Could Travis Henry be a top 6 pick? (1 Viewer)

[Tau837]

You were saying?

--Is only 8 months older than LT with less wear. You dropping LT as well because he's 28?First off, let's hold off on the LT comparisons. I'm merely noting that expecting a 29 year old to have his career year doesn't compute, especially when nothing in his history supports it.

--Is that bad? Sported a 4.5 YPC last year in Tenn. It won't go down this year.

Maybe 4.1 YPC isn't bad, it's average. Sort of like Henry's entire career.

--Aside from a broken leg once in 2004, has only missed one other game in his entire career due to injury (torn rib cartilage in last game of 2003). 1 game missed in 3 yrs as a starter.

And in 2004 when he missed a bunch of games with ankle/foot issues? Oh, that's right, he was the starter until another RB took it from him.

--He won't need to catch much.

Good receiving keeps a RB relevant in clear cut passing situations.

So? LT had a young QB last year. Gore had a young QB last year. You think teams didn't know Gore was gonna run? You think they didn't try to make Alex Smith beat them?

Good point. Some RB excel regardless. Henry didn't when JP Losman and Alex VanPelt were QB, but Willis McGahee did.

Has a total of 4 fumbles LOST in his last 2 yrs as a starter (3 in 2003 and 1 in 2006)

Corrected. In reality, he has fumbled 10 times in his last two seasons as a starter. And 11 times the year before that. Definitely not a problem.

Look, I agree that Henry is a worth first round pick, but to ignore his history is foolish. The collective euphoria in this thread had to be tempered.

FYI, Henry never played with Losman (well, Losman did have 5 passing attempts in 2004 if you want to count that). As for Van Pelt, are you really citing 2001 here? Because that is the only year Van Pelt had more than 12 attempts while Henry was on the team. Henry was a rookie and it's true he wasn't very good, though he did lead Buffalo in rushing. I'm just not sure why that would be relevant though, since his two very good years in Buffalo plus his performance last year in Tennessee are all more recent.

 

[PrinceofDarkness]

You were saying?

--Is only 8 months older than LT with less wear. You dropping LT as well because he's 28?First off, let's hold off on the LT comparisons. I'm merely noting that expecting a 29 year old to have his career year doesn't compute, especially when nothing in his history supports it.

--Is that bad? Sported a 4.5 YPC last year in Tenn. It won't go down this year.

Maybe 4.1 YPC isn't bad, it's average. Sort of like Henry's entire career.

--Aside from a broken leg once in 2004, has only missed one other game in his entire career due to injury (torn rib cartilage in last game of 2003). 1 game missed in 3 yrs as a starter.

And in 2004 when he missed a bunch of games with ankle/foot issues? Oh, that's right, he was the starter until another RB took it from him.

--He won't need to catch much.

Good receiving keeps a RB relevant in clear cut passing situations.

So? LT had a young QB last year. Gore had a young QB last year. You think teams didn't know Gore was gonna run? You think they didn't try to make Alex Smith beat them?

Good point. Some RB excel regardless. Henry didn't when JP Losman and Alex VanPelt were QB, but Willis McGahee did.

Has a total of 4 fumbles LOST in his last 2 yrs as a starter (3 in 2003 and 1 in 2006)

Corrected. In reality, he has fumbled 10 times in his last two seasons as a starter. And 11 times the year before that. Definitely not a problem.

Look, I agree that Henry is a worth first round pick, but to ignore his history is foolish. The collective euphoria in this thread had to be tempered.

FYI, Henry never played with Losman (well, Losman did have 5 passing attempts in 2004 if you want to count that). As for Van Pelt, are you really citing 2001 here? Because that is the only year Van Pelt had more than 12 attempts while Henry was on the team. Henry was a rookie and it's true he wasn't very good, though he did lead Buffalo in rushing. I'm just not sure why that would be relevant though, since his two very good years in Buffalo plus his performance last year in Tennessee are all more recent.

You are correct.The name I wanted was Kelly Holcomb, not Alex Van Pelt. On top of that, Bledsoe was the starter that entire 2004 season.

I guess my point is nothing about Henry's history screams "You can stack the line against me and I will still be a stud."

In fact, let's just forget that I mentioned Cutler is a young QB. He will be pretty good this season.

 

[SSOG]

Not sure what makes everyone think Shanahan is going to just start Henry all year long, a guy that has major issues holding onto the football. I wouldn't touch him in the first. Could he do well enough to earn it? Yea. Will i risk it, heck no.

Ummm... because they paid him $12 million dollars in the offseason? Because they paid him about twice as much money per year, on average, as Mike Anderson was scheduled to make when they cut him?

