contest (finished 3rd last year took home $2,000 in cash + a 3pack of FPC teams worth $1,000 which gives me three chances this year at over $200,000) are all well worth the price of admission. And honestly if FBGs didn't have enough subscribers they couldn't afford to keep this going. So if you enjoy Lammey/Bloom/Waldman "audible" podcasts, and daily email updates, and even the message boards in their current format (just the free offerings)... Then why wouldn't you want to support FBGs and become a subscriber to keep it going and also take advantage of all the subscriber offerings as well?Your first mistake is paying money for fantasy advice of any kind. The best thing about this site is the message board. You have to sort through the knucklehead commentary, but the best info is on the forum. The projections from Footballguys arent better than any free sites out there. Dodds put up a post about this in the Summer. Footballguys weekly ranking last year were good: they ranked #2 last year for all fantasy sites. But the #1 rankings were by a free site.
For Ingram, he's doing almost exactly what I expected him to do. I read a lot of posts on him this summer, and everyone reasonable felt that he was going to be around a 800-1200 yards and around 10 TDs. His stats are right around that pace after 5 games. If Thomas or Sproles get injured he's instantly a starting fantasy player. Likewise, if he goes down Thomas is instantly a starter. Looks just about right to me.
I haven't seen this, though I see many claim it.Thats cool too: If you drafted Ingram then you should also have drafted Thomas. In the Saints games I've watched this year, Thomas has outplayed Ingram anyway.I can't imaging a scenario where someone would draft Ingram relatively early and not take Thomas. If your league has short benches then you should have rated Ingram far lower on your draft board. He was never poised to be a #1 guy without an injury to Thomas/Sproles. It was a similar situation to San Diego's tandem of Mathews and Tolbert this offseason. Plan on taking both if you want to draft either one.I see this point brought up quite a bit.I rarely see anyone consider that that one cuts both ways -- Ingram could just as easily get hurt, and lose whatever value he still has.So you expect tiny Sproles or Mr Glass Pierre Thomas to stay healthy? It only takes one to go down for him to be relevant this season.
Well, I guess you should be getting that resume ready for NFL teams then.........since you're smarter than Payton, who does have a Superbowl ring.Yeah, I just had no idea I was this much smarter than Payton at football. Pretty proud of myself right now.I won't disagree with you, but obviously Payton felt differently.Ingram isn't unique. He could have gotten another guy just like him next year, and without overpaying.Maybe he plays in a dynasty league.'AmosMoses said:Why did Payton draft him? It seems so odd that he'd give up so much to draft a guy that is so replaceable in that offense. There is nothing that Ingram has done in 5 weeks that PT/Sproles (Payton thinks) couldn't do.
Richardson has nothing to do with Ingram. Ingram does not suck, and has looked solid in very limited time this year. Overreaction to the extreme.Richardson >>>>>>>>>>>> Ingramingram sucks and FBG pumped this chump to unreal expectations.
I know!Well, I guess you should be getting that resume ready for NFL teams then.........since you're smarter than Payton, who does have a Superbowl ring.Yeah, I just had no idea I was this much smarter than Payton at football. Pretty proud of myself right now.I won't disagree with you, but obviously Payton felt differently.Ingram isn't unique. He could have gotten another guy just like him next year, and without overpaying.Maybe he plays in a dynasty league.'AmosMoses said:Why did Payton draft him? It seems so odd that he'd give up so much to draft a guy that is so replaceable in that offense. There is nothing that Ingram has done in 5 weeks that PT/Sproles (Payton thinks) couldn't do.
Nobody drafted Blount.Precisely why I don't get why the "experts" on this site have stubbornly pounded the pavement on Ingram since July. I foolishly listened but figured that they gave me some good ones last year like Nicks and Blount, who helped me win my league. The 3rd RB in a 3 ring Circus was not the RB to hang their hats on this season.Thats cool too: If you drafted Ingram then you should also have drafted Thomas. In the Saints games I've watched this year, Thomas has outplayed Ingram anyway.I can't imaging a scenario where someone would draft Ingram relatively early and not take Thomas. If your league has short benches then you should have rated Ingram far lower on your draft board. He was never poised to be a #1 guy without an injury to Thomas/Sproles. It was a similar situation to San Diego's tandem of Mathews and Tolbert this offseason. Plan on taking both if you want to draft either one.I see this point brought up quite a bit.I rarely see anyone consider that that one cuts both ways -- Ingram could just as easily get hurt, and lose whatever value he still has.So you expect tiny Sproles or Mr Glass Pierre Thomas to stay healthy? It only takes one to go down for him to be relevant this season.
