What's new
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.

LeGarrette Blount signs with NE (1 Viewer)

Where is this guy next year? I don't trust him (or anyone) to be the clear RB1 for the Pats.
Since last night I've been offered Blount for a first rd pick twice. I said no thanks. I'm not interested in the NE RB weekly headache .

 
He looks like a buy to me. These are exactly the kind of comments you'd read about right when lynch and Moreno were in the early stages of their redemption.

 
krsone21 said:
KingPrawn said:
What is Blount's contract status? Isn't he a free agent?
He will be a free agent at the end of this season.
Depending on where he ends up he could be great value, especially if he gets away from the NE RBBC headache. Cleveland? New York? Arizona?

 
I like when some people get so pissed after they get eliminated in FF playoffs, they either go "on tilt" or "hibernate" - this allowed me to stash this guy in 3/9 leagues week 17.

 
I like when some people get so pissed after they get eliminated in FF playoffs, they either go "on tilt" or "hibernate" - this allowed me to stash this guy in 3/9 leagues week 17.
I too was fortunate enough to grab him off the waiver wire week 17, just prior to starting him over Frank Gore in my title game. Now Blount is helping me in a playoff pool. Undecided if I'll keep him or not. Don't expect too much in trade offers from anyone, but I never know. I'd be happy to get a 2nd or 3rd rounder if I did trade him.

I too thought Raider Nation's prediction back in April was eerily accurate....nice catch Slapdash

 
I was one of the only Tampa fans MF'ing the Bucs for getting rid of this guy and Talib. Some will still say "they had to go" or come up with some other justification for this horrible personnel decision. All I know is that both of these guys were talented and the Bucs couldn't figure out a way to use them.

Martin is good but he is injured, and wasn't doing much before his injury this season. One could arguably say the Bucs shouldn't of been looking to use a 1st round pick in 2012 on Doug Martin had they recognized the talent they had in Blount. It's not like he wasn't leaping over defenders here. Then all of a sudden Schiano just quits using the guy, and Mark Dominick trades him. Great job Bucs! :rant:

 
krsone21 said:
KingPrawn said:
What is Blount's contract status? Isn't he a free agent?
He will be a free agent at the end of this season.
Depending on where he ends up he could be great value, especially if he gets away from the NE RBBC headache. Cleveland? New York? Arizona?
Disagree here actually -- I'm hoping he stays in NE, personally. IMO 200 carries plus goal line in NE >>> full load behind a bad line in a crappy offense. Blount offers zero as a receiver, so if he's on a team that has to play from behind a bunch his value will take a big hit. If NE pays to keep him, then that is a pretty strong indicator that they're gonna use him -- they don't exactly throw $$$ around at the RB position typically.

 
Belichick is probably thinking ahead to December and the playoffs. Nobody WANTS to tackle Blount in cold weather. Ask the Packers.
:goodposting:
The announcers mentioned players 30+ on the Pats roster and said that is why Belichick is such a good coach. Instead of just filling a roster, he is thinking well ahead and damnit if Blount hasn't filled a freaking end of the year, fresh bruiser role to secure the #2 seed and get to the AFC Championship. As Peyton Manning knows from last year, it is hard to win every playoff game and win the SB. There are always freak plays, but man Belichick is a heckuva coach. Haters will continue to go to spygate on him, but little nuggets like this make a non-fan like me appreciate how good a coach he is. It's no wonder the Pats are in position to win it all every year. Considering the time lost by Gronk, Vereen, Wilfork, Mayo and others this year, pretty damn amazing that they are again among the last 4 teams standing.

 
krsone21 said:
KingPrawn said:
What is Blount's contract status? Isn't he a free agent?
He will be a free agent at the end of this season.
Depending on where he ends up he could be great value, especially if he gets away from the NE RBBC headache. Cleveland? New York? Arizona?
Disagree here actually -- I'm hoping he stays in NE, personally. IMO 200 carries plus goal line in NE >>> full load behind a bad line in a crappy offense. Blount offers zero as a receiver, so if he's on a team that has to play from behind a bunch his value will take a big hit. If NE pays to keep him, then that is a pretty strong indicator that they're gonna use him -- they don't exactly throw $$$ around at the RB position typically.
Agreed. He has over 400 yards and 8 TDs in the last 3 games in NE- why would you want that to change?

 
krsone21 said:
KingPrawn said:
What is Blount's contract status? Isn't he a free agent?
He will be a free agent at the end of this season.
Depending on where he ends up he could be great value, especially if he gets away from the NE RBBC headache. Cleveland? New York? Arizona?
Disagree here actually -- I'm hoping he stays in NE, personally. IMO 200 carries plus goal line in NE >>> full load behind a bad line in a crappy offense. Blount offers zero as a receiver, so if he's on a team that has to play from behind a bunch his value will take a big hit. If NE pays to keep him, then that is a pretty strong indicator that they're gonna use him -- they don't exactly throw $$$ around at the RB position typically.
Had something similar written up but lost it before I got it posted. Much more interested in Blount in NE than not in NE.

