The Bears O-Line will be a lot better this season. He's got a good chance at 10+ TDs
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.
Matt Forte - to be more relevant again (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter whitem0nkey
- Start date
MJohnstone34
Footballguy
I don't think so. Why would the bears not continue to use Michael Bush inside the 3? He's a great short distance runner, one of the best in the league, and maybe most importantly it takes wear and tear off Forte who is much better in space and as a receiver.
pantherclub
Footballguy
Projecting career highs is not a smart way to rank players.
Detroit Revival
Footballguy
Man of Zen
Footballguy
I'm not sure that's the right question to ask, although it's a reasonable one.
You might be better served to ask, "What should we expect the Bears to do?"
Marc Trestman simply hasn't ever really run an offense where the goalline looks went consistently to a perfectly good goalline hammer of the sort Michael Bush represents. Ernest Byner was the primary GL back...not Kevin Mack. Derrick Loville and Terry Kirby were the primary GL backs...not Tommy Vardell or William Floyd.
The closest one can come is in pointing to his tenure with Oakland, when the oft-injured Charlie Garner forced a RBBC approach more than any coach or FF player would want, but even so, a look at the 2001 season (the year before Trestman took over as OC) and the 2002 season, with essentially the same backfield personnel is telling. 2001, Garner had 1 rushing TD, despite having 2.5x as many carries as any other back on the roster, while Crockett and Wheatley combined for 11 TDs. When Trestman took over, Wheatley stepped aside while Garner and Crockett shared the duties much like Byner and Mack. Crockett saw a few more plunges, but Garner scored 5 of his TD's from inside the ten, and over half from inside the red zone...some rushing, some receiving.
Trestman simply seems to like to employ a more versatile offense with a more versatile back, even in the red zone, rather than putting all his eggs into the FB dive basket. If the Bears regularly get to the 1 or 2 yard line, I expect the bulk of those carries to go to Bush. But for the most part, history tells me those other looks are going to be Forte's to lose, unless he does something to diminish Trestman's confidence in him.
Last edited by a moderator:
If Charlie Garner can rack up 1900 yards from scrimmage and 11 total TDs (7 rushing) under Trestman in Oakland when he was 30, I'd wager a bet that Forte can equal those numbers this year.
And that's an RB1.
As far as projecting career highs, if someone said "Hey Charlie Garner will set career highs in yards from scrimmage and total TDs when he's 30" they'd get laughed out of the room too.
Until it turns out they were right.
And that's an RB1.
As far as projecting career highs, if someone said "Hey Charlie Garner will set career highs in yards from scrimmage and total TDs when he's 30" they'd get laughed out of the room too.
Until it turns out they were right.
Man of Zen
Footballguy
Nor is averaging career stats.
The only smart way to rank players is to look at their skills, their situation, and their system, and evaluate as intelligently as possible.
It wasn't smart to project Priest Holmes for a sudden explosion in production in 2001, after years of mediocrity, unless you realized that he was suddenly in line to be the lead dog in an Al Saunders offense, behind a terrific offensive line. And if you realized that and didn't project him into the top ten, you were a fool.
If you see a back with crazy receiving skills and reliable but underwhelming pure rushing production who is suddenly in line to be the focus of a Marc Trestman offense with lots of new and improved blockers, you'd be silly not to project him for career highs in receptions and TD's. (See also, Trent Richardson, 2013.)
pantherclub
Footballguy
How is not looking at career stats from a 5+ year guy not an incredibly smart thing to do. If nothing else it gives you a baseline to start with
matuski
Footballguy
Noone is suggesting you don't... so start there and read the post above you.. specifically:
pantherclub
Footballguy
Projecting career highs for a player across the board is Insanity. Especially for a first year coach.
pantherclub
Footballguy
Read 2 posts up
By this rationale, no one should predict "breakout" WRs or significant stats for RBs taking over for departing vets.
Do you think it's insanity for someone to say Trent Richardson will set career highs this year across the board?
He has a new OC (Norv) and a new HC (Chud).
You're making a broad generalization here but you're ignoring history, while pretending to care a whole lot about history.
History says that Trestman offenses do very well, and the RBs in his system put up great receiving yardage. That held true for Derek Loville, Charlie Garner, and there's no reason to think that history won't repeat itself with Forte this year, especially since he's sort of known for being a gifted receiver out of the backfield.
To you I suppose that's insanity, but to me I would consider it simply an evaluation of a situation and specific attributes of coaches and players.
Last edited by a moderator:
pantherclub
Footballguy
A second year player is a little different from a six year vet no?