Look, im not saying he wont do well this year until he gets pulled, but #4 is CRAZY "i own Henry" talk. Sorry it is.

Why? Because there are so many teams better running the football than Denver?During Shanahan's tenure, there have been 9 seasons where one RB has been the workhorse. During those seasons, the RBs finished 14th (Droughns in 12 games), 5th, 4th, 4th, 14th (Gary in 12 games), 1st, 2nd, 2nd, and 12th (Davis as a rookie, in 14 games). In addition to that, Mike Anderson finished 10th in 2005 while heavily splitting carries. At no point has a workhorse played the entire season and finished lower than 5th. At no point would Denver's featured back have been a "bust" if he was drafted in the 1st round. That's not just studly, that's CONSISTENTLY study. What, is Travis Henry less talented than Reuben Droughns, Mike Anderson, and Olandis Gary all of a sudden? Are you projecting that he's only going to play 10 games? Do you assign no importance to the fact that when Mike Anderson or Reuben Droughns wanted to make $2 million a season, they got cut or traded, while Shanahan had no qualms about paying $12 million guaranteed? There have been TWO runningbacks in Shanahan's history who have asked for big money and been with the Denver Broncos the next season- Terrell Davis, and now Travis Henry.

Oh, wait, I forgot... the Broncos are going to demote him to the 3rd string because he's a fumbler. Because they totally did no research on him before offering him $12 million, and so it'll come as a complete surprise when they learn that he averaged a whopping 5 fumbles per season in his last two years as a starter.

You were saying?

--Is only 8 months older than LT with less wear. You dropping LT as well because he's 28?First off, let's hold off on the LT comparisons. I'm merely noting that expecting a 29 year old to have his career year doesn't compute, especially when nothing in his history supports it.

Nothing in history supports it? The Denver Broncos made Olandis Gary a top-10 RB, and Gary was so awful he couldn't even catch on as the #3 RB for the Detroit Lions. The Denver Broncos made Reuben Droughns a top-10 RB, and Droughns has a career 3.9 yards per carry (even after averaging 4.5 in Denver). The Denver Broncos very nearly became the first team in 20 years with a pair of thousand yard rushers... despite featuring two RBs who are both currently NFL Backups. Nothing supports Travis Henry having a career year when he joins what's perhaps the best rushing system in NFL history? Are you sure you don't want to rethink that statement a little bit?

 

[One]

FWIW ...I'm most likely taking Henry at 1.8

I will then pray that MJD makes it back to me at 2.20

 

[The Man with the Plan]

I don't know that Denver's offense is good enough for Travis Henry to be in the top 5. He should still be a solid pick in the late first round. People expecting the glory days of (TD, Portis and 2000 Mike Anderson) are going to be disappointed.

 

[PrinceofDarkness]

--Is only 8 months older than LT with less wear. You dropping LT as well because he's 28?

First off, let's hold off on the LT comparisons. I'm merely noting that expecting a 29 year old to have his career year doesn't compute, especially when nothing in his history supports it.

Nothing in history supports it? The Denver Broncos made Olandis Gary a top-10 RB, and Gary was so awful he couldn't even catch on as the #3 RB for the Detroit Lions. The Denver Broncos made Reuben Droughns a top-10 RB, and Droughns has a career 3.9 yards per carry (even after averaging 4.5 in Denver). The Denver Broncos very nearly became the first team in 20 years with a pair of thousand yard rushers... despite featuring two RBs who are both currently NFL Backups. Nothing supports Travis Henry having a career year when he joins what's perhaps the best rushing system in NFL history? Are you sure you don't want to rethink that statement a little bit?

What did you say about Travis Henry's history above?RE: Olandis Gary. I'd be careful about comparing the 24 year old Olandis Gary of 1999 (1,318 total yards, 4.2 YRC, and 7 TDs - not exactly killer totals) to the 31 yeard old Olandis Gary of 2006 after the ACL tear. Maybe there was a little more than the difference in systems that caused him to get cut from the Lions. Oh, and he wasn't a top 10 back that year - he was #14.

RE: Ruben Droughns. Once again, he was never a top 10 back. He was #14 in 2004 with 1,481 total yards and 8 TDs.

Year NFL Rushing Rank (Yards) Top RB Fantasy Rank2002 5 4 (Portis)2003 2 5 (Portis)2004 4 14 (Droughns)2005 2 10 (Anderson)2006 8 31 (Bell)Without elite talent, Denver's rushing success doesn't necessarily correlate with top 10 RBs. My arguments are that Henry is not an elite RB and that Denver's offense (17th in the league in scoring in 2006) isn't a scoring juggernaught that ensures large TD totals.Bottom ine: Caveat emptor on Travis Henry with a top 6 pick.

