Brandon Jacobs & Ahmad Bradshaw, RBs, New York Giants (1 Viewer)

[Jason Wood]

2010 Player Spotlight Series

One of Footballguys best assets is our message board community. The Shark Pool is, in our view, the best place on the internet to discuss, debate and analyze all things fantasy football. In what's become an annual tradition, the Player Spotlight series is a key part of the preseason efforts. As many of you know, we consider the Player Spotlight threads the permanent record for analyzing the fantasy prospects of the player in question. This year, we plan to publish more than 140 offensive spotlights covering the vast majority of expected skill position starters.

Each week we will post a list of players to be discussed. Those threads will remain open for the entire preseason, and should be a central point to discussion expectations for the player in question. Importantly, analysis done in the first week of posting will be part of the permanent record in two ways. 1) At the end of the week, we will tally the projections into a consensus. 2) We will select a number of pull quotes from forum contributors who make a compelling statement or observation. Both the projections and pull quotes will be part of a published article on the main website.

Thread Topic: Brandon Jacobs & Ahmad Bradshaw, RBs, New York Giants

Player Page Link: Ahmad Bradshaw Player Page

Player Page Link: Brandon Jacobs Player Page

Each article will include:

[*]Detailed viewpoint from a Footballguys staff member

[*]Highlighted member commentary from the message board threads

[*]FBG Projections

[*]Consensus Member Projections

The Rules

In order for this thread to provide maximum value, we ask that you follow a few simple guidelines:

[*]Focus commentary on the player (or players) in question, and your expectations for said player (or players)

[*]Back up your expectations in whatever manner you deem appropriate; avoid posts that simply say "I hate him" or "He's the best"

[*]Avoid redundancies or ... this should be about incremental analysis or debate

While not a requirement, we strongly encourage you to provide your own projections for the player (players):

Projections should include:

[*]For QBs: Attempts, Completions, Passing Yards, Passing TDs, Ints, Rush Attempts, Rush Yards, Rush TDs

[*]For RBs: Rushes, Rushing Yards, Rush TDs, Receptions, Receiving Yards, Receiving TDs

[*]For WRs & TEs: Receptions, Receiving Yards, Receiving TDs

Now let's get on with the conversation! We look forward to your contributions and let me offer a personal thanks in anticipation of the great debate and analysis.

 

[az_prof]

The G Men typically run their HBs 425-450 times a season. I doubt that will change in 2010. The big question is the breakdown of who gets how many carries and in what situations.

Assuming they are both healthy, I expect the backfield to be a duo and not a trio: so Jacobs and Bradshaw will get the majority of carries again. But I think the breakdown swings toward Bradshaw in 2010. He was so much better last year that I can't imagine he doesn't get more opportunities.

So, I am assuming that

Bradshaw gets 225 carries

Jacobs: 175 carries

Last year jacobs averaged 3.7 but I will assume he is healthy and therefore gets 4.4 ypc, which is his career ypc.

10 receptions for 9.4 ypc

Bradshaw:

225 carries; 4.8 ypc He has a career average of 5.2 so this seems pretty conservative.

20 receptions at 9.9 ypc

Totals:

Jacobs

175, 4.4/770 8 TDs receiving: 10/9.4 94 yards

Bradnsahw:

225, 4.8 1080 yards 6 TDs receiving 20/9.9 198 yards 2 TDs

 

[silentmark]

what about the rest of the G-men's RB's ?

 

[az_prof]

what about the rest of the G-men's RB's ?

Unless they both get hurt I don't see the other backs getting more than a handful of carries.

 

[Bird]

The NYG have a rough, ultra-competitive schedule this year as they play the improved NFC North and the balanced AFC South. The Giants like to control the game with the "ground and pound" philosophy but with these opponents they'll need to throw more than they want. There won't be a 500+ team carries year for them this season like in 2008. I see Jacobs and Bradshaw with a near 50/50 split for touches. Of the two, Bradshaw has the higher ceiling which is limited because of his inabilty to block for Eli consistently and correctly.

Projections:

Bradshaw: 179car/825/6 26rec/245/1 for a PPR ranking of RB26

Jacobs: 203car/895/7 14rec/130/0 for a PPR ranking of RB38

 

[TS Garp]

I think both of these guys are going to be frustrating to own on a week-to-week basis, as I wonder if you'll see the Giants largely feed the hot hand in this rotation, so either of them could turn in pretty bad weeks here and there.

Bradshaw: 190 carries, 874 yards, 6 td's, 30 receptions, 295 yards, 1 td

Jacobs: 185 carries, 814 yards, 8 td's, 16 receptions, 140 yards, 0 td's

 

[Chase Stuart]

Bradshaw:

225 carries; 4.8 ypc He has a career average of 5.2 so this seems pretty conservative.

20 receptions at 9.9 ypc

I don't think 4.8 YPC is conservative for any running back, and it's definitely not conservative for a running back with a limited history (~250 carries) like Bradshaw. It's easy to see that a player has a high YPC every year (usually on a small number of touches), but that doesn't mean it's wies to project that number again. All of the studies I've done show significant regression to the mean for RBs with high YPC in the year before (or the two or three years before). The 100,109 carries by NFL running backs over the past eight seasons have gained 419,590 yards, for an average of 4.19 yards per carry. That average holds true when looking at running backs with at least 125 carries in a season, too.

