Dion Lewis (1 Viewer)

[Adam Harstad]

BOOM. Another great post. Getting the same value in touches as a guy who gets 30 rushes a game without the injury risk or breakdown wear and tear a 30 carry back would experience. Also factor in that his 9 or so rushes is presenting more value than the average rusher as he makes so many people miss to a point he is on anotehr level making his point per rush value much higher than avg. Also factor in his offense is puttign him in scoring position more than an average back. Its a recipe for success, long term success a 30 carry per game back would not have. Oh and he is only 25.

In fairness, no RB is going to average 29 carries per game without a single reception. A more likely comparison would be vs. a 22-carry, 2-reception back, or a 19-carry, 3-reception back. I was just showing how extreme the value differential would be for a theoretical back that never caught any passes at all.

 

[Tau837]

1-For everyone: Why is it that discussing the history of how BB uses his "pass-catching" RBs is irrelevant

IMO you seem to be starting with a faulty assumption, which is to split BB RBs into two categories: pass catching backs and big backs, or whatever terminology you prefer. You aren't the only one, plenty of posters were doing the same early on, and they have been gradually receding into the background as Lewis continues to perform.

I posted previously in the thread a list of all of the RBs who received significant touches under BB, and I stated that IMO Lewis is arguably the most talented and complete RB BB has had other than Dillon. BB did not slot Dillon into either the big back or pass catching back category. He used Dillon as a three down back for as long as he held up. That illustrates that BB is not wed to a platoon system with specific roles, which should not be surprising, since BB is obviously a very smart coach, not an idiot.

If it is true that Lewis is more talented and more complete than guys like Faulk, Vereen, and Woodhead, it stands to reason that BB may use him differently and that he may perform differently. That is my expectation, barring injury or a major fumbling problem.

Given that I think you start from a faulty assumption, I cannot give your conclusions any real weight, since they too are consequently faulty. As you like to say, if you don't agree, you can disregard.

Dillon was not a RB during this "era" of NE football that I'm referring to. I've made it clear that I'm talking about NE from. 2007 on (when the offense became "Brady-centered"). It was when Dillon got older & left when they turned the offense over to Brady that BB began to use the big & small RBs this way. Prior to that point, he used A Smith similarly to Dillon, but he hasn't really done so since. Again, you're free to ignore the last 8 years of BBs handling of his RBs & focus on how he handled then before it became obvious that his offense should be focused on his great QB, who happens to still be his QB, but I'm less inclined to do so.

Hypothetical questions for you:

1. If BB had Jamaal Charles, do you think he would limit his use to how he used his "small" or "pass catching" in this "era" you have arbitrarily defined?

2. If BB had Leveon Bell, do you think he would limit his use to how he has used his "big" RBs in this "era" you have arbitrarily defined?

I assume even you, dug into your stance as you are, will say no to these questions. Which is enough to prove the point that BB is not tied to a system of use of his RBs because his offense is "Brady-centered".

Thus, it becomes a matter of degree and talent. IMO Lewis is a more talented and more complete RB than Vereen, Woodhead, and Faulk. Hence my stance that there is reason to expect that:

1. He will be used differently.

2. He will be used more, even if only a little more.

3. He will be more effective.

Thus, to suggest that his value is limited to value similar to Vereen, Woodhead, and Faulk seems off base to me. It also seems to me that you are really arguing over talent, not system, even though you are framing your posts as discussing the system.

But if you disagree, feel free to disregard.

 

[packersfan]

Lewis is nothing like Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen. Nothing like them at all. The continued insistence on comparing him to RBs who are nothing like him just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[Tau837]

1-For everyone: Why is it that discussing the history of how BB uses his "pass-catching" RBs is irrelevant

IMO you seem to be starting with a faulty assumption, which is to split BB RBs into two categories: pass catching backs and big backs, or whatever terminology you prefer. You aren't the only one, plenty of posters were doing the same early on, and they have been gradually receding into the background as Lewis continues to perform.

I posted previously in the thread a list of all of the RBs who received significant touches under BB, and I stated that IMO Lewis is arguably the most talented and complete RB BB has had other than Dillon. BB did not slot Dillon into either the big back or pass catching back category. He used Dillon as a three down back for as long as he held up. That illustrates that BB is not wed to a platoon system with specific roles, which should not be surprising, since BB is obviously a very smart coach, not an idiot.

If it is true that Lewis is more talented and more complete than guys like Faulk, Vereen, and Woodhead, it stands to reason that BB may use him differently and that he may perform differently. That is my expectation, barring injury or a major fumbling problem.

Given that I think you start from a faulty assumption, I cannot give your conclusions any real weight, since they too are consequently faulty. As you like to say, if you don't agree, you can disregard.

I'm one of the early posters talking about the Big Back / Rec back split. I don't think the Dillon comparison is a good one, because I don't expect that we'll ever see Lewis with a regular 15-20 rush total. He is getting more between the tackles rush attempts than Vereen ever did ( with the small window last year with Vereen as the lead back before Gray / Blount ), but about the same as Woodhead used to get. In general, these backs have received about 7-10 carries / game, which is exactly where Lewis is in games that Blount has played.

None of this discounts his value as a PPR RB1. As Adam has pointed out so completely, his usage is fairly comparable to the receiving back role in NE over the past few years - nearly identical carry totals, higher target totals - with greater results. I don't know that he'll maintain his reception rate, but with the quick passing game working so well, he may. He is the RB that will be on the field in a majority of their personnel groups, so he should continue to see significant opportunities.

The way the NE offense as constructed now is very different than in the Faulk years, and the role that Lewis has in it is a more prominent one than any of the backs that preceded him in a similar role ever had. I think that may be the disconnect. Lewis will see a large chunk of arguably the best offense in the NFL, much of that through the air. He just won't be leading the team in rush attempts.

