Frenchy Fuqua
Footballguy
Sounds eerily similar to the Kevan Barlow saga of 2004.
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!
Droughns (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Deuce'sWild
- Start date
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
Only because I am a happily admitted Bush crotch sniffer.I'd like to see an argument for that one.Everything I've read out of camp sounds HORRIBLE for Chester Taylor - just b/c he's on the Vikes and was signed to a big contract doesn't mean he doesn't face a RBBC in Minn - Fason and MMoore will eat into his production - big time.
her's a HUGE risk with, IMO, only a twinge more upside.
To be honest, I would probably give in to my heart of hearts and take Reggie Bush over Droughns, but after Dunn.
Only because I am a happily admitted Bush crotch sniffer. Take that any way you want.
Nice!
Winston Wolfe
The Cleaner
That is an unfair comparison. The Barlow debacle had him going late first, early second round.
The equation is simple:
A. Droughns was productive behind a poor OL in Cleveland last year.
B. The Browns made major improvements to that OL.
There's a lot of upside here. The game is won on the line of scrimmage. This is the best OL I've ever seen the Browns have. Plus they improved their defensive front seven. The Browns as a team are set up to really surprise a lot of people. And actually, in the NFL, drastic improvements are fairly common.
Here is the knock. Maurice Carthon has not impressed calling the plays. However, I think that downgrades the passing game more, as the running game is less dependent upon it.
A. Droughns was productive behind a poor OL in Cleveland last year.
B. The Browns made major improvements to that OL.
There's a lot of upside here. The game is won on the line of scrimmage. This is the best OL I've ever seen the Browns have. Plus they improved their defensive front seven. The Browns as a team are set up to really surprise a lot of people. And actually, in the NFL, drastic improvements are fairly common.
Here is the knock. Maurice Carthon has not impressed calling the plays. However, I think that downgrades the passing game more, as the running game is less dependent upon it.
Last edited by a moderator:
nygiants56
Footballguy
Because of the other RB's you've mentioned, Droughns is guaranteed to get nearly ALL of his teams carries this year. He's remarkably durable, too..he's a lock to go over 300+ carries. He ran for an avg of 4.0 per carry last year WITH a rookie QB, lousy WR's , and an o-line chock full of holes. Now in 2006, he has the best center in the game, Bentley..that will help tremendously..the line has been reworked and the return of Winslow + the addition of J. Jurevicious should keep defenses away from loading 8-in-the-box, which is exactly what Droughns saw last year, each and every week..so its stunning to see the stats he put up in '05 ,albeit with low TD totals, but with 8 and 9 man fronts all season long..
In case you haven't noticed, about 9 teams DON'T use RBBC. thats it... Cleveland is one of the 9 teams.
Bush will do well , I don't know that I'd take Droughns before him, but he will split with Deuce...
Chester Taylor is so good, the Ravens let him walk, knowing full well that Jamal is CLEARLY NOT the back he once was, has chronic foot problems, and avg'd a career low 3.4 ypc last year..if EVER Taylor was going to get the starting gig, it would've been in Balt. Now he goes to Minnesota, and could be a top 20 RB, but
he has 2 very able-bodied RB's to deal with - Mewelde Moore and Ciatrick Fason.
both are excellent receivers, and the HC loves to throw to his RB's, check his stats while he coached in Philly...that being said, how many passing downs will Taylor be in on? what about 3rd downs? not many, imo..hard to see Taylor getting more than 225 carries with the 2 other RB's on the roster...Droughns has a bunch of bums and busts behind him - Lee Suggs and Willie Green..they drafted a rookie RB perhaps as a 3rd down guy, or to spell Droughns, but, you don't take a guy like Droughns out at the goalline or on 3rd down ( he has good hands)..
he's likely to at least triple his TD totals from 2005, I'd say he'll score between 8-10 TDs..
309-1300-9 tds, that's just 4.2 per carry...
Last edited by a moderator:
Frenchy Fuqua
Footballguy
Since the Browns returned to the NFL in 1999 here are their TOTAL TEAM rushing TDs by season:1999- 9
2000- 7
2001- 8
2002- 10 (made playoffs)
2003- 8
2004- 6
2005- 4
Despite adding an All-Pro center I think it is highly unlikely Droughns approaches 8-10 TDs with an inexperienced QB and WRs.
Frenchy Fuqua
Footballguy
Fixed.
Rounders
Footballguy
Well all this negative talk was truly reflected in my dynasty draft going on right now. http://www.unrealleagues.com/draft_home.asp?DraftID=70
I nabbed Droughns at 4.11 as my RB3-4 (Rudi, KJ, D.Williams). The value was too good to pass up.