There's a good bit of variation, of course, but I'd have a very hard time projecting over 4.5 YPC for all but one or two running backs. And Bradshaw certainly isn't one of them. If I had to choose between over 4.40 and under 4.40, I'd say Bradshaw will be under that this season.

I'd probably project him at about 4.30; doing so gives him over 100 fewer yards this year on the same number of carries, but I also think it means he's unlikely to actually see 225 carries.

 

[Chairshot]

I have a hard time believing that Bradshaw will get more carries then Jacobs. Jacobs had a down year last year, but he was playing mostly hurt. For better or for worse, Jacobs is still Coughlin's boy and will get the bulk of the carries unless he *completely* falls off the map, which I don't think he will.

Bradshaw will get his carries, but it's still going to be 60/40 with the bulk going to Jacobs, I think. Jacobs will probably get the goal line carries, too.

Still doesn't mean that Bradshaw can't be valuable. If the Giants get back to form, both backs could go over 1000 yards. But I think some people look at Bradshaw's YPC from last year and think that means he's the better back (which I'm not sure is true at all) and that he will win the "starting" job. The Giants really don't run like that.

 

[az_prof]

Bradshaw:

225 carries; 4.8 ypc He has a career average of 5.2 so this seems pretty conservative.

20 receptions at 9.9 ypc

I don't think 4.8 YPC is conservative for any running back, and it's definitely not conservative for a running back with a limited history (~250 carries) like Bradshaw. It's easy to see that a player has a high YPC every year (usually on a small number of touches), but that doesn't mean it's wies to project that number again. All of the studies I've done show significant regression to the mean for RBs with high YPC in the year before (or the two or three years before). The 100,109 carries by NFL running backs over the past eight seasons have gained 419,590 yards, for an average of 4.19 yards per carry. That average holds true when looking at running backs with at least 125 carries in a season, too.

There's a good bit of variation, of course, but I'd have a very hard time projecting over 4.5 YPC for all but one or two running backs. And Bradshaw certainly isn't one of them. If I had to choose between over 4.40 and under 4.40, I'd say Bradshaw will be under that this season.

I'd probably project him at about 4.30; doing so gives him over 100 fewer yards this year on the same number of carries, but I also think it means he's unlikely to actually see 225 carries.

4.3? You really think that his performance is going to fall a full yard per carry over his career average? You can try to soft pedal the number of carries, but 250 carries is statistically meaningful. And, 163 of them were in one season, last season--his ypc last year on 163 carries was 4.8. Unless you think the offensive line is going to be worse or unless you think Bradshaw will not recover from his off season surgery, I don't see the rationale for going all the way down to 4.3. He could do better than 4.8 because he was playing hurt last year and those off season surgeries were supposed to correct that. In projecting ypc it's also reasonable to look at the historical performance of backs on that team in general--and when you look back to Tiki and Jacobs as well, backs in that offense have good ypc. Before last season Jacobs had average 5.0 ypc in two previous seasons. So, again, in that historical context for the team and given Bradshaw's historical performance of over five yards a carry. 4.8 is very conservative.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Bradshaw:

225 carries; 4.8 ypc He has a career average of 5.2 so this seems pretty conservative.

20 receptions at 9.9 ypc

I don't think 4.8 YPC is conservative for any running back, and it's definitely not conservative for a running back with a limited history (~250 carries) like Bradshaw. It's easy to see that a player has a high YPC every year (usually on a small number of touches), but that doesn't mean it's wies to project that number again. All of the studies I've done show significant regression to the mean for RBs with high YPC in the year before (or the two or three years before). The 100,109 carries by NFL running backs over the past eight seasons have gained 419,590 yards, for an average of 4.19 yards per carry. That average holds true when looking at running backs with at least 125 carries in a season, too.

There's a good bit of variation, of course, but I'd have a very hard time projecting over 4.5 YPC for all but one or two running backs. And Bradshaw certainly isn't one of them. If I had to choose between over 4.40 and under 4.40, I'd say Bradshaw will be under that this season.

I'd probably project him at about 4.30; doing so gives him over 100 fewer yards this year on the same number of carries, but I also think it means he's unlikely to actually see 225 carries.

4.3? You really think that his performance is going to fall a full yard per carry over his career average? You can try to soft pedal the number of carries, but 250 carries is statistically meaningful. And, 163 of them were in one season, last season--his ypc last year on 163 carries was 4.8. Unless you think the offensive line is going to be worse or unless you think Bradshaw will not recover from his off season surgery, I don't see the rationale for going all the way down to 4.3. He could do better than 4.8 because he was playing hurt last year and those off season surgeries were supposed to correct that. In projecting ypc it's also reasonable to look at the historical performance of backs on that team in general--and when you look back to Tiki and Jacobs as well, backs in that offense have good ypc. Before last season Jacobs had average 5.0 ypc in two previous seasons. So, again, in that historical context for the team and given Bradshaw's historical performance of over five yards a carry. 4.8 is very conservative.