I didn't compare Lewis to Dillon. I said the following:

1. IMO he is the most talented Patriots RB since Dillon.

2. The fact that BB did not pigeonhole Dillon into a timeshare shows that he is not wed to doing that with his RBs.

I agree with the bolded. I also think it is likely he won't lead the team in rushing attempts, but I wouldn't completely eliminate that possibility. If he doesn't, IMO it will be closer than most seem to think.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Oh, like I posted, I think your post was great, those facts give me more confidence than I previously had that Lewis might sustain his current production (or at least not regress as much as I previously feared).With regards to the Reiss quote, thanks for the clarification. I still am not interpreting it the way you did (I read it as him saying Lewis is this years version of Vereen, & he will be the RB in passing situations) but I appreciate the info.

I personally don't think the Shane Vereen comp is anathema or anything. I'm okay calling Dion Lewis "a rich man's Shane Vereen".

Vereen averaged 10.36 PPG last year in PPR, and 16.81 PPG the year before. The former figure, extrapolated out, would have been good for an RB20 finish last year. The latter figure would have resulted in a 7th-place finish. If you do an unweighted average of the two figures, it would have extrapolated to a 10th-place finish. If you do a weighted average, it would have extrapolated to a 13th-place finish.

So if we use Shane Vereen as a comp, in PPR over the last two years we could say his range would have been between RB7 and RB20, with his average somewhere in the RB10-RB13 range.

Vereen played ~53% of New England's snaps last year. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to project that a "Rich Man's Shane Vereen" might log 60-65%. I think it's reasonable to expect a "Rich Man's Shane Vereen" to be moderately more productive than the poor man's version. Right now, Lewis is averaging 20.7 points per game in PPR, which would have ranked him between Forte and Lynch as the #4 RB last year. I don't think it's too much of a stretch to suggest that's likely to regress some. But even if he averages 17 ppg going forward, (just a hair more than Vereen had in 2013), that's still probably enough to earn Lewis a top-6 finish at the end of the year.

I think there's plenty of room for Lewis to be "just" the latest and greatest in a long line of Belichick passing backs and still be a fantasy RB1.

 

[Shutout]

Why so angry? Because I don't 100% agree with your take on the situation? Why should that bother you? If you don't agree with the conclusions I'm drawing, or you don't think the facts/data I'm discussing are relevant, ignore them. Me stating that isn't any reflection of my "feeling special" or not; I don't care to argue with you or anyone else, so I tell you to feel free to ignore my points. Why should that bother you?

I'm sure when you tell people "feel free to ignore my facts" you mean it in a completely innocent and non-condescending manner.

Yeah, gotta love when people load statements that are clearly constituted in a way to mean "you can either agree with me or be wrong because, let's face it, ignoring me equates into 'you're not smart'."

Your point in your earlier post this morning is really THE point in this and some of us have been trying to make it for some time but it never seems to carry much weight in a forum dominated by history, stats, and metrics and that is "at some point, you have to look beyond all that tangible 'feels good to be able to put a number on it and place it in a nice, little box' and you have to look what is actually going on in reality on the field."

From day one, the dominant piece of conversation on this topic has been to place Lewis in that lumped in category of past "pass catching" Patriots backs and then to build the entire argument around what a Patriots "pass catching" back is and the pitfalls that means on the Patriots team. But this is different. Take the logos off the helmets and Lewis looks far more like the type of RB we see come along every few years or so and he's just a good, all-around, dynamic back ... and that translates into great ff value. When Foster came around, when Forte showed up and was heavily involved in the pass game, when Steve Slaton was there before the injury, and so on and son with guys that landed on the right team at the right time and was able to run, pass, and block.

Moreno a few years ago. I pounded the table for that guy saying that he WAS going to be the guy for the Broncos because he did all those things when the other guys couldn't and I encouraged people to forget that mindset of what has to fit in a broncos system and see what he actually brings to the table.

Now that I think about it, I think Adam may have been one of the guys that I went back and forth on that discussion and, if so, that's even more reason to listen to him now because if he was the one who I went back and forth on this on, I'm sure he is drawing from that scenario to see this one very clearly and, IMO, Adam is dead on on what is happening here and, more importantly, WHY.

 

[packersfan]

Adam, your analysis all of this has been terrific but I'm still uncomfortable comparing Lewis to Vereen, even calling him a "rich man's Vereen." Lewis is so much better in the run game than Vereen is or ever was. To me, that's what separates him from all these other RBs he keeps being compared to. He's a legit 3-down RB with strong TD potential in this offense. I really don't think the Patriots have had a RB like him in the Belichick era.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Adam, your analysis all of this has been terrific but I'm still uncomfortable comparing Lewis to Vereen, even calling him a "rich man's Vereen." Lewis is so much better in the run game than Vereen is or ever was. To me, that's what separates him from all these other RBs he keeps being compared to. He's a legit 3-down RB with strong TD potential in this offense. I really don't think the Patriots have had a RB like him in the Belichick era.

It's pretty clear that New England is taking Dion Lewis off the field when they want to switch to a power running game. Against Jacksonville, New England ran 60% of the time when Blount was on the field and just 23% of the time when Lewis was on the field. Against Dallas, New England ran 75% of the time when Blount was on the field and just 14% of the time when Lewis was.

I agree that Lewis *COULD* handle running the ball when New England switched to a power, grind-it-out, run-first offense. He's sensational, as dominant between the tackles as he is outside in space. I'm just saying that, so far, it looks pretty abundantly clear that New England doesn't want him to. We could speculate as to their reasons, (keeping Lewis healthy and fresh for higher-leverage situations), but I don't think we can argue with the results on the field to this point.

Does that change going forward? Maybe, but I don't know why New England would change what's obviously working. Let Lewis dominate snaps when you're spreading the field, give him a few tendency-breaking carries to keep the defense honest, and then let Blount come in when you catch the defense in a light personnel package or when you want to salt the game away. I don't think the dropoff from Lewis to Blount strictly as a rusher is big enough to warrant the extra risk and wear-and-tear on their second-best offensive weapon.

