2012 RB surprises (1 Viewer)

[FF Ninja]

Every year all the rankings look basically the same and the ADPs follow the rankings and then people are aghast when there is the inevitable shake-up, and suddenly (via hindsight) most of it is crystal clear how it happened. I've copied the latest consensus ADP for RBs and I'll list my unpopular opinions on why popular backs are going to drop and I'll list my idiotic opinions on why unpopular backs could surge into popularity by mid-season.

ADP Name Team Positional Rank

1 Arian Foster HOU RB 1

2 Ray Rice BAL RB 2

3 LeSean McCoy PHI RB 3

6 Maurice Jones-Drew JAX RB 4 - how often do hold outs not result in poor play? His knees must worry everyone.

7 Ryan Mathews SD RB 5 - if he's healthy for 15 games, he'll be top 3

8 Chris Johnson TEN RB 6 - this is simply a different team than when he had success and we're not sure if he's even the same player

11 Darren McFadden OAK RB 7 - his offense will be better, but his injury was serious and always a risk for more injuries

13 Marshawn Lynch SEA RB 8 - I would take him as early as #5 overall. Sea offense only going to improve.

15 Matt Forte CHI RB 9 - new offense, likely no goal line touches, plus holdout. No thanks.

19 DeMarco Murray DAL RB 10 - small sample size of success in NFL after mediocre performance last 2 years in Big 12

21 Trent Richardson CLE RB 11 - my guess is he has a 10% chance of scoring 10 TD or more, rookie learning curve might not be instantaneous

25 Jamaal Charles KC RB 12 - OC has ties to Hillis, any loss of speed and he's got nothing on Hillis

26 Adrian Peterson MIN RB 13 - is he superman? I don't think any RB can come back that quickly from that injury

27 Steven Jackson STL RB 14 - Fisher's next Eddie George? Veteran gets to grind it out one more season

31 Darren Sproles NO RB 15 - 173 touches, 9 TDs. Both numbers likely to go down with an improved (no turf toe) Ingram. Plus, with the coaching situation and all the other turmoil, I think we all see the likelihood of at least a downtick in team production.

34 Fred Jackson BUF RB 16

35 Michael Turner ATL RB 17 - Atl already passing a lot last year, should still be 400 rushes to pass around. With just Quizz (3.6 ypc) and Snelling, Turner will get his again unless he really slows down. He may have looked slow last year, but his 4.5 ypc says his vision and veteran savvy makes up for it.

37 Ahmad Bradshaw NYG RB 18

39 Frank Gore SF RB 19

47 Reggie Bush MIA RB 20

52 Chris Wells ARI RB 21

54 Roy Helu WAS RB 22

62 BenJarvus Green-Ellis CIN RB 23 - going from NE to CIN will be like Thomas Jones going from NYJ to KC

63 Shonn Greene NYJ RB 24 - inconsistent last year, but new OC and little competition, 250+ carries @ RB24?

69 Doug Martin TB RB 25 - rookie hype, Blount isn't giving up his job without a fight

70 Willis McGahee DEN RB 26 - does strike me as a Peyton Manning RB, but I could definitely be wrong

71 Jonathan Stewart CAR RB 27 - most elusive back in the NFL last year, possibly in line for more goal line looks

73 Isaac Redman PIT RB 28 - small sample size and likely RBBC during fantasy playoffs, but could shine and keep job. Really torn on him.

75 C.J. Spiller BUF RB 29

76 Jahvid Best DET RB 30 - the hype is down to a trickle finally

-------------------------------- After RB30, almost everyone drafted is drafted as a backup, but I think quite a few of these sneak into the top 18

77 DeAngelo Williams CAR RB 31

79 Peyton Hillis KC RB 32 - got his OC from 2010 back and he's playing for a real contract in 2013. His main competition is a speed guy coming off ACL surgery. Team is built to run. I won't be surprised if he goes for 220/1000/10+40/300/2

80 Michael Bush CHI RB 33

84 Mark Ingram NO RB 34 - I'll admit I don't have a strong feel for his talent, but turf toe hurts RBs and it wouldn't be the first time we've seen a 1st round back take a year before he blows up. Don't have a great feeling here, but we'll all think we should've seen it coming if he blows up.

89 Ben Tate HOU RB 35

90 Stevan Ridley NE RB 36 - BJGE finished RB15 and RB24 on 229 and 181 carries the last 2 years. If this guy is even a little more talented then there's no reason he shouldn't do better. Vereen is a must handcuff, though.

95 James Starks GB RB 37 - Who else is going to carry the ball and catch passes? A third rounder out of Hawaii with no real NFL experience and an ACL injury or an UDFA? TDs will be few and far between, but if he stays healthy, he will finish as a solid RB2. Being a starting RB for the Packers is like getting 200 rushes on 3rd and long...

99 Donald Brown IND RB 38 - former first round talent that took a couple years to develop? He'll get his chances this year with limited competition. Reports say he's going to be a 3 down back, too. If Luck is anything but horrible, how does Brown not put up RB2 numbers?

105 LeGarrette Blount TB RB 39 - must see how training camp will play out, but as one of the most elusive backs in the NFL for the last 2seasons, the suddenly more motivated Blount won't be giving up his job on this up and coming offense without a fight. Additionally, after just talking about Donald Brown's struggles, we can't bank on Martin clicking right away.

106 David Wilson NYG RB 40

108 Daniel Thomas MIA RB 41 - suffered through hamstring injuries last year and lost the coach that drafted him, but could show why he was a second round draft pick if given a fair shot

111 Toby Gerhart MIN RB 42 - got a chance to show what he could do last year and will have an improved o-line to run behind if Peterson simply isn't effective

112 Rashard Mendenhall PIT RB 43

113 Pierre Thomas NO RB 44

114 Ryan Williams ARI RB 45 - forgotten 2nd rounder who had a Caddy injury last year, but Beanie has had his share of injury problems so if Williams is as good as advertised last year he could run with the job if/when that opportunity comes

117 Felix Jones DAL RB 46 - last year's flavor of the offseason could get yet another chance if Murray looks like a 3rd down back trying to be a starter

120 Mikel Leshoure DET RB 47 - achilles injuries are really hard to come back from

134 Ronnie Hillman DEN RB 48 - admittedly I don't know much about him, but he's got to be more like Addai than McGahee, right?

136 Mike Tolbert CAR RB 49 - fullback

142 Kevin Smith DET RB 50 - he looked really, really good when healthy last year and even looked good when nicked up

144 Kendall Hunter SF RB 51

145 Shane Vereen NE RB 52 - if he wins the job but loses goal line touches to Ridley, this offense is potent enough that he should be able to put up enough yards and long TDs to be your RB2

148 Isaiah Pead STL RB 53

150 Cedric Benson RB 54

154 Delone Carter IND RB 55

156 Jacquizz Rodgers ATL RB 56

157 Mike Goodson OAK RB 57 - must handcuff for DMC owners

158 Bernard Scott CIN RB 58 - he hasn't done anything yet, but this is his chance with just a plodder splitting time w/him

165 Joseph Addai NE RB 59

166 Brandon Jacobs SF RB 60

172 Evan Royster WAS RB 61 - just maaaybe

184 Tim Hightower WAS RB 62

186 Lamar Miller MIA RB 63 - current coaching staff didn't draft Thomas or sign Bush

191 Alex Green GB RB 64

192 Knowshon Moreno DEN RB 65

194 Danny Woodhead NE RB 66

195 Taiwan Jones OAK RB 67

199 Ryan Grant RB 68

201 Joe McKnight NYJ RB 69 - I'd rather handcuff Greene with Powell

202 Rashad Jennings JAX RB 70 - don't know much about him although I had him on a few teams in 2010, but you have to think he's got one of the better shots of being forced into a starting role

Every year my strategy changes according to my perception of positional value by round, but this year I really want to land Mathews/Lynch and then wait until at least round 6 for my RB2. I'd be happy with any of those guys between 32-39 that I listed, but I really want Hillis, Ridley, and Brown with Vereen later. After the top 3, I only see 4 guys I'd consider drafting until Greene at 24. So many question marks surrounding the guys in the middle. I know it is all personal preference/perception, but I've never seen an ADP like this where I see so few RBs I'd draft between rounds 2-5, and so many potential gems in rounds 7-9.

We all know the reasons behind people drafting Jamaal Charles, Chris Johnson, Trent Richardson, Adrian Peterson, etc. but does anyone else get a super ominous feeling about a lot of those guys? They've got hype, but if we look at historical data and try to do projections, it's hard to justify drafting them. I feel like they will all be relative busts and we'll feel like we really should've seen the writing on the wall. But more importantly, I don't see how Hillis, Ridley, Brown, etc. are receiving such little attention. I might start a separate thread about Blount, but I've been reading up on him quite a bit and I am going to be shocked if he's not much more productive than Martin this year. He was already a great runner, but he's been working a lot on pass protection, receiving, and ball security.

Serious discussion only please. Don't respond with turd responses like "Duh, JC is a stud and Hillis is a quitter".

 

[LarryAllen'sJockstrap]

19 DeMarco Murray DAL RB 10 - small sample size of success in NFL after mediocre performance last 2 years in Big 12

2009 & 2010 at Oklahoma- 3035 rush/rec yards combined

- 32 rush/rec TDs combined

Career at Oklahoma:

- All-Time Leader in Points Scored (390)

- All-Time Leader in Touchdowns (65)

- All-Time Leader in All Purpose Yards (6,718)

- All-Time Leader in Receiving Yards for a Running Back (1,571)

- All-Time Leader in kickoff return average (27.58)

Maybe you're thinking of someone else?

ETA - JC is a stud and Hillis is a quitter

 

[Touchdown There]

Serious discussion only please. Don't respond with turd responses like "Duh, JC is a stud and Hillis is a quitter".

Lynch. Shonn Greene. Ingram. You are going to make a disturbing amount of money this year.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

nice work Ninja, and every time I think about he RB position Im just passing on it early for QB/WR/Te and then take as many late round fliers like D.brown,ingram, best, k.smith etc. work the wire like and animal and trade.

RB is a landmind position more than ever, and the more I think about it, the more Im going to avoid it early.

 

[FF Ninja]

19 DeMarco Murray DAL RB 10 - small sample size of success in NFL after mediocre performance last 2 years in Big 12

2009 & 2010 at Oklahoma- 3035 rush/rec yards combined

- 32 rush/rec TDs combined

Career at Oklahoma:

- All-Time Leader in Points Scored (390)

- All-Time Leader in Touchdowns (65)

- All-Time Leader in All Purpose Yards (6,718)

- All-Time Leader in Receiving Yards for a Running Back (1,571)

- All-Time Leader in kickoff return average (27.58)

Maybe you're thinking of someone else?

ETA - JC is a stud and Hillis is a quitter

I see this aggregate argument every time I mention his poor performance his last two years. Totals mean very little if you ignore how the totals were accumulated. The fact that Murray played a large role all four years helped accumulate those numbers, but if you look at his 4.1 ypc and 4.3 ypc numbers the last two years in an offensive based conference (read soft defenses), you have to realize that those are not the indicators of success at the NFL level. Maybe the OC didn't use him well those years or something, but given his very small sample size in the NFL and his current ADP, I'm putting a red flag next to him.

 

[Mr Rodgers neighborhood]

19 DeMarco Murray DAL RB 10 - small sample size of success in NFL after mediocre performance last 2 years in Big 12

2009 & 2010 at Oklahoma- 3035 rush/rec yards combined

- 32 rush/rec TDs combined

Career at Oklahoma:

- All-Time Leader in Points Scored (390)

- All-Time Leader in Touchdowns (65)

- All-Time Leader in All Purpose Yards (6,718)

- All-Time Leader in Receiving Yards for a Running Back (1,571)

- All-Time Leader in kickoff return average (27.58)

Maybe you're thinking of someone else?

ETA - JC is a stud and Hillis is a quitter

I see this aggregate argument every time I mention his poor performance his last two years. Totals mean very little if you ignore how the totals were accumulated. The fact that Murray played a large role all four years helped accumulate those numbers, but if you look at his 4.1 ypc and 4.3 ypc numbers the last two years in an offensive based conference (read soft defenses), you have to realize that those are not the indicators of success at the NFL level. Maybe the OC didn't use him well those years or something, but given his very small sample size in the NFL and his current ADP, I'm putting a red flag next to him.