RBM
Footballguy
You can't just use Garner like that. Gannon was playing at a much, much higher level than we've ever seen Cutler play at. And they had 3 really good wrs in Rice, Brown and Porter. That Raider offense was incredible that year.
Kenny Powers
Footballguy
RBM
Footballguy
Man of Zen
Footballguy
Gannon was playing at a much, much higher level than we've ever seen Gannon play at, too. In fact both Gannon and Garner had career years in 2002. I suggest it is not a coincidence that this happened in the one full and healthy year both played with Trestman, and that this fact ought to be given some consideration.
RBM
Footballguy
SameSongNDance
Footballguy
Double digit rushing TDs is possible but definitely not something you should take into account when evaluating Forte this year. We have enough data points by now (unlike with someone like TRich) to know Forte doesn't exactly have a nose for the GL. In fact, he's been quite horrible, converting something like 1 out of every 10 GL attempts. O-line and coaching issues aside, he never passed the eyeball test for me at the GL either. If you're buying it's because of his PPR prospects as Forte could lead the league in receptions (from the RB position) if Trestman really plans to exploit Forte's strengths this year. If I'm predicting an up year, I'm predicting 10+ total TDs, not 10+ rushing TDs.
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
A run at the 3 really isn't a goal line carry anyway (a goal line carry is the same as a short yardage carry, except that it is at the goal line instead of 3rd and 1 or 2, so only a run from the 1 or 2 is really a goal line carry), so jumping to the conclusion that Forte is suddenly gonna be the Bears goal line guy is quite a leap.
silentcoach
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
pantherclub
Footballguy
wtf?
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Very true. But I will still be surprised if Forte is their main ball carrier when they get to the 1 or 2 or in other short yardage situations, especially when they have a guy like Bush who has been pretty effective for them in those situations.maybe but it is better than if he had been pulled
Man of Zen
Footballguy
For them who? The them who call the plays are the same them who looked at a team in Oakland where their little speedy back had 1 rushing TD the year before, and the big bruisers had 11, and made the little speedy guy the first option near the GL. Bush hasn't had any of that success yet for this group of "them," but he does fit the profile of guys Trestman has told to take a seat in the past because of his limited skillset.Very true. But I will still be surprised if Forte is their main ball carrier when they get to the 1 or 2 or in other short yardage situations, especially when they have a guy like Bush who has been pretty effective for them in those situations.maybe but it is better than if he had been pulled
Let me get this straight-
Don't bring up Charlie Garner's 1900+ and 11 TD year under Trestman, because of Rich Gannon.
The same Rich Gannon who averaged 239 passing YPG the year before Trestman, and 293 YPG when Trestman took over as OC.
?
I rarely post on this forum, but when I do, it's because something is glaringly obvious and others want to deny the obvious. If they hadn't parsed out most of the post history when searching, you could find something besides my predictions of T.O. having a better year than Antonio Bryant in 2010 in Cincinnati when people were arguing T.O. was done. This was my prediction- 72/1094/9.
This was the outcome- 72/983/9
http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=540790
Take my commentary on Forte for what it's worth. And I don't intend to come across as cocky here, but it's worth more than someone's commentary like this-
The person who says crap like that doesn't draft Jamaal Charles in 2009 when that first year coach Todd Haley comes over, and he rushes for 1120 and 7 TDs (both career highs).
He probably wouldn't have drafted Charlie Garner under Trestman as OC either, and probably didn't draft Matt Forte this year.
Charlie Garner never topped 600 yards rushing his first 5 years in the league. In Forte's first 5 years in the league he's never had less than 929.
Too bad Forte doesn't have Rich Gannon.
Don't bring up Charlie Garner's 1900+ and 11 TD year under Trestman, because of Rich Gannon.
The same Rich Gannon who averaged 239 passing YPG the year before Trestman, and 293 YPG when Trestman took over as OC.
?
I rarely post on this forum, but when I do, it's because something is glaringly obvious and others want to deny the obvious. If they hadn't parsed out most of the post history when searching, you could find something besides my predictions of T.O. having a better year than Antonio Bryant in 2010 in Cincinnati when people were arguing T.O. was done. This was my prediction- 72/1094/9.
This was the outcome- 72/983/9
http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=540790
Take my commentary on Forte for what it's worth. And I don't intend to come across as cocky here, but it's worth more than someone's commentary like this-
Because the person who says crap like this doesn't draft Drew Brees in 2006 when that first year coach Sean Payton comes over, and he throws for 4400 yards and 276 passing YPG (both career highs).