You do realize the reason FBG exists (and a large portion of their target audience who subscribe to them) is so people can blindly follow them, right?Sounds to me like most of the crying and gnashing of teeth here is being done by people who blindly followed FBG's instead of doing their own research.....any Saints homer could've told you there was going to be a 3-way split and how Payton handles his backs (granted, at the time the 3rd back was Ivory instead of Sproles, but still....) Matter of fact, if I'm not mistaken there were several posts on this very board to that point.
That's me. I love their insight and most of the material I use from them is free but to show my support I purchased a subscription.Every FBG staffer was pimping Ingram hard - they were all in agreement. Lots of counter points from them as to why Ingram would be a top15 RB anytime the situations was questioned.You do realize the reason FBG exists (and a large portion of their target audience who subscribe to them) is so people can blindly follow them, right?Sounds to me like most of the crying and gnashing of teeth here is being done by people who blindly followed FBG's instead of doing their own research.....any Saints homer could've told you there was going to be a 3-way split and how Payton handles his backs (granted, at the time the 3rd back was Ivory instead of Sproles, but still....) Matter of fact, if I'm not mistaken there were several posts on this very board to that point.
If you havent seen it then you havent been watching the games or even reading the basic stats. Thomas is outplaying Ingram per touch, by a large margin.Rushing StatisticsI haven't seen this, though I see many claim it.Thats cool too: If you drafted Ingram then you should also have drafted Thomas. In the Saints games I've watched this year, Thomas has outplayed Ingram anyway.I can't imaging a scenario where someone would draft Ingram relatively early and not take Thomas. If your league has short benches then you should have rated Ingram far lower on your draft board. He was never poised to be a #1 guy without an injury to Thomas/Sproles. It was a similar situation to San Diego's tandem of Mathews and Tolbert this offseason. Plan on taking both if you want to draft either one.I see this point brought up quite a bit.I rarely see anyone consider that that one cuts both ways -- Ingram could just as easily get hurt, and lose whatever value he still has.So you expect tiny Sproles or Mr Glass Pierre Thomas to stay healthy? It only takes one to go down for him to be relevant this season.
I get that, but if you're so disinterested in playing FF that you can't be bothered to do your own research, why bother? You might as well just take all your FF money and go buy a bunch of scratch-off lotto tickets if that's the case.I like FBG and I think it's a great tool, but at the end of the day I'm going to trust my own observations if they are different.'GreenNGold said:You do realize the reason FBG exists (and a large portion of their target audience who subscribe to them) is so people can blindly follow them, right?
Best post of the thread! There is a great deal of crying in this thread blaming FBGs. You should blame yourselves for being foolish. I sometimes wonder how many people on this board actually watch as many games as possible and how many only purchase FF info and read stat lines. Anyone who has watched the Saints games could only get excited about Ingram's potential.'Luke Skywalker said:Sounds to me like most of the crying and gnashing of teeth here is being done by people who blindly followed FBG's instead of doing their own research.....any Saints homer could've told you there was going to be a 3-way split and how Payton handles his backs (granted, at the time the 3rd back was Ivory instead of Sproles, but still....) Matter of fact, if I'm not mistaken there were several posts on this very board to that point.
This is very flawed analysis. I'm one of Pierre's biggest supporters, and he hasn't looked as impressive as Ingram. Ingram has had the bulk of short yardage carries which has his ypc skewed. Defenses have really keyed on him in those situations'ChromeWeasel said:If you havent seen it then you havent been watching the games or even reading the basic stats. Thomas is outplaying Ingram per touch, by a large margin.Rushing Statistics'shader said:I haven't seen this, though I see many claim it.'ChromeWeasel said:Thats cool too: If you drafted Ingram then you should also have drafted Thomas. In the Saints games I've watched this year, Thomas has outplayed Ingram anyway.I can't imaging a scenario where someone would draft Ingram relatively early and not take Thomas. If your league has short benches then you should have rated Ingram far lower on your draft board. He was never poised to be a #1 guy without an injury to Thomas/Sproles. It was a similar situation to San Diego's tandem of Mathews and Tolbert this offseason. Plan on taking both if you want to draft either one.'davearm said:I see this point brought up quite a bit.I rarely see anyone consider that that one cuts both ways -- Ingram could just as easily get hurt, and lose whatever value he still has.'Mr Rodgers neighborhood said:So you expect tiny Sproles or Mr Glass Pierre Thomas to stay healthy? It only takes one to go down for him to be relevant this season.
Player Att Yds Yds/Att Long TD
Mark Ingram 62 216 3.5 17 2
Pierre Thomas 34 154 4.5 21 0
Receiving Statistics
Player Rec Yds Yds/Rec Long TD
Pierre Thomas 14 133 9.5 19 1
Mark Ingram 6 17 2.8 9 0
If either player goes down, the other one becomes much more valuable. Thomas has looked much better this year, although Ingram is getting more carries. If you don't see that then you aren't watching the games.