Lets not forget that he also accumulated nearly half of his rushing yards against the Rams and the Bills defenses. I think Murray will be good, but I don't see elite. I also think Felix Jones gets his share of touches. Just enough to severely anger the Murray bandwagon.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I'm actually skeptical on murray -- I'll avoid him.

he didn't look so great against the pats, got fat against a few of the worst run defenses in the nfl, then put up a few mediocre games before getting hurt --- all this with no competition from felix, and it's my understanding he had injury history in college.

I think he's just overrated, and dallas doesn't tend to produce much in the way of rushing td's.

skimming over your list I think I tend to agree on the bulk of it.

greene and brown are popular sleepers because they'll get all these carries, and they're fine picks as late as they are, but I'm not eager on either guy because of their schedules, and indy signing moore.

starks is another guy who makes a decent pick late because of his situation, but I'm not convinced I can count on his td production.

I don't have a strong opinion on the kc situation.

edit: btw, how is romeo going to react if hillis starts putting the ball on the ground?

he had 8 fumbles in his big year.

 

[EBF]

With Mendenhall gimped, I wouldn't be surprised to see Dwyer or Redman have a big year.

Greene is no stud, but I think he's better than the other Jets RBs. I could see another Rudi Johnson type of year.

 

[smackdaddies]

To be top 10 you need a minimum of 9tds (historically speaking)and at least 1000 yards rushing, plus a good number of receptions

If your in ppr you can lose a few tds, but in general terms, no RB finishes top 10 without at least 9 tds, regardless of number of receptions.

You need basically 6tds to make 11-20, although in ppr you can make top 20 with as few as 4 td, assuming at least 50 rcpts and 1,000 yards rushing. if your in a .5ppr league for rb rcpts you have no chance of being top 20 based on a lot of catches w/o at least 6 tds.

So, as always, scoring system is vital in evaluating future trends.

so let us consider Mr. James Starks

95 James Starks GB RB 37 - Who else is going to carry the ball and catch passes? A third rounder out of Hawaii with no real NFL experience and an ACL injury or an UDFA? TDs will be few and far between, but if he stays healthy, he will finish as a solid RB2. Being a starting RB for the Packers is like getting 200 rushes on 3rd and long...

Really don't understand the man love for starks. didn't understand it last year, don't this year. Remember, this is the man that could not overtake Ryan Grant, who the Pack did not offer a minimum contract to after last year and zero teams in the NFL have demonstrated interest in him. Plus, he always gets freaking hurt. So, not good enough to beat out a journeyman, and gets hurt all the time.

Second, in order for Starks to break top 20, he has to get the combined stats of himself and Grant. That would give him 1,100 yards rushing, 4 tds and 48 rcpts. If he got all of Grants carries, rcpts and tds. And that puts him maybe at 20 - quite possibly around 24 or so. How likely is it that he gets those? On the rushing side he fights with Green, Seine and KKKKKKKKKKKKKUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN. And Rodgers of course. So right off the bat he gets zero short yardage tds - they go to WR/TE/Rodgers/KKKKKKKKKKKKUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNN. Also, I dont see him getting all of Grant's carries. Yes, Green and Seine will get some - at least half of grants. That puts Starks maybe in the top 30. More likely.....37th....

As for him getting more than 50 rcpts - trust me, he is no Ray Rice. 50 rcpts is a lot for a RB. He won't make 50. The packers have way too many threats in that arena. Who is Rodgers going to take passes away from in order to throw to Starks? As good as you might think he is as a receiver, he is no Jennings/Nelson/Jones/Cobb/driver/Finley/Girly or whatever that wr/qb from Utah's name is. Starks is not a top 10 receiving RB and he is not going to get more than 48 receptions.

If Starks has a good year, he will finish about 30th. He just will not get enough TD's to push him higher than that. I think 37th is a rational adp for him.

 

[lbouchard]

Serious discussion only please. Don't respond with turd responses like "Duh, JC is a stud and Hillis is a quitter".

Lynch. Shonn Greene. Ingram. You are going to make a disturbing amount of money this year.

All-Plodder Team

 

[Hoosier16]

With Mendenhall gimped, I wouldn't be surprised to see Dwyer or Redman have a big year.

So, who are yu taking - Redman at RB28 or Dwyer at RB75? Or both?I'm leaning Dwyer at RB75. I don't think Redman will hold the job for the year.

 

[wiscstlatlmia]

Every year all the rankings look basically the same and the ADPs follow the rankings and then people are aghast when there is the inevitable shake-up, and suddenly (via hindsight) most of it is crystal clear how it happened. I've copied the latest consensus ADP for RBs and I'll list my unpopular opinions on why popular backs are going to drop and I'll list my idiotic opinions on why unpopular backs could surge into popularity by mid-season.

ADP Name Team Positional Rank

1 Arian Foster HOU RB 1

2 Ray Rice BAL RB 2

3 LeSean McCoy PHI RB 3

6 Maurice Jones-Drew JAX RB 4 - how often do hold outs not result in poor play? His knees must worry everyone.

7 Ryan Mathews SD RB 5 - if he's healthy for 15 games, he'll be top 3

8 Chris Johnson TEN RB 6 - this is simply a different team than when he had success and we're not sure if he's even the same player

11 Darren McFadden OAK RB 7 - his offense will be better, but his injury was serious and always a risk for more injuries

13 Marshawn Lynch SEA RB 8 - I would take him as early as #5 overall. Sea offense only going to improve.

15 Matt Forte CHI RB 9 - new offense, likely no goal line touches, plus holdout. No thanks.

19 DeMarco Murray DAL RB 10 - small sample size of success in NFL after mediocre performance last 2 years in Big 12

21 Trent Richardson CLE RB 11 - my guess is he has a 10% chance of scoring 10 TD or more, rookie learning curve might not be instantaneous

25 Jamaal Charles KC RB 12 - OC has ties to Hillis, any loss of speed and he's got nothing on Hillis

26 Adrian Peterson MIN RB 13 - is he superman? I don't think any RB can come back that quickly from that injury

27 Steven Jackson STL RB 14 - Fisher's next Eddie George? Veteran gets to grind it out one more season

31 Darren Sproles NO RB 15 - 173 touches, 9 TDs. Both numbers likely to go down with an improved (no turf toe) Ingram. Plus, with the coaching situation and all the other turmoil, I think we all see the likelihood of at least a downtick in team production.

34 Fred Jackson BUF RB 16

35 Michael Turner ATL RB 17 - Atl already passing a lot last year, should still be 400 rushes to pass around. With just Quizz (3.6 ypc) and Snelling, Turner will get his again unless he really slows down. He may have looked slow last year, but his 4.5 ypc says his vision and veteran savvy makes up for it.

37 Ahmad Bradshaw NYG RB 18

39 Frank Gore SF RB 19

47 Reggie Bush MIA RB 20

52 Chris Wells ARI RB 21

54 Roy Helu WAS RB 22

62 BenJarvus Green-Ellis CIN RB 23 - going from NE to CIN will be like Thomas Jones going from NYJ to KC

63 Shonn Greene NYJ RB 24 - inconsistent last year, but new OC and little competition, 250+ carries @ RB24?

69 Doug Martin TB RB 25 - rookie hype, Blount isn't giving up his job without a fight

70 Willis McGahee DEN RB 26 - does strike me as a Peyton Manning RB, but I could definitely be wrong

71 Jonathan Stewart CAR RB 27 - most elusive back in the NFL last year, possibly in line for more goal line looks

73 Isaac Redman PIT RB 28 - small sample size and likely RBBC during fantasy playoffs, but could shine and keep job. Really torn on him.

75 C.J. Spiller BUF RB 29

76 Jahvid Best DET RB 30 - the hype is down to a trickle finally

-------------------------------- After RB30, almost everyone drafted is drafted as a backup, but I think quite a few of these sneak into the top 18

77 DeAngelo Williams CAR RB 31

79 Peyton Hillis KC RB 32 - got his OC from 2010 back and he's playing for a real contract in 2013. His main competition is a speed guy coming off ACL surgery. Team is built to run. I won't be surprised if he goes for 220/1000/10+40/300/2

80 Michael Bush CHI RB 33

84 Mark Ingram NO RB 34 - I'll admit I don't have a strong feel for his talent, but turf toe hurts RBs and it wouldn't be the first time we've seen a 1st round back take a year before he blows up. Don't have a great feeling here, but we'll all think we should've seen it coming if he blows up.

89 Ben Tate HOU RB 35

90 Stevan Ridley NE RB 36 - BJGE finished RB15 and RB24 on 229 and 181 carries the last 2 years. If this guy is even a little more talented then there's no reason he shouldn't do better. Vereen is a must handcuff, though.

95 James Starks GB RB 37 - Who else is going to carry the ball and catch passes? A third rounder out of Hawaii with no real NFL experience and an ACL injury or an UDFA? TDs will be few and far between, but if he stays healthy, he will finish as a solid RB2. Being a starting RB for the Packers is like getting 200 rushes on 3rd and long...

99 Donald Brown IND RB 38 - former first round talent that took a couple years to develop? He'll get his chances this year with limited competition. Reports say he's going to be a 3 down back, too. If Luck is anything but horrible, how does Brown not put up RB2 numbers?

105 LeGarrette Blount TB RB 39 - must see how training camp will play out, but as one of the most elusive backs in the NFL for the last 2seasons, the suddenly more motivated Blount won't be giving up his job on this up and coming offense without a fight. Additionally, after just talking about Donald Brown's struggles, we can't bank on Martin clicking right away.

106 David Wilson NYG RB 40

108 Daniel Thomas MIA RB 41 - suffered through hamstring injuries last year and lost the coach that drafted him, but could show why he was a second round draft pick if given a fair shot

111 Toby Gerhart MIN RB 42 - got a chance to show what he could do last year and will have an improved o-line to run behind if Peterson simply isn't effective

112 Rashard Mendenhall PIT RB 43

113 Pierre Thomas NO RB 44

114 Ryan Williams ARI RB 45 - forgotten 2nd rounder who had a Caddy injury last year, but Beanie has had his share of injury problems so if Williams is as good as advertised last year he could run with the job if/when that opportunity comes

117 Felix Jones DAL RB 46 - last year's flavor of the offseason could get yet another chance if Murray looks like a 3rd down back trying to be a starter

120 Mikel Leshoure DET RB 47 - achilles injuries are really hard to come back from

134 Ronnie Hillman DEN RB 48 - admittedly I don't know much about him, but he's got to be more like Addai than McGahee, right?

136 Mike Tolbert CAR RB 49 - fullback

142 Kevin Smith DET RB 50 - he looked really, really good when healthy last year and even looked good when nicked up

144 Kendall Hunter SF RB 51

145 Shane Vereen NE RB 52 - if he wins the job but loses goal line touches to Ridley, this offense is potent enough that he should be able to put up enough yards and long TDs to be your RB2

148 Isaiah Pead STL RB 53

150 Cedric Benson RB 54

154 Delone Carter IND RB 55

156 Jacquizz Rodgers ATL RB 56

157 Mike Goodson OAK RB 57 - must handcuff for DMC owners

158 Bernard Scott CIN RB 58 - he hasn't done anything yet, but this is his chance with just a plodder splitting time w/him

165 Joseph Addai NE RB 59

166 Brandon Jacobs SF RB 60

172 Evan Royster WAS RB 61 - just maaaybe

184 Tim Hightower WAS RB 62

186 Lamar Miller MIA RB 63 - current coaching staff didn't draft Thomas or sign Bush

191 Alex Green GB RB 64

192 Knowshon Moreno DEN RB 65

194 Danny Woodhead NE RB 66

195 Taiwan Jones OAK RB 67

199 Ryan Grant RB 68

201 Joe McKnight NYJ RB 69 - I'd rather handcuff Greene with Powell

202 Rashad Jennings JAX RB 70 - don't know much about him although I had him on a few teams in 2010, but you have to think he's got one of the better shots of being forced into a starting role

Every year my strategy changes according to my perception of positional value by round, but this year I really want to land Mathews/Lynch and then wait until at least round 6 for my RB2. I'd be happy with any of those guys between 32-39 that I listed, but I really want Hillis, Ridley, and Brown with Vereen later. After the top 3, I only see 4 guys I'd consider drafting until Greene at 24. So many question marks surrounding the guys in the middle. I know it is all personal preference/perception, but I've never seen an ADP like this where I see so few RBs I'd draft between rounds 2-5, and so many potential gems in rounds 7-9.

We all know the reasons behind people drafting Jamaal Charles, Chris Johnson, Trent Richardson, Adrian Peterson, etc. but does anyone else get a super ominous feeling about a lot of those guys? They've got hype, but if we look at historical data and try to do projections, it's hard to justify drafting them. I feel like they will all be relative busts and we'll feel like we really should've seen the writing on the wall. But more importantly, I don't see how Hillis, Ridley, Brown, etc. are receiving such little attention. I might start a separate thread about Blount, but I've been reading up on him quite a bit and I am going to be shocked if he's not much more productive than Martin this year. He was already a great runner, but he's been working a lot on pass protection, receiving, and ball security.

Serious discussion only please. Don't respond with turd responses like "Duh, JC is a stud and Hillis is a quitter".

great post man... let me look at this for a few minutes lol

 

[One More Rep]

I agree with a lot of points you made but I could not stomach taking Lynch in the first round let alone at 5.

 

[FF Ninja]

I agree with a lot of points you made but I could not stomach taking Lynch in the first round let alone at 5.

Just wait. You'll see. That's why I highlighted him in blue. He's going to be a guy we should've seen coming but everyone was too busy calling him a plodder. Seattle's offense is a decent unit, scoring 30 TDs last year. They look to be improved this year with a healthy o-line, a healthy S.Rice, and Flynn at QB. Lynch got 285 carries in 15 games last year, and really saw his touches/game increase in the second half when they started doing well (188 carries for 806 yds 8 TD, 16 rec for 121 yds 1 TD). So I think we're looking at one of the very few 300 carry backs of 2012. Not to mention his coach feeds him near the end zone. I like his chances of being top 5 better than anyone outside of Foster, McCoy, Rice, and Mathews. Forsett, their 3rd down back, is no longer with the team. So it's possible that Lynch not only sees 300-330 carries, but also improves upon his 28 receptions from last year.People forget all too soon, that with Tarvaris Jackson at QB, Lynch was the only RB to either run for 100 yards or score on SF all season. I can't remember which one they hadn't allowed, but this plodder did both while he went for over 5 yards a carry against SF (21 carries, 107 yds, 1 TD, 2 rec, 24 yds).It might be time to forget what everyone thinks they know about this guy. He just turned 26 and was once a highly touted first round draft pick.

 

[EBF]

With Mendenhall gimped, I wouldn't be surprised to see Dwyer or Redman have a big year.

So, who are yu taking - Redman at RB28 or Dwyer at RB75? Or both?I'm leaning Dwyer at RB75. I don't think Redman will hold the job for the year.

Dwyer is the better value. Grabbing those two and Mendenhall could be an interesting strategy, though you'd be using a lot of roster spots.

 

[Late225]

best leshoure smith - take all three at those spots and get rb1 value all season long.

 

[finito]

best leshoure smith - take all three at those spots and get rb1 value all season long.

I'd be really surprised if this turned out to be true. I mean would you know who to start on a weekly basis? For my money, I like the Lynch and Donald Brown calls.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

best leshoure smith - take all three at those spots and get rb1 value all season long.

I'm keeping my eye on Leshoure's comeback. He could be a decent pick in TD heavy leagues.

 

[skedssays]

I agree with a lot of points you made but I could not stomach taking Lynch in the first round let alone at 5.

People forget all too soon, that with Tarvaris Jackson at QB, Lynch was the only RB to either run for 100 yards or score on SF all season. I can't remember which one they hadn't allowed, but this plodder did both while he went for over 5 yards a carry against SF (21 carries, 107 yds, 1 TD, 2 rec, 24 yds).

It was both 100 rushing yards and a TD on the ground vs SF. Pretty impressive. He nearly had 2 TDs in that game but there was a botched handoff between him and Jackson. Lynch ran hard all game, breaking off some decent runs. I'm all in on Lynch.

 

[ldizzle]

a motivated blount

i dont see how the situation for lynch is worse than last year. he should at least repeat his season from last year

 

[Mr. Fusion]

I agree with a lot of your points, we both seem to have a lot of running backs in the top half that we aren't thrilled about.

A back that really intrigues me and could really rocket up draft boards is Ingram. He is never going to replace Sproles in that offense but should see an increased role and the chance to score a lot.

I'm definitely avoiding MJD. I would take Matthews or Lynch ahead of him and definitely take another position first. If I picked at 12 and he was there I would probably leave him on the board. It appears that he's looking for that one last payday and I don't want to be there when his production falls off the cliff. I'd rather be wrong and not have picked him than be right and have him on my team, even at the relatively low cost.

I like Jamal Charles a lot (talent wise) but there is too much uncertainty for me to see him going as early as he is in early drafts. I don't know if it's necessarily Hillis that I'm worried about or the ACL or the overall state of the team. Either way, I'm avoiding him at his ADP.

 

[Matt Bitonti]

the more we look at these RB, the less we like any of em.

 

[butcher boy]

I'm a little worried about what Lynch does after getting his paycheck. Give a clown like him a lot of money and he can get himself into a lot of trouble. Agree that his ceiling is through the roof though.

 

[Sweet Love]

With Mendenhall gimped, I wouldn't be surprised to see Dwyer or Redman have a big year.

Greene is no stud, but I think he's better than the other Jets RBs. I could see another Rudi Johnson type of year.

I have been looking for a comparison for Greene, and really like the Rudi Johnson one...while I will not say he is as tough, I would call him a "Poor Man's Rudi Johnson"...1100 yards, 6 TDs and 35+ receptions and places him as a very nice RB2. Those projections put him at 220+ points in a PPR, about 13.75 points per week.

Greene is pretty unique in my eyes, because like no other player, I feel his floor is very close to his ceiling (more so than any other RB), and makes it easier to project numbers for him, and oddly, build my team around that one constant.

 

[FF Ninja]

To be top 10 you need a minimum of 9tds (historically speaking)and at least 1000 yards rushing, plus a good number of receptions

If your in ppr you can lose a few tds, but in general terms, no RB finishes top 10 without at least 9 tds, regardless of number of receptions.

You need basically 6tds to make 11-20, although in ppr you can make top 20 with as few as 4 td, assuming at least 50 rcpts and 1,000 yards rushing. if your in a .5ppr league for rb rcpts you have no chance of being top 20 based on a lot of catches w/o at least 6 tds.

So, as always, scoring system is vital in evaluating future trends.

so let us consider Mr. James Starks

95 James Starks GB RB 37 - Who else is going to carry the ball and catch passes? A third rounder out of Hawaii with no real NFL experience and an ACL injury or an UDFA? TDs will be few and far between, but if he stays healthy, he will finish as a solid RB2. Being a starting RB for the Packers is like getting 200 rushes on 3rd and long...

Really don't understand the man love for starks. didn't understand it last year, don't this year. Remember, this is the man that could not overtake Ryan Grant, who the Pack did not offer a minimum contract to after last year and zero teams in the NFL have demonstrated interest in him. Plus, he always gets freaking hurt. So, not good enough to beat out a journeyman, and gets hurt all the time.

Second, in order for Starks to break top 20, he has to get the combined stats of himself and Grant. That would give him 1,100 yards rushing, 4 tds and 48 rcpts. If he got all of Grants carries, rcpts and tds. And that puts him maybe at 20 - quite possibly around 24 or so. How likely is it that he gets those? On the rushing side he fights with Green, Seine and KKKKKKKKKKKKKUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN. And Rodgers of course. So right off the bat he gets zero short yardage tds - they go to WR/TE/Rodgers/KKKKKKKKKKKKUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNN. Also, I dont see him getting all of Grant's carries. Yes, Green and Seine will get some - at least half of grants. That puts Starks maybe in the top 30. More likely.....37th....

As for him getting more than 50 rcpts - trust me, he is no Ray Rice. 50 rcpts is a lot for a RB. He won't make 50. The packers have way too many threats in that arena. Who is Rodgers going to take passes away from in order to throw to Starks? As good as you might think he is as a receiver, he is no Jennings/Nelson/Jones/Cobb/driver/Finley/Girly or whatever that wr/qb from Utah's name is. Starks is not a top 10 receiving RB and he is not going to get more than 48 receptions.

If Starks has a good year, he will finish about 30th. He just will not get enough TD's to push him higher than that. I think 37th is a rational adp for him.

You've successfully stated all of the standard knocks on Starks. Unfortunately, the aim of this thread is to uncover the information that would be obvious in hindsight after a guy breaks out and see how it weighs against the oft incorrect conventional wisdom.In the case of Starks I see a guy whose injury his senior year led to his draft stock plummeting further than it normally would for a wirey RB from a D-II school. The fact he got drafted at all speaks volumes.

Anyway, the Packers took him in the 6th round as a developmental running back. Yet, they kept a precious roster spot open for him all the way until his debut in week 13. I think that fact is pretty amazing. Teams will send marginal veterans to the IR just to not waste a spot for a few weeks, but they kept a spot open for a developmental rookie rookie. They ended up giving the guy 81 carries and 3 targets in their 4 playoff games which he turned into 315/1, 3/15/0 - not exciting numbers, but it was the playoffs and he was a rookie.

Next year, he ups his ypc to 4.35 while splitting time with the solid, but unspectacular Ryan Grant. Grant was relatively productive with 4.2 ypc on 134 carries. And FWIW, Grant was RB36 last year with 134/559/2 and 19/268/1. You really think that's about where Starks will end up this year?

Back to the present, in the third year of this RB project, they let Grant walk and have decided to roll with Starks, a 3rd rounder from Hawaii recovering from an ACL, and an UDFA. This organization must see something they like in Starks and maybe we are foolish for ignoring it.

To say he won't receive 50 rec just because he is "not Ray Rice" seems overly simplistic and more than a bit silly. He caught 29 passes in limited time last year. I see no reason why 50 rec is a reach for him this year. If he can further improve his ypc, he won't need a bellcow workload to put up solid yardage numbers each week, with a chance of breaking a 20-30 yd TD rec/run occasionally.

I recalled Waldman being a fan so I just did a quick google search for "starks waldman" and I think this article is worth taking a gander at (although I thought I remembered one from him before Starks' rookie year):

emerging talents

He's not my favorite of the RB30-39 guys, largely due to injury history, but to dismiss his chances of breaking out due to the generic, groupthink logic that is being circulated about him and his situation defeats the purpose of this thread. Although your point about 1000 yds and 9 TD is well taken. Starks is not a guy I give a high probability of breaking into the top 12, but I can't see him not outperforming his ADP by at least 12 spots if he stays healthy.

Serious discussion only please. Don't respond with turd responses like "Duh, JC is a stud and Hillis is a quitter".

Lynch. Shonn Greene. Ingram. You are going to make a disturbing amount of money this year.

All-Plodder Team

Both of these are examples of turd posts. Either put some sort of logic or explanation into your response or please go pad your post count elsewhere.

 

[Modog814]

To be top 10 you need a minimum of 9tds (historically speaking)and at least 1000 yards rushing, plus a good number of receptions

If your in ppr you can lose a few tds, but in general terms, no RB finishes top 10 without at least 9 tds, regardless of number of receptions.

You need basically 6tds to make 11-20, although in ppr you can make top 20 with as few as 4 td, assuming at least 50 rcpts and 1,000 yards rushing. if your in a .5ppr league for rb rcpts you have no chance of being top 20 based on a lot of catches w/o at least 6 tds.

So, as always, scoring system is vital in evaluating future trends.

so let us consider Mr. James Starks

95 James Starks GB RB 37 - Who else is going to carry the ball and catch passes? A third rounder out of Hawaii with no real NFL experience and an ACL injury or an UDFA? TDs will be few and far between, but if he stays healthy, he will finish as a solid RB2. Being a starting RB for the Packers is like getting 200 rushes on 3rd and long...

Really don't understand the man love for starks. didn't understand it last year, don't this year. Remember, this is the man that could not overtake Ryan Grant, who the Pack did not offer a minimum contract to after last year and zero teams in the NFL have demonstrated interest in him. Plus, he always gets freaking hurt. So, not good enough to beat out a journeyman, and gets hurt all the time.

Second, in order for Starks to break top 20, he has to get the combined stats of himself and Grant. That would give him 1,100 yards rushing, 4 tds and 48 rcpts. If he got all of Grants carries, rcpts and tds. And that puts him maybe at 20 - quite possibly around 24 or so. How likely is it that he gets those? On the rushing side he fights with Green, Seine and KKKKKKKKKKKKKUUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN. And Rodgers of course. So right off the bat he gets zero short yardage tds - they go to WR/TE/Rodgers/KKKKKKKKKKKKUUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNN. Also, I dont see him getting all of Grant's carries. Yes, Green and Seine will get some - at least half of grants. That puts Starks maybe in the top 30. More likely.....37th....

As for him getting more than 50 rcpts - trust me, he is no Ray Rice. 50 rcpts is a lot for a RB. He won't make 50. The packers have way too many threats in that arena. Who is Rodgers going to take passes away from in order to throw to Starks? As good as you might think he is as a receiver, he is no Jennings/Nelson/Jones/Cobb/driver/Finley/Girly or whatever that wr/qb from Utah's name is. Starks is not a top 10 receiving RB and he is not going to get more than 48 receptions.

If Starks has a good year, he will finish about 30th. He just will not get enough TD's to push him higher than that. I think 37th is a rational adp for him.

Good Analysis.

 

[lbouchard]

Serious discussion only please. Don't respond with turd responses like "Duh, JC is a stud and Hillis is a quitter".

Lynch. Shonn Greene. Ingram. You are going to make a disturbing amount of money this year.

All-Plodder Team

Both of these are examples of turd posts. Either put some sort of logic or explanation into your response or please go pad your post count elsewhere.

Sorry bro, I'll explain. I equate Plodder typically to mean "Slow". Lynch, Ingram, and especially Greene, in my opinion, are "Plodders" who will rely on volume and maybe TDs to carry fantasy value. I don't like relying on TDs, because they vary wildly. Ingram is overrated for a variety of reasons, including a 4 way RBBC on a passing team and bad knees. Greene is not a NFL talent at all, check out Evan Silva's twitter for recent thoughts. Lynch, before a admittedly very solid 2nd half of last season, has always been mediocre. I would not want any of these "Plodders" on my team at their current prices (Lynch your RB1, Greene your RB2, and Ingram your RB3). Perhaps that better explains "All-Plodder Team"?

 

[Modog814]

Anyway, the Packers took him in the 6th round as a developmental running back. Yet, they kept a precious roster spot open for him all the way until his debut in week 13. I think that fact is pretty amazing. Teams will send marginal veterans to the IR just to not waste a spot for a few weeks, but they kept a spot open for a developmental rookie rookie. They ended up giving the guy 81 carries and 3 targets in their 4 playoff games which he turned into 315/1, 3/15/0 - not exciting numbers, but it was the playoffs and he was a rookie.Next year, he ups his ypc to 4.35 while splitting time with the solid, but unspectacular Ryan Grant. Grant was relatively productive with 4.2 ypc on 134 carries. And FWIW, Grant was RB36 last year with 134/559/2 and 19/268/1. You really think that's about where Starks will end up this year?Back to the present, in the third year of this RB project, they let Grant walk and have decided to roll with Starks, a 3rd rounder from Hawaii recovering from an ACL, and an UDFA. This organization must see something they like in Starks and maybe we are foolish for ignoring it.To say he won't receive 50 rec just because he is "not Ray Rice" seems overly simplistic and more than a bit silly. He caught 29 passes in limited time last year. I see no reason why 50 rec is a reach for him this year. If he can further improve his ypc, he won't need a bellcow workload to put up solid yardage numbers each week, with a chance of breaking a 20-30 yd TD rec/run occasionally.

I haven't decided exactly where I think Starks will land yet, but just to add to the conversation in a thinking out loud way...The mention of them keeping a roster spot open for a 6th round project is interesting, but we don't really know the exact reason they did this. Undoubtedly they thought he could help once healthy but for all we know they kept the spot open for him because they didn't really have anyone better to take it. I mean why IR a player you think can contribute in a couple weeks for a some guy who will only contribute on ST.The YPC is also interesting because you originally mention that running for the GB Packers is like getting 200 rushes on 3rd and long yet the two of them could only muster a 4.35 ypc average? Not that it's a bad ypc, just that I'd think someone would average more in "3rd and long" situations.Like I said, I'm not exactly sure where I think Stark falls yet, but I think his upside is severely capped for 2 reasons, 1) They pass the ball a whole lot and he's at best 5th option in the passing game? Maybe 6th? 2) Goal line options are a) Rodgers pass, b) Rodgers run, c) Kuhn run d) Starks run I really can't see him scoring more than 6 TD's. To that I think he gets a large chunk of Grants carries and ends up somewhere around 1000 yards and 4 TD's. I'll add in 35 receptions as a conservative base, possible as high as 50.

 

[FF Ninja]

Serious discussion only please. Don't respond with turd responses like "Duh, JC is a stud and Hillis is a quitter".

Lynch. Shonn Greene. Ingram. You are going to make a disturbing amount of money this year.

All-Plodder Team

Both of these are examples of turd posts. Either put some sort of logic or explanation into your response or please go pad your post count elsewhere.

Sorry bro, I'll explain. I equate Plodder typically to mean "Slow". Lynch, Ingram, and especially Greene, in my opinion, are "Plodders" who will rely on volume and maybe TDs to carry fantasy value. I don't like relying on TDs, because they vary wildly. Ingram is overrated for a variety of reasons, including a 4 way RBBC on a passing team and bad knees. Greene is not a NFL talent at all, check out Evan Silva's twitter for recent thoughts. Lynch, before a admittedly very solid 2nd half of last season, has always been mediocre. I would not want any of these "Plodders" on my team at their current prices (Lynch your RB1, Greene your RB2, and Ingram your RB3). Perhaps that better explains "All-Plodder Team"?

Cool, bro. Except, I'm sure you don't count Arian Foster as slow, yet his pro day (almost always better than combine) 40 time was 4.7 while Marshawn Lynch ran a 4.46. Greene ran a 4.62 as did Ingram. I give you these times, but I really don't think they matter too much. No one would argue that Michael Turner is fast anymore, but he put up 4.5 ypc in a full 16 games last year. Shaun Alexander was a 4.6 guy, but he had a pretty good career for a "plodder". Speed is overrated by fantasy footballers. I'm sorry, but I am not going to rely on Evan Silva's twitter to tell me whether Greene is an NFL talent or not. (Were you serious with that?! All that matters is if he gets carries and produces in 2012. All signs point to that happening.

And for you to write off TDs "because they vary widely" is nothing short of silly. Whether you want to admit it or not, TDs carry a lot of weight. There is a good amount of variance, but they follow trends. Typically guys who don't get goal line touches don't score a lot of TDs. Guys like Ingram, Lynch, and Greene all look like candidates to receive quite a few goal line carries on relatively good offenses. TDs vary much more for lower carry, non-goal line backs like Jahvid Best, Jamaal Charles, and Sproles.

Also, you are right, these guys rely on volume (probably even more than TDs). And their volume is what gives them a chance at consistency. Ingram is not guaranteed volume, but could earn it. Greene and Lynch look like strong candidates for high volume. Greene scored 6 TDs last year and only 3 of them were goal line, so even plodders can score non-goal line TDs if given enough carries.

But the perception that guys are plodders is what allows them to provide value. Otherwise, how could I land a 250-300 carry goal line RB in the 6th round? I'm not expecting him to be a pro bowler if I'm drafting him in the 6th. I'm fine with 4.2 ypc so long as he gets 15-20 carries a game and maybe a goal line carry or two. Plod away...

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

re: James Starks

just for the eff of it I'm going to look at every play from 2011 from 10 yards in.

3-4-NO 7 (10:12) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short left to 85-G.Jennings for 7 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

1-6-NO 6 (7:19) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass incomplete short right to 44-J.Starks.

2-6-NO 6 (7:19) (Shotgun) PENALTY on GB-70-T.Lang, False Start, 5 yards, enforced at NO 6 - No Play.

3-3-NO 3 (6:29) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right to 87-J.Nelson for 3 yards, TOUCHDOWN

1-10-NO 10 (13:12) (Shotgun) 44-J.Starks left guard to NO 7 for 3 yards (51-J.Vilma, 22-T.Porter).

2-7-NO 7 (12:35) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right to 87-J.Nelson to NO 1 for 6 yards (33-J.Greer, 22-T.Porter).

3-1-NO 1 (11:52) 30-J.Kuhn up the middle for 1 yard, TOUCHDOWN.

1-6-CAR 6 (10:17) 12-A.Rodgers pass incomplete short left to 88-J.Finley. PENALTY on CAR-23-S.Martin, Defensive Pass Interference, 5 yards, enforced at CAR 6 - No Play.

1-1-CAR 1 (10:13) 12-A.Rodgers pass incomplete short right to 30-J.Kuhn.

2-1-CAR 1 (10:06) 30-J.Kuhn up the middle for 1 yard, TOUCHDOWN.

1-8-CAR 8 (7:19) (Shotgun) 44-J.Starks up the middle to CAR 8 for no gain (94-S.Fua).

2-8-CAR 8 (6:40) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right to 30-J.Kuhn to CAR 1 for 7 yards (20-C.Gamble, 58-T.Davis).

3-1-CAR 1 (5:49) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass incomplete short right to 87-J.Nelson.

4-1-CAR 1 (5:46) 2-M.Crosby 19 yard field goal is GOOD, Center-61-B.Goode, Holder-8-T.Masthay

1-6-CHI 6 (11:33) 12-A.Rodgers pass incomplete short right to 87-J.Nelson.

2-6-CHI 6 (11:29) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short left to 88-J.Finley for 6 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

2-1-CHI 7 (12:07) 12-A.Rodgers pass short middle to 88-J.Finley for 7 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

3-9-CHI 10 (12:54) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right to 88-J.Finley for 10 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

4-1-DEN 12 (11:55) 44-J.Starks right end to DEN 13 for -1 yards (20-B.Dawkins).

1-9-DEN 9 (9:13) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers scrambles up the middle to DEN 8 for 1 yard (58-V.Miller).

2-8-DEN 8 (8:33) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers scrambles right end to DEN 1 for 7 yards (52-W.Woodyard). Green Bay challenged the runner broke the plane ruling, and the play was REVERSED. (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers scrambles right end for 8 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

2-5-DEN 8 (8:33) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right to 85-G.Jennings to DEN 8 for no gain (25-C.Harris).

3-5-DEN 8 (7:50) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right to 80-D.Driver for 8 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

ok, screw that -- only 4 games.

edit: gonna do 4 more.....

1-4-ATL 4 (7:25) (Shotgun) 44-J.Starks right guard to ATL 2 for 2 yards (71-K.Biermann; 50-C.Lofton).

2-2-ATL 2 (6:43) 12-A.Rodgers sacked at ATL 13 for -11 yards (56-S.Weatherspoon).

2-2-ATL 7 (1:19) 25-R.Grant left tackle to ATL 7 for no gain (50-C.Lofton; 56-S.Weatherspoon).

3-2-ATL 7 34) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers scrambles up the middle to ATL 2 for 5 yards (26-K.Hayden). PENALTY on GB-71-J.Sitton, Offensive Holding, 10 yards, enforced at ATL 7 - No Play.

1-7-STL 7 (2:00) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass incomplete short right to 85-G.Jennings.

2-7-STL 7 (1:56) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short left to 80-D.Driver for 7 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

1-9-MIN 9 (9:25) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right to 18-R.Cobb to MIN 2 for 7 yards (21-A.Allen).

2-2-MIN 2 (8:39) 12-A.Rodgers pass short left to 30-J.Kuhn for 2 yards, TOUCHDOWN

1-6-MIN 6 (11:03) 25-R.Grant left end pushed ob at MIN 2 for 4 yards (52-C.Greenway).

2-2-MIN 2 (10:35) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right to 88-J.Finley for 2 yards, TOUCHDOWN

1-5-MIN 5 (5:19) 30-J.Kuhn right guard to MIN 4 for 1 yard (52-C.Greenway; 90-F.Evans).

2-4-MIN 4 (4:43) 25-R.Grant right end to MIN 4 for no gain (56-EJ.Henderson; 69-J.Allen).

3-4-MIN 4 (4:01) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers sacked at MIN 6 for -2 yards (35-M.Sherels).

1-5-SD 5 (5:41) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right to 88-J.Finley for 5 yards, TOUCHDOWN

1-4-SD 4 (10:36) (Shotgun) 12-A.Rodgers pass incomplete short left to 88-J.Finley.

2-4-SD 4 (10:31) 12-A.Rodgers pass short right to 85-G.Jennings for 4 yards, TOUCHDOWN.

 

[pghrob]

With Mendenhall gimped, I wouldn't be surprised to see Dwyer or Redman have a big year.

So, who are yu taking - Redman at RB28 or Dwyer at RB75? Or both?I'm leaning Dwyer at RB75. I don't think Redman will hold the job for the year.

Dwyer is the better value. Grabbing those two and Mendenhall could be an interesting strategy, though you'd be using a lot of roster spots.

I would avoid Steelers RB or take a flyer in last round on Dwyer or Batch.

 

[Chazzhawk]

I wouldn't say speed is overrated by fantasy footballers. It is overrated in running backs.

 

[bengalbuck]

I agree with some of your likes/dislikes, but I disagree with quite a few of your predictions and think you seem to greatly differ with where I think the RB value lies on two main factors:

1. You seem to be overly willing to ignore talent-level and instead focus on situation (as you perceive it). Situation changes faster at RB than any other position in the league. I talked myself into Hillis last year because I loved his situation and the amount of touches it appeared he would get. But the guy just isn't all that talented a RB. I don't think Hillis is a terrible option at his ADP, but Charles is going to be the guy who puts up numbers in that backfield. I think you're just wrong if you think they're going to give a mediocre at best talent like Hillis a ton of touches at Charles' expense. I feel similarly about Shonn Greene. Ignore talent at your own peril. It may look like he is a lock for 300 touches today, but he could lose that job very easily. It happens all the time and you see RBs (Arian Foster) come from out of nowhere who you weren't expecting. I also think Doug Martin is far more talented than Blount and will quickly push him down the depth chart.

In general, I think a lot of the guys you seem to like are guys that I don't think are very talented and you are overrating the stability of their situations because guys who are below average NFL starters are in situations that are inherently unstable because they can fall out of their coaching staff's favor very easily.

On the flip side, I think you underrate some guys with elite talent. You seem to think that Richardson won't score TDs because his offense isn't very good. If you're really giving 10-1 odds on him scoring 10 TDs, I would take that bet all day. That is a terrible prediction that I can't imagine will turn out well for you. Great players make plays. Crappy players lose their jobs to more talented guys who are often hard to see coming.

2. The 2nd thing we differ on is that you seem to equate great offenses to great fantasy situations for RBs. New England and Green Bay just don't use their RBs that much. And they have a history of very heavy RBBC. I don't see any one RB in NE emerging as a guy who you can count on to put up consistent fantasy production from week to week. Same with Ingram in NO. Sproles is going to get most of the receptions. The carries are probably going to be pretty spread out amongst 3 or 4 guys. And Brees will likely throw for a ton of TDs. Cleveland on the other hand may not be a great offense, but they are going to give Trent a ton of touches. And while they won't score a ton of TDs overall, they may score over 50% of their TDs on the ground (nearly all by the primary RB) while GB/NE score 80% of their TDs throwing the ball and many of the remaining ones will be scored by the FBs (Kuhn) and QBs on sneaks.

I also think BJGE in Cincy will not fall off from his worth in NE. He will get a lot of touches behind a very good O Line on a team that is serious about running the ball a lot. The Thomas Jones comparison doesn't make much sense. BJGE is in his mid-20s. Jones was in his 30s and clearly lost a step or two. Plus, the Jets at the time had one of the best run blocking lines in the NFL and he went to KC who at the time was struggling at a couple spots on the OL. New England doesn't run block all that well and Cincy should have one of the best run blocking lines in the NFL. I don't see anything in that comparison that seems logical or based on any facts.

 

[Craig_MiamiFL]

Felix Murray is a Top 5 fantasy RB.

Felix is a tremendous 8-10 carry back. (JMO He's as lethal a weapon in the NFL as anyone in that role). Murray has injury issues of his own. This situation screams committee. Worst thing Dallas could do is give Murray 20+ carries consistently, watch him go down & then have to use Felix in a 20+ carry role (he's not nor will be a workhorse back). Model Carolina with their two talented backs / Heck, model Arkansas with McFadden/Felix.

 

[Tanner9919]

37 Ahmad Bradshaw NYG RB 18

89 Ben Tate HOU RB 35

99 Donald Brown IND RB 38 - former first round talent that took a couple years to develop? He'll get his chances this year with limited competition. Reports say he's going to be a 3 down back, too. If Luck is anything but horrible, how does Brown not put up RB2 numbers?

106 David Wilson NYG RB 40

111 Toby Gerhart MIN RB 42 - got a chance to show what he could do last year and will have an improved o-line to run behind if Peterson simply isn't effective

I think you're too high on Bradshaw, too low on Wilson, and you're extremely low on Gerhart and most importantly, Ben Tate..Bradshaw is a sneeze away from yet another foot injury..my money is on Wilson starting at least half-a-dozen ball games in 2012, if not more..he hits the holes faster than Bradshaw, which is important when you consider that the Giants O-line isn't as top notch as it once was..I think Bradshaw fills the Jacobs role,while Wilson becomes the main guy at some point this season..

are we all underestimating the colts this season, I'm not saying they're going 16-0 but I think 6-10 , 7-9 is possible..Brown avg'd a whopping 4.8 yards/carry with a hodgepodge of lousy Qb's at the helm.

in no way with ADP be ready to come back to a full time position by the start of the season,in fact, I'd bet he's warming the bench until Thanksgiving at the earliest.that leaves Gerhart as the #1 back in Minnesota, at least for the first 9-10 weeks of the season, and for that,he's worth a lot more than a ranking of RB #42..

Ben Tate - he's just one play away from being the #1 RB in the NFL should Foster go down with an injury..Tate nearly ran for 1000 yards as a backup , #2 rb last season..I think he warrants something more than RB #35..

Lynch - maybe we should listen to what you are saying about him,the only thing worrying me is that 2011 was a contract year, and that he might be a fat-cat now,and just go thru the motions instead of playing as hard as he did last season...it's hard to believe that he can/will once again continue his dominance in 2012..I'm more inclined to let someone else gamble on him...

D. Murray - never has been , never will be..he'll be yet another overhyped Dallas player who fizzles...

T. Richardson - Browns have a solid O-line..if the kid is legit,he's going to be a top 10 RB..in 2010, Peyton Hillis looked like an All-Pro behind that line

thanks for putting this list togher Ninja!

 

[smackdaddies]

Anyway, the Packers took him in the 6th round as a developmental running back. Yet, they kept a precious roster spot open for him all the way until his debut in week 13. I think that fact is pretty amazing. Teams will send marginal veterans to the IR just to not waste a spot for a few weeks, but they kept a spot open for a developmental rookie rookie. They ended up giving the guy 81 carries and 3 targets in their 4 playoff games which he turned into 315/1, 3/15/0 - not exciting numbers, but it was the playoffs and he was a rookie.Next year, he ups his ypc to 4.35 while splitting time with the solid, but unspectacular Ryan Grant. Grant was relatively productive with 4.2 ypc on 134 carries. And FWIW, Grant was RB36 last year with 134/559/2 and 19/268/1. You really think that's about where Starks will end up this year?Back to the present, in the third year of this RB project, they let Grant walk and have decided to roll with Starks, a 3rd rounder from Hawaii recovering from an ACL, and an UDFA. This organization must see something they like in Starks and maybe we are foolish for ignoring it.To say he won't receive 50 rec just because he is "not Ray Rice" seems overly simplistic and more than a bit silly. He caught 29 passes in limited time last year. I see no reason why 50 rec is a reach for him this year. If he can further improve his ypc, he won't need a bellcow workload to put up solid yardage numbers each week, with a chance of breaking a 20-30 yd TD rec/run occasionally.

I haven't decided exactly where I think Starks will land yet, but just to add to the conversation in a thinking out loud way...The mention of them keeping a roster spot open for a 6th round project is interesting, but we don't really know the exact reason they did this. Undoubtedly they thought he could help once healthy but for all we know they kept the spot open for him because they didn't really have anyone better to take it. I mean why IR a player you think can contribute in a couple weeks for a some guy who will only contribute on ST.The YPC is also interesting because you originally mention that running for the GB Packers is like getting 200 rushes on 3rd and long yet the two of them could only muster a 4.35 ypc average? Not that it's a bad ypc, just that I'd think someone would average more in "3rd and long" situations.Like I said, I'm not exactly sure where I think Stark falls yet, but I think his upside is severely capped for 2 reasons, 1) They pass the ball a whole lot and he's at best 5th option in the passing game? Maybe 6th? 2) Goal line options are a) Rodgers pass, b) Rodgers run, c) Kuhn run d) Starks run I really can't see him scoring more than 6 TD's. To that I think he gets a large chunk of Grants carries and ends up somewhere around 1000 yards and 4 TD's. I'll add in 35 receptions as a conservative base, possible as high as 50.

If Stark ends up at a 1,000 yards rushing, 4 td and 50 rcpt, he will approach top 15 rb in ppr leagues that give 1pt (or more) to rb for rcpt. So, a decent #2 RB. I just don't see that happening however - as in less than 10% chance. Bad blocker, injury prone, far to many other passing targets, just average running back ability, far to many other options at the goal line, Green, Seine and the Packers could still bring Grant back at league minimum when he realizes that no team is willing to pay what he wants. He is not Ray Rice (as he has been compared to on these boards) and he is not the T Jones of three years ago (as he has also been compared to on these boards). He is an ok rb in actually a terrible situation - a situation were the RB is the least important position on the offense.

 

[Shutout]

Good stuff FFNinja (and follow ups).

This is one of the few places i've seen some really solid thoughts re: DeMarco Murray. It seems like there is a huge bandwagon out there ready to annoint him as a top 5-10 guy but I think you and others really laid out the reality on this one. There IS fantasy value to be had here, but you need both the RBs. The numbers were there for Felix when he returned and the numbers showing a very quick wear-down against the better teams was there for Murray. Points are there; but you have to monitor and play accordingly on this one.

Really like where you put Tate. I'm a bit surprised to see so many people STILL saying Tate is one paly away from being so good; he's not. The differences between him and Foster are night and day if you watched last year in what the Texans can and WILL do when Foster is not available. He's a good handcuff, but he's not THE handcuff to have in Fantasy.

I think a player that is going completely overlooked is Cyrus Gray. With the offense that I expect the Chiefs to run, and the players they have at the position, I think Gray is going to be very much like Charles was when he came in to the league from the aspect of he will have very polarizing opinions, and it will take some time, but within a season-seasonn and a half, this guy will will be rightfully rostered in all leagues.

The discussion on Lynch is very good. Are you guys seeing him comparable to what we have seen from Turner the past few years? A situation where the sheer number of carry oportunities and his ability to be physical will translate into one of those statlines that make him a top 12-18 guy? That's kind of how I see it.

A couple of guys I think will vastly be more valuable than what people are giving credit today:

beanie Wells (not a superstar for years and years but we could look back and see he has a season similar to Hillis' a few seasons ago in terms of value to ff teams).

Joe mcKnight-Will get on the field this year and be a factor.