Also, Ridley had 131 carries in the first nine games, Blount's had 95 in the last six. I think that the 'big back' role is worth more like 240-250 carries. Still only mid/low RB2 as a ceiling, but if you got him cheap or free it's nice value.

 
Belichick is probably thinking ahead to December and the playoffs. Nobody WANTS to tackle Blount in cold weather. Ask the Packers.
:goodposting:
The announcers mentioned players 30+ on the Pats roster and said that is why Belichick is such a good coach. Instead of just filling a roster, he is thinking well ahead and damnit if Blount hasn't filled a freaking end of the year, fresh bruiser role to secure the #2 seed and get to the AFC Championship. As Peyton Manning knows from last year, it is hard to win every playoff game and win the SB. There are always freak plays, but man Belichick is a heckuva coach. Haters will continue to go to spygate on him, but little nuggets like this make a non-fan like me appreciate how good a coach he is. It's no wonder the Pats are in position to win it all every year. Considering the time lost by Gronk, Vereen, Wilfork, Mayo and others this year, pretty damn amazing that they are again among the last 4 teams standing.
I hate Belichick, dude is just coaching on a different level than everyone else.

 
krsone21 said:
KingPrawn said:
What is Blount's contract status? Isn't he a free agent?
He will be a free agent at the end of this season.
Depending on where he ends up he could be great value, especially if he gets away from the NE RBBC headache. Cleveland? New York? Arizona?
Disagree here actually -- I'm hoping he stays in NE, personally. IMO 200 carries plus goal line in NE >>> full load behind a bad line in a crappy offense. Blount offers zero as a receiver, so if he's on a team that has to play from behind a bunch his value will take a big hit. If NE pays to keep him, then that is a pretty strong indicator that they're gonna use him -- they don't exactly throw $$$ around at the RB position typically.
Had something similar written up but lost it before I got it posted. Much more interested in Blount in NE than not in NE.

Also, Ridley had 131 carries in the first nine games, Blount's had 95 in the last six. I think that the 'big back' role is worth more like 240-250 carries. Still only mid/low RB2 as a ceiling, but if you got him cheap or free it's nice value.
Agreed on the carry total -- Ridley actually had 290 in 2012. I threw out 200 as an "even sharing the power role" hypothetical. RBs that don't contribute in the passing game needs lots of TDs to be FF relevant, and NE scores a ton on the ground -- 19 this year after 25 in 2012 -- probably tithe best spot in the NFL for a power RB.

 
krsone21 said:
KingPrawn said:
What is Blount's contract status? Isn't he a free agent?
He will be a free agent at the end of this season.
Depending on where he ends up he could be great value, especially if he gets away from the NE RBBC headache. Cleveland? New York? Arizona?
Disagree here actually -- I'm hoping he stays in NE, personally. IMO 200 carries plus goal line in NE >>> full load behind a bad line in a crappy offense. Blount offers zero as a receiver, so if he's on a team that has to play from behind a bunch his value will take a big hit. If NE pays to keep him, then that is a pretty strong indicator that they're gonna use him -- they don't exactly throw $$$ around at the RB position typically.
Had something similar written up but lost it before I got it posted. Much more interested in Blount in NE than not in NE.

Also, Ridley had 131 carries in the first nine games, Blount's had 95 in the last six. I think that the 'big back' role is worth more like 240-250 carries. Still only mid/low RB2 as a ceiling, but if you got him cheap or free it's nice value.
Agreed on the carry total -- Ridley actually had 290 in 2012. I threw out 200 as an "even sharing the power role" hypothetical. RBs that don't contribute in the passing game needs lots of TDs to be FF relevant, and NE scores a ton on the ground -- 19 this year after 25 in 2012 -- probably tithe best spot in the NFL for a power RB.
LawFirm upside?