The carry ratio between Blount and Lewis will probably be more even when New England isn't blowing the other team off the field, but I think they've made it clear that they're putting Lewis in their "spread offense, pass-first" offensive packages and Blount in their "ground-and-pound, power" packages. Or, to put it another way, it seems that Lewis is, in fact, manning the "Shane Vereen role". Albeit with dramatically superior results.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Now that I think about it, I think Adam may have been one of the guys that I went back and forth on that discussion and, if so, that's even more reason to listen to him now because if he was the one who I went back and forth on this on, I'm sure he is drawing from that scenario to see this one very clearly and, IMO, Adam is dead on on what is happening here and, more importantly, WHY.

I was, but I don't think the situations are really all that analogous. I was down on Moreno because I didn't think he was good at football. I'm high on Lewis because I think he is.

 

[davearm]

Removed the earlier posts to eliminate the nested posts.

This is very good info, thanks for posting it. I do realize that RB receptions tend to equate to more points on a per-touch basis than RB rushes; but the numbers are nice to see.

Do you run those numbers yourself, or is there a site that allows you to do it (or if it's FBG, how can I do it)?

One of the secret features of the Data Dominator is the ability to produce reports for entire team offenses or even the entire league. In the first dropdown box at the top, switch between "Player Report", "Team Offense Report", and "League Total/Averages" report. I just generated a league total/average report for all running back carries for the 2014 season; from there, it was simple enough to calculate total fantasy points and divide by total carries. I did the same for receptions by a running back.

If you want, you can also do the same thing just for New England. Since 2007, New England running backs average 0.688 fantasy points per carry, 1.103 fantasy points per reception in standard, and 2.103 fantasy points per reception in PPR. The ratio isn't quite as skewed towards receptions, (it's only 60% more instead of 80% more), largely because of the huge rushing touchdown total. Still, both rates are noticeably above league average, which suggests 10 rushes and 5 receptions in New England are even more valuable relative to 10/5 anywhere else in the league.

So FWIW, I ran Lewis' 9 rushes and 5.75 receptions per game through the multipliers you gave (the .578 and 1.041 NFL-wide fantasy points per rush and rec; 0.688 and 1.103 NE-specific), and came up with average standard-league PPGs of 11.2 using the NFL-wide averages, and 12.5 using the NE-specific averages.

In standard leagues, 11.2 PPG would have been good for:

RB15 in 2014

RB18 in 2013

RB19 in 2012

RB21 in 2011

RB19 in 2010

12.5 PPG would have been good for:

RB10 in 2014

RB12 in 2013

RB12 in 2012

RB15 in 2011

RB16 in 2010

In the PPR world, 16.9 PPG would have been good for:

RB8 in 2014

RB9 in 2013

RB8 in 2012

RB12 in 2011

RB11 in 2010

18.3 PPG would have been good for:

RB6 in 2014

RB6 in 2013

RB4 in 2012

RB8 in 2011

RB7 in 2010

The takeaway for me is that at his current touch rates, Lewis is more of a RB2 in standard leagues, but in PPR leagues, he's in the RB1 category.

 

[packersfan]

I just think Lewis is a much better runner than Vereen which opens the door for Belichick to use him in ways he never did or could with Vereen (or Faulk or Woodhead). I'm not saying if the Pats go run-heavy they'll give Lewis 20-25 carries. I think Blount would be the primary RB in that type of a game. However, I wouldn't be surprised if the Pats decided on a 30-40 carry game approach that Blount could get 20-25 with Lewis getting 10-15.

Point being, I just don't see him going away in this offense regardless of the approach. He's been too good and too productive. And unlike Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen, there shouldn't be any reason to think your run game would suffer if he received extended opportunities there.

 

[Bayhawks]

1-For everyone: Why is it that discussing the history of how BB uses his "pass-catching" RBs is irrelevant

IMO you seem to be starting with a faulty assumption, which is to split BB RBs into two categories: pass catching backs and big backs, or whatever terminology you prefer. You aren't the only one, plenty of posters were doing the same early on, and they have been gradually receding into the background as Lewis continues to perform.

I posted previously in the thread a list of all of the RBs who received significant touches under BB, and I stated that IMO Lewis is arguably the most talented and complete RB BB has had other than Dillon. BB did not slot Dillon into either the big back or pass catching back category. He used Dillon as a three down back for as long as he held up. That illustrates that BB is not wed to a platoon system with specific roles, which should not be surprising, since BB is obviously a very smart coach, not an idiot.

If it is true that Lewis is more talented and more complete than guys like Faulk, Vereen, and Woodhead, it stands to reason that BB may use him differently and that he may perform differently. That is my expectation, barring injury or a major fumbling problem.

Given that I think you start from a faulty assumption, I cannot give your conclusions any real weight, since they too are consequently faulty. As you like to say, if you don't agree, you can disregard.

Dillon was not a RB during this "era" of NE football that I'm referring to. I've made it clear that I'm talking about NE from. 2007 on (when the offense became "Brady-centered"). It was when Dillon got older & left when they turned the offense over to Brady that BB began to use the big & small RBs this way. Prior to that point, he used A Smith similarly to Dillon, but he hasn't really done so since. Again, you're free to ignore the last 8 years of BBs handling of his RBs & focus on how he handled then before it became obvious that his offense should be focused on his great QB, who happens to still be his QB, but I'm less inclined to do so.

Hypothetical questions for you:

1. If BB had Jamaal Charles, do you think he would limit his use to how he used his "small" or "pass catching" in this "era" you have arbitrarily defined?

2. If BB had Leveon Bell, do you think he would limit his use to how he has used his "big" RBs in this "era" you have arbitrarily defined?

I assume even you, dug into your stance as you are, will say no to these questions. Which is enough to prove the point that BB is not tied to a system of use of his RBs because his offense is "Brady-centered".

