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!
I've seen every single snap, some practices and have most of the games on tape. The Texans have a good run blocking line.....most just assume that the line can't drive block because they struggle in pass protection...but those folks are making the wrong assumptions. Here is a breakdown from this site that seems to agree with me...http://www.footballguys.com/05teamreport_hou.htm
Fantasy points are based on what? Yards and TD's. Per touch, DD had more yards and TD's than TJ. 20% more. You really need a lesson in stats because you are just starting to sound silly or are you in a yardage only league?
It's not really a dumb argument. An overwhelming majority of the league's best RBs were first round picks. That's because they possessed physical tools and a track record of success that made them highly-regarded prospects. Domanick Davis had a decent college career, but he's below average physically. That's important.
http://www.nfl.com/draft/profiles/davis_domanick
HOLD THE PHONE!! That is a piece about what the line COULD do in 2005. It doesn't talk about the line's 3.9 YPC regardless of the RB in 2004. That line got better as the season went on as did Davis. More time in the new scheme, a highly drafted C, as well as a newly signed OT to add some depth will help to improve the line over last year's numbers. And along with that it should improve DD's YPC as well as reduce the wear and tear on Davis.Everyone does know that this is an expansion team that is just a few years old, right?. And that their first expansion pick never made an impact on the team (Boselli), right? And that in those few years they have already changed their offensive line blocking scheme, right?
Even against the Jets this year (another top 10 defense against the run), he would have had a good game except for two key penalties. Houston got killed 29-7 and he had only 17-52 1TD and one reception, so it was tough but I watched and he just missed a great game (from cbs sportsline):2-3-HOU40 (3:55) D.Davis right tackle for 60 yards, TOUCHDOWN NULLIFIED by Penalty. PENALTY on HST-M.Bruener, Offensive Holding, 10 yards, enforced at HST 40 - No Play.
) I wanted to see what his ypc would have been with this run and it was 4.1 ypc.
You misunderstand my argument. My argument is that Domanick Davis may not be productive enough from an NFL standpoint to remain his team's unchallenged workhorse. That has nothing to do with fantasy points. It's not a fantasy football argument. It's an argument about the real world, where coaches look at things like yards gained. A fantasy owner is happy with DD when he runs 26 times for 80 yards and two scores. His coach is unlikely to be as happy with that performance.People consistently justify DD's talent by referring to fantasy points. I think they're making a bit of a mistake. Fantasy points are great, but they're not a perfect indicator of NFL effectiveness.
All I'm saying is that the argument that the Texans have a miserable line and DD gets his yards despite of it is just not accurate. I didn't have to provide a link or a second opinion, but I am just showing you I’m not out in left field when I redundantly state that our line has excellent drive blockers and do a much better job than most of you guys (who don't really watch many Texans games) perceive based on the commentary I see here over and over and over. The Texans offensive line is chock full of oversized mauling run blocking types....that's just how it is.
I would like to hear EBF's explanation for DD's 4.57 YPC in the second half. He was obviously injured in the first half of the season. But in the second half he ruled. How does he explain that? He wants to nitpick at this one stat, then let's really dissect it.....
If you don't find my arguments compelling then don't change your stance. The funny thing about this thread is that I've never made an overly bold claim regarding Davis. In my initial post I actually said that he'll probably be good for top 15 numbers assuming that Morency plays only a minor role. Anyhow, I don't personally think Davis is a special back. I don't think he's among the top 15 NFL RBs in talent. My concern is that he may not be talented enough to keep his job. He doesn't have the pedigree of a star, he doesn't have the physical tools of a star, he's been inconsistent, and he hasn't produced like a star (real world production, not fantasy points). That's why I'd definitely avoid him in dynasty leagues and probably in redraft leagues. If this seems absurd to you then that's unfortunate. It's clear that you choose to believe that Davis is a great fantasy back. That's fine. You might be right.
You made a bad inference. That the majority of the top RBs in the NFL were high picks does not imply that every high pick will become a top NFL RB.
I don't think they are disagreeing with you, I think they are pointing out that the Texans had a new blocking scheme and once Davis got healthy and the line jelled/learned the new scheme their running game was actually good. Based on the end of the year, I am looking forward to Davis having a great full year and making sure I handcuff him with the #2 and/or draft Morency in case Davis leaves as a RFA.
I will try to be a voice of reason.
He did also have a 4.3 ypc average in his rookie year on 238 carries, which ain't bad since he wasn't actually the starter to begin the season so he wasn't getting many reps in practice. He also had his worse YPC games against Buffalo, Jacksonville, NE and Tampa, which is not unexpected. I think I did the overall YPC removing the 4 games in 2004 in which he got hurt in the game or was still questionable, and his ypc for around 1.5 seasons was very respectable, somewhere around 4.3 to 4.5. Throw in his receiving ability and that sure seems like a solid back. Again, I have seen enough on this message board to know that I will draft Morency (in a keeper not dynasty) since no one else will to ensure my team's future as DD is one of my FF studs.
Wrong. When given the starter role in '03 his #'s were 238-1031 (4.33 YPC). So in 2003 he averaged over 4.33 YPC, in the beginning of 2004 when hurt over 7 games he averaged 2.975 YPC, and when healthy over the last 8 games he averaged 4.57 YPC. So based on those #'s it looks like the 1st 8 games of '04 when he was hurt and averaged 2.975 YPC are the outliers.