There is a significant amount of regression to the mean for all running backs; the mean in the NFL is 4.20 YPC, and most running backs are probably around that mean. Jerious Norwood had a 5.84 YPC average his first three seasons in Atlanta; he averaged 3.3 YPC last year. Tatum Bell averaged 4.9 YPC his first three seasons; he averaged 4.1 in year four; Larry Johnson averaged 5.1 YPC his first three seasons; he averaged 4.3 in year four; Brian Westbrook averaged 4.8 YPC his first three seasons; he averaged 4.0 in year four; Napolean Kaufman averaged 5.0 YPC his first three seasons; he averaged 4.2 in year four.This isn't a knock on Bradshaw. I don't think Bradshaw's "true" ability is anywhere near 4.8 yards per carry. If it was, he'd have received significantly more carries by now. Just my .02.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

This isn't a knock on Bradshaw. I don't think Bradshaw's "true" ability is anywhere near 4.8 yards per carry. If it was, he'd have received significantly more carries by now. Just my .02.

I think that's a bit of a silly statement. We've seen countless examples of guys who had "true" ability that high that weren't given more carries early on in their career. Heck, we need look no further than this very team with Tiki Barber, or their next door neighbor with Brian Westbrook (who averaged 5.1ypc and 4.8ypc in the first two seasons that he was finally given the load).I think Bradshaw's talent is being underrated in this thread. The only thing he's missing is opportunity. Bradshaw and Beanie are the next breakout RBs in this league, imho.

 

[Chase Stuart]

This isn't a knock on Bradshaw. I don't think Bradshaw's "true" ability is anywhere near 4.8 yards per carry. If it was, he'd have received significantly more carries by now. Just my .02.

I think that's a bit of a silly statement. We've seen countless examples of guys who had "true" ability that high that weren't given more carries early on in their career. Heck, we need look no further than this very team with Tiki Barber, or their next door neighbor with Brian Westbrook (who averaged 5.1ypc and 4.8ypc in the first two seasons that he was finally given the load).I think Bradshaw's talent is being underrated in this thread. The only thing he's missing is opportunity. Bradshaw and Beanie are the next breakout RBs in this league, imho.

That's a fair point. It's certainly possible that Bradshaw is that next guy. I guess I just don't think that's the most likely career path. I thought Barber and Westbrook were a bit more talented than Bradshaw, but who knows -- it certainly is possible that he takes over and becomes the main Giants back for the next few seasons.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

This isn't a knock on Bradshaw. I don't think Bradshaw's "true" ability is anywhere near 4.8 yards per carry. If it was, he'd have received significantly more carries by now. Just my .02.

I think that's a bit of a silly statement. We've seen countless examples of guys who had "true" ability that high that weren't given more carries early on in their career. Heck, we need look no further than this very team with Tiki Barber, or their next door neighbor with Brian Westbrook (who averaged 5.1ypc and 4.8ypc in the first two seasons that he was finally given the load).I think Bradshaw's talent is being underrated in this thread. The only thing he's missing is opportunity. Bradshaw and Beanie are the next breakout RBs in this league, imho.

That's a fair point. It's certainly possible that Bradshaw is that next guy. I guess I just don't think that's the most likely career path. I thought Barber and Westbrook were a bit more talented than Bradshaw, but who knows -- it certainly is possible that he takes over and becomes the main Giants back for the next few seasons.

Yeah, I don't really have any stats or figures to back it up for Bradshaw, it's just that when I watch him run that's what I see, and everyone sees these kinds of things differently.I know youtube highlights aren't really something I can use to convince people, but this is a pretty good watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3MkLCRkPIM

 

[az_prof]

This isn't a knock on Bradshaw. I don't think Bradshaw's "true" ability is anywhere near 4.8 yards per carry. If it was, he'd have received significantly more carries by now. Just my .02.

I think that's a bit of a silly statement. We've seen countless examples of guys who had "true" ability that high that weren't given more carries early on in their career. Heck, we need look no further than this very team with Tiki Barber, or their next door neighbor with Brian Westbrook (who averaged 5.1ypc and 4.8ypc in the first two seasons that he was finally given the load).I think Bradshaw's talent is being underrated in this thread. The only thing he's missing is opportunity. Bradshaw and Beanie are the next breakout RBs in this league, imho.

That's a fair point. It's certainly possible that Bradshaw is that next guy. I guess I just don't think that's the most likely career path. I thought Barber and Westbrook were a bit more talented than Bradshaw, but who knows -- it certainly is possible that he takes over and becomes the main Giants back for the next few seasons.

Yeah, I don't really have any stats or figures to back it up for Bradshaw, it's just that when I watch him run that's what I see, and everyone sees these kinds of things differently.I know youtube highlights aren't really something I can use to convince people, but this is a pretty good watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3MkLCRkPIM

I have watched a lot of him the past few years and that video is representative of what he does on a regular basis.1) He has the quickness and elusiveness of a scat back

2) But, he has the ability and the willingness to lower his shoulders and push for the tough yards when he needs to

3) And he is pretty adept at breaking arm tackles

4) he has a nose for the endzone that all great backs have

5) he can catch well although the G Men haven't used him much this way

6) he has the speed to get outside and yet he has great vision to pick his hole, then burst, and so he can squeeze through a small hole on the interior.

I think Westbrook is a very good comparison. The only question in my mind is whether he can hold up to the punishment, but there were the same questions with Westbrook. Only time will tell.

But if people think he just a small scat back and only a third down back or he needs a bigger back to "tire defenses out," watch how he takes on a big defensive tackle at the end of that video. He isn't a big guy but he plays much bigger than his weight. He has attitude.

 

[Allbucdup]

If Jacobs stand up running style does not change, Bradshaw will see more carries simply due to Jacobs' injuries.