Thus, it becomes a matter of degree and talent. IMO Lewis is a more talented and more complete RB than Vereen, Woodhead, and Faulk. Hence my stance that there is reason to expect that:

1. He will be used differently.

2. He will be used more, even if only a little more.

3. He will be more effective.

Thus, to suggest that his value is limited to value similar to Vereen, Woodhead, and Faulk seems off base to me. It also seems to me that you are really arguing over talent, not system, even though you are framing your posts as discussing the system.

But if you disagree, feel free to disregard.

That's an interesting question, as while other have compared Lewis to Barry Sanders in this thread, I've found myself comparing his situation to Charles' early career; i.e.-he seems like an explosive RB who seemed capable of doing more despite a smaller build, but didn't get the work (that he would later prove capable of handling). I would imagine that if he felt Charles could handle more than just the passing-game role, he'd give him more, and that if he felt Bell could handle more than just the big-back role, he'd give him more.

As for being dug into my stance, you're off-base. When presented with facts, I'm more than willing to change my thinking. You saying "Lewis is more talented than any other previous RB" isn't a fact; it's your opinion, and it may prove to be 100% correct, but it's still not a fact.

What is a fact is that BB is playing Lewis virtually exactly the same as he played those previous backs; they are on teh field in obvious passing situation, and getting a few carries (7/game). In obvious running situations, he is being pulled.

 

[davearm]

Lewis is nothing like Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen. Nothing like them at all. The continued insistence on comparing him to RBs who are nothing like him just doesn't make any sense to me.

You're dramatically overstating this. Those 4 guys are more similar than different. JMHO.

 

[packersfan]

Lewis is nothing like Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen. Nothing like them at all. The continued insistence on comparing him to RBs who are nothing like him just doesn't make any sense to me.

You're dramatically overstating this. Those 4 guys are more similar than different. JMHO.

I think Lewis is a much better runner than any of those guys. I would categorize those three as receiving RBs who can/could run it a bit. I would categorize Lewis as a 3-down back. Possibly not built for 20-25 carries a game but a far more effective runner than any of those three.

 

[Bayhawks]

Lewis is nothing like Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen. Nothing like them at all. The continued insistence on comparing him to RBs who are nothing like him just doesn't make any sense to me.

You're dramatically overstating this. Those 4 guys are more similar than different. JMHO.

I think Lewis is a much better runner than any of those guys. I would categorize those three as receiving RBs who can/could run it a bit. I would categorize Lewis as a 3-down back. Possibly not built for 20-25 carries a game but a far more effective runner than any of those three.

I agree with you, but to this point, BBs usage of him (with the exception of week 1 when Blount was out), doesn't show that he does. Lewis is "only" getting 7 carries a game, which is in line with how BB used those RBs.

 

[packersfan]

Lewis is nothing like Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen. Nothing like them at all. The continued insistence on comparing him to RBs who are nothing like him just doesn't make any sense to me.

You're dramatically overstating this. Those 4 guys are more similar than different. JMHO.

I think Lewis is a much better runner than any of those guys. I would categorize those three as receiving RBs who can/could run it a bit. I would categorize Lewis as a 3-down back. Possibly not built for 20-25 carries a game but a far more effective runner than any of those three.

I agree with you, but to this point, BBs usage of him (with the exception of week 1 when Blount was out), doesn't show that he does. Lewis is "only" getting 7 carries a game, which is in line with how BB used those RBs.

They don't run the ball much. Blount's averaging 15.5 carries the past two games but a lot of that is skewed by the Jacksonville game when they didn't need to throw it in the second half and Lewis was being rested. But even if you discount that you're talking about a shade over 20 carries combined for Lewis and Blount. That isn't a lot. This team is built to throw it and throw it a lot. What I'm saying is Lewis' ability as a runner (which I consider to be far superior to Vereen, Woodhead and Faulk) gives them a new element to the offense they never had before should they choose to go run-heavy.

 

[packersfan]

Bottom line I don't think there will be "Lewis games" and "Blount games" like there used to be "Vereen games" and "Blount games." I think every game will be a Lewis game given his role and what he's shown. Blount's the one who I believe will be more matchup dependent for fantasy owners.

 

[Tau837]

Lewis is nothing like Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen. Nothing like them at all. The continued insistence on comparing him to RBs who are nothing like him just doesn't make any sense to me.

You're dramatically overstating this. Those 4 guys are more similar than different. JMHO.

I think Lewis is a much better runner than any of those guys. I would categorize those three as receiving RBs who can/could run it a bit. I would categorize Lewis as a 3-down back. Possibly not built for 20-25 carries a game but a far more effective runner than any of those three.

I agree with you, but to this point, BBs usage of him (with the exception of week 1 when Blount was out), doesn't show that he does. Lewis is "only" getting 7 carries a game, which is in line with how BB used those RBs.

To be accurate, Lewis has 36 rushing attempts in 4 games, which is 9 carries per game.

 

[Bayhawks]

Bottom line I don't think there will be "Lewis games" and "Blount games" like there used to be "Vereen games" and "Blount games." I think every game will be a Lewis game given his role and what he's shown. Blount's the one who I believe will be more matchup dependent for fantasy owners.

I think if you are correct, we might know after this weekend. The last 4 games against Indy, NE has run the ball an average of 39 times, mostly with their "big backs." If we see Lewis get 15+ rushes Sunday, that will be telling, IMO.

 

[Bayhawks]

Lewis is nothing like Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen. Nothing like them at all. The continued insistence on comparing him to RBs who are nothing like him just doesn't make any sense to me.

You're dramatically overstating this. Those 4 guys are more similar than different. JMHO.

I think Lewis is a much better runner than any of those guys. I would categorize those three as receiving RBs who can/could run it a bit. I would categorize Lewis as a 3-down back. Possibly not built for 20-25 carries a game but a far more effective runner than any of those three.

I agree with you, but to this point, BBs usage of him (with the exception of week 1 when Blount was out), doesn't show that he does. Lewis is "only" getting 7 carries a game, which is in line with how BB used those RBs.