 

[Chaka]

--Is only 8 months older than LT with less wear. You dropping LT as well because he's 28?

First off, let's hold off on the LT comparisons. I'm merely noting that expecting a 29 year old to have his career year doesn't compute, especially when nothing in his history supports it.

Nothing in history supports it? The Denver Broncos made Olandis Gary a top-10 RB, and Gary was so awful he couldn't even catch on as the #3 RB for the Detroit Lions. The Denver Broncos made Reuben Droughns a top-10 RB, and Droughns has a career 3.9 yards per carry (even after averaging 4.5 in Denver). The Denver Broncos very nearly became the first team in 20 years with a pair of thousand yard rushers... despite featuring two RBs who are both currently NFL Backups. Nothing supports Travis Henry having a career year when he joins what's perhaps the best rushing system in NFL history? Are you sure you don't want to rethink that statement a little bit?

What did you say about Travis Henry's history above?RE: Olandis Gary. I'd be careful about comparing the 24 year old Olandis Gary of 1999 (1,318 total yards, 4.2 YRC, and 7 TDs - not exactly killer totals) to the 31 yeard old Olandis Gary of 2006 after the ACL tear. Maybe there was a little more than the difference in systems that caused him to get cut from the Lions. Oh, and he wasn't a top 10 back that year - he was #14.

RE: Ruben Droughns. Once again, he was never a top 10 back. He was #14 in 2004 with 1,481 total yards and 8 TDs.

Year NFL Rushing Rank (Yards) Top RB Fantasy Rank2002 5 4 (Portis)2003 2 5 (Portis)2004 4 14 (Droughns)2005 2 10 (Anderson)2006 8 31 (Bell)Without elite talent, Denver's rushing success doesn't necessarily correlate with top 10 RBs. My arguments are that Henry is not an elite RB and that Denver's offense (17th in the league in scoring in 2006) isn't a scoring juggernaught that ensures large TD totals.Bottom ine: Caveat emptor on Travis Henry with a top 6 pick.

Droughns put up that #14 ranking on 307 touches. IIRC Quentin Griffin was the starter for the first few games and Tatum Bell saw significant time.

 

[SSOG]

--Is only 8 months older than LT with less wear. You dropping LT as well because he's 28?

First off, let's hold off on the LT comparisons. I'm merely noting that expecting a 29 year old to have his career year doesn't compute, especially when nothing in his history supports it.

Nothing in history supports it? The Denver Broncos made Olandis Gary a top-10 RB, and Gary was so awful he couldn't even catch on as the #3 RB for the Detroit Lions. The Denver Broncos made Reuben Droughns a top-10 RB, and Droughns has a career 3.9 yards per carry (even after averaging 4.5 in Denver). The Denver Broncos very nearly became the first team in 20 years with a pair of thousand yard rushers... despite featuring two RBs who are both currently NFL Backups. Nothing supports Travis Henry having a career year when he joins what's perhaps the best rushing system in NFL history? Are you sure you don't want to rethink that statement a little bit?

What did you say about Travis Henry's history above?RE: Olandis Gary. I'd be careful about comparing the 24 year old Olandis Gary of 1999 (1,318 total yards, 4.2 YRC, and 7 TDs - not exactly killer totals) to the 31 yeard old Olandis Gary of 2006 after the ACL tear. Maybe there was a little more than the difference in systems that caused him to get cut from the Lions. Oh, and he wasn't a top 10 back that year - he was #14.

What? Olandis Gary went to the Lions in 2003, in his 5th season in the league and just 4 years removed from his huge rookie performance. And he couldn't beat out Shawn Bryson for the job- Shawn Bryson, who set a career high in rushing yards while competing against Gary... with 606. Trust me, Olandis Gary just wasn't that good. Even if you think Henry is mediocre, mediocre is a heck of a lot better than Olandis Gary.Also, Olandis Gary was #14... in 12 games (TD played the first 4). If he had played a full 16 games at that level, he would have scored 232 fantasy points, which would have ranked him 5th.

RE: Ruben Droughns. Once again, he was never a top 10 back. He was #14 in 2004 with 1,481 total yards and 8 TDs.

Reuben Droughns didn't get the start until game #5, either. Pro-rate his numbers over a 16-game season (since we're talking about what a Denver RB could do if he started for the full year) and he would have finished as RB#7.That means, if you look at the pro-rated totals (because, again, we're talking about what an RB could do in a full 16 games as the starter), in the seasons Denver's RB has been a workhorse, he has finished 7th, 5th, 4th, 4th, 5th, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, and 7th.