YR
TM G RSH YD Y/R TD TRG REC YD Y/R TD FPT RANK

2010 NE 16 229 1008 4.4 13 16 12 85 7.1 0 187 15

2011 NE 16 181 667 3.7 11 15 9 159 17.7 0 149 24

 
Last edited by a moderator:
krsone21 said:
KingPrawn said:
What is Blount's contract status? Isn't he a free agent?
He will be a free agent at the end of this season.
Depending on where he ends up he could be great value, especially if he gets away from the NE RBBC headache. Cleveland? New York? Arizona?
Disagree here actually -- I'm hoping he stays in NE, personally. IMO 200 carries plus goal line in NE >>> full load behind a bad line in a crappy offense. Blount offers zero as a receiver, so if he's on a team that has to play from behind a bunch his value will take a big hit. If NE pays to keep him, then that is a pretty strong indicator that they're gonna use him -- they don't exactly throw $$$ around at the RB position typically.
Had something similar written up but lost it before I got it posted. Much more interested in Blount in NE than not in NE.

Also, Ridley had 131 carries in the first nine games, Blount's had 95 in the last six. I think that the 'big back' role is worth more like 240-250 carries. Still only mid/low RB2 as a ceiling, but if you got him cheap or free it's nice value.
Agreed on the carry total -- Ridley actually had 290 in 2012. I threw out 200 as an "even sharing the power role" hypothetical. RBs that don't contribute in the passing game needs lots of TDs to be FF relevant, and NE scores a ton on the ground -- 19 this year after 25 in 2012 -- probably tithe best spot in the NFL for a power RB.
LawFirm upside?

YR
TM G RSH YD Y/R TD TRG REC YD Y/R TD FPT RANK

2010 NE 16 229 1008 4.4 13 16 12 85 7.1 0 187 15

2011 NE 16 181 667 3.7 11 15 9 159 17.7 0 149 24
Yeah... in standard scoring that's a nice range. Should have said mid/low RB2 was for PPR.

 
krsone21 said:
KingPrawn said:
What is Blount's contract status? Isn't he a free agent?
He will be a free agent at the end of this season.
Depending on where he ends up he could be great value, especially if he gets away from the NE RBBC headache. Cleveland? New York? Arizona?
Disagree here actually -- I'm hoping he stays in NE, personally. IMO 200 carries plus goal line in NE >>> full load behind a bad line in a crappy offense. Blount offers zero as a receiver, so if he's on a team that has to play from behind a bunch his value will take a big hit. If NE pays to keep him, then that is a pretty strong indicator that they're gonna use him -- they don't exactly throw $$$ around at the RB position typically.
Had something similar written up but lost it before I got it posted. Much more interested in Blount in NE than not in NE.

Also, Ridley had 131 carries in the first nine games, Blount's had 95 in the last six. I think that the 'big back' role is worth more like 240-250 carries. Still only mid/low RB2 as a ceiling, but if you got him cheap or free it's nice value.
Agreed on the carry total -- Ridley actually had 290 in 2012. I threw out 200 as an "even sharing the power role" hypothetical. RBs that don't contribute in the passing game needs lots of TDs to be FF relevant, and NE scores a ton on the ground -- 19 this year after 25 in 2012 -- probably tithe best spot in the NFL for a power RB.
LawFirm upside?

YR

TM G RSH YD Y/R TD TRG REC YD Y/R TD FPT RANK

2010 NE 16 229 1008 4.4 13 16 12 85 7.1 0 187 15

2011 NE 16 181 667 3.7 11 15 9 159 17.7 0 149 24
I actually think he's a more dynamic runner than BJGE -- he's been at 5 YPC twice now, his rookie year with TB and again this year. If we're talking pie in the sky upside, as in Blount having the NE power role all to himself for the entire 2014 season (and not fumbling it away), I think he'll have a much better yardage total.

 
Rotoworld:

The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette expects LeGarrette Blount to handle 6-8 carries per game behind Le'Veon Bell this season.

It'll be worth monitoring in camp whether Blount replaces Bell in goal-line situations, although Le'Veon is effective short-yardage runner and Blount has historically had mixed results. Blount will be a change-of-pace back in Pittsburgh, and solid handcuff for Bell drafters. Although Le'Veon is 6-foot-1, 230, he's not a true power back like Blount. Bell, in fact, plays more along the lines of a Matt Forte, with outstanding versatility and vision, and elusiveness at the second level.