To be accurate, Lewis has 36 rushing attempts in 4 games, which is 9 carries per game.

I've posted, many times, that when I say 7 rushes/game, I'm talking about games when Blount was available.

 

[packersfan]

Bottom line I don't think there will be "Lewis games" and "Blount games" like there used to be "Vereen games" and "Blount games." I think every game will be a Lewis game given his role and what he's shown. Blount's the one who I believe will be more matchup dependent for fantasy owners.

I think if you are correct, we might know after this weekend. The last 4 games against Indy, NE has run the ball an average of 39 times, mostly with their "big backs." If we see Lewis get 15+ rushes Sunday, that will be telling, IMO.

I wouldn't expect him to get 15 carries but 15 or so touches should be a lock IMO.

 

[Adam Harstad]

I just think Lewis is a much better runner than Vereen which opens the door for Belichick to use him in ways he never did or could with Vereen (or Faulk or Woodhead). I'm not saying if the Pats go run-heavy they'll give Lewis 20-25 carries. I think Blount would be the primary RB in that type of a game. However, I wouldn't be surprised if the Pats decided on a 30-40 carry game approach that Blount could get 20-25 with Lewis getting 10-15.

Point being, I just don't see him going away in this offense regardless of the approach. He's been too good and too productive. And unlike Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen, there shouldn't be any reason to think your run game would suffer if he received extended opportunities there.

I think Belichick *could* use him in ways he never did with Vereen. But through four games, he seems to show little inclination to actually do so. And I think it's smart. Save Lewis for high-leverage situations, use Blount in obvious-running situations where the dropoff really isn't that huge. Keep Lewis fresh and healthy for the playoffs, which is what New England really cares about, anyway.

Right now, Lewis is getting a carry or a target nearly 40% of the time when he's on the field. That's a pretty generous rate for a guy in a spread offense like this. If that rate holds up, and Lewis gets the 65% of snaps I expect, and New England runs 1,000 plays this year, and Lewis is catching say 75% of his targets, then that translates into 220 touches. 220 touches is a pretty good amount, especially when we're talking about really high-leverage touches. I think a 150-carry, 80-catch season would be really nice from Dion Lewis. He could get more, but he doesn't need to in order to return value.

If I were Belichick, that's how I'd be using him, at any rate. No sense giving him 250 carries when Blount is more than capable of running the ball against stacked fronts in obvious running situations.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Also, just reposting stats here since I was tweeting them out earlier:

Over the last two games, Dion Lewis has received a carry on 18% of his snaps.

Over the last two games, LeGarrette Blount has received a carry on 66% of his snaps.

Over the last two games, Dion Lewis has been "involved" (handoff or target) on 39% of his snaps.

Over the last two games, LeGarrette Blount has been "involved" (handoff or target) on 68% of his snaps.

Read into it what you will.

 

[Run It Up]

Bad news for the Pats in general.

Nate Solder done for the year, torn bicep.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Lewis is nothing like Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen. Nothing like them at all. The continued insistence on comparing him to RBs who are nothing like him just doesn't make any sense to me.

You're dramatically overstating this. Those 4 guys are more similar than different. JMHO.

I think Lewis is a much better runner than any of those guys. I would categorize those three as receiving RBs who can/could run it a bit. I would categorize Lewis as a 3-down back. Possibly not built for 20-25 carries a game but a far more effective runner than any of those three.

I agree with you, but to this point, BBs usage of him (with the exception of week 1 when Blount was out), doesn't show that he does. Lewis is "only" getting 7 carries a game, which is in line with how BB used those RBs.

To be accurate, Lewis has 36 rushing attempts in 4 games, which is 9 carries per game.

I've posted, many times, that when I say 7 rushes/game, I'm talking about games when Blount was available.

There was no "big back" on the roster for that game? I though we were just using generic "pass catching" and "big back" terms in our analysis.

 

[davearm]

Lewis is nothing like Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen. Nothing like them at all. The continued insistence on comparing him to RBs who are nothing like him just doesn't make any sense to me.

You're dramatically overstating this. Those 4 guys are more similar than different. JMHO.

I think Lewis is a much better runner than any of those guys. I would categorize those three as receiving RBs who can/could run it a bit. I would categorize Lewis as a 3-down back. Possibly not built for 20-25 carries a game but a far more effective runner than any of those three.

Those other guys averaged in the 4.2, 4.3 YPC range with the Patriots. Not amazing but solid. What YPC are you anticipating for Lewis?

And what's the difference? On 7-10 carries, an improvement of 1 YPC is still only about 1 fantasy point.

 

[Bayhawks]

Lewis is nothing like Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen. Nothing like them at all. The continued insistence on comparing him to RBs who are nothing like him just doesn't make any sense to me.

You're dramatically overstating this. Those 4 guys are more similar than different. JMHO.

I think Lewis is a much better runner than any of those guys. I would categorize those three as receiving RBs who can/could run it a bit. I would categorize Lewis as a 3-down back. Possibly not built for 20-25 carries a game but a far more effective runner than any of those three.

I agree with you, but to this point, BBs usage of him (with the exception of week 1 when Blount was out), doesn't show that he does. Lewis is "only" getting 7 carries a game, which is in line with how BB used those RBs.

To be accurate, Lewis has 36 rushing attempts in 4 games, which is 9 carries per game.

I've posted, many times, that when I say 7 rushes/game, I'm talking about games when Blount was available.

There was no "big back" on the roster for that game? I though we were just using generic "pass catching" and "big back" terms in our analysis.

Bolden was there, but he's a ST guy, not really a viable RB; they had cut Gray. I don't think I'm missing Antone, so no, in that game, BB didn't have a "big" RB available.

 

[davearm]

Lewis is nothing like Faulk, Woodhead or Vereen. Nothing like them at all. The continued insistence on comparing him to RBs who are nothing like him just doesn't make any sense to me.

You're dramatically overstating this. Those 4 guys are more similar than different. JMHO.