 

[baconisgood]

Jacobs over his career has averaged ~1 reception more per game without Ward than with Ward, and the Giants have not shown any real effort to get Bradshaw involved in the passing game- and honestly it makes sense for this to continue in 2010. The Giants have 3 quality WRs and a TE with good enough hands. They don't need the screen pass to move the ball the way they did in 2008 when ward had 41 receptions. I think ~24 receptions each (1.5 /game) is a likely split in that sense.

As far as carries goes- it has come out that Jacobs tore his meniscus in game 1 and could/should have had surgery then- even running on a bad knee (and showing it with diminished production) the Giants still gave him double digit carries in 12/14 remaining games with > 20 carries 4 times. Bradshaw was banged up most of the season as well, but he never got 20 carries in a game- his max was 18 touches (14 carries/4 receptions) to Jacobs' 27 touch max. In Bradshaw's favor last 7 games he averaged 14.5 touches while Jacobs averaged 13.5 touches. I think this is the absolute best case scenario starting this season for Bradshaw. If both back's are healthy it doesn't look like he is going to be getting > 15 touches per game unless he outperforms Jacobs (and remember he outperformed Jacobs by a large amount in 2009) by a large amount. Most likely seems to be a bigger load in favor of Jacobs in the realm of 17-19 touches per game with Bradshaw getting 10-12 touches.

 

[netnalp]

I believe the problem with Jacobs is for him to run effectively, he needs to have that bruising style. That same style puts more wear on him and he already has people tackling him low, so he loses time to injury. When he tries to be more evasive like he did last year he doesn't run as well. He did claim that he had a knee injury all last season, maybe trying to protect that knee had him move away from his bulldozer style. This is one backfield I'm eager to see how it looks when preseason starts.

 

[KellysHeroes]

Bradshaw was just as hurt if not more hurt than BJ last yr and looked a lot better until the final couple of games.

IMO, look for Bradshaw to get a Tiki like role and Bj go back to his COP/Short yardage role like he should be.

 

[bonesman]

what about the rest of the G-men's RB's ?

I think one of them will be forced into action due to injury to one or both of Jacobs/Bradshaw.

 

[rascal]

Might be one situation to avoid unless their is good value.

 

[Sabertooth]

I disagree. I think if you can get the right guy (I'm betting on Bradshaw) there is going to be a lot of points to be scored here. Obviously you don't want to take these guys in the early rounds but if you can get Bradshaw later on, he could outscore all but the very top guys.

He's the guy the Giants kept instead of Ryan Grant remember and I think he's more talented than Grant. He's that good.

 

[rascal]

I disagree. I think if you can get the right guy (I'm betting on Bradshaw) there is going to be a lot of points to be scored here. Obviously you don't want to take these guys in the early rounds but if you can get Bradshaw later on, he could outscore all but the very top guys. He's the guy the Giants kept instead of Ryan Grant remember and I think he's more talented than Grant. He's that good.

I guess it depends on what you mean by later on. I've got him at RB30.

 

[Sabertooth]

I disagree. I think if you can get the right guy (I'm betting on Bradshaw) there is going to be a lot of points to be scored here. Obviously you don't want to take these guys in the early rounds but if you can get Bradshaw later on, he could outscore all but the very top guys. He's the guy the Giants kept instead of Ryan Grant remember and I think he's more talented than Grant. He's that good.

I guess it depends on what you mean by later on. I've got him at RB30.

Well, do you think he'll finish around that spot or are you on the fence. Because I tend to think he's got a better shot at finishing in the 1-12 range or the 40-50 range than in the 25-35 range. I don't think this is a committee situation and I tend to believe he'll win the job outright. If he does, that puts him in the top 12 if he stays healthy. If he doesn't he's fodder. It is certainly a risk-reward thing there. But I'm definitely think he'll win this battle. Of course I completely acknowledge A) Taking him in the Top 15 is not pick for value and B) I could be wrong and he could be a wasted pick.So I bump him back a bit from where I think he'll finish for those reasons.

 

[humpback]

I disagree. I think if you can get the right guy (I'm betting on Bradshaw) there is going to be a lot of points to be scored here. Obviously you don't want to take these guys in the early rounds but if you can get Bradshaw later on, he could outscore all but the very top guys. He's the guy the Giants kept instead of Ryan Grant remember and I think he's more talented than Grant. He's that good.

I guess it depends on what you mean by later on. I've got him at RB30.

Well, do you think he'll finish around that spot or are you on the fence. Because I tend to think he's got a better shot at finishing in the 1-12 range or the 40-50 range than in the 25-35 range. I don't think this is a committee situation and I tend to believe he'll win the job outright. If he does, that puts him in the top 12 if he stays healthy. If he doesn't he's fodder. It is certainly a risk-reward thing there. But I'm definitely think he'll win this battle. Of course I completely acknowledge A) Taking him in the Top 15 is not pick for value and B) I could be wrong and he could be a wasted pick.So I bump him back a bit from where I think he'll finish for those reasons.

I disagree- I think this is a pretty likely committee situation, as neither RB has shown to be capable of handling a full load. You have 2 good RBs with some different strengths (durability isn't one for either), why wouldn't they use some sort of committee?

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I disagree. I think if you can get the right guy (I'm betting on Bradshaw) there is going to be a lot of points to be scored here. Obviously you don't want to take these guys in the early rounds but if you can get Bradshaw later on, he could outscore all but the very top guys. He's the guy the Giants kept instead of Ryan Grant remember and I think he's more talented than Grant. He's that good.

