Hugh falls? Someone must be dropped to lift them in preseason lists.As for Suggs - I wouldn't put him into the top-20, even if he were named the starter tomorrow.As for Rudi - I love him, and would be psyched for him to be on my team, but first round? IMO, the top-10 RBs should contain no surprise if someone says their name in the first round. It's the main reason DDavis dropped to my #12 - - and I would drop my jaw if anyone called for Rudi in the first round.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
2004 Top 15 NFL RB's (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter eoMMan
- Start date
Priest Holmes - my only fear is that he rushes the ball less as the team gets LJohn some time in relief. I'm going with a preliminary guess at:300 carries, 4.8 YPC, 1440 yards rushing, 15 rush TDs, 75 receptions, 620 yards, 2 TDs.I'll take a 2G total yards, and 17 total TDs rusher = #2 overall. Right behind LT. And note, please, that this means his rushing numbers are reduced over what he did this year - down to nearly 18 carries a game. However, like Faulk or LT, he is easily capable of making up production with his receiving numbers.
ShadowMaster
Footballguy
I'm amazed at how many people have Holmes right at the top, but Faulk in the low teens because he's approaching washed up.Fact is, every player is an injury risk on every play.Fact Faulk is a whole 8 months older than Holmes.M.Faulk - 2/26/73P.Holmes - 10/7/73S.Davis - 3/1/74Faulk could EASILY return to top productivity IF he stays healthy. Of course 16 games of productivity is key for every player to do their best for ya isn't it?
Uruk-Hai
Footballguy
Anyone have a list of Faulk's injuries from the last 3 or 4 years? I could be way off, but they seem to be more of the "breakdown" sort of injuries than the flukey kind.Anyway, I agree that Faulk could be 1st round material IF he plays 15 or 16 games. But that's just it, isn't it? When you have the weight of the 4 most recent seasons with significant time missed, it'll tend to make you give pause. At this time, there's no way I can project him for 16 games worth of fantasy points.
Last edited by a moderator:
ShadowMaster
Footballguy
Faulk missed 5 games this (2003) year with a broken hand. Could happen to anyone.He was productive when he returned.....Faulks 2003 numbers projected for 16 games:304 carriers 1190 yards, 65 rec 422 yards, 16 TDs (Top 10 easy)Missed 2 games in each of the past few years, but I don't think any of those were serious. Sprained anckles and what not.Nevermind, I'm just going to shut up now and steal him late in round one next year.
Go for it - I really HOPE folks think they'll be able to "steal" Faulk in the first round and leave some of the more solid backs to fall into the second. I owned Faulk this past year, and while he made my run into the post-season and through the Bowl successful, he almost tanked my season with his production from weeks 1 through 10 and he got me bumped from a Survivor league. It is a mircale, considering my #2 was WGReen, that I was able to weather that storm and continue to be playoff eligible heading into the last 5 weeks of the FF regular season.Faulk has not played a full season since 1999, hasn't crested 1000 yards in three years, has a boatload more carries than Holmes, his YPCarry have dropped dramatically (despite a supposedly imporved o-line for 2003), and we have watched his reception numbers - the bread and butter for making Faulk a top back - drop markedly:year: catches, yards, average, long reception on the year, TDs2000:81 830 10.2 72 8 2001:83 765 9.2 65 9 2002:80 537 6.7 40 2 2003:45 290 6.4 30 1Even projecting his years out to 16 game seasons, his skills are declining. Finally, you discount his injuries, but they hit him each and every year for the last 4 years - why should 2004 be different? If I had ANY faith Faulk could finish the year injury free, he'd be a mid-first round pick. When I am vitually guaranteed of losing a player's services for 2 games or more, he is no longer a first round selection.
Before someone else jumps in here - he was missing 6 weeks b/c of the broken hand, true, but that injury gave the team the time to do surgery on his knee - which has a degenerative condition that will only get worse over time. Believe what you want to believe as a homer, but draft your fantasy back with the knowledge that THIS one is an extreme injury risk - more so than any other back in the top-20.
packersfan
Footballguy
Not in my book either. I think you and I talked about him before in another thread and I mentioned that I would only consider him as a No. 2 RB if he was in a really good spot in the draft. It would be tough to pass on him early to mid-second round even with all of his injuries taken into consideration (and I have ZERO confidence he'll play all 16 games next year). But there's no way I'd want him as a No. 1 RB anymore.