I think Lewis is a much better runner than any of those guys. I would categorize those three as receiving RBs who can/could run it a bit. I would categorize Lewis as a 3-down back. Possibly not built for 20-25 carries a game but a far more effective runner than any of those three.

I agree with you, but to this point, BBs usage of him (with the exception of week 1 when Blount was out), doesn't show that he does. Lewis is "only" getting 7 carries a game, which is in line with how BB used those RBs.

To be accurate, Lewis has 36 rushing attempts in 4 games, which is 9 carries per game.

I've posted, many times, that when I say 7 rushes/game, I'm talking about games when Blount was available.

There was no "big back" on the roster for that game? I though we were just using generic "pass catching" and "big back" terms in our analysis.

Bolden and White were the only other backs active.

 

[packersfan]

In 16 games last season Vereen had 16 touches from the 10 and in for the Patriots. 12 rushing attempts, 4 receptions and 4 TDs.

In 4 games this season Lewis has had 6. Of those six, 5 were rushing attempts with one reception and 3 TDs.

Lewis has already had nearly half of the rushing attempts Vereen got in those situations in 25% of the games. The reception total is similar but the TD potential is much higher.

Regardless of the number of carries Lewis may be getting per game when the Patriots are between the 10 and the 2, Belichick is showing that he's more inclined to use Lewis as a runner there than he did with Vereen. Given how often I anticipate the Patriots being at the opponents' 10 this season I think this bodes well for Lewis' potential going forward.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

There was no "big back" on the roster for that game? I though we were just using generic "pass catching" and "big back" terms in our analysis.

Bolden was there, but he's a ST guy, not really a viable RB; they had cut Gray. I don't think I'm missing Antone, so no, in that game, BB didn't have a "big" RB available.

Bolden is 5'11", 220 pounds and had 139 carries at 4.56 yards per carry (and 25 receptions) entering his fourth season in the league. But feel free to ignore the facts that don't fit your narrative.

 

[Run It Up]

Uh, Bolden is a special teams player, a good special teams player.

Sure hes compiled however many carries, getting less than a handful a game for 3 years.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Uh, Bolden is a special teams player, a good special teams player.

Sure hes compiled however many carries, getting less than a handful a game for 3 years.

Yes but he was the "big back" on the roster for Game 1 and has shown to be a capable runner. I agree that his roster spot is based largely on his special teams play - but if Belichick wanted a "big back" for week 1 he was it. In fact most people on this message board were talking up Bolden for that game. I saw him started in at least one league. No one was calling for Lewis to see the bulk of the carries.

 

[[icon]]

HEY Bayhawks:

Please list the RBs you have ahead of Lewis the rest of the way in PPR.

TIA

 

[Bayhawks]

There was no "big back" on the roster for that game? I though we were just using generic "pass catching" and "big back" terms in our analysis.

Bolden was there, but he's a ST guy, not really a viable RB; they had cut Gray. I don't think I'm missing Antone, so no, in that game, BB didn't have a "big" RB available.

Bolden is 5'11", 220 pounds and had 139 carries at 4.56 yards per carry (and 25 receptions) entering his fourth season in the league. But feel free to ignore the facts that don't fit your narrative.

Yeah, that's what I'm doing. That's why I included RBs like James White & Leon Washington when I looked at "pass-catching" RBs.

 

[Bayhawks]

In 16 games last season Vereen had 16 touches from the 10 and in for the Patriots. 12 rushing attempts, 4 receptions and 4 TDs.

In 4 games this season Lewis has had 6. Of those six, 5 were rushing attempts with one reception and 3 TDs.

Lewis has already had nearly half of the rushing attempts Vereen got in those situations in 25% of the games. The reception total is similar but the TD potential is much higher.

Regardless of the number of carries Lewis may be getting per game when the Patriots are between the 10 and the 2, Belichick is showing that he's more inclined to use Lewis as a runner there than he did with Vereen. Given how often I anticipate the Patriots being at the opponents' 10 this season I think this bodes well for Lewis' potential going forward.

Vereen only had 16 touches last year, but he had 21 opps (targets + rushes). Lewis has had the 6 opps this year, thus far.

Lewis is on pace for 3 more opportunities than Vereen had last year. I don't feel that is a significant difference, but that's my opinion. Your opinion that this difference is significant is just as valid.

 

[packersfan]

In 16 games last season Vereen had 16 touches from the 10 and in for the Patriots. 12 rushing attempts, 4 receptions and 4 TDs.

In 4 games this season Lewis has had 6. Of those six, 5 were rushing attempts with one reception and 3 TDs.

Lewis has already had nearly half of the rushing attempts Vereen got in those situations in 25% of the games. The reception total is similar but the TD potential is much higher.

Regardless of the number of carries Lewis may be getting per game when the Patriots are between the 10 and the 2, Belichick is showing that he's more inclined to use Lewis as a runner there than he did with Vereen. Given how often I anticipate the Patriots being at the opponents' 10 this season I think this bodes well for Lewis' potential going forward.

Vereen only had 16 touches last year, but he had 21 opps (targets + rushes). Lewis has had the 6 opps this year, thus far.

Lewis is on pace for 3 more opportunities than Vereen had last year. I don't feel that is a significant difference, but that's my opinion. Your opinion that this difference is significant is just as valid.

Projecting out to 16 games is highly flawed but if we were to do that Lewis' rushing attempts in a prime scoring area on the field project to be nearly double what Vereen got last season. The TD projection is also considerably higher as well.

Again, this is flawed and I realize that but what the current numbers tell me is Belichick is far more apt to use Lewis as a runner in that prime scoring area than he was with Vereen. And given how Lewis is scoring at a good clip in that area it stands to reason that trend will continue.

So I just don't see Lewis being similar to Vereen when scoring opportunities are at their highest. I've said all along I think he's a better runner than Vereen and to this point Belichick would seem to agree based on rushing usage near the end zone.