I guess it depends on what you mean by later on. I've got him at RB30.

Well, do you think he'll finish around that spot or are you on the fence. Because I tend to think he's got a better shot at finishing in the 1-12 range or the 40-50 range than in the 25-35 range. I don't think this is a committee situation and I tend to believe he'll win the job outright. If he does, that puts him in the top 12 if he stays healthy. If he doesn't he's fodder. It is certainly a risk-reward thing there. But I'm definitely think he'll win this battle. Of course I completely acknowledge A) Taking him in the Top 15 is not pick for value and B) I could be wrong and he could be a wasted pick.So I bump him back a bit from where I think he'll finish for those reasons.

Could you explain why you think Bradshaw will "win this battle" in 2010?

 

[TitansFan10]

For those of you who've been asking, Ahmad Bradshaw looks completely healthy to me. He had to bounce a run outside Monday because linebacker Clint Sintim came knifing through the line of scrimmage and he showed that same quickness that I remember from a couple years ago. The Giants will be very cautious with Bradshaw in camp, but he doesn't have any limitations at this point.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/...tion-deck-day-2

Bradshaw is much more explosive than Jacobs. This might be pretty interesting if Bradshaw does get the Tiki role and Jacobs goes back to 8 - 10 plays of short yardage work only.

I thought Jacobs just lost his power last year, I thought he looked afraid. Coming in just for those 2 yards or just for that for that goal line TD might be just what Jacobs needs and just what would make Bradshaw a great RB this year.

 

[Sabertooth]

I disagree. I think if you can get the right guy (I'm betting on Bradshaw) there is going to be a lot of points to be scored here. Obviously you don't want to take these guys in the early rounds but if you can get Bradshaw later on, he could outscore all but the very top guys.

He's the guy the Giants kept instead of Ryan Grant remember and I think he's more talented than Grant. He's that good.

I guess it depends on what you mean by later on. I've got him at RB30.

Well, do you think he'll finish around that spot or are you on the fence. Because I tend to think he's got a better shot at finishing in the 1-12 range or the 40-50 range than in the 25-35 range. I don't think this is a committee situation and I tend to believe he'll win the job outright. If he does, that puts him in the top 12 if he stays healthy. If he doesn't he's fodder. It is certainly a risk-reward thing there. But I'm definitely think he'll win this battle. Of course I completely acknowledge A) Taking him in the Top 15 is not pick for value and B) I could be wrong and he could be a wasted pick.

So I bump him back a bit from where I think he'll finish for those reasons.

Could you explain why you think Bradshaw will "win this battle" in 2010?

I just think he's more suited to doing everything. He's Jacobs' equal or better at everything. In short, he's the better player and talent should win out. It doesn't alway happen though.Link to Bradshaw vs. the Raiders from NFL.com

Oakland wasn't very good against the run last season but you get to see his vision, short yardage, catching, and heart in quite a few of these runs.

 

[Sabertooth]

Ahmad Bradshaw is taking the majority of first-team tailback reps at Giants camp, ahead of Brandon Jacobs.Both the NY Daily News and Newark Star-Ledger have observed Bradshaw getting the first crack in every drill. Though Jacobs has reportedly shown improved burst, he is clearly in danger of losing his "starting" job. We're not sure it's a coaching staff trick after Bradshaw outplayed Jacobs all last year. Now completely healthy, Bradshaw could flirt with 14-17 touches a game if he opens the regular season as a first-teamer. Confidently move him up your rankings into the high-end RB3 range. Aug. 6 - 8:57 am et

Source: Newark Star-Ledger

 

[werdnoynek]

Ahmad Bradshaw is taking the majority of first-team tailback reps at Giants camp, ahead of Brandon Jacobs.Both the NY Daily News and Newark Star-Ledger have observed Bradshaw getting the first crack in every drill. Though Jacobs has reportedly shown improved burst, he is clearly in danger of losing his "starting" job. We're not sure it's a coaching staff trick after Bradshaw outplayed Jacobs all last year. Now completely healthy, Bradshaw could flirt with 14-17 touches a game if he opens the regular season as a first-teamer. Confidently move him up your rankings into the high-end RB3 range. Aug. 6 - 8:57 am et

Source: Newark Star-Ledger

while it's still early, i for one love seeing this... given last years performance i think the guy deserves a chance.a dynasty note - i was amazed to learn he's only 24 years of age.

 

[Sabertooth]

Ahmad Bradshaw is taking the majority of first-team tailback reps at Giants camp, ahead of Brandon Jacobs.Both the NY Daily News and Newark Star-Ledger have observed Bradshaw getting the first crack in every drill. Though Jacobs has reportedly shown improved burst, he is clearly in danger of losing his "starting" job. We're not sure it's a coaching staff trick after Bradshaw outplayed Jacobs all last year. Now completely healthy, Bradshaw could flirt with 14-17 touches a game if he opens the regular season as a first-teamer. Confidently move him up your rankings into the high-end RB3 range. Aug. 6 - 8:57 am et

Source: Newark Star-Ledger

while it's still early, i for one love seeing this... given last years performance i think the guy deserves a chance.a dynasty note - i was amazed to learn he's only 24 years of age.

I gave up quite a bit to get him earlier this offseason when I realized this. He's younger than Shonn Greene.