I think that may have been in this thread - we seem to think on very similar grounds about backs. I was commenting on the blind statement that Faulk should not be considered decaying if Priest is till a #1-3 back. Which is pure idiocy.Faulk is falling apart before our eyes, every year. He could run like Faulk 1999, but if he is also as likely to miss a lot of games, and can't carry my team those weeks. Therefore, he doesn't deserve my first round selection. I would take him anywhere in the 2nd.Aas for Holmes, very little wear and tear, and missed his first games EVER as a pro last year, and his O-line is simply the best in the game. A Holmes 2003 drop in production each week by 25%, with the minimal risk of injury, is still worth a first round, top-5, selection - A Zero drop in Faulk's 2003 production, with the significant risk that it would be reduced to ZERO in several games due to injury, means he drops out of the top-12 backs.If this gentleman truly believes their injury risks are the same, then that is his right - I am hoping there are at least a few folks at MY draft who think that way, though, so the low injury risk, just as productive, backs will fall to me.
Last comment on this - the 16 TDs would propel him into the top-10, true, but a projected total of 1600 total yards from Faulk is not the Marshal Faulk who was worth a first round selection.A first round Faulk is a 2G 15+ TD back with little injury risk. That 'aint the Marshal Faulk heading into 2004.
ShadowMaster
Footballguy
smlevin - your a banana head. You propose your opinion as fact, but the numbers don't lie.MONTH G Att Yds Avg Lg TD Rec Yds Avg TD SEPTEMBER 3 42 116 2.8 26 1 12 66 5.5 0 NOVEMBER 4 81 359 4.4 52 6 13 95 7.3 0 DECEMBER 4 86 343 4.0 28 3 20 129 6.5 1 If he deteriorating before your eyes, then how come he finished strong? He scored in 7 of the last 9 games, including 3 multiple TD games. He went over 150 yards rushing twice in Dec. He had @100 total yards in 7 of the last 9. (not doing math)16 TDs would tie hm for 5th overall from the non-QB position and certainly makes him worthy of a 1st round pick. Maybe not number one overall, but certainly top 16 - probably top 10, and the potential for more.
zamboni
Footballguy
No need for the name calling, shadow.The numbers don't lie that he finished strong, but it's unrealistic to extrapolate his last several weeks over an entire season - just doesn't work that way.I happen to agree somewhat with smelvin - Faulk is still a very good back (say, top 10-15 <edit: IF HEALTHY>
, but we're not talking about the Marshall of 2000. So many young bucks have just seemed to pass him bye. He would probably be a dynamite #2 RB, but I wouldn't want to rely on him as my #1 guy.
Last edited by a moderator:
packersfan
Footballguy
I think the main question is if you still think Faulk is a Top 10 RB who would you take him ahead of and why?
packersfan
Footballguy
That's my viewpoint as well. Faulk is one of those guys (like Edge was this year since I knew he'd go in the lower part of the first round of my draft -- and he did -- and there's no way I was going to take him there) who I want nothing to do with and hope somebody takes him so I don't have to worry about making a choice my gut tells me I should avoid. I'll gladly let someone else take Faulk so I can grab a RB who I feel much more confident in.
Hey, crack is a GOOD thing and who cares what other people think besides when someone gets their predictions right 100% of the time THEN they can judge you, right?He always was and is my #1, except if i put him there, people will think i am on crack and stop reading my list right there.hurry up and change your list to have DM as your number 1!Oh, admit it you just like that he put Deuce #1 overall.Good list, you and i think alot alike
That said, love DM going forward and could see him fall out of the top 4 or 5 with an excellent value selection.Thank you - I appreciate bananas. They're yummy.But I stated the clear facts, with supporting numbers, that:1) Faulk has missed time every year since 1999.2) his YPC have declined3) his YPReception have declined4) his total yardage numbers in 2003, even projected for a full season, are around 1500, which does not make for a top-10 back.5) Your point was why is Priest up there and not Faulk - and I backed all that up with facts that include Priest has not taken the pounding, and Priest has not missed time outside of the two games last year.I did not state opinion as fact - I backed up my opinions with fact. You are actually the one using the illusion of extrapolating Faulk's 11 game 2003 numbers into 16 games to predict 2004 success. I was using pure numbers of what actually happened (rather than an illusion of what could have been) to support my theory that Faulk's skills are declining.Finally, you fail to offer even the slightest counter argument to WHY Faulk's been injured the last three years - a degenerative knee condition that is not going to get any better over time. Faulk missed SIX weeks (not five as you claim - one of those weeks was a bye week), had knee surgery mid-season, and the surgery was related to the knee condition.If "degenerative knee condition" doesn't scare you off a 31 year old back in the first round, what would? Finally, any FFGuy or Shark in this Pool will take issue with your pure extrapolation from Faulk's 11 games that he would have had 16 TDs if he was healthy. Who is asserting "opinions" as facts by doing that?Here's the bone you obviously need
- yeah, fine, if I ever end up thinking Faulk will both play 16 games and score a TD per game, I will take him in the first round. As it stands, given his mad skills, he is worth an early to mid second round selection as the #13-#16 back off the board just for those hopefully at least 14 really good games he'll give me.