Let me repeat that. When Denver has had a workhorse RB, that RB has been 7th, 5th, 4th, 4th, 5th, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, and 7th. Travis Henry doesn't have to be good- Olandis Gary wasn't good, and he finished 5th. Mike Anderson wasn't that great, and he finished 5th (and then 10th while splitting time and missing a game). Reuben Droughns wasn't that good and he finished 7th. *NEVER* has Mike Shanahan coached a workhorse runningback who, over the course of a 16-game season, was on pace to finish worse than 7th. *EVER*. Nine instances, no finishes lower than 7th. Not only does the history of stud production hold value, but the CONSISTENCY holds value- much like Peyton Manning was the consensus #1 overall QB long before he was ever the ACTUAL #1 overall QB because of his consistency, or like Tomlinson was the consensus #1 overall RB long before he was the ACTUAL #1 overall RB.

 

[Obie Wan]

--Is only 8 months older than LT with less wear. You dropping LT as well because he's 28?

First off, let's hold off on the LT comparisons. I'm merely noting that expecting a 29 year old to have his career year doesn't compute, especially when nothing in his history supports it.

Nothing in history supports it? The Denver Broncos made Olandis Gary a top-10 RB, and Gary was so awful he couldn't even catch on as the #3 RB for the Detroit Lions. The Denver Broncos made Reuben Droughns a top-10 RB, and Droughns has a career 3.9 yards per carry (even after averaging 4.5 in Denver). The Denver Broncos very nearly became the first team in 20 years with a pair of thousand yard rushers... despite featuring two RBs who are both currently NFL Backups. Nothing supports Travis Henry having a career year when he joins what's perhaps the best rushing system in NFL history? Are you sure you don't want to rethink that statement a little bit?

What did you say about Travis Henry's history above?RE: Olandis Gary. I'd be careful about comparing the 24 year old Olandis Gary of 1999 (1,318 total yards, 4.2 YRC, and 7 TDs - not exactly killer totals) to the 31 yeard old Olandis Gary of 2006 after the ACL tear. Maybe there was a little more than the difference in systems that caused him to get cut from the Lions. Oh, and he wasn't a top 10 back that year - he was #14.

What? Olandis Gary went to the Lions in 2003, in his 5th season in the league and just 4 years removed from his huge rookie performance. And he couldn't beat out Shawn Bryson for the job- Shawn Bryson, who set a career high in rushing yards while competing against Gary... with 606. Trust me, Olandis Gary just wasn't that good. Even if you think Henry is mediocre, mediocre is a heck of a lot better than Olandis Gary.Also, Olandis Gary was #14... in 12 games (TD played the first 4). If he had played a full 16 games at that level, he would have scored 232 fantasy points, which would have ranked him 5th.

RE: Ruben Droughns. Once again, he was never a top 10 back. He was #14 in 2004 with 1,481 total yards and 8 TDs.

Reuben Droughns didn't get the start until game #5, either. Pro-rate his numbers over a 16-game season (since we're talking about what a Denver RB could do if he started for the full year) and he would have finished as RB#7.That means, if you look at the pro-rated totals (because, again, we're talking about what an RB could do in a full 16 games as the starter), in the seasons Denver's RB has been a workhorse, he has finished 7th, 5th, 4th, 4th, 5th, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, and 7th.

Let me repeat that. When Denver has had a workhorse RB, that RB has been 7th, 5th, 4th, 4th, 5th, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, and 7th. Travis Henry doesn't have to be good- Olandis Gary wasn't good, and he finished 5th. Mike Anderson wasn't that great, and he finished 5th (and then 10th while splitting time and missing a game). Reuben Droughns wasn't that good and he finished 7th. *NEVER* has Mike Shanahan coached a workhorse runningback who, over the course of a 16-game season, was on pace to finish worse than 7th. *EVER*. Nine instances, no finishes lower than 7th. Not only does the history of stud production hold value, but the CONSISTENCY holds value- much like Peyton Manning was the consensus #1 overall QB long before he was ever the ACTUAL #1 overall QB because of his consistency, or like Tomlinson was the consensus #1 overall RB long before he was the ACTUAL #1 overall RB.

Assuming Henry performs, how high should he go in PRR?Who deserves to be picked ahead of him?

LT, SJax ?

all the rest have questions

 

[SSOG]

Assuming Henry performs, how high should he go in PRR?Who deserves to be picked ahead of him? LT, SJax ?all the rest have questions

LT/SJax/Gore should all be solidly ahead of Henry, and most people will add LJ, too. After that, there's a huge nebulous tier of RBs- Henry, Addai, Westbrook, Rudi Johnson, Fast Willie Parker, Laurence Maroney, and Reggie Bush (PPR only). Some people might even include Shaun Alexander, Clinton Portis, or Maurice Jones-Drew, but they're a tier down, in my mind. In short, I think Henry should be ranked anywhere between RB4 and RB11. He could fall anywhere at all in that scale and I don't think it'd make much difference, given how tightly packed the tier is.