 

[Shutout]

Now that I think about it, I think Adam may have been one of the guys that I went back and forth on that discussion and, if so, that's even more reason to listen to him now because if he was the one who I went back and forth on this on, I'm sure he is drawing from that scenario to see this one very clearly and, IMO, Adam is dead on on what is happening here and, more importantly, WHY.

I was, but I don't think the situations are really all that analogous. I was down on Moreno because I didn't think he was good at football. I'm high on Lewis because I think he is.

LOL. That's not helping your case here, Adam (And I was trying to throw a vote of support).

I was hoping to read what you took from that and what/if it meant anything in how you saw this scenario. Instead, it reads like "Adam was wrong that time. Is he this time?"

All tongue-in-cheek here. I DO think you are spot on with this and, for myself, in my own analysis of this situation, the Moreno situation wasn't what got me to liking Lewis, initially, but I can see similar correlations in how several people's perceptions attempted to manufacture the expected ability but it does not match when you just watch what is going on and you disconnect it from FF a bit.

 

[SameSongNDance]

ITT: People arguing as to whether or not their waiver wire pick-up is a high-end RB1 or just a middling RB1 ROS.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

There was no "big back" on the roster for that game? I though we were just using generic "pass catching" and "big back" terms in our analysis.

Bolden was there, but he's a ST guy, not really a viable RB; they had cut Gray. I don't think I'm missing Antone, so no, in that game, BB didn't have a "big" RB available.

Bolden is 5'11", 220 pounds and had 139 carries at 4.56 yards per carry (and 25 receptions) entering his fourth season in the league. But feel free to ignore the facts that don't fit your narrative.

Yeah, that's what I'm doing. That's why I included RBs like James White & Leon Washington when I looked at "pass-catching" RBs.

So why don't Lewis' carries in Week 1 count?

When you stated that it's a "fact" that he's being used the same as previous "pass catching backs" did you disregard their carries during the weeks that Ridley, Blount, BJGE, Morris, Maroney etc. sat out with injuries?

 

[tone1oc]

Bottom line I don't think there will be "Lewis games" and "Blount games" like there used to be "Vereen games" and "Blount games." I think every game will be a Lewis game given his role and what he's shown. Blount's the one who I believe will be more matchup dependent for fantasy owners.

This is my problem with comparing him to Vereen. I totally respect where Adam is coming from with the "rich-man Vereen" comp, but he was very much a dice roll and his big games offset his games where he didn't see the field much. Basically the type of player I don't like to roster (ideally) while Dion Lewis will have a safe floor every single week.

ITT: People arguing as to whether or not their waiver wire pick-up is a high-end RB1 or just a middling RB1 ROS.

Handle/Post

 

[packersfan]

Bottom line I don't think there will be "Lewis games" and "Blount games" like there used to be "Vereen games" and "Blount games." I think every game will be a Lewis game given his role and what he's shown. Blount's the one who I believe will be more matchup dependent for fantasy owners.

This is my problem with comparing him to Vereen. I totally respect where Adam is coming from with the "rich-man Vereen" comp, but he was very much a dice roll and his big games offset his games where he didn't see the field much. Basically the type of player I don't like to roster (ideally) while Dion Lewis will have a safe floor every single week.

Yup. That's why I said I think every game will be a "Lewis game." He's locked into a primary role on this offense. He's not a dice roll. Whether you think he's a RB1 or a RB2 all that matters is I think you can start him with confidence every week going forward unless something dramatically unexpected occurs or he suffers an injury. Right now there isn't a single thing that points to a reduced role. I definitely haven't seen anything presented that indicates that will occur. Meanwhile, there are plenty of reasons to think he's legit and his role is quite secure.

 

[Adam Harstad]

Now that I think about it, I think Adam may have been one of the guys that I went back and forth on that discussion and, if so, that's even more reason to listen to him now because if he was the one who I went back and forth on this on, I'm sure he is drawing from that scenario to see this one very clearly and, IMO, Adam is dead on on what is happening here and, more importantly, WHY.

I was, but I don't think the situations are really all that analogous. I was down on Moreno because I didn't think he was good at football. I'm high on Lewis because I think he is.

LOL. That's not helping your case here, Adam (And I was trying to throw a vote of support).

I was hoping to read what you took from that and what/if it meant anything in how you saw this scenario. Instead, it reads like "Adam was wrong that time. Is he this time?"

All tongue-in-cheek here. I DO think you are spot on with this and, for myself, in my own analysis of this situation, the Moreno situation wasn't what got me to liking Lewis, initially, but I can see similar correlations in how several people's perceptions attempted to manufacture the expected ability but it does not match when you just watch what is going on and you disconnect it from FF a bit.

I'm not trying to help my case, I'm trying to present my case. I don't think Dion Lewis is at all analogous to Knowshon Moreno, because I think Dion Lewis is a very good football player.

I also to this day don't think I was wrong that time in my "Knowshon Moreno isn't a very good football player" stance, or my "the coaching staff isn't a very big fan of Knowshon Moreno" stance. I clearly overrated the ability and trust of the other backs on the roster. But it's telling just how willing Denver was to let Knowshon walk after his big season. They never even made him an offer. Hardly something you do with a running back who you like and think is good. Miami wound up signing him in free agency for Ben Tate money.

I was wrong about how the 2013 Denver backfield was going to shake out. Was it a learning experience? Everything is a learning experience. I spend a good chunk of time after every season engaging in serious self evaluation. The very first article I wrote for Footballguys was about how important it is to evaluate our own processes. (It was the very first thing I wrote for DynastyRankings.net, too, back when I wrote for DynastyRankings.net.) My evaluation of my process showed some flaws. I overestimated Hillman and Ball. I underestimated the coaching staff's willingness to go with a guy they didn't like. I underestimated the potency of Denver's offense, (though in fairness, it's not like anyone was predicting they'd be the highest-scoring team in NFL history).

