Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
***David Wilson Bandwagon*** (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter Jeff Pasquino
- Start date
msudaisy26
Footballguy
I understand they are just highlights but I really like the way he seems to fall forward at the end of each run. I also like the way he flattens his runs out once he breaks into the secondary. He seems to have a natural understanding to get north and southmonk said:
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
I'm guess one is you rubbing David Wilson's nuts now. How old are you?
netnalp
Footballguy
Tiiki also said the current line is more of a pass blocking line than he had. I wonder if they'll gmake a bold move and try to run a Tiki type running game right away or slowly evolve towards that.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Cookiemonster
Footballguy
JustinHawkins
Footballguy
Who do we like better this year in a ppr, Reggie bush or Wilson?
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Wilson just went 2.04 in my 14 team PPR dynasty start-up.
18th overall.
Woah.
18th overall.
Woah.
Last edited by a moderator:
TwinTurbo
Footballguy
In a PPR redraft, I just drafted Wilson ahead of Bush, Sproles, and MJD. You can make an argument for any of them, especially Sproles, but I feel like Wilson is on the brink of a huge year and will break off more long TD runs than any other RB in the league outside Peterson.
msudaisy26
Footballguy
TwinTurbo
Footballguy
Yes it's a gamble but I feel the same way about Wilson now as I did about Doug Martin last year.
This is from Evan Silva's article on Wilson http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/43534/260/2nd-year-rbs-david-wilson
"I charted all of 75 of Wilson's touches, and 32 of them gained two yards or worse (42.7 percent). He was prone to negative runs. Wilson totaled 392 yards from scrimmage in his first NFL season. 188 of them (48.0 percent) came on seven plays. Wilson showed a frequent tendency to attempt to make plays outside of the design of the offense, which I can't imagine helped him gain any more of conservative Coughlin's already fleeting trust."
"I charted all of 75 of Wilson's touches, and 32 of them gained two yards or worse (42.7 percent). He was prone to negative runs. Wilson totaled 392 yards from scrimmage in his first NFL season. 188 of them (48.0 percent) came on seven plays. Wilson showed a frequent tendency to attempt to make plays outside of the design of the offense, which I can't imagine helped him gain any more of conservative Coughlin's already fleeting trust."
And Barry Sanders.
Silva's observations are also based on last year's tape. The flaw with rear-view analysis, of course, is that is doesn't assume any improvements to his skills and knowledge going forward into his second year. Wilson was also one of the youngest players in the NFL last year.
TwinTurbo
Footballguy
Barry Sanders still holds the NFL record for most carries for negative yardage. And he's arguably the best RB of all time. Wilson seemed to become a more patient runner as his rookie season progressed. It took Doug Martin a few games to figure it out too.
I don't think comparing David Wilson to two potential HOF running backs is healthy for discussion. What works for one, may not work for another. If you think gaining 2 yards or less on 42.7% of your touches is a good thing, then their is no helping you. A RB's goal is to gain 3 yards on every run, no matter the blocking. They should be athletic/physical enough to gain 3 yards. That doesn't always happen, but on almost half of your touches is a red flag.
What else was Silva supposed to look at? If you take it for what it is(an non-Wilson owner, aka no bias) then it can be useful.
David Wilson's chaotic style goes well beyond his rookie season and was one major negative entering the NFL.
I agree that only gaining 2 yards or less on 42.7% of your touches is an area of concern, and Silva's analysis is helpful to understand what transpired last year for Wilson's season, and this an issue that Wilson will likely have all throughout his career (similar to other explosive backs like him), but players often improve their skills and knowledge of what it takes to be a pro over the first few years of their career, so that is all I am suggesting. The flip side of that statistic is that he gained just over 2 yards or more on the other 57.3% of his carries, sometimes having those home-run hits that gets everyone excited about having him on their roster.
I would be willing to suggest that a large number of "plodding style" RBs gain 3 yards or less on a significant % of their carries as well, and that is why the saying also goes "If you need 3 yards, he can get you 3 yards, if you need 6 yards, he can get you 3 yards." Wilson is the opposite of this.