 

[-jb-]

Someone on NFL Radio was talking about this situation and made an interesting point. It would make sense that Jacobs would benefit more than Bradshaw from better line performance. He's more likely to turn a 5 yard run into a 10 yard run than Bradshaw, and Bradshaw is more likely to turn a loss into 25 yards. As a HC, you'd likely take the steady approach with Jacobs in order to keep drives alive and maintain some clock management, but given how poorly the Giants line played last year, it stands to reason that Jacobs was as limited as he was...and Bradshaw made the best of some bad situations. All that said, I don't see a huge improvement in the line this year, so I tend to believe that the Giants will need Bradshaw's creativity more than they will need Jacobs grind. I see an improvement with both players this year, but I see Bradshaw being the play here, both from a value and straight performance perspective. He just seems like the better compliment to an offense that is developing some real power.

 

[Sabertooth]

Someone on NFL Radio was talking about this situation and made an interesting point. It would make sense that Jacobs would benefit more than Bradshaw from better line performance. He's more likely to turn a 5 yard run into a 10 yard run than Bradshaw, and Bradshaw is more likely to turn a loss into 25 yards. As a HC, you'd likely take the steady approach with Jacobs in order to keep drives alive and maintain some clock management, but given how poorly the Giants line played last year, it stands to reason that Jacobs was as limited as he was...and Bradshaw made the best of some bad situations. All that said, I don't see a huge improvement in the line this year, so I tend to believe that the Giants will need Bradshaw's creativity more than they will need Jacobs grind. I see an improvement with both players this year, but I see Bradshaw being the play here, both from a value and straight performance perspective. He just seems like the better compliment to an offense that is developing some real power.

I was listening to another site's podcast the other night and the were talking about how Jacobs has stated that he "doesn't have to hit every defender" and they looked at that as a negative because that's his game. If he's out there smashing people like he did in 2009, he's effective. I think Bradshaw has more carries when all is said and done but Jacobs almost has to be the goalline bellcow. So their fantasy value may be similar.

 

[werdnoynek]

Ahmad Bradshaw is taking the majority of first-team tailback reps at Giants camp, ahead of Brandon Jacobs.Both the NY Daily News and Newark Star-Ledger have observed Bradshaw getting the first crack in every drill. Though Jacobs has reportedly shown improved burst, he is clearly in danger of losing his "starting" job. We're not sure it's a coaching staff trick after Bradshaw outplayed Jacobs all last year. Now completely healthy, Bradshaw could flirt with 14-17 touches a game if he opens the regular season as a first-teamer. Confidently move him up your rankings into the high-end RB3 range. Aug. 6 - 8:57 am et

Source: Newark Star-Ledger

while it's still early, i for one love seeing this... given last years performance i think the guy deserves a chance.a dynasty note - i was amazed to learn he's only 24 years of age.

I gave up quite a bit to get him earlier this offseason when I realized this. He's younger than Shonn Greene.

with 3 years NFL experience to boot.

 

[KellysHeroes]

Ahmad Bradshaw is taking the majority of first-team tailback reps at Giants camp, ahead of Brandon Jacobs.

Both the NY Daily News and Newark Star-Ledger have observed Bradshaw getting the first crack in every drill. Though Jacobs has reportedly shown improved burst, he is clearly in danger of losing his "starting" job. We're not sure it's a coaching staff trick after Bradshaw outplayed Jacobs all last year. Now completely healthy, Bradshaw could flirt with 14-17 touches a game if he opens the regular season as a first-teamer. Confidently move him up your rankings into the high-end RB3 range. Aug. 6 - 8:57 am et

Source: Newark Star-Ledger

while it's still early, i for one love seeing this... given last years performance i think the guy deserves a chance.a dynasty note - i was amazed to learn he's only 24 years of age.

I gave up quite a bit to get him earlier this offseason when I realized this. He's younger than Shonn Greene.

with 3 years NFL experience to boot.

I love Bradshaw... but hes had a lot of work done to his legs for a 24 yr old.

 

[KellysHeroes]

Someone on NFL Radio was talking about this situation and made an interesting point. It would make sense that Jacobs would benefit more than Bradshaw from better line performance. He's more likely to turn a 5 yard run into a 10 yard run than Bradshaw, and Bradshaw is more likely to turn a loss into 25 yards. As a HC, you'd likely take the steady approach with Jacobs in order to keep drives alive and maintain some clock management, but given how poorly the Giants line played last year, it stands to reason that Jacobs was as limited as he was...and Bradshaw made the best of some bad situations. All that said, I don't see a huge improvement in the line this year, so I tend to believe that the Giants will need Bradshaw's creativity more than they will need Jacobs grind. I see an improvement with both players this year, but I see Bradshaw being the play here, both from a value and straight performance perspective. He just seems like the better compliment to an offense that is developing some real power.

I was listening to another site's podcast the other night and the were talking about how Jacobs has stated that he "doesn't have to hit every defender" and they looked at that as a negative because that's his game. If he's out there smashing people like he did in 2009, he's effective. I think Bradshaw has more carries when all is said and done but Jacobs almost has to be the goalline bellcow. So their fantasy value may be similar.

The best situation is they use Bradshaw as Tiki and BJ goes back to his COP / GL guy. Ofcourse BJ gets more carries than he did when Tiki played but when healthy there isn't a better GL, punch you right in the face back.