But the "Denver doesn't like Knowshon Moreno" bit, and the "Knowshon Moreno isn't very good at football" bit? I mark those down under good process, bad outcome. If that causes people to think I'm a stubborn fool who never changes his mind... well, I had Dion Lewis unranked in dynasty before the season and I have him in my top five dynasty backs today. I can change my mind. I just didn't this time.

If that causes people to trust my evaluation less, that's fine, too. I'm not really aiming to convince people I'm right. I'm just laying out my position as best I can and letting people evaluate it for themselves on its own merits. My track record- both good and bad- is absolutely fair game for that evaluation.

 

[Bayhawks]

There was no "big back" on the roster for that game? I though we were just using generic "pass catching" and "big back" terms in our analysis.

Bolden was there, but he's a ST guy, not really a viable RB; they had cut Gray. I don't think I'm missing Antone, so no, in that game, BB didn't have a "big" RB available.

Bolden is 5'11", 220 pounds and had 139 carries at 4.56 yards per carry (and 25 receptions) entering his fourth season in the league. But feel free to ignore the facts that don't fit your narrative.

Yeah, that's what I'm doing. That's why I included RBs like James White & Leon Washington when I looked at "pass-catching" RBs.

So why don't Lewis' carries in Week 1 count?

When you stated that it's a "fact" that he's being used the same as previous "pass catching backs" did you disregard their carries during the weeks that Ridley, Blount, BJGE, Morris, Maroney etc. sat out with injuries?

I'm not sure if you are being deliberately obtuse, or not. I'm inclined to say you are, but from your previous postings of yours that I remember reading, I've never gotten that vibe from you.

Take this how you want, but you can feel free to go back and look at which games NO "big RB" was available for NE. Or feel free not to. Unlike you, I have no intention of arguing with you. You seem inclined to pick a fight with me, for some reason.

The numbers are what they are; BB isn't using Lewis as a runner significantly more than he has used his other "pass-situation" RBs since 2007.

 

[Bayhawks]

In 16 games last season Vereen had 16 touches from the 10 and in for the Patriots. 12 rushing attempts, 4 receptions and 4 TDs.

In 4 games this season Lewis has had 6. Of those six, 5 were rushing attempts with one reception and 3 TDs.

Lewis has already had nearly half of the rushing attempts Vereen got in those situations in 25% of the games. The reception total is similar but the TD potential is much higher.

Regardless of the number of carries Lewis may be getting per game when the Patriots are between the 10 and the 2, Belichick is showing that he's more inclined to use Lewis as a runner there than he did with Vereen. Given how often I anticipate the Patriots being at the opponents' 10 this season I think this bodes well for Lewis' potential going forward.

Vereen only had 16 touches last year, but he had 21 opps (targets + rushes). Lewis has had the 6 opps this year, thus far.

Lewis is on pace for 3 more opportunities than Vereen had last year. I don't feel that is a significant difference, but that's my opinion. Your opinion that this difference is significant is just as valid.

Projecting out to 16 games is highly flawed but if we were to do that Lewis' rushing attempts in a prime scoring area on the field project to be nearly double what Vereen got last season. The TD projection is also considerably higher as well.

Again, this is flawed and I realize that but what the current numbers tell me is Belichick is far more apt to use Lewis as a runner in that prime scoring area than he was with Vereen. And given how Lewis is scoring at a good clip in that area it stands to reason that trend will continue.

So I just don't see Lewis being similar to Vereen when scoring opportunities are at their highest. I've said all along I think he's a better runner than Vereen and to this point Belichick would seem to agree based on rushing usage near the end zone.

That's a fair conclusion. If the trend continues, he will get more rushes inside the 10; even if his TD rate diminishes, he'll score more down there than Vereen did (since he already has as many as Vereen did all last year).

 

[SameSongNDance]

I'm reading that their LT Nate Soldier is done for the year. I'm not sure how much this affects Dion's outlook.

 

[Adam Harstad]

I'm reading that their LT Nate Soldier is done for the year. I'm not sure how much this affects Dion's outlook.

Obviously losing a player is rarely a positive thing, but New England has been rotating its offensive linemen a lot this year. Solder was one of the more-used players in the rotation, but there's several guys behind him who have already received heavy game action so far.

 

[Workhorse]

He reminds me an awful lot of Tiki Barber at the same age. Think back to the 1999 season when Fassel gave Tiki the starting RB job when everyone else went down and Barber was clearly the most elusive back on the roster. His usage over the next few seasons was largely relegated to the passing game but he was an effective runner given limited opportunities. The fear was that his frame (similar to Lewis) wouldn't hold up with a full time workload but his elusiveness, vision and speed won out and Tiki was an extremely effective starting RB for many years.

I think Dion has that same skillset and potential going forward.

 

[Run It Up]

Cannon came in for Solder after the half against the Cowboys.

Solder allowed a lot of sacks and pressure in the first half, Cannon allowed 0 sacks.

Solder is an elite LT, but his play has been spotty since the beginning of last year, it was unknown for most of the year but he had apparently been playing with testicular cancer and had a testicle removed midseason.

 

[addicted2ff]

I'm reading that their LT Nate Soldier is done for the year. I'm not sure how much this affects Dion's outlook.

I think that means Brady will have even less time to throw meaning even more short passes but probably lower the efficiency a little bit. In theory Edelman, Dion, Lafell, Amendola will have to break out of their routes a little quicker to make up for the faster pressure on Brady and that lowers everyone's ypc a little bit and creates more 3rd and 4th downs as a consequence. Doubt it will have that much of an effect for fantasy purposes though regarding start/sit decisions.

 

[Bayhawks]

Cannon came in for Solder after the half against the Cowboys.

Solder allowed a lot of sacks and pressure in the first half, Cannon allowed 0 sacks.

Solder is an elite LT, but his play has been spotty since the beginning of last year, it was unknown for most of the year but he had apparently been playing with testicular cancer and had a testicle removed midseason.

Holy sh!t!

Talk about playing through it.