Wilson did average 5.0 yards per carry on 71 carries last year, so I also weigh that metric into my evaluation. I am tempering my expectations a touch, as I do think that the hype has perhaps inflated him past his value this year, as he will still need to prove himself in his pass protection responsibilities, and Ware (when healthy) is a viable RBBC partner for Wilson and capable of stealing red-zone and short-yardage carries.
Last edited by a moderator:
Kenny Powers
Footballguy
Wilson's ADP is 35. That seems about right to me, and all the others RBs going around him are in the same boat as him being unproven, or theyre in timeshares or have an injury history as well. I would think that Wilson has as much upside as any of them. Not sure Im ready to pull the trigger on him there yet but I might a month from now. Considering what his ADP is, he's pretty much the perfect RB to pick at that point and pair with the stud RB you got in the 1st half of Round 1.
Well, interestingly enough, I just went through Chris Johnson's 2009 season and hand-counted 169 rushes of 2 yards or fewer out of 358 attempts.
That comes out to 47.2% of rushes being 2 or fewer yards. And a lot of those were for 1, 0, or negative yards.
In a season where he ran for over 2,000 yards.
If you can't understand my point that David Wilson's 42% with 2 or fewer yards, with huge runs scattered within, sounds like Chris Johnson, there is no helping you.
Last edited by a moderator:
First off, thanks for having a respectful debate. Too many times the SP becomes personal junk in debates.
I think Silva stat was touches(not carries), but I agree that he can develop. The thing I like most about Wilson is his toughness as a runner. He's explosive, but his ability to bounce off of defenders and keep gaining yardage is remarkable.
My biggest fear this year for FF owners is unrealistic expectations of these young RBs: Miller, Wilson, Lacy, Bernard, Bell, Ball. Yes, sometimes Doug Martin/Trich/A. Morris happen, but they're more the exception than the rule. Cranking out over 1500 total yards isn't easy.
And here is the personal junk I just mentioned in the SP.
I said that having 42% of your runs under 2 yards isn't a good thing. Am I incorrect?
Thanks for calculating that up about Chris Johnson, very interesting point. Doesn't take away that running <2 yards on almost half your carries is a good thing.
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
I tried. Outside of a late run in a blowout vs CLE where Bradshaw already had 200 yards and another late in a blowout vs NO he stunk. The rest of his numbers weeks 1-16 54 carries for 191 yards(3.54ypc) and 2 TD's. I'll refrain from commentary.
msudaisy26
Footballguy
They are saying take what Silva said with a grain of salt. Rookies have a problem trying to do to much usually, it is natural they are in their young 20's and feel like they can do it all.
No one is comparing him to Barry or CJ. They are just saying if he doesn't try to run inside he could still turn out to be a good back. The odds are just less likely.
Oh, the irony.
You're the one that instigated this by taking my comment that it "sounds like Chris Johnson" (with zero statement nor implication that it was a good thing, just an accurate observation) and went off attacking and insulting me by claiming that I said it was good, and then commenting that if I think that's good "there's no helping" me.
And now you are going to call me out for "personal junk" because I used your exact phrase back at you?
Gimme a break.
Like I said, that sounds like Chris Johnson. Whether that is good or bad is up to you, but the numbers don't lie, that is a lot like Chris Johnson, just like I said.
Dippa
Footballguy
You picked those posts to bump? You took away his 3 best plays for no reason, and I and others corrected your numbers. Are you trying to imply that you tried to warn us about Wilson last year and we wouldn't listen? I've been a big Wilson supporter throughout this thread, but Wilson sat on my taxi squad all last year.I tried. Outside of a late run in a blowout vs CLE where Bradshaw already had 200 yards and another late in a blowout vs NO he stunk. The rest of his numbers weeks 1-16 54 carries for 191 yards(3.54ypc) and 2 TD's. I'll refrain from commentary.
If someone predicted a huge year for Wilson, feel free to bump that, but this shows nothing except that your preseason stats were wrong.
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
I only quoted you because I fkd up the numbers. It's relevant to the current Wilson conversation because the trend carried into the season. He might need to be force feed carries to break a big run. Nothing else was implied.You picked those posts to bump? You took away his 3 best plays for no reason, and I and others corrected your numbers. Are you trying to imply that you tried to warn us about Wilson last year and we wouldn't listen? I've been a big Wilson supporter throughout this thread, but Wilson sat on my taxi squad all last year.I tried. Outside of a late run in a blowout vs CLE where Bradshaw already had 200 yards and another late in a blowout vs NO he stunk. The rest of his numbers weeks 1-16 54 carries for 191 yards(3.54ypc) and 2 TD's. I'll refrain from commentary.