The person who says crap like that doesn't draft Jamaal Charles in 2009 when that first year coach Todd Haley comes over, and he rushes for 1120 and 7 TDs (both career highs).
He probably wouldn't have drafted Charlie Garner under Trestman as OC either, and probably didn't draft Matt Forte this year.
Charlie Garner never topped 600 yards rushing his first 5 years in the league. In Forte's first 5 years in the league he's never had less than 929.
This will be Forte's 6th year. In Garner's 6th year he put up 1764 total yards.
Too bad Forte doesn't have Rich Gannon.
karmarooster
Footballguy
That's sort of his thing. Pantherclub will poo-poo most any hyped player not named Cam Newton.
This is him last year on Matt Ryan:
pantherclub said:
pantherclub said:
I understand the principle, but if you never expect a player to produce his best year, then you then miss out on every career year. We get that there's risk involved in expecting a player to have his most yards, most TDs, or best average. But every single player has a best year at least once.pantherclub said:
Last year's top 10 non-QBs in a particular scoring format:
- Calvin Johnson - most yards ever for a WR, most receptions of his career
- Brandon Marshall - most receptions, most yards, most TDs in his career
- AP - hands down best year of his career.... so far??
- Dez Bryant - career highs so far as a 3rd year breakout WR
- AJ Green - career highs
- Andre Johnson - even this guy had a career high in yards
- Wes Welker - finally someone without a career high in receptions, yards, or TDs
- Martin - does not compute
- Foster - career high in rushes, but nothing else
- Lynch - Career high rushing attempts, rushing yards, total yards, and YPA
- Spiller - career highs across the boards
If you want any shot at landing top 5-10 talent, you have to try to anticipate major breakthroughs, otherwise you'll only get players the year after they blow up.
Of course Forte isn't really thought of as 5 talent, but he was up there as a rook, best RB in PPR scoring IIRC. With a good year he can easily be top 5-10 again even without 10+ TDs.
Other than the risk-averse principle of "avoid projecting career numbers," what reasons are there to think Forte won't be as good as some people hype? Or, who are one or two other RBs at similar ADP who you think are much better alternatives?
Last edited by a moderator:
MJohnstone34
Footballguy
it's really impossible to say much more than forte is a very solid RB and with a new offensive scheme that gives him more upside than he had before. he, like just about every other RB, has a few issues that prevent him from being a home-run pick. the best thing going about forte is that he catches a lot of passes and is quite consistent -- i would look to pair forte with some more speculative RB2's or WR's that have a chance to boom, not draft him expecting there to be a realistic chance he's a top 3-5 player.
Faust
MVP
Last edited by a moderator:
SameSongNDance
Footballguy
Man of Zen
Footballguy
I was kind of hoping he'd crap the bed today, so I could make a move for him in the one league I didn't get him in. Didn't expect much against Cinci. But oh well, that train has left the building. Still feeling good about calling him top 5.
Feeling even better about Bush.
We'll have to wait and see on TRich.
Feeling even better about Bush.
We'll have to wait and see on TRich.
SameSongNDance
Footballguy
SameSongNDance
Footballguy
Definitely a bummer and a head scratcher at the same time. Bush looked like he was running in mud out there last night and I feel like Forte has looked darn good at the GL this year (much better then in years past). Oh well.
HurryUpSundays
Footballguy
I thought the exact same thing. From a non-fantasy perspective this makes little to no sense to my eyeballs.
NajehHejan
Footballguy
It took Bush 3 cracks to get that one yard. I saw a trainwreck out there and Trestman saw his designated GL back? Ok now. Stupid.
WilsonTheVolleyball
Footballguy
I'm sure I'm just overacting, but I hate how Trestman is basically saying "Hey opposing defensive coordinators out there, if we're at the goalline and you see Michael Bush in the backfield, go ahead and stack the line."
If anyone out there has the number of carries within the 5 between Forte and Bush, I would love to see them. In the meantime, my memory seems to recall Forte getting those touches this year rather than Bush, so for now it's a bit hard to really buy this.
Man of Zen
Footballguy
Prior to last game, Forte had 3 runs and 1 reception from inside the five. Bush had no touches from that close.
SportsGuru311
Footballguy
Yeah i have been getting some good points from him this year on a few of my teams.
LargeMouthBass
Footballguy
Only guy I'm happy with in my teams this year.
Cutler injury might have helped his stats for today though.
Cutler injury might have helped his stats for today though.
Last edited by a moderator:
