Bradshaw week 5 (1 Viewer)

[atcdav]

If this thread is started please merge.

Was Bradshaw still feeling effects of a sprained ankle? Why did Jacobs get all those carries? 1 week scenerio or is this a look at whats to come rest of the season?

 

[gotexansgo]

He still had 19 touches, his 2nd lowest of the season, I wouldnt read to much into it.

wk 1 - 22

wk 2 - 17

wk 3 - 20

wk 4 - 25

wk 5 - 19

 

[bulger2holt]

19 touches is plenty for him.

 

[Herm23]

It was more situation than anything, although there was potentially disturbing development for Bradshaw owners- it appears Jacobs is once again the goal line back of choice.

I was admittedly only casually watching it (was focusing more on other games), but it seemed each time the Giants got within the 5, Bradshaw came out and Jacbobs came in. On top of that, he converted his opportunity.

 

[Deaddawg]

I don't think the ankle was bothering him much. The team did the smart thing and used him sparingly in a blow out game. Why take a chance on him getting injured with no need? The fact of the matter is, if we want Bradshaw to be there at the end of the year, Jacobs has to play. I think in most games we will see a 2 to 1 ratio of carries. Bradshaw will also lose the GL carries but he will still be good for 8 to 10 TD's this year. He is a low end RB 1 with top 5 potential some weeks.

 

[texasbirdfan]

it made me block a trade I was thinking about doing in a dynasty team

 

[Yenrub]

It was more situation than anything, although there was potentially disturbing development for Bradshaw owners- it appears Jacobs is once again the goal line back of choice.I was admittedly only casually watching it (was focusing more on other games), but it seemed each time the Giants got within the 5, Bradshaw came out and Jacbobs came in. On top of that, he converted his opportunity.

Jacobs converted one of his goal line opportunities, he lost about 3 yards on another.

 

[Trey]

It was more situation than anything, although there was potentially disturbing development for Bradshaw owners- it appears Jacobs is once again the goal line back of choice.I was admittedly only casually watching it (was focusing more on other games), but it seemed each time the Giants got within the 5, Bradshaw came out and Jacbobs came in. On top of that, he converted his opportunity.

Just an FYI: Jacobs converted 1 and failed on another. But he is clearly the goal line back again after this week.

 

[Road Warriors]

It was more situation than anything, although there was potentially disturbing development for Bradshaw owners- it appears Jacobs is once again the goal line back of choice.I was admittedly only casually watching it (was focusing more on other games), but it seemed each time the Giants got within the 5, Bradshaw came out and Jacbobs came in. On top of that, he converted his opportunity.

I was flipping between this and the IND-KC game. I got to the HOU-NYG game late. I watched the series that Jacobs scored on... he was the RB in for that entire series. I recall wondering if Bradshaw had re-injured his ankle and been knocked out of the game.I don't recall if Jacobs was in at the GL on any drives that Bradshaw as the main back for the series. I don't think so in all cases.It looked to me like Jacobs has a handful of carries and a series or 2 as his workload. I'll be curious to see what the true GL opportunities look like. If I'm Coughlin, I would use the 265 lb bruiser from the 1 pretty regularly.

 

[Herm23]

It was more situation than anything, although there was potentially disturbing development for Bradshaw owners- it appears Jacobs is once again the goal line back of choice.I was admittedly only casually watching it (was focusing more on other games), but it seemed each time the Giants got within the 5, Bradshaw came out and Jacbobs came in. On top of that, he converted his opportunity.

I was flipping between this and the IND-KC game. I got to the HOU-NYG game late. I watched the series that Jacobs scored on... he was the RB in for that entire series. I recall wondering if Bradshaw had re-injured his ankle and been knocked out of the game.I don't recall if Jacobs was in at the GL on any drives that Bradshaw as the main back for the series. I don't think so in all cases.It looked to me like Jacobs has a handful of carries and a series or 2 as his workload. I'll be curious to see what the true GL opportunities look like. If I'm Coughlin, I would use the 265 lb bruiser from the 1 pretty regularly.

Actually, if I am remembering right (and there is a chance I am not- like I said, I was only casually watching), Bradshaw was in on the play directly preceding Jacobs goal line TD.

 

[Liquid Tension]

I stated this in another thread, but Jacobs should be getting 35-40 % of the carries, he is a good back with value. he also gets most of the short yardage opportunities as he should. I know you are looking at fantasy, but for the NY Giants, Jacobs has value. Bradshaw has incredible balance and quick cutting ability to go along with surprising power for a lighter guy, but his vision is not that great. He deserves to be the starter but defenses need to feel Jacobs some and Jacobs has ability as well.

The Giants gave Jacobs all the short yardage work yesterday and depending on the situation, he will get most of it. The Giants are best keeping Bradshaw and Jacobs fresh so when they each touch the rock they are at their best. Bradshaw has also fumbled 4 times this year, although yesterday's he recovered. I also am not sure whether yesterday's became an official fumble or not as he appeared to lose the ball before his knee touched, but I am not sure how they ruled it..regardless he needs to protect the ball better.

 

[Macdaddy_2004]

Any bradshaw owners concerned with the ankle? I'm considering trading for bradshaw.

 

[mdlane]

Any bradshaw owners concerned with the ankle? I'm considering trading for bradshaw.

No. He has shown the ability to play well through injuries.I'm sort of "concerned" by Jacobs' continued presence, but as long as you look at Bradshaw as a RB2 with upside, I think you should be happy with the results. I would be shocked if Jacobs stole enough work to devalue Bradshaw into a RB3.

 

[Road Warriors]

Any bradshaw owners concerned with the ankle? I'm considering trading for bradshaw.

Concerned, yes. Slightly. From what I saw yesterday, he didn't appear limited in his cuts, so I don't believe his production is severely impacted at this time. My concern stems from the fact that injured ankles have a fairly high recurrence rate, and Bradshaw has had foot and ankle issues for the past year or so. As a Bradshaw owner, I'd have to be given a pretty good package to consider dealing him. He is penciled in as an every week starter for me, providing low-end RB1 numbers as my RB2.

 

[Macdaddy_2004]

Any bradshaw owners concerned with the ankle? I'm considering trading for bradshaw.

Concerned, yes. Slightly. From what I saw yesterday, he didn't appear limited in his cuts, so I don't believe his production is severely impacted at this time. My concern stems from the fact that injured ankles have a fairly high recurrence rate, and Bradshaw has had foot and ankle issues for the past year or so. As a Bradshaw owner, I'd have to be given a pretty good package to consider dealing him. He is penciled in as an every week starter for me, providing low-end RB1 numbers as my RB2.

Would WR would you deal Bradshaw for? Fitz?

 

[az_prof]

I stated this in another thread, but Jacobs should be getting 35-40 % of the carries, he is a good back with value. he also gets most of the short yardage opportunities as he should. I know you are looking at fantasy, but for the NY Giants, Jacobs has value. Bradshaw has incredible balance and quick cutting ability to go along with surprising power for a lighter guy, but his vision is not that great. He deserves to be the starter but defenses need to feel Jacobs some and Jacobs has ability as well. The Giants gave Jacobs all the short yardage work yesterday and depending on the situation, he will get most of it. The Giants are best keeping Bradshaw and Jacobs fresh so when they each touch the rock they are at their best. Bradshaw has also fumbled 4 times this year, although yesterday's he recovered. I also am not sure whether yesterday's became an official fumble or not as he appeared to lose the ball before his knee touched, but I am not sure how they ruled it..regardless he needs to protect the ball better.

I disagree that Bradshaw doesn't have great vision--I have seen him look at a play developing and more often than not he makes the right choice about whether to bounce ouside or stay inside and grind it out. He also is a strong short yardage back. But that being said, from a football standpoint, you want to keep him healthy and fresh, and Jacobs is a good shortage back too so they should both be used. I think the ratio yesterday was just about right and that is what I expect to continue to see.

 

[Road Warriors]

Any bradshaw owners concerned with the ankle? I'm considering trading for bradshaw.

Concerned, yes. Slightly. From what I saw yesterday, he didn't appear limited in his cuts, so I don't believe his production is severely impacted at this time. My concern stems from the fact that injured ankles have a fairly high recurrence rate, and Bradshaw has had foot and ankle issues for the past year or so. As a Bradshaw owner, I'd have to be given a pretty good package to consider dealing him. He is penciled in as an every week starter for me, providing low-end RB1 numbers as my RB2.

Would WR would you deal Bradshaw for? Fitz?

Slipping towards AC here... but I'll answer anyway. I'd have to really think about Fitz for Bradshaw straight up... Love Fitz's skills, but for this year ( redraft ), I have significant doubts about his FF production. The QB situation in ARI looks pretty bad. Other WRs I'd consider in a 1:1...I'd take Roddy White, Calvin ( like his upside with Stafford coming back ), Austin or Wayne without having to think too hard about it. AJ and R Moss would give me some pause ( better read on injury with AJ, better read on fit with MIN on Moss ).

 

[netnalp]

I'm not concerned about the ankle.

Jacobs isn't a big worry, he comes in to give Bradshaw a breather or on 3rd and really short. The team doesn't trust him to get more than 3 yards in goalline formations so that limits how much he can vulture Bradshaw. Jacobs doesn't go in when the team is in the redzone unless Bradshaw needs a rest or it's 3 yards or less to the endzone. Bradshaw has been in when it's been 4 yards or more in past games and during this past game when Jacobs went -3 yds on 2-1, Bradshaw came in. The play was the TD to Smith. Jacobs is the better blocker, so it wasn't for blocking that Bradshaw was brought in, it was because defenses know Jacobs isn't likely to get the ball on 3-4.

Jacobs will vulture the occasional TD, but it's not often that the ball will be at the 3 yardline or less and even then, he still isn't a lock to get the goalline carry over Bradshaw.

 

[netnalp]

I stated this in another thread, but Jacobs should be getting 35-40 % of the carries, he is a good back with value. he also gets most of the short yardage opportunities as he should. I know you are looking at fantasy, but for the NY Giants, Jacobs has value. Bradshaw has incredible balance and quick cutting ability to go along with surprising power for a lighter guy, but his vision is not that great. He deserves to be the starter but defenses need to feel Jacobs some and Jacobs has ability as well. The Giants gave Jacobs all the short yardage work yesterday and depending on the situation, he will get most of it. The Giants are best keeping Bradshaw and Jacobs fresh so when they each touch the rock they are at their best. Bradshaw has also fumbled 4 times this year, although yesterday's he recovered. I also am not sure whether yesterday's became an official fumble or not as he appeared to lose the ball before his knee touched, but I am not sure how they ruled it..regardless he needs to protect the ball better.

I disagree that Bradshaw doesn't have great vision--I have seen him look at a play developing and more often than not he makes the right choice about whether to bounce ouside or stay inside and grind it out. He also is a strong short yardage back. But that being said, from a football standpoint, you want to keep him healthy and fresh, and Jacobs is a good shortage back too so they should both be used. I think the ratio yesterday was just about right and that is what I expect to continue to see.

I agree that Bradshaw has good vision. Or if your going to insist Bradshaw has bad vision, his vision is way better than Jacobs.

 

[humpback]

It was more situation than anything, although there was potentially disturbing development for Bradshaw owners- it appears Jacobs is once again the goal line back of choice.I was admittedly only casually watching it (was focusing more on other games), but it seemed each time the Giants got within the 5, Bradshaw came out and Jacbobs came in. On top of that, he converted his opportunity.

I was flipping between this and the IND-KC game. I got to the HOU-NYG game late. I watched the series that Jacobs scored on... he was the RB in for that entire series. I recall wondering if Bradshaw had re-injured his ankle and been knocked out of the game.I don't recall if Jacobs was in at the GL on any drives that Bradshaw as the main back for the series. I don't think so in all cases.It looked to me like Jacobs has a handful of carries and a series or 2 as his workload. I'll be curious to see what the true GL opportunities look like. If I'm Coughlin, I would use the 265 lb bruiser from the 1 pretty regularly.

Actually, if I am remembering right (and there is a chance I am not- like I said, I was only casually watching), Bradshaw was in on the play directly preceding Jacobs goal line TD.

Pretty sure this isn't the case. Jacobs was in when Nicks got down to the 1 and then ran it in the very next play. On the first Nicks TD, Bradshaw was in on 1st and goal from the 6. Jacobs may get a few more looks down there, but i.t doesn't appear that they have a true goal line RB.

 

[MNTom]

It was more situation than anything, although there was potentially disturbing development for Bradshaw owners- it appears Jacobs is once again the goal line back of choice.I was admittedly only casually watching it (was focusing more on other games), but it seemed each time the Giants got within the 5, Bradshaw came out and Jacbobs came in. On top of that, he converted his opportunity.

I was flipping between this and the IND-KC game. I got to the HOU-NYG game late. I watched the series that Jacobs scored on... he was the RB in for that entire series. I recall wondering if Bradshaw had re-injured his ankle and been knocked out of the game.I don't recall if Jacobs was in at the GL on any drives that Bradshaw as the main back for the series. I don't think so in all cases.It looked to me like Jacobs has a handful of carries and a series or 2 as his workload. I'll be curious to see what the true GL opportunities look like. If I'm Coughlin, I would use the 265 lb bruiser from the 1 pretty regularly.

Actually, if I am remembering right (and there is a chance I am not- like I said, I was only casually watching), Bradshaw was in on the play directly preceding Jacobs goal line TD.

Pretty sure this isn't the case. Jacobs was in when Nicks got down to the 1 and then ran it in the very next play. On the first Nicks TD, Bradshaw was in on 1st and goal from the 6. Jacobs may get a few more looks down there, but i.t doesn't appear that they have a true goal line RB.

On a later first and Goal from the 4, Bradshaw got the carry and took it to the one. Jacobs then came in and lost 3 yards on 2nd and Goal from the one. The next play was the 4 yard TD pass to Steve Smith. Looks like it might be what another poster stated: from the 4 on out, Bradshaw is the back. From the 3 on in, it's Jacobs.

 

[humpback]

The week before Bradshaw had a 3 yd. TD run the play after his 25 yd. run. Still doesn't seem like a complete vulture situation, but I don't think it's a big deal- there aren't a ton of plays from inside the 3, and Jacobs has a tendency to lose yardage down there anyway.

 

[netnalp]

The week before Bradshaw had a 3 yd. TD run the play after his 25 yd. run. Still doesn't seem like a complete vulture situation, but I don't think it's a big deal- there aren't a ton of plays from inside the 3, and Jacobs has a tendency to lose yardage down there anyway.

exactly

 

[Liquid Tension]

I stated this in another thread, but Jacobs should be getting 35-40 % of the carries, he is a good back with value. he also gets most of the short yardage opportunities as he should. I know you are looking at fantasy, but for the NY Giants, Jacobs has value. Bradshaw has incredible balance and quick cutting ability to go along with surprising power for a lighter guy, but his vision is not that great. He deserves to be the starter but defenses need to feel Jacobs some and Jacobs has ability as well. The Giants gave Jacobs all the short yardage work yesterday and depending on the situation, he will get most of it. The Giants are best keeping Bradshaw and Jacobs fresh so when they each touch the rock they are at their best. Bradshaw has also fumbled 4 times this year, although yesterday's he recovered. I also am not sure whether yesterday's became an official fumble or not as he appeared to lose the ball before his knee touched, but I am not sure how they ruled it..regardless he needs to protect the ball better.

I disagree that Bradshaw doesn't have great vision--I have seen him look at a play developing and more often than not he makes the right choice about whether to bounce ouside or stay inside and grind it out. He also is a strong short yardage back. But that being said, from a football standpoint, you want to keep him healthy and fresh, and Jacobs is a good shortage back too so they should both be used. I think the ratio yesterday was just about right and that is what I expect to continue to see.

I can't say too much to sway your opinion, but if you watch teh games and plays over and over you can see he makes a lot of wrong reads. I like what Bradshaw can bring to an offense, but if he had good vision he would be a top 3 back because his other traits outside of top speed are really good. I know this sounds lame, but I am telling you he goes the wrong way a lot. If you get a chance record a Giant game and look at his reads. Again, he has amazing balance and power for a back his size and he runs like every run is his last one.

 

[Liquid Tension]

It was more situation than anything, although there was potentially disturbing development for Bradshaw owners- it appears Jacobs is once again the goal line back of choice.I was admittedly only casually watching it (was focusing more on other games), but it seemed each time the Giants got within the 5, Bradshaw came out and Jacbobs came in. On top of that, he converted his opportunity.

I was flipping between this and the IND-KC game. I got to the HOU-NYG game late. I watched the series that Jacobs scored on... he was the RB in for that entire series. I recall wondering if Bradshaw had re-injured his ankle and been knocked out of the game.I don't recall if Jacobs was in at the GL on any drives that Bradshaw as the main back for the series. I don't think so in all cases.It looked to me like Jacobs has a handful of carries and a series or 2 as his workload. I'll be curious to see what the true GL opportunities look like. If I'm Coughlin, I would use the 265 lb bruiser from the 1 pretty regularly.

he did, Jacobs got every short yardage carry in the game

 

[Liquid Tension]

I stated this in another thread, but Jacobs should be getting 35-40 % of the carries, he is a good back with value. he also gets most of the short yardage opportunities as he should. I know you are looking at fantasy, but for the NY Giants, Jacobs has value. Bradshaw has incredible balance and quick cutting ability to go along with surprising power for a lighter guy, but his vision is not that great. He deserves to be the starter but defenses need to feel Jacobs some and Jacobs has ability as well. The Giants gave Jacobs all the short yardage work yesterday and depending on the situation, he will get most of it. The Giants are best keeping Bradshaw and Jacobs fresh so when they each touch the rock they are at their best. Bradshaw has also fumbled 4 times this year, although yesterday's he recovered. I also am not sure whether yesterday's became an official fumble or not as he appeared to lose the ball before his knee touched, but I am not sure how they ruled it..regardless he needs to protect the ball better.

I disagree that Bradshaw doesn't have great vision--I have seen him look at a play developing and more often than not he makes the right choice about whether to bounce ouside or stay inside and grind it out. He also is a strong short yardage back. But that being said, from a football standpoint, you want to keep him healthy and fresh, and Jacobs is a good shortage back too so they should both be used. I think the ratio yesterday was just about right and that is what I expect to continue to see.

I agree that Bradshaw has good vision. Or if your going to insist Bradshaw has bad vision, his vision is way better than Jacobs.

netnalp, I think you underestimate Jacobs abilities in both your posts