4.33 is not the same as 4.57, so I was actually right. However, you're correct in noting that he had a pretty good rookie year. His best hope to become Houston's unquestioned long term guy is to get his YPC back up to the 4.3-4.5 range. I don't think he'll be replaced if he can do that.
Please, oh please go to your nearest community college and get a course guide, enroll in logic 101 and take it. I made the bad inference to prove a point. That the majority of top RB's in the NFL were high picks does not that every high pick will become a top NFL RB is true, the inverse is also true: Just because the majority of top RB's in the NFL were high picks does not imply that every low pick in the NFL will not become a top NFL RB. It's an absolutely ignorant argument to stand on.
Does this mean you have zero expectations for guys like David Terrell and to a lesser extent Joey Harrington?
No. It means that my expectations of both of these guys has nothing to do with when they were drafted. It has no bearing now as far as I'm concerned. How about you? Are you bumping Terrell up your draft board because he was a former first rounder?
Nope.
So he has a 4.3 YPC in 2003 and then they switch to a new blocking scheme in 2004 and his YPC drops to 3.9. I can see how you can assume it was all DD. Makes perfect sense to me
I don't think it's stupid at all. It's another factor to consider.It's still early in DD's career. As a result, I still keep his draft position in the back of my mind when I evaluate his prospects.
Plenty of peripheral reasons to doubt the guy. YPC, draft position and measureables? There were only 11 players that had 1K yards in 2003 and 2004. 1K yards is only 67 yards per game, should be easy enough. Those 11 are:Alexander
No, it's not. Draft position is not a factor to consider for whether a player is good or bad in the NFL, it's only a factor to reflect whether he was good/bad in college.
That is pretty elite company. But that doesn't make DDavis an elite RB.Regardless of my opinion on Dom Davis, being in great company doesn't make one great. Having back to back seasons of 1,000 yards means just a few things:
It doesn't always show it. But draft position is NEVER a guarantee on NFL success. Ever. It's always a reflection on their college careers as a whole.
Give me Cleveland's last 6 first round picks, and tell me how it correlated to their respective NFL careers.
Give me Cleveland's last 6 seventh round picks and tell me how it correlated to their respective NFL careers.
That's supposed to prove something? The last round of the draft? Or do you just like answering a question with a question when you know you're dead in the water?Let me rephrase. If you're picked 200th, you probably will suck in the NFL, but if you're picked 1st, it doesn't predict jack ####.
It's still wrong. You can look at each draft slot as having a particular expected value. The further you get from the 1st overall pick, the less likely the player is to succeed.
This is also wrong. Ronnie Brown was the #2 pick. Do you think his college career justified that? He was a backup RB who never carried more than 200 times in a season. Professional scouts inevitably look at college production, but their focus is on projecting a player's pro potential. That's why they look at things like physical measurables.
So, then, what's the explanation for all the failed picks?I've already said it's NOT much of a predictor. Prove me wrong with something other than the obvious.
This is poor, poor reasoning. No pick is a sure thing. However, high picks are much more likely to develop into elite players than low picks. A good analogy is Texas Hold 'Em starting hands. AA is the best hand. Does that mean it never loses? No, but the odds of it winning a given hand are better than they would be with an inferior starting hand.
Huge difference there. Turner fell into their laps in the 5th round and they couldn't pass him up. They took Sproles in the 4th since they needed a kick returner. Morency is starting RB material and they used a 3rd round pick on him (higher than they took DD). You don't do that unless you are a little concerned about the health or ability of your starting RB.
These are all assumptions at this point. Unless you have inside information then I don't see how you can justify these statements.
Tomlinson has demonstrated that he can sustain an elite YPC average over the course of a season. In 2002 he averaged 4.5 YPC on 372 carries and in 2003 he averaged 5.3 YPC on 313 carries. If Davis had seasons like those under his belt then no one would be worried. At this point he doesn't have a comparable track record of elite performance.
Turner was a fifth round pick and my understanding is that Sproles was brought in to replace Tim Dwight in the return game. At any rate, neither guy was a top 75 selection like Morency.
I think the big difference is LT would still be productive with a torn groin. DD on the other hand.I can't imagine that playing with a torn groin for most of the season (bad enough to have to leave in the 3rd quarter) would have anything to do with his YPC.
Wait, you told me that draft position was important AFTER we've seen them play. So, AA isn't too damn strong when KKQQ is on the board now, is it.
Draft position is a much more predictive factor before the player has any time in the league. Once a player has 2 years in as a starter his draft position of say the 4th round is much less predictive of his future performance than a myriad of other factors. And every year in the league reduces the draft position factor even more....I've said it before and I'll say it again, we never look at Dayne's or Brady's respective draft position in looking at what they might do in the coming years anymore. People mention Priest Holmes a lot when talking about DD, at least his supporters. I see more of a Marshall Faulk type player. To say that DD can't be very good because his YPC was only 3.9 last year is like saying Marshall Faulk wasn't very good in 1999 because he only had about 85 yards rushing per game and disregarding the 1K yards receiving he had. Like I said, DD moves the chains. Only 4 guys in the league did it better last year. So keep looking at about 66% of his game and I'll ride the guy to the SB for the second straight season.
And what if in 2005 DD only rushes for about 70 yards per game on average over 16 games? That comes out to a measley 1100 yards but he also catches 700 yards in the air and finishes with 1800 total yards but only has a 4.0 YPC? What would you think of DD then?