Related: Le'Veon Bell

Source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Jun 1 - 2:03 PM
 
Steelers backfield is beefed-up and balanced

Excerpt:

After the Steelers signed Blount as a free agent, many suggested he would be used mostly in short-yardage situations. Yet they have mixed and matched him and Bell, even splitting them out wide. Archer gives them different dimension and flip-flops between working with the backs and wide receivers.

It all fits nicely into their plans to run more no-huddle offense.

“I don think you’ll be able to tell anything with the first two guys,” Roethlisberger said of what could become the B&B backfield. “I don’t think we’re going to run power with Dri — you never know, I guess — but I don’t think you’ll be able to tell the difference because we’re asking both to do the same stuff.

“The key for me is to not know which one is in there. To have that much confidence and faith in both of them, that both can get it done whether it’s running, catching or blocking.”
 
Rotoworld:

LeGarrette Blount - RB - Steelers

Coach Mike Tomlin indicated LeGarrette Blount may be more than just a red-zone, goal-line back.

"Theyre both going to get their share," Tomlin said of Blount and Le'Veon Bell. "Well deal with that on a game-by-game basis based on the plan." In the preseason opener, Blount received two consecutive red-zone carries while also seeing a third-down rep. The Steelers have been hinting at a possible mix-and-match committee-style approach since signing Blount and drafting Dri Archer. Blount stealing goal-line and occasional work between the 20s from Bell would be a big hit to Bell's stock. He's hard to get behind as a first- or early-second round pick in fantasy drafts. Blount's value is great in the 11th.

Related: Le'Veon Bell

Source: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Aug 15 - 11:45 AM
http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/steelers/2014/08/15/New-Steelers-RB-coach-Saxson-must-manage-crowd/stories/201408150097

 
Rotoworld:

Le'Veon Bell said after Saturday night's preseason game that LeGarrette Blount will likely get the goal-line work this season for the Steelers.

Coach Mike Tomlin said roles have yet to be determined in the Steelers backfield. Bell and Blount were announced as co-starters before Saturday's exhibition tilt against the Bills, and Tomlin indicated last week that he sees Blount as more than a "red-zone, goal-line" back. Bell is currently being drafted as RB9 in the middle of the second round in fantasy drafts. A case could be made to bump him down a few slots, behind TD scorers Zac Stacy and Doug Martin.

Related: Le'Veon Bell

Source: Dave Richard on Twitter

Aug 17 - 9:33 AM
 
Rotoworld:

LeGarrette Blount - RB - Steelers

LeGarrette Blount and Le'Veon Bell were arrested for possession of marijuana Wednesday.

Bell was also popped for DUI. The two Steelers were reportedly in possession of 20 grams of marijuana and accompanied by a female, who was in possession of two grams. Blount has a checkered past from his college days, but he's mostly kept his nose clean in the NFL. Both Bell and Blount will be subject to a suspension once the case is resolved. It may not affect them in 2014.

Related: Le'Veon Bell

Source: Colin Dunlap on Twitter

Aug 20 - 7:41 PM
 
Rotoworld:

LeGarrette Blount rushed seven times for 32 yards in Thursday's preseason game, and secured 3-of-3 targets for an additional 14 yards.

Blount came off the bench behind Le'Veon Bell, but got to work on Pittsburgh's second series. Apparently being "punished" for their Wednesday arrests, both players played into the fourth quarter, finishing with 10 touches apiece. Blount out-gained Bell 46-26. Neither player got the rock near the goal-line, as the Steelers were never in position. Blount is clearly ticketed for weekly work, but remains a firm No. 2 to Bell's No. 1. Even if he earns the majority of the goal-line opportunities, Blount is little more than a mid-range RB3.

Related: Le'Veon Bell

Aug 21 - 11:03 PM
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Curious to know what happened prior to this. I think he must have been quite a tool to get cut that quickly.

 
Rotoworld:

Patriots signed RB LeGarrette Blount to a two-year contract.

Oh, the irony. Just eight months after letting Blount walk to Pittsburgh as a free agent (and getting a compensatory draft pick for it), the Patriots get to re-sign him to a team-friendly, minimum contract plus incentives deal. He returns to a backfield that has lost Stevan Ridley to a torn ACL, but does have Jonas Gray functioning well as the clear-cut No. 1 power back. We'd expect Gray to retain a big piece role, with Blount serving as insurance and depth. The 153-772-7 line he put up for Bill Belichick last season is not in the cards, making Blount only a deep-league flier. Blount will at least make sure Gray doesn't have to carry the ball 38 times again like he did in Week 11, putting a bit of a damper on Gray's volume projections.