If someone predicted a huge year for Wilson, feel free to bump that, but this shows nothing except that your preseason stats were wrong.
Dippa
Footballguy
Fair enough, but Adrian Peterson and Jamaal Charles also had 40-50% of their yardage come on around 10% of their carries last year. Doug Martin and CJ Spiller had high percentages as well. I don't really see this as a big deal for fantasy, unless you play in a league that penalizes for long runs.
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
I don't think anybody is saying nor implying that.
These are simply examples of obviously very talented RB's who have the same kind of rushing splits, with the implication that it may be a bit short-sighted to knock Wilson down because of those stats/numbers.
Dippa
Footballguy
Exactly..never implied that Wilson is at their level. I'm just pointing out that many guys who have a high YPC and yardage tend to accumulate a big chunk of their yardage on a small percentage of long runs, and it hasn't reduced their fantasy value.
To Shah's point, which game last year did Wilson have to be "force fed" to produce? He never had more than 16 touches.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
No offense, but of course you'd say that. For someone who is a Wilson believer, the entire POINT of being a believer is that he could be a 22 year old Spiller or Charles (of course he's not AP). That's his upside. That's the whole idea.
TwinTurbo
Footballguy
Agreed. Plus the guy has already shown a bit of what he can do in week 14 last year, when he set the Giants single game franchise record for all-purpose yds. He also led the league in kick return yds. Other teammates have said he is the most athletic guy on the team. Tiki Barber, who criticizes almost everyone, had high praise for him. He'll be the starter on a team with a good offense. There is a lot to like about his situation.
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
At what point did I say he wasn't a talent? I don't think he's Chalrles/Spiller special; I think he's good, and will be dependent on circumstances/touches.
Which on is it? That's 5-15 spots off of his current APD. He may have not lasted to his next pick.
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
I don't know if you've forgotten already, but about 75% of the dynasty community didn't think Spiller was "Spiller special" until he finally got the proper "circumstances/touches".
Last edited by a moderator:
JohnnyU
Footballguy
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
Fair enough. And a lucrative situation for you and your dynasty rosters, I imagine.
That doesn't mean you'll be right every time, however.
Khy
Footballguy
Exactly, this is getting out of hand. How is it possible you can say he's not in a class with those names? You've seen him run the ball about 1/4 of what a normal starting back does in a single season and you're already making these assumptions. His talent and ceiling is about as high as anyone in the NFL right now (at least in my opinion). Clearly he has some issues to iron out, but if he does iron them out the sky is the limit for the kid. To say otherwise is not an objective statement it's a personal assumption.Who knows, his upside could be Barry Sanders
Funny enough if you watch footage of his runs from last season (and college) side by side with Sanders they actually run incredibly similar. And this whole thing about he negative yardage is ridiculous... every good back accumulates the majority of their yardage on break away plays. Not many elite RBs are these plodders who go 3+ yards on 70% of their carries or something. Charles, AP, Spiller, T Rich, Martin, Foster etc. all have roughly the same percentage of >2 yards as Wilson had last year. But somehow that's a knock against him because he's 'not in the same league' as those guys.
Chose not to believe he has the ability to be one of the best RBs in the NFL if you want too. But don't be upset when he starts tossing up ridiculous numbers every season. To say he isn't Charles or Spiller good is obnoxious also. Spiller was largely considered a bust until last season.
Spiller Rookie Stats: 74 Carries, 283 Yards, 3.8ypc, 0 TDs
Charles Rookie Stats: 67 carries, 357 yards, 5.3 ypc, 0 TDs
Wilson Rookie Stats: 71 rushes, 358 yards, 5.0ypc, 4 TDs
So based on this with the two players that are significantly better than Wilson? Wilson outscored them by MONSTEROUS amounts in fantasy. But it's fine because he's clearly not on their level.
Grahamburn
Footballguy
They tend to go this way when we have such little information to form opinions off of.
You have his dynasty owners who expect him to be a RB1 stud. They aren't backing off and refuse to see the negatives.
