MattFancy
Footballguy
Well, it looks like on FantasyPros at least, he's starting to move up a little bit. Right now he is RB19, which is about where I would expect him. He's right below Woodhead.
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.
Shane Vereen (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter chinawildman
- Start date
It's important to understand Vereen's role and gameplanning.
Vereen is their "joker." In most games, he won't be "scheduled" to get 10+ carries. When he gets most of his carries, it will be because of a D who plays the pass more than the run, and Brady/NE audible to a running play out of a passing look.
Obviously, if Ridley is ineffective/fumbles, the potential for more carries arises. However, yesterday, when Bolden fumbled, Blount filled in just fine. If Blount had been ineffective, Vereen might have gotten more carries. Since they were able to continue to line up in and "power" the ball with Blount, they didn't need to adjust.
It's a two-edged sword. If Blount is active/Bolden is inactive, Blount will be able to fill the "power" back type role if Ridley is ineffective/fumbles/gets hurt. But when Bolden is inactive, Vereen should see more/most of the RB targets in the passing game. If Bolden is active/Blount is inactive, Vereen might get more carries, but could have to share the RB targets (since Bolden is a better receiving option than Blount).
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I don't know if it works like that in NE.
Bowe essentially equaled the best game of the year vs DEN - and he had 14 targets. McCluster had his second most targets, 8. Fasano had his best game, 4 targets, 1 TD. The fullback Sherman caught two balls.
In NE (in my opinion) Vereen should be partly operating in the offensive space once held by Hernandez, he should be getting different quality of targets from Charles. I really liked how they used him in the last drive and they hit him for a 17 yard gain in the last drive of the first half.
silentcoach
Footballguy
I like this. We've somewhat established that Vereen is not really a pure rb, so let's look at what mccluster did (who himself is not really just a wr, confusing I know).
8 targets 5 for 53 receiving. That seems like a good baseline to work with given that Vereen > McCluster, imo, and Brady > Smith.
It would be great to count on rushing yards, but at this point, I don't think it is "wise" to do so.
Based on his two games Vereen averages 7.5 rec for 61.5 yards, so that is probably an accurate over/under seeing how Brady will probably have to throw a lot on Sunday night. Touchdowns are random.
Vereen's value is deflated in nonppr leagues.
Last edited by a moderator:
ryno1980
Footballguy
The season long stats, though, show Denver around 20th in receiving yards allowed to running backs.
silentcoach
Footballguy
Yeah, I changed my reasoning, see 2 posts above for baseline and over/under for the week. I think those are okay numbers to work with.
shader
Footballguy
He played in 34 of 72 snaps last night. They said they were going to ease him into it, and they did.
With only 34 snaps he had 8 receptions.
In the season opener he had 57 snaps.
I suppose in a non-ppr league, his value isn't incredible, but in a ppr league, he's a stud.
The Patriots have struggled to replace the loss of Welker/Hernandez all year long. Vereen was the guy that was supposed to pick up that slack. He made a big difference last night and will likely be used more and more over the course of the next few weeks.
That makes sense to me because Denver has scored so much that teams are forced to thrown it downfield a lot more. Dump offs to RBs don't really work down 2TDs+. That said, I also would imagine that Denver made a concerted effort on Charles. Alex Smith has shown he doesn't really know how to use Bowe or WRs more than 10 yards down the field. Brady >>>> Smith and Pats WRs+Gronk >>>> Bowe/Avery/McCluster/Fasano. I think Vereen will get wide open a lot like he did last night. If Denver concentrates on Vereen, then Gronk, Amendola, Dobson and Thompkins will have a field day.
I would say a night like last night is decent estimate for this week. I would think in PPR, he has a 10 point floor (5-50) and a 20 point ceiling (8+ for 60+ and 1 TD). He had 14 points in most PPR leagues and for most folks, he is probably a flex spot by now and that makes him easily startable.
LawFitz
Footballguy
I think his hands are good not great. He's definitely not as good as Welker/Hernandez were in the joker role.
That said, I support the rest of what you say here, but my enthusiasm is tempered after seeing Blount and Ridley utterly dominate the rushing pie.
When the power running plays are working, those 2 guys will get the lion's share of those carries. If/when however, those power running plays aren't as effective, Vereen will see more carries. It's just the way it is. When you consider that Vereen is more than capable of punching in a short TD, or taking a long catch to the house (as well as carrying the load for a game if Ridley/Blount are ineffective, hurt, or have fumble-itis), he is a reasonalbe RB2/Flex play.