A couple of guys that I think will pay a big dividend at SOME POINT for ff teams this year that you can get later:

LeShoure-I see this as the classic "comes out of nowhere and helps ff teams down the stretch"

Moreno-Just a weird feeling but I can't see McGahee being the guy all year, I don't know if Hillman is everything people expect IN THIS SYSTEM, and I think there will be a point in the season where Manning can reslly take advantage of Moreno in the short catching game. I really think this is one area where Moreno is actually very good (IF, and thats the biggie, he can stay healthy and available).

 

[FF Ninja]

37 Ahmad Bradshaw NYG RB 18

89 Ben Tate HOU RB 35

99 Donald Brown IND RB 38 - former first round talent that took a couple years to develop? He'll get his chances this year with limited competition. Reports say he's going to be a 3 down back, too. If Luck is anything but horrible, how does Brown not put up RB2 numbers?

106 David Wilson NYG RB 40

111 Toby Gerhart MIN RB 42 - got a chance to show what he could do last year and will have an improved o-line to run behind if Peterson simply isn't effective

I think you're too high on Bradshaw, too low on Wilson, and you're extremely low on Gerhart and most importantly, Ben Tate..Bradshaw is a sneeze away from yet another foot injury..my money is on Wilson starting at least half-a-dozen ball games in 2012, if not more..he hits the holes faster than Bradshaw, which is important when you consider that the Giants O-line isn't as top notch as it once was..I think Bradshaw fills the Jacobs role,while Wilson becomes the main guy at some point this season..

are we all underestimating the colts this season, I'm not saying they're going 16-0 but I think 6-10 , 7-9 is possible..Brown avg'd a whopping 4.8 yards/carry with a hodgepodge of lousy Qb's at the helm.

in no way with ADP be ready to come back to a full time position by the start of the season,in fact, I'd bet he's warming the bench until Thanksgiving at the earliest.that leaves Gerhart as the #1 back in Minnesota, at least for the first 9-10 weeks of the season, and for that,he's worth a lot more than a ranking of RB #42..

Ben Tate - he's just one play away from being the #1 RB in the NFL should Foster go down with an injury..Tate nearly ran for 1000 yards as a backup , #2 rb last season..I think he warrants something more than RB #35..

Lynch - maybe we should listen to what you are saying about him,the only thing worrying me is that 2011 was a contract year, and that he might be a fat-cat now,and just go thru the motions instead of playing as hard as he did last season...it's hard to believe that he can/will once again continue his dominance in 2012..I'm more inclined to let someone else gamble on him...

D. Murray - never has been , never will be..he'll be yet another overhyped Dallas player who fizzles...

T. Richardson - Browns have a solid O-line..if the kid is legit,he's going to be a top 10 RB..in 2010, Peyton Hillis looked like an All-Pro behind that line

thanks for putting this list togher Ninja!

I think there's been some confusion here. I did not mean to represent that as my rankings. The order in which these guys are listed is simply the latest non-PPR ADP. There were 70 backs and I didn't have it in me to write about each and every one of them. Bradshaw and Wilson were two guys I have so little interest in this year that I chose to neglect them in my breakdown. I think Bradshaw is talented enough to prevent Wilson from getting enough carries to justify his ADP, while Wilson will probably get enough carries to prevent Bradshaw from providing value. Plus, the recurring foot injuries you mentioned and I just don't see a favorable risk/reward ratio for Bradshaw. Plus, Wilson is a rookie and they rarely pan out their rookie years. I will be absolutely shocked if either of these guys show up on my teams in any format.I agree that Ben Tate is an injury away from being a stud thanks to the Houston offense and Kubiak's willingness to pound the ball in near the goal line, but Tate is buried in the middle of a lot of guys that I think will present great value from week 1 without the need for a starter's injury. Yes, Tate would almost certainly outproduce Brown if Foster went down, but Foster only had hamstring issues last year. I will be very surprised if Foster misses any significant time. He's a big, smart, elusive back. As a Houston native, I'm passing on Tate. If you are a gambler, go for it. But I'd rather have Hillis, Brown, etc.

As for Lynch, I think his attitude problems are over. He seems really happy in Seattle. The fans love him, his coach loves him, he's got an opportunity to be great here. I'm not worried about the contract at all.

Hillis' Browns in 2010 were a totally different team than the 2012 Browns. The 2010 OC is now in KC with Hillis. Shurmur's offense looks horrible and didn't they lose their pro bowl LG? The entire RB corps only scored 4 TDs last year. The entire offense only scored 20 TDs (passing/rushing). Richardson's scoring opps will be few and far between. I think predictions of 10-12 TDs are nutso. Plus, Hillis looked like an all-pro because he is. He looked good when he got his shot in Denver so it shouldn't have surprised anyone that he looked good when he got his shot in Cleveland. Stupid people will call him a quitter and I say stupid because MRIs confirmed he was injured last year. Players might lie, but MRIs don't lie.

 

[jonboltz]

Second, in order for Starks to break top 20, he has to get the combined stats of himself and Grant. That would give him 1,100 yards rushing, 4 tds and 48 rcpts. If he got all of Grants carries, rcpts and tds. And that puts him maybe at 20 - quite possibly around 24 or so.

Just as a FYI, if you combined Starks and Grant from 2011 you wouldn't get "maybe at 20" stats, you'd actually be looking at RB7-8 in a PPR league, right about where Lynch finished last year. Now I don't think he's going to get this many touches, especially enough rushes to get up to 1100 yards. I do think, however, he can manage to get 900 rushing, 45-400 recieving, and 4 scores. That would put him at RB16 in my league last year, so I don't think top20 production is unthinkable.

 

[FF Ninja]

Tanner, I forgot to address Gerhart. I agree that he'll provide value, but much like Redman, he'll likely be splitting carries during your fantasy playoffs, making his true value less than his projected overall season ranking.

 

[FF Ninja]

Good stuff FFNinja (and follow ups).This is one of the few places i've seen some really solid thoughts re: DeMarco Murray. It seems like there is a huge bandwagon out there ready to annoint him as a top 5-10 guy but I think you and others really laid out the reality on this one. There IS fantasy value to be had here, but you need both the RBs. The numbers were there for Felix when he returned and the numbers showing a very quick wear-down against the better teams was there for Murray. Points are there; but you have to monitor and play accordingly on this one.Really like where you put Tate. I'm a bit surprised to see so many people STILL saying Tate is one paly away from being so good; he's not. The differences between him and Foster are night and day if you watched last year in what the Texans can and WILL do when Foster is not available. He's a good handcuff, but he's not THE handcuff to have in Fantasy.I think a player that is going completely overlooked is Cyrus Gray. With the offense that I expect the Chiefs to run, and the players they have at the position, I think Gray is going to be very much like Charles was when he came in to the league from the aspect of he will have very polarizing opinions, and it will take some time, but within a season-seasonn and a half, this guy will will be rightfully rostered in all leagues.The discussion on Lynch is very good. Are you guys seeing him comparable to what we have seen from Turner the past few years? A situation where the sheer number of carry oportunities and his ability to be physical will translate into one of those statlines that make him a top 12-18 guy? That's kind of how I see it.A couple of guys I think will vastly be more valuable than what people are giving credit today:beanie Wells (not a superstar for years and years but we could look back and see he has a season similar to Hillis' a few seasons ago in terms of value to ff teams).Joe mcKnight-Will get on the field this year and be a factor.A couple of guys that I think will pay a big dividend at SOME POINT for ff teams this year that you can get later:LeShoure-I see this as the classic "comes out of nowhere and helps ff teams down the stretch"Moreno-Just a weird feeling but I can't see McGahee being the guy all year, I don't know if Hillman is everything people expect IN THIS SYSTEM, and I think there will be a point in the season where Manning can reslly take advantage of Moreno in the short catching game. I really think this is one area where Moreno is actually very good (IF, and thats the biggie, he can stay healthy and available).

While I don't endorse drafting Tate at RB35 and I don't think he's a straight up replacement for Foster (RB1, IMO), I do think he'll be a stud (RB10 or better) due to Houston's RB workload and goal line tendencies. If Foster were to go down, Tate would almost certainly receive 20+ carries a game and have a great shot at TD per game. He is nowhere hear the receiver that Foster is, but the sheer number of carries in this system would make any capable starting back a strong RB1 (top 12) candidate.I'm not sure I see a role for Cyrus Gray (although as an A&M alum, I'd like to see him do well) on the Chiefs. I always felt like Christine Michael was the better A&M tailback. But that's another story. Right now he's got to compete with Hillis and Charles. If Charles is slowed by injury to the point where he's ineffective, then Gray could steal his role, but as the incumbent I'd have to think the scat back role is Charles' to lose.As for Lynch, I do see him as the workhorse back that Turner was, but with more receptions.I was all about Beanie last year. He was being severely undervalued for a guy with no real competition and 1st round pedigree, but this year the o-line still looks to be bad and now Ryan Williams is healthy. I'm not sure how effective Williams is, but his presence kind of tipped the scales for me since it appears this offense will struggle again.I think Powell is the backup to own on the Jets. From what I've read, McKnight just doesn't seem like he's given anyone on the Jets a workhorse back impression. He'll fill the Tomlinson role of 2011 at best, I suspect.Leshoure... achilles injures are very, very hard to come back from. Was his a partial or full? Either way, I'm very leery of anyone with that injury. I know that D.Thomas has filled everyone with hope, but I think that is a mistake. There is very little history of success from a torn achilles in the NFL.I forget his name, but there is a 4th RB on Denver that could surprise. I think he was a UDFA from 2011 that got hurt in training camp. Either way, I think Moreno is a longshot of longshots. I wouldn't bother drafting him if I was you. Just keep him on your watch list and be the first to grab him if the situation changes. Trust me, you won't have much competition! I play in mostly WW auction format leagues and if you do, then I'd suggest a bid of 1% or less. You very well could get him for $0 following his first 5-10 touch effort if the rosters are less than 20 spots. I feel confident there will be more exciting waiver options to most people... But I like the way you are thinking. Moreno is very outside the box!

 

[smackdaddies]

Second, in order for Starks to break top 20, he has to get the combined stats of himself and Grant. That would give him 1,100 yards rushing, 4 tds and 48 rcpts. If he got all of Grants carries, rcpts and tds. And that puts him maybe at 20 - quite possibly around 24 or so.

Just as a FYI, if you combined Starks and Grant from 2011 you wouldn't get "maybe at 20" stats, you'd actually be looking at RB7-8 in a PPR league, right about where Lynch finished last year. Now I don't think he's going to get this many touches, especially enough rushes to get up to 1100 yards. I do think, however, he can manage to get 900 rushing, 45-400 recieving, and 4 scores. That would put him at RB16 in my league last year, so I don't think top20 production is unthinkable.

fyi, no, he would not be in the top 10 with those stats at best, 15th

 

[FF Ninja]

I agree with some of your likes/dislikes, but I disagree with quite a few of your predictions and think you seem to greatly differ with where I think the RB value lies on two main factors:

1. You seem to be overly willing to ignore talent-level and instead focus on situation (as you perceive it). Situation changes faster at RB than any other position in the league. I talked myself into Hillis last year because I loved his situation and the amount of touches it appeared he would get. But the guy just isn't all that talented a RB. I don't think Hillis is a terrible option at his ADP, but Charles is going to be the guy who puts up numbers in that backfield. I think you're just wrong if you think they're going to give a mediocre at best talent like Hillis a ton of touches at Charles' expense. I feel similarly about Shonn Greene. Ignore talent at your own peril. It may look like he is a lock for 300 touches today, but he could lose that job very easily. It happens all the time and you see RBs (Arian Foster) come from out of nowhere who you weren't expecting. I also think Doug Martin is far more talented than Blount and will quickly push him down the depth chart.

I think you are placing too much value on talent level as you perceive it. Talent level is the hardest thing to judge. I agree that situations change a lot in the NFL, but not as much as you might think. Most situation changes can be forseen. There are statistical trends and/or coaching changes that dictate most situation changes. I think the departure of Shotty Jr. for Sparano at OC can only be a good thing for Greene. There were way too many passing plays called last year. And the goal line play selection was questionable at best. But I'm getting sidetracked.You are way off base on your assessment of Hillis. First of all, his situation changed when he lost his OC and got Shurmur. But beyond that, it has been verified that he was injured last year, so to say he just isn't all that talented when he was playing injured on a trainwreck of an offense is horribly, horribly shortsighted.