 

[eefflrat]

Now that we're into the preseason games Bradshaw started the other night, although he didn't see much work running. he was however productive in the passing game thanks to the 51 yard play. jacobs looked terrible, and nearly got his Qb decapitated. So the questions i have for giants followers is who emerges as the feature back there. Bradshaw is 24 years old and is in his 4th year, jacobs is 28 and hasn't really shown that he can stay healthy and be the longterm answer. But, is jacobs still the short term answer?

Thoughts please.

 

[Hoart Petterson]

Now that we're into the preseason games Bradshaw started the other night, although he didn't see much work running. he was however productive in the passing game thanks to the 51 yard play. jacobs looked terrible, and nearly got his Qb decapitated. So the questions i have for giants followers is who emerges as the feature back there. Bradshaw is 24 years old and is in his 4th year, jacobs is 28 and hasn't really shown that he can stay healthy and be the longterm answer. But, is jacobs still the short term answer?Thoughts please.

I think it's going to be close to a 50-50 split. AB will amass more yards, BJ will have more TD's. I'd probably want AB at this point but I'd read nothing into what they do in the preseason. They were playing behind a makeshift O-line Monday night with their top 4 TE's out.

 

[Sabertooth]

Now that we're into the preseason games Bradshaw started the other night, although he didn't see much work running. he was however productive in the passing game thanks to the 51 yard play. jacobs looked terrible, and nearly got his Qb decapitated. So the questions i have for giants followers is who emerges as the feature back there. Bradshaw is 24 years old and is in his 4th year, jacobs is 28 and hasn't really shown that he can stay healthy and be the longterm answer. But, is jacobs still the short term answer?Thoughts please.

I think it's going to be close to a 50-50 split. AB will amass more yards, BJ will have more TD's. I'd probably want AB at this point but I'd read nothing into what they do in the preseason. They were playing behind a makeshift O-line Monday night with their top 4 TE's out.

I'm not so sure on the TDs. I think Bradshaw may prove to be more effective inside the 5. And we are probably only talking about 5 or 6 touchdowns total. So maybe Jacobs gets 4 to Bradshaw's 2 or something. I don't think the spread will be as big as some are predicting. I think Bradshaw catches a lot more passes. Like 20 more. And I think they both tote the rock about the same amount of times.

 

[-jb-]

Now that we're into the preseason games Bradshaw started the other night, although he didn't see much work running. he was however productive in the passing game thanks to the 51 yard play. jacobs looked terrible, and nearly got his Qb decapitated. So the questions i have for giants followers is who emerges as the feature back there. Bradshaw is 24 years old and is in his 4th year, jacobs is 28 and hasn't really shown that he can stay healthy and be the longterm answer. But, is jacobs still the short term answer?

Thoughts please.

I think it's going to be close to a 50-50 split. AB will amass more yards, BJ will have more TD's. I'd probably want AB at this point but I'd read nothing into what they do in the preseason. They were playing behind a makeshift O-line Monday night with their top 4 TE's out.

I'm not so sure on the TDs. I think Bradshaw may prove to be more effective inside the 5. And we are probably only talking about 5 or 6 touchdowns total. So maybe Jacobs gets 4 to Bradshaw's 2 or something. I don't think the spread will be as big as some are predicting. I think Bradshaw catches a lot more passes. Like 20 more. And I think they both tote the rock about the same amount of times.

Wait, what?

 

[bakes]

This isn't a knock on Bradshaw. I don't think Bradshaw's "true" ability is anywhere near 4.8 yards per carry. If it was, he'd have received significantly more carries by now. Just my .02.

I think that's a bit of a silly statement. We've seen countless examples of guys who had "true" ability that high that weren't given more carries early on in their career. Heck, we need look no further than this very team with Tiki Barber, or their next door neighbor with Brian Westbrook (who averaged 5.1ypc and 4.8ypc in the first two seasons that he was finally given the load).I think Bradshaw's talent is being underrated in this thread. The only thing he's missing is opportunity. Bradshaw and Beanie are the next breakout RBs in this league, imho.

Agreed. Jacobs has in the past, and will continue to in the future, run too damned upright. Unless he can correct this (i.e. turn himself into a 5'8" bowling ball that plows through everything in his path) Bradshaw will get more and more carries. He's better out of the backfield, more elusive, and even a staid coach like Coughlin won't be able to ignore this.

 

[Das Boot]

Anyone particularly worried about all the work Bradshaw has had done to his feet?

It's my biggest concern with drafting him.

 

[Avery]

Anyone particularly worried about all the work Bradshaw has had done to his feet?It's my biggest concern with drafting him.

I read somewhere recently that Bradshaw says he runs bowlegged which puts extra pressure on the outside of his feet, instead of the force being distributed more evenly across his entire foot, especially when he cuts.Not a reason to avoid him, but could be a long term and possibly recurring issue with him.

 

[Avery]

This isn't a knock on Bradshaw. I don't think Bradshaw's "true" ability is anywhere near 4.8 yards per carry. If it was, he'd have received significantly more carries by now. Just my .02.

I think that's a bit of a silly statement. We've seen countless examples of guys who had "true" ability that high that weren't given more carries early on in their career. Heck, we need look no further than this very team with Tiki Barber, or their next door neighbor with Brian Westbrook (who averaged 5.1ypc and 4.8ypc in the first two seasons that he was finally given the load).I think Bradshaw's talent is being underrated in this thread. The only thing he's missing is opportunity. Bradshaw and Beanie are the next breakout RBs in this league, imho.