You have redraft guys who are interested in the situation, but are tempering enthusiasm because Wilson hasn't shown anything consistently yet, and the pick investment necessary to get him is a high one. They post their concerns, but quickly get blasted by said dynasty owner who knows his guy is going to be a stud.
You get enticed by the athletic ability, but you're unsure how the Giants will use him. Kickoffs? That's not good news, but then you look at Andre Browns injury history and get excited about Wilson possibly becoming the bell cow guy. What if Andre Brown stays healthy all season?
Back and forth. On and on. Here we are.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
And the guy mentioned "fleeting" trust of Tom Coughlin. If there was fleeting trust, then they would've resigned Bradshaw or at least worked out one of the vets. Nada. Nobody came in for a work out. Not Reggie Bush, not Mendenhall, nobody. You can look at all the coach speak or conjecture from writers, but the one thing David Wilson has right now is complete and utter trust by Tom Coughlin....
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
Why would I get upset? I would just draft him. I'm not going to spend two more pages explaining why he isn't CJ Spiller or Charles. It's already a consensus he's the next Jim Brown. I won't bother.Exactly, this is getting out of hand. How is it possible you can say he's not in a class with those names? You've seen him run the ball about 1/4 of what a normal starting back does in a single season and you're already making these assumptions. His talent and ceiling is about as high as anyone in the NFL right now (at least in my opinion). Clearly he has some issues to iron out, but if he does iron them out the sky is the limit for the kid. To say otherwise is not an objective statement it's a personal assumption.Who knows, his upside could be Barry Sanders
Funny enough if you watch footage of his runs from last season (and college) side by side with Sanders they actually run incredibly similar. And this whole thing about he negative yardage is ridiculous... every good back accumulates the majority of their yardage on break away plays. Not many elite RBs are these plodders who go 3+ yards on 70% of their carries or something. Charles, AP, Spiller, T Rich, Martin, Foster etc. all have roughly the same percentage of >2 yards as Wilson had last year. But somehow that's a knock against him because he's 'not in the same league' as those guys.
Chose not to believe he has the ability to be one of the best RBs in the NFL if you want too. But don't be upset when he starts tossing up ridiculous numbers every season. To say he isn't Charles or Spiller good is obnoxious also. Spiller was largely considered a bust until last season.
Spiller Rookie Stats: 74 Carries, 283 Yards, 3.8ypc, 0 TDs
Charles Rookie Stats: 67 carries, 357 yards, 5.3 ypc, 0 TDs
Wilson Rookie Stats: 71 rushes, 358 yards, 5.0ypc, 4 TDs
So based on this with the two players that are significantly better than Wilson? Wilson outscored them by MONSTEROUS amounts in fantasy. But it's fine because he's clearly not on their level.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
That Silva article was AWFUL. Those numbers are useless in a vacuum. I just looked at all of the top runners in the NFL in terms of rushes that amounted to 2 yards or less. Guess what? Wilson's numbers are right in line with them.
Foster was at 46%
Peterson was at 43%
Martin was at 44%
Wilson was at 46%
Everybody's favorite ole' reliable, BJGE was at 47%.
So THAT's his big beef with Wilson? Believe me, most offenses would GLADLY take an extra short gainer or two for the opportunity to take an extra one or two to the house. If he was at 70% or something, sure, red flag it. But at 46%? That's the run game my friend, a lot of them don't go anywhere.
Foster was at 46%
Peterson was at 43%
Martin was at 44%
Wilson was at 46%
Everybody's favorite ole' reliable, BJGE was at 47%.
So THAT's his big beef with Wilson? Believe me, most offenses would GLADLY take an extra short gainer or two for the opportunity to take an extra one or two to the house. If he was at 70% or something, sure, red flag it. But at 46%? That's the run game my friend, a lot of them don't go anywhere.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
Shows how little Silva knows about football as well as some of the people that jumped up at that quote and said, "SEE, WILSON SUCKS!"
They either have little knowledge of the game or they are so biased against the guy, they couldn't wait to say "I told you so" before digging into the reality of the situation.
So when someone says, "Sounds like Chris Johnson," maybe the haters should take a deep breath before typing because IT DOES SOUND like CJ. Oh and it sounds like Foster and Martin and Peterson too.