 

[Chaka]

--Is only 8 months older than LT with less wear. You dropping LT as well because he's 28?

First off, let's hold off on the LT comparisons. I'm merely noting that expecting a 29 year old to have his career year doesn't compute, especially when nothing in his history supports it.

Nothing in history supports it? The Denver Broncos made Olandis Gary a top-10 RB, and Gary was so awful he couldn't even catch on as the #3 RB for the Detroit Lions. The Denver Broncos made Reuben Droughns a top-10 RB, and Droughns has a career 3.9 yards per carry (even after averaging 4.5 in Denver). The Denver Broncos very nearly became the first team in 20 years with a pair of thousand yard rushers... despite featuring two RBs who are both currently NFL Backups. Nothing supports Travis Henry having a career year when he joins what's perhaps the best rushing system in NFL history? Are you sure you don't want to rethink that statement a little bit?

What did you say about Travis Henry's history above?RE: Olandis Gary. I'd be careful about comparing the 24 year old Olandis Gary of 1999 (1,318 total yards, 4.2 YRC, and 7 TDs - not exactly killer totals) to the 31 yeard old Olandis Gary of 2006 after the ACL tear. Maybe there was a little more than the difference in systems that caused him to get cut from the Lions. Oh, and he wasn't a top 10 back that year - he was #14.

What? Olandis Gary went to the Lions in 2003, in his 5th season in the league and just 4 years removed from his huge rookie performance. And he couldn't beat out Shawn Bryson for the job- Shawn Bryson, who set a career high in rushing yards while competing against Gary... with 606. Trust me, Olandis Gary just wasn't that good. Even if you think Henry is mediocre, mediocre is a heck of a lot better than Olandis Gary.Also, Olandis Gary was #14... in 12 games (TD played the first 4). If he had played a full 16 games at that level, he would have scored 232 fantasy points, which would have ranked him 5th.

RE: Ruben Droughns. Once again, he was never a top 10 back. He was #14 in 2004 with 1,481 total yards and 8 TDs.

Reuben Droughns didn't get the start until game #5, either. Pro-rate his numbers over a 16-game season (since we're talking about what a Denver RB could do if he started for the full year) and he would have finished as RB#7.That means, if you look at the pro-rated totals (because, again, we're talking about what an RB could do in a full 16 games as the starter), in the seasons Denver's RB has been a workhorse, he has finished 7th, 5th, 4th, 4th, 5th, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, and 7th.

Let me repeat that. When Denver has had a workhorse RB, that RB has been 7th, 5th, 4th, 4th, 5th, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, and 7th. Travis Henry doesn't have to be good- Olandis Gary wasn't good, and he finished 5th. Mike Anderson wasn't that great, and he finished 5th (and then 10th while splitting time and missing a game). Reuben Droughns wasn't that good and he finished 7th. *NEVER* has Mike Shanahan coached a workhorse runningback who, over the course of a 16-game season, was on pace to finish worse than 7th. *EVER*. Nine instances, no finishes lower than 7th. Not only does the history of stud production hold value, but the CONSISTENCY holds value- much like Peyton Manning was the consensus #1 overall QB long before he was ever the ACTUAL #1 overall QB because of his consistency, or like Tomlinson was the consensus #1 overall RB long before he was the ACTUAL #1 overall RB.

I'll buy that for a dollar.

 

[Chaka]

Assuming Henry performs, how high should he go in PRR?Who deserves to be picked ahead of him? LT, SJax ?all the rest have questions

LT/SJax/Gore should all be solidly ahead of Henry, and most people will add LJ, too. After that, there's a huge nebulous tier of RBs- Henry, Addai, Westbrook, Rudi Johnson, Fast Willie Parker, Laurence Maroney, and Reggie Bush (PPR only). Some people might even include Shaun Alexander, Clinton Portis, or Maurice Jones-Drew, but they're a tier down, in my mind. In short, I think Henry should be ranked anywhere between RB4 and RB11. He could fall anywhere at all in that scale and I don't think it'd make much difference, given how tightly packed the tier is.

I have him rated #2 on my RB board. The guy is nails. He played part of the season with a broken fibula back in Buffalo. The only way he will pull himself out of the lineup is if he is in jail. I don't feel as comfortable with Gore or SJax in that regard.

