C.Williams VS. Lynch? (1 Viewer)

[Disposable Hero]

I did not watch either of these players in college and I haven't followed Williams in his 2 years in the league so I know very little about either player. In terms of football talent, not situation/ supporting cast etc., who is the better player? In terms of Fantasy Football they appear to be equal but I feel usually the more talented RB will prevail if they play to their potential barring injuries. I know Adrain Peterson is more talented than both but is he worth the risk to take stash away this year as he'll most likely be in a RBBC situation. The reason I ask is I have Williams, could trade him, and look at Lynch or maybe Peterson, needing a them to produce RB2 #'s. I also have D.williams, talent wise how does he stack up? Give me your opinion solely based of football talent.

 

[Gandalf]

I've had Lynch on my roster since college. He is the real deal. A good, shifty inside runner with size with good hands. And the rep from my friends at Cal were that he was a good leader on the football field. I like Caddy's ability, but he doesn't seem to be as much of an every down back. All told, based on talent alone, I'd rank Lynch over Caddy.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

I've had Lynch on my roster since college. He is the real deal. A good, shifty inside runner with size with good hands. And the rep from my friends at Cal were that he was a good leader on the football field. I like Caddy's ability, but he doesn't seem to be as much of an every down back. All told, based on talent alone, I'd rank Lynch over Caddy.

The NFL scouts and front offices would disagree with you.

 

[mulliganman]

What kind of league is it? If it is a redraft, you may want to take into consideration that Lynch has a very tough strength of schedule this year.

 

[sholditch]

When Caddy came into the league I was convinced he would become a top five back. After his rookie season I was much encouraged. Needless to say, last year was a

However, I don't think talent like his just disappears. I think last year rather than his rookie year was the aberration. If those are the two best options left, I'd probably take Caddy just because I have trouble trusting backs out of the Pac-10 in their rookie year. The Pac-10 is by far the weakest of the major conferences on defense and I think Lynch will have a lot of trouble adjusting to the speed of NFL defenses, and wouldn't be surprised to see him miss a game or two to wear and tear. However, these are all just Pac-10 prejudices and not particular to Lynch. He could be good enough to overcome all these things.

Usually Deuce and D-Will are available a round or two later so I'd just go with a stud wide and take one of them. Same risk/reward as with Caddy and Lynch.

 

[einstein2u]

What kind of league is it? If it is a redraft, you may want to take into consideration that Lynch has a very tough strength of schedule this year.

his schedule is brutal.

 

[BigJim®]

I've had Lynch on my roster since college. He is the real deal. A good, shifty inside runner with size with good hands. And the rep from my friends at Cal were that he was a good leader on the football field. I like Caddy's ability, but he doesn't seem to be as much of an every down back. All told, based on talent alone, I'd rank Lynch over Caddy.

The NFL scouts and front offices would disagree with you.

All of them do? As of today? Interesting.

 

[BLOX]

What does being from Cal have to do with anything?

From what I've seen from Lynch he looks like he has all the skills it takes to be an elite back in the NFL.

Cadillac had decent skills too, but in terms of where teams are now and where they are headed I prefer Lynch's abilities and his future much more than Caddy right now.

 

[Gandalf]

I've had Lynch on my roster since college. He is the real deal. A good, shifty inside runner with size with good hands. And the rep from my friends at Cal were that he was a good leader on the football field. I like Caddy's ability, but he doesn't seem to be as much of an every down back. All told, based on talent alone, I'd rank Lynch over Caddy.

The NFL scouts and front offices would disagree with you.

Please provide a link or some evidence to back up your claim.

 

[kensat30]

Lynch is a good RB and so is Caddy. They have different talents, but I think Lynch is entering the league in a better situation. You won't really see the real Caddy for another year or two and possibly not until Gruden leaves town as well. The guy got 30+ carries a game for his first three games in the league, but even then Caddy was not really being showcased. With Alstott there, and Pittman in the picture, and Gruden being the coach that he is, Caddy will never average 25 touches a game like other RBs can and do. Could be that injuries will hold him back for the rest of his career, but I think the system and other RBs on the roster are doing a much better job in clouding Caddy's potential. It really is unclear how much of an all-around game Caddy truly possesses right now at the NFL level.

Lynch on the other hand should step into the spotlight right away and you will see him in all facets of his game. Workhorse, short yardage, passing situations, etc. I don't expect him to do especially well this season, because I have little faith in JP Losman, but you will see flashes of his abilities. I think Lynch will be regarded as the better RB going into 2008 because of this, but opinions may shift by the time 2009 comes around if changes are made in Tampa next offseason.

 

[NorrisB]

When Caddy came into the league I was convinced he would become a top five back. After his rookie season I was much encouraged. Needless to say, last year was a However, I don't think talent like his just disappears. I think last year rather than his rookie year was the aberration. If those are the two best options left, I'd probably take Caddy just because I have trouble trusting backs out of the Pac-10 in their rookie year. The Pac-10 is by far the weakest of the major conferences on defense and I think Lynch will have a lot of trouble adjusting to the speed of NFL defenses, and wouldn't be surprised to see him miss a game or two to wear and tear. However, these are all just Pac-10 prejudices and not particular to Lynch. He could be good enough to overcome all these things.Usually Deuce and D-Will are available a round or two later so I'd just go with a stud wide and take one of them. Same risk/reward as with Caddy and Lynch.