There is a strong argument to be made that Foster did not actually come out of nowhere. Talent was not the reason he wasn't drafted. Injuries and attitude were. Plus, he showcased his skills in the final weeks of 2009.

And speaking of placing too much value on perceived talent, where do you get this idea that Martin is so much more talented than Blount? Some people may shrug off the 2011 and 2010 elusive rankings for RBs, but I think they deserve a close look. Plus, I referenced an article in the first post about Blount working on his blocking, receiving, and ball control this offseason. This would not be the first time a talented incumbent held off a rookie. Oh, but I forgot, you don't think Blount is talented. Where do you get that idea? From the fact that he was underutilized on a struggling offense last year? Let's ignore that he was still breaking tackles and gaining yards after contact while being hit in the backfield last year. And the fact that he averaged 5.0 ypc as a rookie without a training camp the year before (went to Titans training camp, not Bucs). Martin was the 2nd to last pick in the first round out of Boise. He could be a good back and still not be as good as Blount, or he could take a year to develop. We don't know. But I like Blount's odds, and I really like his value as RB39 on what looks to be an improved offense.

In general, I think a lot of the guys you seem to like are guys that I don't think are very talented and you are overrating the stability of their situations because guys who are below average NFL starters are in situations that are inherently unstable because they can fall out of their coaching staff's favor very easily.

On the flip side, I think you underrate some guys with elite talent. You seem to think that Richardson won't score TDs because his offense isn't very good. If you're really giving 10-1 odds on him scoring 10 TDs, I would take that bet all day. That is a terrible prediction that I can't imagine will turn out well for you. Great players make plays. Crappy players lose their jobs to more talented guys who are often hard to see coming.

You must've missed the point of the thread because you are stating something in a contrarian fashion when you are simply stating the obvious premise that this thread was founded on. I like these guys because people like you view them as inferior talents, thus they are slipping a great deal in the drafts. And likewise, people like you are overdrafting perceived skill despite horrible situations. Shurmur threw the ball a lot with a poor QB he inherrited last year (McCoy). Sure, some of that could be attributed to his injured/poor RBs, but McCoy wasn't getting it done either. But now he's got his own QB, so I wouldn't be surprised to see the Browns running the ball less than 350 times once again. Plus, they lost Steinbach, a staple of the 2010 o-line, and I don't know that they've added anyone of worth (if anyone is close to the situation, let me know). You might be willing to bank on a rookie RB adapting quickly, handling 300+ touches, revitalizing the rookie QB led offense, and scoring 50% of the team's touchdowns, but I'd rather spend my 2nd round round pick elsewhere.

2. The 2nd thing we differ on is that you seem to equate great offenses to great fantasy situations for RBs. New England and Green Bay just don't use their RBs that much. And they have a history of very heavy RBBC. I don't see any one RB in NE emerging as a guy who you can count on to put up consistent fantasy production from week to week. Same with Ingram in NO. Sproles is going to get most of the receptions. The carries are probably going to be pretty spread out amongst 3 or 4 guys. And Brees will likely throw for a ton of TDs. Cleveland on the other hand may not be a great offense, but they are going to give Trent a ton of touches. And while they won't score a ton of TDs overall, they may score over 50% of their TDs on the ground (nearly all by the primary RB) while GB/NE score 80% of their TDs throwing the ball and many of the remaining ones will be scored by the FBs (Kuhn) and QBs on sneaks.

I also think BJGE in Cincy will not fall off from his worth in NE. He will get a lot of touches behind a very good O Line on a team that is serious about running the ball a lot. The Thomas Jones comparison doesn't make much sense. BJGE is in his mid-20s. Jones was in his 30s and clearly lost a step or two. Plus, the Jets at the time had one of the best run blocking lines in the NFL and he went to KC who at the time was struggling at a couple spots on the OL. New England doesn't run block all that well and Cincy should have one of the best run blocking lines in the NFL. I don't see anything in that comparison that seems logical or based on any facts.

No, I don't simply equate great offenses to great fantasy situations for RBs. But I do require at least a passing threat and some scoring opportunities. Teams like the Browns and the Titans who will likely score 20-25 TDs on the year are scary to me. That shows me they aren't moving the ball well. While teams with elite QBs don't utilize their RBs at the goal line are not optimal, at least you have a solid chance to put up some decent yardage numbers. History shows us that the best situations are balanced teams that favor the RBs near the goal line. Think back to Brees in SD. He had already broken out and become an elite QB, but they didn't use him enough for him to put up elite QB numbers. They used a balanced attack and let Tomlinson run it in a the goal line. Or Hasselbeck in Seattle. He was a very good QB, but Holmgren was content to let SA score the TDs.But to write off NE RBs is just silly. I've already shown that BJGE was a solid RB2 (15, 24) in that offense. You really think he was more talented than Ridley?

And you totally whiffed on the BJGE/T.Jones comparison. I don't care about their age. It was the situation change that mattered. And did Jones really lose a couple steps in a matter of months? Cincy may be dedicated to the run, but that actually hurts him. The defenses facing the Patriots were playing the pass which made it easy for BJGE to run (and yet he was still a 4.0 ypc guy). Dalton looked good last year, but he's no Brady. BJGE is going to find it much harder to run in Cincy than NE. How many carries are they going to give him when he's putting up 3.7 ypc? How many goal line opps will he have? He is being drafted as RB23. I'd rather save my pick and keep an eye on Scott or Herron. I don't think BJGE keeps that job all year. You say NE didn't run block well, but Woodhead and Ridley put up 4.6 and 5.1 ypc compared to BJGE's 3.7 last year. I'm not sure the blame falls on the o-line there. I like Ridley at RB36 much better than BJGE at RB23.

 

[Modog814]

If Stark ends up at a 1,000 yards rushing, 4 td and 50 rcpt, he will approach top 15 rb in ppr leagues that give 1pt (or more) to rb for rcpt. So, a decent #2 RB. I just don't see that happening however - as in less than 10% chance. Bad blocker, injury prone, far to many other passing targets, just average running back ability, far to many other options at the goal line, Green, Seine and the Packers could still bring Grant back at league minimum when he realizes that no team is willing to pay what he wants. He is not Ray Rice (as he has been compared to on these boards) and he is not the T Jones of three years ago (as he has also been compared to on these boards). He is an ok rb in actually a terrible situation - a situation were the RB is the least important position on the offense.

Why don't you see that happening exactly? Is it purely injury or demotion?The reason I ask is that GB ran the ball close to 400 times last year (385 I think was the exact number). Say Rodgers runs the ball 60 times again, that leaves 340, Kuhn keeps his role the same so another 30 are gone, that leaves 310. That's about 19 carries a game split between Starks, Saine and Green. I don't think it's too far fetched to think that Starks gets between 12 and 15 of those so you're looking at 200-240 carries, we'll say 220. At 4.3 ypc (his ypc last year), that puts him at 946. As for the catches you want to argue he won't get 50, fine, but he did have 29 in a time share last year, so you have to imagine he'll at least match that. Grant leaving opens up another 19 receptions, so yeah it might be overzealous to assume they all go to Starks. So I'll down grade it to 35 receptions.I really fail to see how he doesn't come close to these numbers unless a) he gets hurt (which I'm not about to try and guess who'll get hurt and who won't), b) They re-sign Grant or Saine/Green take a much bigger role than expected. While b is certainly possible, I think it seems fairly baked into his ADP. If all goes right he's got solid RB2 upside.

 

[jonboltz]

Second, in order for Starks to break top 20, he has to get the combined stats of himself and Grant. That would give him 1,100 yards rushing, 4 tds and 48 rcpts. If he got all of Grants carries, rcpts and tds. And that puts him maybe at 20 - quite possibly around 24 or so.

Just as a FYI, if you combined Starks and Grant from 2011 you wouldn't get "maybe at 20" stats, you'd actually be looking at RB7-8 in a PPR league, right about where Lynch finished last year. Now I don't think he's going to get this many touches, especially enough rushes to get up to 1100 yards. I do think, however, he can manage to get 900 rushing, 45-400 recieving, and 4 scores. That would put him at RB16 in my league last year, so I don't think top20 production is unthinkable.

fyi, no, he would not be in the top 10 with those stats at best, 15th

As I've stated in the post you quoted, see bolded.

 

[smackdaddies]

If Stark ends up at a 1,000 yards rushing, 4 td and 50 rcpt, he will approach top 15 rb in ppr leagues that give 1pt (or more) to rb for rcpt. So, a decent #2 RB.

I just don't see that happening however - as in less than 10% chance. Bad blocker, injury prone, far to many other passing targets, just average running back ability, far to many other options at the goal line, Green, Seine and the Packers could still bring Grant back at league minimum when he realizes that no team is willing to pay what he wants.

He is not Ray Rice (as he has been compared to on these boards) and he is not the T Jones of three years ago (as he has also been compared to on these boards). He is an ok rb in actually a terrible situation - a situation were the RB is the least important position on the offense.

Why don't you see that happening exactly? Is it purely injury or demotion?

The reason I ask is that GB ran the ball close to 400 times last year (385 I think was the exact number). Say Rodgers runs the ball 60 times again, that leaves 340, Kuhn keeps his role the same so another 30 are gone, that leaves 310. That's about 19 carries a game split between Starks, Saine and Green. I don't think it's too far fetched to think that Starks gets between 12 and 15 of those so you're looking at 200-240 carries, we'll say 220. At 4.3 ypc (his ypc last year), that puts him at 946. As for the catches you want to argue he won't get 50, fine, but he did have 29 in a time share last year, so you have to imagine he'll at least match that. Grant leaving opens up another 19 receptions, so yeah it might be overzealous to assume they all go to Starks. So I'll down grade it to 35 receptions.

I really fail to see how he doesn't come close to these numbers unless a) he gets hurt (which I'm not about to try and guess who'll get hurt and who won't), b) They re-sign Grant or Saine/Green take a much bigger role than expected. While b is certainly possible, I think it seems fairly baked into his ADP. If all goes right he's got solid RB2 upside.

Anyone who has been injured three straight years has to prove it to me that it won't happen again.As to why he won't approach those numbers, to repeat myself

Bad blocker, injury prone, far to many other passing targets, just average running back ability, far to many other options at the goal line, Green, Seine and the Packers could still bring Grant back at league minimum when he realizes that no team is willing to pay what he wants.

He is an ok rb in actually a terrible situation - a situation were the RB is the least important position on the offense

Pretty sure everything I said are facts, not opinion or supposition. Add to that is the fact the Packers have shown zero interest in the past three of having a "bell cow" rb, there are quite literally no facts to support the postition he will approach being a legitimate FF starter

The other issue that I have, which is entirely subjective, is that I don't want a #2 RB/WR/TE that is not in the top 12 scoring for that position. If your going to win, that is what you have to make happen. Getting the #24 scoring RB as your #2RB in a 12 team league means your a loser. (loser = everyone not in 1st).

Will he have a couple of good games - sure. Overall, not a starter on a team that is competing

 

[jonboltz]

Anyone who has been injured three straight years has to prove it to me that it won't happen again.

Good point, and part of the reason his ADP is where it is.

The other issue that I have, which is entirely subjective, is that I don't want a #2 RB/WR/TE that is not in the top 12 scoring for that position. If your going to win, that is what you have to make happen. Getting the #24 scoring RB as your #2RB in a 12 team league means your a loser. (loser = everyone not in 1st).Will he have a couple of good games - sure. Overall, not a starter on a team that is competing

I don't believe anyone is here advocating that you draft Starks to be your RB2. That doesn't mean he can't perform above his ADP and still be a guy that can be used in matchups, flex, bye weeks, or to cover an injury.

 

[johnadams]

I dig this thread. Great insight already.