 

[Tau837]

That means, if you look at the pro-rated totals (because, again, we're talking about what an RB could do in a full 16 games as the starter), in the seasons Denver's RB has been a workhorse, he has finished 7th, 5th, 4th, 4th, 5th, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, and 7th.Let me repeat that. When Denver has had a workhorse RB, that RB has been 7th, 5th, 4th, 4th, 5th, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, and 7th. Travis Henry doesn't have to be good- Olandis Gary wasn't good, and he finished 5th. Mike Anderson wasn't that great, and he finished 5th (and then 10th while splitting time and missing a game). Reuben Droughns wasn't that good and he finished 7th. *NEVER* has Mike Shanahan coached a workhorse runningback who, over the course of a 16-game season, was on pace to finish worse than 7th. *EVER*. Nine instances, no finishes lower than 7th. Not only does the history of stud production hold value, but the CONSISTENCY holds value- much like Peyton Manning was the consensus #1 overall QB long before he was ever the ACTUAL #1 overall QB because of his consistency, or like Tomlinson was the consensus #1 overall RB long before he was the ACTUAL #1 overall RB.

Good info here.

 

[Judge Smails]

Pretty confident it will be LT and SJax 1-2. I'm sitting at 4. Guy at 3 will take LJ/Gore. I'm left with the one remaining or I can go in a different direction. As I said before it will be really, really tough for me to take LJ this year (had him the last 2 years, despise Herm's offense). Gore may slip due to the hand injury.

I'm not in a PPR league. So I'm looking for the best back who A) doesn't split carries, and B) scores a lot of touchdowns.

Trading down probably not an option - as people realize a bunch of these backs are bunched together.

Henry is definitely an option for me at 4

 

[LawFitz]

Pretty confident it will be LT and SJax 1-2. I'm sitting at 4. Guy at 3 will take LJ/Gore. I'm left with the one remaining or I can go in a different direction. As I said before it will be really, really tough for me to take LJ this year (had him the last 2 years, despise Herm's offense). Gore may slip due to the hand injury. I'm not in a PPR league. So I'm looking for the best back who A) doesn't split carries, and B) scores a lot of touchdowns. Trading down probably not an option - as people realize a bunch of these backs are bunched together. Henry is definitely an option for me at 4

I will be taking Henry at 4 for sure. His running style is absolutely perfect for the Denver ZBS. My only fear is that our draft is three weeks away still. Way too much time for the #3 guy to get a lil high on some T. Henry brownies as well. I think Henry will finish as the #2 RB in fantasy football by the end of the year.

 

[j3r3m3y]

Nothing in history supports it? The Denver Broncos made Olandis Gary a top-10 RB, and Gary was so awful he couldn't even catch on as the #3 RB for the Detroit Lions. The Denver Broncos made Reuben Droughns a top-10 RB, and Droughns has a career 3.9 yards per carry (even after averaging 4.5 in Denver). The Denver Broncos very nearly became the first team in 20 years with a pair of thousand yard rushers... despite featuring two RBs who are both currently NFL Backups. Nothing supports Travis Henry having a career year when he joins what's perhaps the best rushing system in NFL history? Are you sure you don't want to rethink that statement a little bit?

When SSOG predicts the RB situation in Denver, I usually disagree. But this I can not agree with more. Taking Henry at 5 or 6 is swinging for the fences, but if you connect it could be out of the stadium.

 

[SSOG]

More food for thought.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_6526379

Fantasy-league geeks — OK, fellow fantasy-league geeks — take note: Mike Shanahan, who knows a little about tailbacks, expects Travis Henry to be among the NFL's best this season.

Henry, who'll turn 29 in October, appears headed for a career year after signing with the Broncos as a free agent. His career highs in rushing and touchdowns came in 2002, when he ground out 1,438 yards and 13 TDs. To hear Shanahan tell it, those numbers are going down this year.

So, Shanahan was asked, might Henry go for 1,500 yards?

"Definitely," Shanahan said. "Fifteen hundred or 1,600. That's a hundred yards a game. He's capable of doing that."

The Broncos need that kind of production from Henry, and they need him to score touchdowns, too. One of the team's most troubling stats from last season was this: No Broncos tailback recorded a touchdown run of longer than 9 yards.

Mike Bell led the team with eight touchdown runs. Of those eight, five were from 1 yard out, one from 2 and two others from 3. Tatum Bell, meanwhile, scored from 2 and 9 yards out, a far cry from 2005, when he had eight touchdown runs, including three from 34, 55 and 67 yards.

Enter Henry, who'll give the Broncos a physical dimension to their running game that has been lacking since Mike Anderson left Denver. He's listed at 215 pounds in the Broncos' media guide, but don't kid yourself. Shanahan says Henry is closer to 230, a weight that should enable him to handle a workload of 20-25 carries a game.