Lynch did fine against USC, you know, that team with the best defense in the country, the team that shut down Darren McFadden and Mike Hart,

 

[sholditch]

When Caddy came into the league I was convinced he would become a top five back. After his rookie season I was much encouraged. Needless to say, last year was a However, I don't think talent like his just disappears. I think last year rather than his rookie year was the aberration. If those are the two best options left, I'd probably take Caddy just because I have trouble trusting backs out of the Pac-10 in their rookie year. The Pac-10 is by far the weakest of the major conferences on defense and I think Lynch will have a lot of trouble adjusting to the speed of NFL defenses, and wouldn't be surprised to see him miss a game or two to wear and tear. However, these are all just Pac-10 prejudices and not particular to Lynch. He could be good enough to overcome all these things.Usually Deuce and D-Will are available a round or two later so I'd just go with a stud wide and take one of them. Same risk/reward as with Caddy and Lynch.

Lynch did fine against USC, you know, that team with the best defense in the country, the team that shut down Darren McFadden and Mike Hart,

McFadden was hurt that game and if you honestly beleive that USC has the best defense in the country then there's nothing I can do for you. That has to be one of the most homeriffic statements I've ever heard, and I live in Alabama, where a spring scrimmage brings 92,000+. Seriously, USC, best defense in the country?

 

[Gottabesweet]

Interesting post. I have Caddy and don't know about him anymore.

 

[sholditch]

What does being from Cal have to do with anything?

It basically means he probably went his entire college career without having to against a really tough defense. Here are some backs from the Pac-10 who have had some success in the NFL in recent years: Corey Dillon (Washington), Steven Jackson (Oregon State), Reggie Bush (USC), Maurice Jones-Drew (UCLA). Bush did well his rookie season but if you remember things looked pretty rocky for the first half of the season, and at times he seemed lost. And he was the most highly-touted running back in recent memory.

Sjax was in a timeshare his first year, but he looked lost at times too, and struggled his first full year as a starter just barely breaking 1,000 yards.

Dillon's rookie year was so long ago it's kind of hard to compare to today, but he did well despite not starting, averaged 4.8.

Then you have MJD who absolutely killed his rookie season.

So it might not mean anything, it might mean that a back's running style determines how quickly they adapt, I don't know.

But here are some blue-chippers from the SEC, and their rookie seasons:

Addai (LSU), considered an average back in the SEC, topped 1,000 yards in his rookie season despite being in a time share, and scored 7 times

SA (Bama) averaged almost 5 ypc his rookie season despite getting only 64 attempts. The next season he took over and topped 1,300 yards and had 14 Tds

Ronnie Brown (Aaaaaaaaaauuuuuubuuuurrrrrrrrrrrnnnnnnnnn!) almost topped 1,000 playing behind Ricky Williams and managed a respectable 4.4 ypc, but scored only 3 times. His following year I probably don't need to point out was somewhat of a disappointment.

Caddy (Aaaaaaaaaauuuuuubuuuurrrrrrrrrrrnnnnnnnnn!) topped 1100 despite missing two games with injury and being severely limited in others. In fairness, he was overused in the first few games, averaging something nuts like 27 cpg as a rook. Not smart.

Travis Henry (Tennessee) absolutely sucked his rookie season

Jamal Lewis (Tennessee) topped 1300 and 300 carries his rookie season

Deuce McAl (Ole Miss) only got 16 attempts his rook season but topped 13000 as a soph, and certainly with that few rook carries his soph year was really his first in the league

Fred Taylor (Florida) broke 1200 and had 14 Tds his rookie year.

There could be a pattern and it could be totally randar, but it would make sense that backs who play in the toughest defensive conference in college football (if anyone wants to argue this, just look up the DROY and DROY runner up from last year) would be more NFL-ready than backs that come from a much weaker conference on defense (Pac-10).

Now, there are no good SEC backs in this draft with the possible exception of Irons who has no shot at starting this year or next, so this doesn't matter this year, but last year, if you were looking for an impact rookie of the big 4 (Bush, D-Will, Maroney, and Addai) Addai was the best bet and he wasn't even considered a top talent in the conference. Of course this is not a causal relationship and certainly being in one of the more explosive offenses in the NFL didn't hurt, but NO was not far behind Indy in offense last year and it didn't get Bush past 1,000 rushing, and Bush was practically deemed the second coming of Gale Sayers in the offseason.

All this to say that I could easily see a subpar year from Lynch, and a great second year. Since Caddy should be primed for a bounce back with O-line additions and QB stability/improvement, I think he's the better bet.

 

[NorrisB]

Maurice Jones Drew

Steven Jackson

Reggie Bush

Are P10 quit hating on P10

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

Travis Henry (Tennessee) absolutely sucked his rookie season

Oh?

 

[sholditch]

Maurice Jones DrewSteven JacksonReggie Bush Are P10 quit hating on P10

Quit drinking martinis and actually read a post before you respond to it. I mentioned all of those guys. And I'm not saying it's a pattern or anything, just crunching some numbers.