The Real Deal
Footballguy
1. Tomlinson - absolute monster2. McAllister - ditto, TD numbers should be closer to '02 than '03.3. Holmes - monster but riskier than top 2.4. Portis - injury prone but can't pass him up at this point b/c of upside5. J Lewis - not the receiving threat the others are plus knee question marks6. A Green - slight dropoff from '03 but should still be very solid7. S. Alexander - very solid and I still consider him tier 18. Edge - very solid but not the focal point of the offense anymore9. D. Davis - Triplets part III? Complete package w/ great receiving skills.10. Barlow - will take over next year in an offense that loves to run11. R. Williams - could rebound next year and might be a huge bargain12. Taylor - can the fragile one go 3 years w/o injury? Doubt it.13. T. Henry - should still get the rock plenty next year14. M. Faulk - clearly not what he once was but should have 1 good year left15. S. Davis - in an offense that loves to run but huge injury risk
Burning Sensation
Footballguy
Whos that handsome guy in your avatar
Haslett was breaking down the Eagles and Panther's Ds on SCenter, and, man, sometimes when Haslett would run the play in slow mo, Deuce looked like he was running at full speed. He's amazing the way he runs at angles, too. I don't think anyone in the league can cut him off an angle before he's gone at least 15 yards upfield.
nightshift
Footballguy
I have to agree with you. I don't see the Saints being a powerhouse offense. Brooks is being poorly coached and/or his attitude is stinks. Horn isn't a happy camper, either. Those two will definitely affect McAllister's production.
Last edited by a moderator:
Eric Stratton
Footballguy
Initial 2004 Top 20 Running Backs1. Priest Holmes- Should produce nicely next year2. Ladainien Tomlinson- Even better in leagues that award points for receptions3. Ahman Green- The Packers offensive line will be strong again4. Clinton Portis- Can he approach 20 touchdowns next year?5. Jamal Lewis- Baltimore’s offensive weapon6. Deuce McAllister- His touchdown total will increase next year7. Shaun Alexander- Not the threat out of the backfield that many expected8. Edgerrin James- He moves up due to his strong finish in 20039. Ricky Williams- 3.4 yards per carry in 2003 worries me10. Fred Taylor- He comes with risk but he rewarded his owners this year11. Travis Henry- Watch the Buffalo RB situation and McGahee12. Marshall Faulk- I doubt that I draft him next year13. Stephen Davis- He has another solid year left14. Kevan Barlow- He finally should get his chance15. Dominick Davis- This kid is exciting to watch16. Michael Bennett- Keep an eye on the Onterrio Smith factor17. Rudi Johnson- The favorite to take over for the Bengals18. James Stewart- I bet you forgot about him19. Thomas Jones- 4.6 yards per carry this season20. Curtis Martin- Not flashy but he should get a lot of carries in 2004Others:Brain Westbrook- The downside is the way Reid uses his RBsWilliam Green/Lee Suggs- Suggs has sleeper written all over himCharlie Garner- He should bounce back but watch out for Justin FargasEddie George- Add him to my do not touch list for 2004T.J. Duckett/Warrick Dunn- It looks like RBBC again next yearTiki Barber- His luster may be dimming in New York. Pay attention to how Coughlin wants to use him. He may move up on this list.Anthony Thomas- Not dependable from a fantasy standpointCorey Dillon- If he changes teams and is the #1 RB, he makes the top 20Trung Canidate- I’m not sold on him and I’m not sure Gibbs isNote: This list does not include college players that may get drafted.
Burning Sensation
Footballguy
As a Deuce backer, i am not sure he will get 15 TD's, but what i would bet on is that he scores more than he did last year, with a solid chance he will get 15 or more. After all, everyone has LT2 in the top 2, and he is in a worse situation than Deuce.