Granted, Shanny didn't say that he WOULD go for 1500-1600, just that he COULD. I'm more focusing on the "no TD run longer than 9 yards" thing, which seems like a bit of an aberration, and indicates it's very likely that Denver's rushing TD totals are going to go up a significant amount this season.

 

[j3r3m3y]

More food for thought.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_6526379

Fantasy-league geeks — OK, fellow fantasy-league geeks — take note: Mike Shanahan, who knows a little about tailbacks, expects Travis Henry to be among the NFL's best this season.

Henry, who'll turn 29 in October, appears headed for a career year after signing with the Broncos as a free agent. His career highs in rushing and touchdowns came in 2002, when he ground out 1,438 yards and 13 TDs. To hear Shanahan tell it, those numbers are going down this year.

So, Shanahan was asked, might Henry go for 1,500 yards?

"Definitely," Shanahan said. "Fifteen hundred or 1,600. That's a hundred yards a game. He's capable of doing that."

The Broncos need that kind of production from Henry, and they need him to score touchdowns, too. One of the team's most troubling stats from last season was this: No Broncos tailback recorded a touchdown run of longer than 9 yards.

Mike Bell led the team with eight touchdown runs. Of those eight, five were from 1 yard out, one from 2 and two others from 3. Tatum Bell, meanwhile, scored from 2 and 9 yards out, a far cry from 2005, when he had eight touchdown runs, including three from 34, 55 and 67 yards.

Enter Henry, who'll give the Broncos a physical dimension to their running game that has been lacking since Mike Anderson left Denver. He's listed at 215 pounds in the Broncos' media guide, but don't kid yourself. Shanahan says Henry is closer to 230, a weight that should enable him to handle a workload of 20-25 carries a game.

Granted, Shanny didn't say that he WOULD go for 1500-1600, just that he COULD. I'm more focusing on the "no TD run longer than 9 yards" thing, which seems like a bit of an aberration, and indicates it's very likely that Denver's rushing TD totals are going to go up a significant amount this season.

Credit where credit is due.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

Wow, I'm glad I already got him in my redraft (He was picked 2.3. I had 2.4 and had to trade for him.) based on all of these posts. I hope we aren't jinxing him...

2) MJD

I'll be suprised if he is top 12... Taylor is still the #1 RB there...

MJD was #8 RB last season. Fred Taylor was #20.MJD also only played from week 3 onward. (Weeks 1 and 2 he had 2 carries). If you take his average score from weeks 3-16 and give him that for games 1 and 2, he becomes #6 RB last season behind LT/LJ/SJax/Westbrook/Gore. (Yes this is a PPR league)I think he can only go up from here. Give him a few more touches per game, over 16 weeks, compared to last season, and he has the talent to crack top 3 EASY.

no wonder this guy remains anonymous. Much like Norwood MJD broke lots of HUGE runs on 3rd down (when coverages were in more oftehn than not) Now they coudl spring him again a lot this year, but ironically the earlier he starts, his FF #'s might go down, as he'd wear down and have to run against run defenses keying on him, instead of behind safteies running deep on draws.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

More food for thought.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_6526379

Fantasy-league geeks — OK, fellow fantasy-league geeks — take note: Mike Shanahan, who knows a little about tailbacks, expects Travis Henry to be among the NFL's best this season.

Henry, who'll turn 29 in October, appears headed for a career year after signing with the Broncos as a free agent. His career highs in rushing and touchdowns came in 2002, when he ground out 1,438 yards and 13 TDs. To hear Shanahan tell it, those numbers are going down this year.

So, Shanahan was asked, might Henry go for 1,500 yards?

"Definitely," Shanahan said. "Fifteen hundred or 1,600. That's a hundred yards a game. He's capable of doing that."

The Broncos need that kind of production from Henry, and they need him to score touchdowns, too. One of the team's most troubling stats from last season was this: No Broncos tailback recorded a touchdown run of longer than 9 yards.

Mike Bell led the team with eight touchdown runs. Of those eight, five were from 1 yard out, one from 2 and two others from 3. Tatum Bell, meanwhile, scored from 2 and 9 yards out, a far cry from 2005, when he had eight touchdown runs, including three from 34, 55 and 67 yards.

Enter Henry, who'll give the Broncos a physical dimension to their running game that has been lacking since Mike Anderson left Denver. He's listed at 215 pounds in the Broncos' media guide, but don't kid yourself. Shanahan says Henry is closer to 230, a weight that should enable him to handle a workload of 20-25 carries a game.

Granted, Shanny didn't say that he WOULD go for 1500-1600, just that he COULD. I'm more focusing on the "no TD run longer than 9 yards" thing, which seems like a bit of an aberration, and indicates it's very likely that Denver's rushing TD totals are going to go up a significant amount this season.