Agreed. Jacobs has in the past, and will continue to in the future, run too damned upright. Unless he can correct this (i.e. turn himself into a 5'8" bowling ball that plows through everything in his path) Bradshaw will get more and more carries. He's better out of the backfield, more elusive, and even a staid coach like Coughlin won't be able to ignore this.

I did read that he was working on running with lower pad level in camp, but part of the problem with being so tall is that even if he runs lower, his low is higher that most RBs low.

 

[netnalp]

This isn't a knock on Bradshaw. I don't think Bradshaw's "true" ability is anywhere near 4.8 yards per carry. If it was, he'd have received significantly more carries by now. Just my .02.

I think that's a bit of a silly statement. We've seen countless examples of guys who had "true" ability that high that weren't given more carries early on in their career. Heck, we need look no further than this very team with Tiki Barber, or their next door neighbor with Brian Westbrook (who averaged 5.1ypc and 4.8ypc in the first two seasons that he was finally given the load).I think Bradshaw's talent is being underrated in this thread. The only thing he's missing is opportunity. Bradshaw and Beanie are the next breakout RBs in this league, imho.

Agreed. Jacobs has in the past, and will continue to in the future, run too damned upright. Unless he can correct this (i.e. turn himself into a 5'8" bowling ball that plows through everything in his path) Bradshaw will get more and more carries. He's better out of the backfield, more elusive, and even a staid coach like Coughlin won't be able to ignore this.

I did read that he was working on running with lower pad level in camp, but part of the problem with being so tall is that even if he runs lower, his low is higher that most RBs low.

And with his size, most tacklers are targetting his legs.

 

[Sabertooth]

Now that we're into the preseason games Bradshaw started the other night, although he didn't see much work running. he was however productive in the passing game thanks to the 51 yard play. jacobs looked terrible, and nearly got his Qb decapitated. So the questions i have for giants followers is who emerges as the feature back there. Bradshaw is 24 years old and is in his 4th year, jacobs is 28 and hasn't really shown that he can stay healthy and be the longterm answer. But, is jacobs still the short term answer?

Thoughts please.

I think it's going to be close to a 50-50 split. AB will amass more yards, BJ will have more TD's. I'd probably want AB at this point but I'd read nothing into what they do in the preseason. They were playing behind a makeshift O-line Monday night with their top 4 TE's out.

I'm not so sure on the TDs. I think Bradshaw may prove to be more effective inside the 5. And we are probably only talking about 5 or 6 touchdowns total. So maybe Jacobs gets 4 to Bradshaw's 2 or something. I don't think the spread will be as big as some are predicting. I think Bradshaw catches a lot more passes. Like 20 more. And I think they both tote the rock about the same amount of times.

Wait, what?

I'm talking about goalline touchdowns only here. HTH

 

[baconisgood]

Now that we're into the preseason games Bradshaw started the other night, although he didn't see much work running. he was however productive in the passing game thanks to the 51 yard play. jacobs looked terrible, and nearly got his Qb decapitated. So the questions i have for giants followers is who emerges as the feature back there. Bradshaw is 24 years old and is in his 4th year, jacobs is 28 and hasn't really shown that he can stay healthy and be the longterm answer. But, is jacobs still the short term answer?

Thoughts please.

I think it's going to be close to a 50-50 split. AB will amass more yards, BJ will have more TD's. I'd probably want AB at this point but I'd read nothing into what they do in the preseason. They were playing behind a makeshift O-line Monday night with their top 4 TE's out.

I'm not so sure on the TDs. I think Bradshaw may prove to be more effective inside the 5. And we are probably only talking about 5 or 6 touchdowns total. So maybe Jacobs gets 4 to Bradshaw's 2 or something. I don't think the spread will be as big as some are predicting. I think Bradshaw catches a lot more passes. Like 20 more. And I think they both tote the rock about the same amount of times.

Wait, what?

I'm talking about goalline touchdowns only here. HTH

Last 3 years the Giants RBs had 8, 13 and 9 rushing TDs inside of the 5. Jacobs has 17 out of those 30.

 

[Sabertooth]

Last 3 years the Giants RBs had 8, 13 and 9 rushing TDs inside of the 5. Jacobs has 17 out of those 30.

Ok. Well bump 6 to 9 then. Maybe the split goes Jacobs 5 or 6 and Bradshaw 4 or 5. My point is that Jacobs isn't some Ladainian Tomlinson or Priest Holmes that is money at the goalline. He's just ok, and Bradshaw may actually be more effective this year. Plus I think Bradshaw makes up the difference with some longer scores. I think their touchdowns end up about the same.

 

[Exit 1]

For as big as he is, Jacobs runs like a #####. Also, because he is so big, he's always going to be more susceptible to injury. Big guys just don't last long at the RB position. The NYG running situation is a situation that's best left avoided, imo, and if you have to play one of them, try to do it in a flex spot and not as one of your top two RB's.

 

[Avery]

For as big as he is, Jacobs runs like a #####.

Horse cookies.He runs hard. He runs too tall at times making it easier for guys to chop at his knees, but he sure as hell runs hard.You're probably remembering Ron Dayne.

 

[RTB1]

For as big as he is, Jacobs runs like a #####.

Horse cookies.He runs hard. He runs too tall at times making it easier for guys to chop at his knees, but he sure as hell runs hard.You're probably remembering Ron Dayne.

Dayne should go on Dancing with the Stars, as much as he danced around in the Giants' backfield.