MattFancy
Footballguy
Ted Mullins
Footballguy
I wonder if they go no huddle more vs Denver, especially if they get behind? He seems like their optimal fit for if they need to hurry up and clearly need to pass.
Warrior
Footballguy
IheartGuinness
Footballguy
In a PPR league, I have McCoy, Bush, Ridley and Vereen.Yeah, I know...no one cares about my team. Here's why I'm mentioning it: with McCoy on a Bye, I'm debating which I should start between Ridley or Vereen. And that's a question for the AC forum. But for the purposes of this forum (and this thread), I'm wondering...will both Ridley and Vereen retain value for the rest of the season (i.e., will they both be startable options)?
This question just pertains to PPR, obviously. Their roles are so distinct that it seems like there could be scenarios in which an owner could feasibly start both. Granted, one could certainly cut into the other depending on the success of their performance, but to me Vereen looks like at least a viable flex play in most leagues for the remainder of the year. And despite that, I still think Ridley is still usable as a low-end No. 2 RB (fumbling issues aside). Do other people agree?
This question just pertains to PPR, obviously. Their roles are so distinct that it seems like there could be scenarios in which an owner could feasibly start both. Granted, one could certainly cut into the other depending on the success of their performance, but to me Vereen looks like at least a viable flex play in most leagues for the remainder of the year. And despite that, I still think Ridley is still usable as a low-end No. 2 RB (fumbling issues aside). Do other people agree?
solorca
Footballguy
As a Panthers fan, I was happy with what we saw last night. He didn't destroy the Panthers, but he was heavily involved in the passing game.
With that said, the way to beat the Panthers defense is by dinking and dunking down the field and Vereen is a good fit in that role. I think he'll get a ton of catches, but I don't think we can count on that level of involvement going forward. On the other hand, he's likely to get more carries in a normal week, so it should hopefully even out.
With that said, the way to beat the Panthers defense is by dinking and dunking down the field and Vereen is a good fit in that role. I think he'll get a ton of catches, but I don't think we can count on that level of involvement going forward. On the other hand, he's likely to get more carries in a normal week, so it should hopefully even out.
shader
Footballguy
Bottom line: He's played in two games this year. He scored very well in both games, after an off-season that promised to see him heavily involved.
The second game was one in which he was held to a snap count and he still had 8 receptions.
He's a PPR stud in the making. Silly to think otherwise, and REALLY silly to think that Blount is going to be a long-term threat to Vereen in any significant way.
The second game was one in which he was held to a snap count and he still had 8 receptions.
He's a PPR stud in the making. Silly to think otherwise, and REALLY silly to think that Blount is going to be a long-term threat to Vereen in any significant way.
silentcoach
Footballguy
Blount was not really part of the gameplan week 1.
Just look at what happened last game v Carolina: Ridley was benched, and Blount took over as the "runner" NOT Vereen. Will it be this way going forward? Who knows, but ignoring what happened last night would not be the wisest of decisions.
Last edited by a moderator:
silentcoach
Footballguy
Agreed. I was being kind with my use of deflated in nonppr leagues
. PPR he is more than adequate, but it is hard to count on rushing yards, as it stands, when even Blount earned more carries than Vereen. Of course this is subject to change, but we are in the business of making calculated risks/predictions.The reason he was not getting carries was because they were easing him in. BB will not be able to have him in the game if he is not getting at least 6 - 10 carries since the other team will always know it is a pass.
Vereen is a PPR star. At this time next week, the early ppr rankings will read "No.8 Shane Vereen"
Vereen is a PPR star. At this time next week, the early ppr rankings will read "No.8 Shane Vereen"
djmich
Footballguy
Didn't see all of the game last night so if this situation arose (and even if it did not sure if last nights game and easing him back in is the best guide)....but, I honestly expect Vereen to be in the packages just as often as Ridley/Blount when the pats are 2-6 yards outside the endzone. Which to me means, Vereen is going to get his TD's.
It's one thing to lean on Ridley/Blount as part of a game plan that has a ground & pound element. But, when it is time to put 7 points on the board I expect Belicheck to have the guy most likely to get him in and I believe that is Vereen due to his versatility (if nothing else to create other favorable defensive matchups).