Base it on the player. Don't believe anything that comes out of that #######s mouth.

 

[SSOG]

Base it on the player. Don't believe anything that comes out of that #######s mouth.

Ah, yet another person who buys into the MYTH that Shanahan is deliberately misleading. I debunked this one a lot last year, and don't want to get into the details, but historically speaking, Shanahan is every bit as honest as every other coach in the league, and a good sight more honest than the Bill Belichicks and Jeff Fishers of the world. This whole misconception that Shanahan is more deceptive than other coaches is the result of the high-profile 2001 season where he didn't know from week-to-week who his starting RB would be. That wasn't a case of Shanahan lying- Terrell Davis was the man if he was healthy, and that was just Shanahan not knowing if TD would be healthy enough to play from week to week. Since then, everyone has repeated this whole "Shanahan lies" thing to the point where everyone just accepts it as true and repeats it, perpetuating the cycle.

 

[Chaka]

More food for thought.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_6526379

Fantasy-league geeks — OK, fellow fantasy-league geeks — take note: Mike Shanahan, who knows a little about tailbacks, expects Travis Henry to be among the NFL's best this season.

Henry, who'll turn 29 in October, appears headed for a career year after signing with the Broncos as a free agent. His career highs in rushing and touchdowns came in 2002, when he ground out 1,438 yards and 13 TDs. To hear Shanahan tell it, those numbers are going down this year.

So, Shanahan was asked, might Henry go for 1,500 yards?

"Definitely," Shanahan said. "Fifteen hundred or 1,600. That's a hundred yards a game. He's capable of doing that."

The Broncos need that kind of production from Henry, and they need him to score touchdowns, too. One of the team's most troubling stats from last season was this: No Broncos tailback recorded a touchdown run of longer than 9 yards.

Mike Bell led the team with eight touchdown runs. Of those eight, five were from 1 yard out, one from 2 and two others from 3. Tatum Bell, meanwhile, scored from 2 and 9 yards out, a far cry from 2005, when he had eight touchdown runs, including three from 34, 55 and 67 yards.

Enter Henry, who'll give the Broncos a physical dimension to their running game that has been lacking since Mike Anderson left Denver. He's listed at 215 pounds in the Broncos' media guide, but don't kid yourself. Shanahan says Henry is closer to 230, a weight that should enable him to handle a workload of 20-25 carries a game.

Granted, Shanny didn't say that he WOULD go for 1500-1600, just that he COULD. I'm more focusing on the "no TD run longer than 9 yards" thing, which seems like a bit of an aberration, and indicates it's very likely that Denver's rushing TD totals are going to go up a significant amount this season.

Base it on the player. Don't believe anything that comes out of that #######s mouth.

Henry is the best running back they have had since Portis and TD.And that is the most positive statement I have read from SHanny about a running back in awhile.

 

[joffer]

Base it on the player. Don't believe anything that comes out of that #######s mouth.

Ah, yet another person who buys into the MYTH that Shanahan is deliberately misleading. I debunked this one a lot last year, and don't want to get into the details, but historically speaking, Shanahan is every bit as honest as every other coach in the league, and a good sight more honest than the Bill Belichicks and Jeff Fishers of the world. This whole misconception that Shanahan is more deceptive than other coaches is the result of the high-profile 2001 season where he didn't know from week-to-week who his starting RB would be. That wasn't a case of Shanahan lying- Terrell Davis was the man if he was healthy, and that was just Shanahan not knowing if TD would be healthy enough to play from week to week. Since then, everyone has repeated this whole "Shanahan lies" thing to the point where everyone just accepts it as true and repeats it, perpetuating the cycle.

i don't think Shanahan lies, but last offseason(as you repeatedly tried to point out), everything coming out of the GM and Shanahan's mouth pointed to Ron Dayne.that said, i agree Henry is as good a candidate to finish top 10 as the others in that tier.

 

[cscarlett67]

Good posts....just need some thoughts to help me make up my mind. I drew #4 pick in a 16-team league, would have much rather drawn something else. I am very high on Travis Henry, but not sure he warrants selection with the #4 pick, but I know he will not be there when I select at #29 in the 2nd round. I fully anticipate LT, SJax and LJ are going 1-2-3. The added twist in our league is TD passes are worth 6, and passing yards are rewarded at 1 pt per 20 yds, so QBs carry more weight in this league than most I play in. Would taking Peyton be justified at #4? I really like Henry's chances in Denver, and think he will do well, but feel like I may be reaching for potential. Peyton is the safer pick, but I don't like the idea of what I may end up with at RB if I make that move.