One situation to watch for me is how the RB touches play out in MIA. Bush had a very strong second half of the season, showing a level of play as a RB that he hadn't shown to this point in his career. From weeks 8-16 (he was out in week 17), he averaged over 20 touches (17 rush/3 recept) per game with a very strong 5.5 ypc. I suspect that either Bush (RB20 on this list) or Thomas is going to way outperform their draft position. My money is on Bush, but it's not a heavy bet as I'm still a bit concerned about injury.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

79 Peyton Hillis KC RB 32 - got his OC from 2010 back and he's playing for a real contract in 2013. His main competition is a speed guy coming off ACL surgery. Team is built to run. I won't be surprised if he goes for 220/1000/10+40/300/2

Right now, as I look at it, Peyton Hills absolutely screams value ADP bounceback season. 1) People are reckoning back to the 2010 season when Charles averaged 6.4 YPC. That's an absurd figure - one bolstered by the fact that essentially 1 out of every 5 attempts resulted in at least 10 yards. Coming off ACL...how's that knee going to be feeling come November/December? I don't think Charles won't be good, but there's simply no way he gets a workhorse load.

2) When KC effectively interchanged Jones/Charles, they combined for 475 carries; Charles had 230. Fact is, even when completely healthy, Haley was careful to not overuse Charles. Even with Haley gone, Crennel was there when this worked best...and with Hillis being reunited with Daboll (his 2010 OC)...so long as Hillis has accepted his medicine for acting the fool in 2011, he should be a more productive version of Jones. Not to mention, whereas Jones was completely deficient in the passing game - Hillis is solid here, so it could even eat into Charles 3rd down reps.

Honestly, I expect a 50/50 split workload here. There will be plenty of opportunity for both...but then Hillis will probably be the first option on the all important Inside the 5 carries. Hillis's ADP is in the 7th round. I'd draft him in Round 4.

 

[bengalbuck]

I agree with some of your likes/dislikes, but I disagree with quite a few of your predictions and think you seem to greatly differ with where I think the RB value lies on two main factors:

1. You seem to be overly willing to ignore talent-level and instead focus on situation (as you perceive it). Situation changes faster at RB than any other position in the league. I talked myself into Hillis last year because I loved his situation and the amount of touches it appeared he would get. But the guy just isn't all that talented a RB. I don't think Hillis is a terrible option at his ADP, but Charles is going to be the guy who puts up numbers in that backfield. I think you're just wrong if you think they're going to give a mediocre at best talent like Hillis a ton of touches at Charles' expense. I feel similarly about Shonn Greene. Ignore talent at your own peril. It may look like he is a lock for 300 touches today, but he could lose that job very easily. It happens all the time and you see RBs (Arian Foster) come from out of nowhere who you weren't expecting. I also think Doug Martin is far more talented than Blount and will quickly push him down the depth chart.

I think you are placing too much value on talent level as you perceive it. Talent level is the hardest thing to judge. I agree that situations change a lot in the NFL, but not as much as you might think. Most situation changes can be forseen. There are statistical trends and/or coaching changes that dictate most situation changes. I think the departure of Shotty Jr. for Sparano at OC can only be a good thing for Greene. There were way too many passing plays called last year. And the goal line play selection was questionable at best. But I'm getting sidetracked.You are way off base on your assessment of Hillis. First of all, his situation changed when he lost his OC and got Shurmur. But beyond that, it has been verified that he was injured last year, so to say he just isn't all that talented when he was playing injured on a trainwreck of an offense is horribly, horribly shortsighted.

There is a strong argument to be made that Foster did not actually come out of nowhere. Talent was not the reason he wasn't drafted. Injuries and attitude were. Plus, he showcased his skills in the final weeks of 2009.

And speaking of placing too much value on perceived talent, where do you get this idea that Martin is so much more talented than Blount? Some people may shrug off the 2011 and 2010 elusive rankings for RBs, but I think they deserve a close look. Plus, I referenced an article in the first post about Blount working on his blocking, receiving, and ball control this offseason. This would not be the first time a talented incumbent held off a rookie. Oh, but I forgot, you don't think Blount is talented. Where do you get that idea? From the fact that he was underutilized on a struggling offense last year? Let's ignore that he was still breaking tackles and gaining yards after contact while being hit in the backfield last year. And the fact that he averaged 5.0 ypc as a rookie without a training camp the year before (went to Titans training camp, not Bucs). Martin was the 2nd to last pick in the first round out of Boise. He could be a good back and still not be as good as Blount, or he could take a year to develop. We don't know. But I like Blount's odds, and I really like his value as RB39 on what looks to be an improved offense.

In general, I think a lot of the guys you seem to like are guys that I don't think are very talented and you are overrating the stability of their situations because guys who are below average NFL starters are in situations that are inherently unstable because they can fall out of their coaching staff's favor very easily.

On the flip side, I think you underrate some guys with elite talent. You seem to think that Richardson won't score TDs because his offense isn't very good. If you're really giving 10-1 odds on him scoring 10 TDs, I would take that bet all day. That is a terrible prediction that I can't imagine will turn out well for you. Great players make plays. Crappy players lose their jobs to more talented guys who are often hard to see coming.

You must've missed the point of the thread because you are stating something in a contrarian fashion when you are simply stating the obvious premise that this thread was founded on. I like these guys because people like you view them as inferior talents, thus they are slipping a great deal in the drafts. And likewise, people like you are overdrafting perceived skill despite horrible situations. Shurmur threw the ball a lot with a poor QB he inherrited last year (McCoy). Sure, some of that could be attributed to his injured/poor RBs, but McCoy wasn't getting it done either. But now he's got his own QB, so I wouldn't be surprised to see the Browns running the ball less than 350 times once again. Plus, they lost Steinbach, a staple of the 2010 o-line, and I don't know that they've added anyone of worth (if anyone is close to the situation, let me know). You might be willing to bank on a rookie RB adapting quickly, handling 300+ touches, revitalizing the rookie QB led offense, and scoring 50% of the team's touchdowns, but I'd rather spend my 2nd round round pick elsewhere.

2. The 2nd thing we differ on is that you seem to equate great offenses to great fantasy situations for RBs. New England and Green Bay just don't use their RBs that much. And they have a history of very heavy RBBC. I don't see any one RB in NE emerging as a guy who you can count on to put up consistent fantasy production from week to week. Same with Ingram in NO. Sproles is going to get most of the receptions. The carries are probably going to be pretty spread out amongst 3 or 4 guys. And Brees will likely throw for a ton of TDs. Cleveland on the other hand may not be a great offense, but they are going to give Trent a ton of touches. And while they won't score a ton of TDs overall, they may score over 50% of their TDs on the ground (nearly all by the primary RB) while GB/NE score 80% of their TDs throwing the ball and many of the remaining ones will be scored by the FBs (Kuhn) and QBs on sneaks.

I also think BJGE in Cincy will not fall off from his worth in NE. He will get a lot of touches behind a very good O Line on a team that is serious about running the ball a lot. The Thomas Jones comparison doesn't make much sense. BJGE is in his mid-20s. Jones was in his 30s and clearly lost a step or two. Plus, the Jets at the time had one of the best run blocking lines in the NFL and he went to KC who at the time was struggling at a couple spots on the OL. New England doesn't run block all that well and Cincy should have one of the best run blocking lines in the NFL. I don't see anything in that comparison that seems logical or based on any facts.

No, I don't simply equate great offenses to great fantasy situations for RBs. But I do require at least a passing threat and some scoring opportunities. Teams like the Browns and the Titans who will likely score 20-25 TDs on the year are scary to me. That shows me they aren't moving the ball well. While teams with elite QBs don't utilize their RBs at the goal line are not optimal, at least you have a solid chance to put up some decent yardage numbers. History shows us that the best situations are balanced teams that favor the RBs near the goal line. Think back to Brees in SD. He had already broken out and become an elite QB, but they didn't use him enough for him to put up elite QB numbers. They used a balanced attack and let Tomlinson run it in a the goal line. Or Hasselbeck in Seattle. He was a very good QB, but Holmgren was content to let SA score the TDs.But to write off NE RBs is just silly. I've already shown that BJGE was a solid RB2 (15, 24) in that offense. You really think he was more talented than Ridley?

And you totally whiffed on the BJGE/T.Jones comparison. I don't care about their age. It was the situation change that mattered. And did Jones really lose a couple steps in a matter of months? Cincy may be dedicated to the run, but that actually hurts him. The defenses facing the Patriots were playing the pass which made it easy for BJGE to run (and yet he was still a 4.0 ypc guy). Dalton looked good last year, but he's no Brady. BJGE is going to find it much harder to run in Cincy than NE. How many carries are they going to give him when he's putting up 3.7 ypc? How many goal line opps will he have? He is being drafted as RB23. I'd rather save my pick and keep an eye on Scott or Herron. I don't think BJGE keeps that job all year. You say NE didn't run block well, but Woodhead and Ridley put up 4.6 and 5.1 ypc compared to BJGE's 3.7 last year. I'm not sure the blame falls on the o-line there. I like Ridley at RB36 much better than BJGE at RB23.

I disagree with almost everything in your response, but that's okay as I understand where you're coming from. It just seems like we differ on the perceived talent of a lot of the RBs in question, which will obviously skew our views of things quite a bit and we probably won't be able to convince each other differently.If our eyes see things differently, that's just the way it is. However, I also try to rely heavily on what I can infer from the actions of NFL teams. For example, you are quick to shrug off the fact that a new coaching staff came into Tampa, saw a team with a ton of holes and still was willing to trade-up to get back into the 1st and draft Doug Martin. Sure, it was a late 1st, but that is still a pretty significant investment in a RB. If they were actually high on Blount at all, no way they make that pick. They could have used help at TE (Fleener), CB (Jenkins), DE (Upshaw), etc. but instead chose to trade up and get Martin.

Similarly, you can make all kinds of arguments for Hillis' talent based on injuries, YPC, etc. However, he was a FA this offseason and every single team in the NFL could have made him an offer. The best he could do was a 1 year offer for about $2 million. That's a pretty good indicator of his market value. I'd argue that my perception of his talent level is more in line with that of NFL professionals who evaluate talent for a living than yours is...

As for some of your other points...Cleveland drafted Mitchell Schwartz at the top of the 2nd round. He was considered to be the best RT in the draft and an instant plug and play starter who excels as a run blocker. Cleveland now has a stud at LT (Joe Thomas), a stud at C (Alex Mack) and have upgraded RT, their weakest OL position last year. Their OGs aren't great, but to me OT and C are the 3 most important positions on the OL. Again, they've invested significant resources (2 1st rounders and an early 2nd rounder) into getting somve talented run blocking OL. As to your point about Shurmur, he gave SJax a ton of touches as OC in St. Louis. I think Richardson at his age is a better talent than Sjax was in his 8th year and that Cleveland's OL is better than that STL O Line. I'll take Richardson in the 2nd round all day. I wonder what you see in Seattle's offense that makes it so much more attractive than Cleveland's...

With regard to the Bengals v. Pats offensive discussion. There are benefits and drawbacks to different offensive schemes. Sure, against the Pats teams have extra DBs on the field and have to focus on the pass. On first glance, that should make it easy for the RBs to dominate. However, BJGE was also running behind an OL that excelled as pass blockers, not run blockers (tall skinny OTs, undersized but quick C, etc.). He had a finesse move TE in Hernandez out there instead of a bruising FB. He had undersized WRs like Welker who didn't exactly block great. In Cincy, he'll be behind an OL that is built to run the football. The right side of the line for example has RT Andre Smith, a recent top 10 draft pick who is really coming into his own and is a hell of a run blocker. RG Kevin Zeitler, a mauler from Wisconsin, was just drafted in the 1st round. The Bengals have a bowling ball of a FB in Chris Pressley (another Wisconsin guy). And their slot WR is likely to be Mohammad Sanu, who is a huge, tough, physical blocker. Maybe the Ds will be more focused on stopping the run (though Green's presence keeps them honest), but the offensive talent is also more geared towards excelling in the run game as opposed to a spread, shotgun, pass-first offense. There may be 7 in the box instead of 6, but that's not the only variable in the YPC equation.

As far as scoring chances, the stats have been posted on here in other threads, but the Bengals had more RB rushing attempts inside the 5 yard line than the Pats did last year, despite the rookie QB vs. Brady's historic season. Not sure why that should change. And I like BJGE's chances of getting the majority of those chances vs. the Pats RBs possibly sharing them.