Related: Jonas Gray

Nov 20 - 8:20 AM
 
Man, I cannot imagine a worse timed idea in the wrong place with the wrong coach than what Gray did.
There was nothing Gray could do to altar the impact of Blount in the offense. Blount will have to earn his opportunities just like last year, when he unseated Ridley.

 
Man, I cannot imagine a worse timed idea in the wrong place with the wrong coach than what Gray did.
There was nothing Gray could do to altar the impact of Blount in the offense. Blount will have to earn his opportunities just like last year, when he unseated Ridley.
I don't know about that. In that article, BB says:

"That'll be up to him, just like everybody else,"When he gets an opportunity, how much he can take advantage of it, how much he can be productive, what he can do with those opportunities will determine how many more there are."
BB says when he gets an opportunity, how he does will determine how many more opps there will be.

Perhaps Gray over-sleeping will give Blount that opportunity. If Gray doesn't over-sleep, doesn't fumble, doesn't miss a block, etc, perhaps Blount doesn't get that opportunity. But saying there was nothing Gray could do to alter the impact of Blount on the offense doesn't fit with what BB said.

 
Man, I cannot imagine a worse timed idea in the wrong place with the wrong coach than what Gray did.
There was nothing Gray could do to altar the impact of Blount in the offense. Blount will have to earn his opportunities just like last year, when he unseated Ridley.
I don't know about that. In that article, BB says:
"That'll be up to him, just like everybody else,"When he gets an opportunity, how much he can take advantage of it, how much he can be productive, what he can do with those opportunities will determine how many more there are."
BB says when he gets an opportunity, how he does will determine how many more opps there will be.Perhaps Gray over-sleeping will give Blount that opportunity. If Gray doesn't over-sleep, doesn't fumble, doesn't miss a block, etc, perhaps Blount doesn't get that opportunity. But saying there was nothing Gray could do to alter the impact of Blount on the offense doesn't fit with what BB said.
Which is what I said. Grays performance is near irrelevant when it comes to what Blount's role will end up being.

 
I'm surprised there are still Blount supporters and people who think he matters. He may get 6 -8 carries a game, will it matters, doubt it. Gray is a talented kid, I dont think Blount is. Just my thought as Grays absence is going to drive the Blount hype even more.

 
I'm surprised there are still Blount supporters and people who think he matters. He may get 6 -8 carries a game, will it matters, doubt it. Gray is a talented kid, I dont think Blount is. Just my thought as Grays absence is going to drive the Blount hype even more.
In the last 2 games of the 2013 season Blount rushed for 265 yds and 4 tds while averging 6.63 yards per carry ... he also returned 2 kicks for 145 (he had over 300 all purpose yards in one game) In game 1 of the playoffs he rushed for 166 yards 6.92 yards per carry and 4 tds and had 37 return yards (Gray averaged 5.43 yds per last week)

Do you really think Blount's not talented or do you just own Gray?

Gray might not even be active this week in which case I'm pretty sure Blount will exceed 6-8 carries

 
Run It Up said:
Bayhawks said:
Run It Up said:
SaintsInDome2006 said:
Faust said:
Man, I cannot imagine a worse timed idea in the wrong place with the wrong coach than what Gray did.
There was nothing Gray could do to altar the impact of Blount in the offense. Blount will have to earn his opportunities just like last year, when he unseated Ridley.
I don't know about that. In that article, BB says:
"That'll be up to him, just like everybody else,"When he gets an opportunity, how much he can take advantage of it, how much he can be productive, what he can do with those opportunities will determine how many more there are."
BB says when he gets an opportunity, how he does will determine how many more opps there will be.Perhaps Gray over-sleeping will give Blount that opportunity. If Gray doesn't over-sleep, doesn't fumble, doesn't miss a block, etc, perhaps Blount doesn't get that opportunity. But saying there was nothing Gray could do to alter the impact of Blount on the offense doesn't fit with what BB said.
Which is what I said. Grays performance is near irrelevant when it comes to what Blount's role will end up being.
That's not what you said. You said there was nothing Gray could do to alter the impact Blount might have. If he gets benched for being late, that would alter Blounts impact, by giving him the chance to earn mote PT.If that's what you meant, then I agree, to a point. I think is Gray were to average 5.0 YPC, that would limit Blounts opps, & therefore, his impact.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top