Not to mention, Ingram is a rookie and didn't have the normal training camp time to get accustom to the offense (see full and extremely detailed play book, blocking assignments, audibles, etc).This is very flawed analysis. I'm one of Pierre's biggest supporters, and he hasn't looked as impressive as Ingram. Ingram has had the bulk of short yardage carries which has his ypc skewed. Defenses have really keyed on him in those situations'ChromeWeasel said:If you havent seen it then you havent been watching the games or even reading the basic stats. Thomas is outplaying Ingram per touch, by a large margin.Rushing Statistics'shader said:I haven't seen this, though I see many claim it.'ChromeWeasel said:Thats cool too: If you drafted Ingram then you should also have drafted Thomas. In the Saints games I've watched this year, Thomas has outplayed Ingram anyway.I can't imaging a scenario where someone would draft Ingram relatively early and not take Thomas. If your league has short benches then you should have rated Ingram far lower on your draft board. He was never poised to be a #1 guy without an injury to Thomas/Sproles. It was a similar situation to San Diego's tandem of Mathews and Tolbert this offseason. Plan on taking both if you want to draft either one.'davearm said:I see this point brought up quite a bit.I rarely see anyone consider that that one cuts both ways -- Ingram could just as easily get hurt, and lose whatever value he still has.'Mr Rodgers neighborhood said:So you expect tiny Sproles or Mr Glass Pierre Thomas to stay healthy? It only takes one to go down for him to be relevant this season.
Player Att Yds Yds/Att Long TD
Mark Ingram 62 216 3.5 17 2
Pierre Thomas 34 154 4.5 21 0
Receiving Statistics
Player Rec Yds Yds/Rec Long TD
Pierre Thomas 14 133 9.5 19 1
Mark Ingram 6 17 2.8 9 0
If either player goes down, the other one becomes much more valuable. Thomas has looked much better this year, although Ingram is getting more carries. If you don't see that then you aren't watching the games.
I'm not trying to defend the Ingram season but if you have been watching the games like I have you'll see that Ingram is only running in obvious running situations. Thomas is being run in mostly pass downs and sneaky plays. I believe that Ingram is making the most of his opportunities and I'd go so far as to say that he looks damn good on the one cut. If New Orleans would open up the playbook for him (draw plays, misdirection) he'd be close to where some of the experts here thought he'd be. But, as we've seen there is no need to do that because there are three complimentary backs that are all producing. They've got wins so you can't knock it, but they have also come close to losing some due to the irrational playcalling.'ChromeWeasel said:If you havent seen it then you havent been watching the games or even reading the basic stats. Thomas is outplaying Ingram per touch, by a large margin.Rushing Statistics'shader said:I haven't seen this, though I see many claim it.'ChromeWeasel said:Thats cool too: If you drafted Ingram then you should also have drafted Thomas. In the Saints games I've watched this year, Thomas has outplayed Ingram anyway.I can't imaging a scenario where someone would draft Ingram relatively early and not take Thomas. If your league has short benches then you should have rated Ingram far lower on your draft board. He was never poised to be a #1 guy without an injury to Thomas/Sproles. It was a similar situation to San Diego's tandem of Mathews and Tolbert this offseason. Plan on taking both if you want to draft either one.'davearm said:I see this point brought up quite a bit.I rarely see anyone consider that that one cuts both ways -- Ingram could just as easily get hurt, and lose whatever value he still has.'Mr Rodgers neighborhood said:So you expect tiny Sproles or Mr Glass Pierre Thomas to stay healthy? It only takes one to go down for him to be relevant this season.
Player Att Yds Yds/Att Long TD
Mark Ingram 62 216 3.5 17 2
Pierre Thomas 34 154 4.5 21 0
Receiving Statistics
Player Rec Yds Yds/Rec Long TD
Pierre Thomas 14 133 9.5 19 1
Mark Ingram 6 17 2.8 9 0
If either player goes down, the other one becomes much more valuable. Thomas has looked much better this year, although Ingram is getting more carries. If you don't see that then you aren't watching the games.
Eventhough I love ff I simply don't have the time to comb over hours and hours of film to judge talent. I watch the games and I do to trust my own judgement and ingram to me looked as everything you could want from a bell cow rb. Once again I will re-itterate that every staffer was in agreement on ingram's talent being utilized in the saints offence. Ingram owners were promised a top 15 rb.........the hype was insane with many staffers saying his ceiling was 1200 yards and double digit td's.I get that, but if you're so disinterested in playing FF that you can't be bothered to do your own research, why bother? You might as well just take all your FF money and go buy a bunch of scratch-off lotto tickets if that's the case.I like FBG and I think it's a great tool, but at the end of the day I'm going to trust my own observations if they are different.'GreenNGold said:You do realize the reason FBG exists (and a large portion of their target audience who subscribe to them) is so people can blindly follow them, right?