It's one thing to lean on Ridley/Blount as part of a game plan that has a ground & pound element. But, when it is time to put 7 points on the board I expect Belicheck to have the guy most likely to get him in and I believe that is Vereen due to his versatility (if nothing else to create other favorable defensive matchups).
unckeyherb
Footballguy
Debating benching one of AJohnson, VJax, Antonio Brown for Vereen. If he'd gotten a score last week I'd feel better about it, but Ridley is still going to have a role in this offense, regardless of his fumble issues. I'm concerned that anything inside the 10 will go to Gronk or Ridley and Vereen will only score from 20 yards out (which he is capable of doing,obviously).
I was happy with his performance Monday night, just not sure if I can anoint him as a PPR monster yet.
I was happy with his performance Monday night, just not sure if I can anoint him as a PPR monster yet.
McGarnicle
Footballguy
Starting him with confidence the rest of the way.
Koya
Footballguy
I think you could see him on some goaline passing situations (why wouldn't you? He blocks, then releases and is an outlet), but he's basically a possession WR that can run after the catch with the additional upside of a few carries... or more in certain circumstance.
karmarooster
Footballguy
Leroy Hoard
Footballguy
first round bust
Footballguy
How could anyone be benching Andre Johnson, in any matchup, at this point? So underrated its ridiculous.
It's impossible to guess what Belichick will do with his RB situation going forward but Vereen looked really good on Monday night.
unckeyherb
Footballguy
Obviously if I were to bench any of those guys it would be Brown and not Andre. I guess my point is that I'm still concerned about his usage moving forward.
Wrigley
Footballguy
MoveToSkypager
Footballguy
This guy is a RB1 the rest of the season. Must start.
drfeelgood
Footballguy
PinkydaPimp
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
unckeyherb
Footballguy
MoveToSkypager
Footballguy
Yes because giving points for making a catch for 0 yards and basically a loss of downs should reward a point. Ppr is garbage.....making scrubs relevant since the inception of ppr leagues.
McGarnicle
Footballguy
Why do you hate Chris Ogbannaya?
Koya
Footballguy
He said a RB 1, which likely means the 7-12 overall range. Not THE overall RB 1. In a full poor league it's certainly possible, in a .5 you are pushing it, though with the RB situation this year and the potential role for Vereen in an offense that may finally be coming together , who knows.
Give an example - I have Leveon Bell and Demarco Murray. Vereen right in that mix and those two could certainly be top 12 players at the position ROS. Maybe not, but maybe... As is true itch Vereen.
Koya
Footballguy
Vereen's in over both Murray and Bell without too much concern. Now, which tough matchup RB to go with for my second slot... to the ACS!
timoleander
Footballguy
I think I've finally decided to roll with Vereen this week over Bobby Rainey as a flex start; the DET front just scares me too much, and I think the Pats will work to get him (Vereen) more carries this week to keep DEN guessing both on passing downs and early downs. DEN might tend to expect a pass when Vereen is in the formation, especially since he had just the one carry last week on all those snaps. Getting him some draws and delays early in the game could suck in the LBs and free up Gronkowski and Amendola over the middle or down the seams.
So, here's to hoping a more active participation in the run game for Vereen!
So, here's to hoping a more active participation in the run game for Vereen!
unckeyherb
Footballguy
I understand what he meant. I still think it's very overly optimistic to think he'll be a top 12 guy ROS. I'd love it, but just don't see it. Hope he's right. As it stands he usurped Antonio browns spot as my flex player this week.
Koya
Footballguy
Personally, I think he's more a mid #2 with upside. That said, you have the definite #1 RBs:
Charles
Forte
McCoy
Lynch
Peterson
Then a couple consensus guys, but even they have some questions:
Gore
Bush
E Lacy
Then you have what, Moreno (definitely there but there's some question in some people's mind) and probably Z Stacy
That's ten RBs that probably are consensus #1 RBs. Then you have guys like Bell, Morris... Andre Brown maybe in the Convo? Ray Rice... is he "back" or a one game mirage... Ben Tate who can't get TDs it seems. Danny Woodhead? Losing steam to his backfield mate Matthews. I'd put Murray in this group, maybe even toward the top, but you are concerned about injury and moreso them abandoning the run. Does C Johnson enter this conversation with his wild inconsistency?
So, after the first ten or so, he's definitely in the equation, and I could see a good argument from 12-15 range, no worse than 12-18 range and if you are optimistic, a case for cracking the top 12.
At this point I agree that's a bit of a stretch, but again, so many question marks and so few true studs that I can understand the argument that he's a #1.