It helped that I had 2-3rds and 2-4ths, but still it seems like owners are more scared of drafting him than they are willing to "gamble" on his upside.
I nabbed Droughns at 4.11 as my RB3-4 (Rudi, KJ, D.Williams). The value was too good to pass up.
It helped that I had 2-3rds and 2-4ths, but still it seems like owners are more scared of drafting him than they are willing to "gamble" on his upside.
Deuce'sWild
Footballguy
I think what is standing out to me the most, is that Droughns will be the man ON EVERY DOWN in Cleveland. He might not have as outstanding of a supporting cast, but he did it last year with lesser talents around him. The thing that scares me is 1. His QB and 2. His schedule.....but once again, he did it last year.
With only two tds last year, and the improvements in OL, I see only room to go up. He's not sexy, true, but I'll take a lesser looking babe that puts out more than one who looks great and I only get to bang every now and then....that's how I see this comparison.
Thanks for the info. Keep it coming.
Right now, I'm Droughns > Dunn....thanks to the info.
I love this freakin site.
With only two tds last year, and the improvements in OL, I see only room to go up. He's not sexy, true, but I'll take a lesser looking babe that puts out more than one who looks great and I only get to bang every now and then....that's how I see this comparison.
Thanks for the info. Keep it coming.
Right now, I'm Droughns > Dunn....thanks to the info.
I love this freakin site.
I'm not sure Frye is such a major downgrade from Trent Difler. He was a rookie last year and Braylon also went down in Frye's 2nd game as starter whereas Dilfer had him for most of his starts. In their only game together Frye went 13 for 20 for 226 and 2 TD's against a tough JAX defense.The jury's out, however, right now I'm certainly leaning your way. Hopefully preseason will shed some light on how much Frye can improve over his poor first season.
Last edited by a moderator:
M
MLBrandow
Guest
hard to tell with the new QB who didn't really impress last year (although I have faith in Frye for the long haul), and with Edwards out for a long time.KW2 and JJ aren't exactly burners, which looks like it could be a real problem for Droughns.
Just in case you were curious how much the loss of Edwards hurt Droughns:
With
+----------+-------------+--------+----+| WK OPP | RSH YD | RECYD | TD |+----------+-------------+--------+----+| 1 cin | 12 78 | 22 | 0 || 2 gnb | 20 50 | 29 | 0 || 3 ind | 22 76 | 32 | 0 || 7 det | 19 100 | 9 | 0 || 8 hou | 20 99 | 0 | 0 || 9 ten | 20 116 | 73 | 0 || 10 pit | 17 56 | 67 | 1 || 11 mia | 30 166 | 3 | 1 || 12 min | 19 73 | 46 | 0 || 13 jax | 30 88 | 0 | 0 |+----------+-------------+--------+----+| TOTAL | 209 902 | 281 | 2 |+----------+-------------+--------+----+4.3ypc, 118.3ypg, 0.2TDpgWithout
+----------+-------------+--------+----+| WK OPP | RSH YD | RECYD | TD |+----------+-------------+--------+----+| 5 chi | 17 72 | 21 | 0 || 6 bal | 15 55 | -2 | 0 || 14 cin | 21 74 | 4 | 0 || 15 oak | 18 53 | 31 | 0 || 16 pit | 10 36 | 29 | 0 || 17 bal | 19 40 | 5 | 0 |+----------+-------------+--------+----+| TOTAL | 100 330 | 88 | 0 |+----------+-------------+--------+----+3.3ypc, 69.7ypg, 0.0TDpgNote that Edwards won't be back until late October/Early November.
I see Bush as WAY more of a risk. I honestly think Droughns will be a safe #2 back for someone this year. I'm thinking of taking him at 3.1 to go with LJ or LT. Not sure yet and of course it depends who slides but I think a conservative pick with your #2 back isn't bad when you have a homerun hitter with your 1st back.And those of you STILL talking about Suggs need to let it go already. GEEEESH!
Deuce'sWild
Footballguy
With the exception of Oak and Cin (which Droughns didn't play well against either time) the quality of defenses were much better in the w/o Edwards comparison. Do you really think he made that much of a difference?The discouraging thing is that he sucked down the stretch, but I don't think Edwards had anything to do with it. More so, the defenses he was up against. I would have hated to have him in the playoffs....would've left a sour taste in my mouth.
I value your opinion, but almost always disagree with what you are saying.
M
MLBrandow
Guest
You don't think that's at least a slightly coincidental trend, that all of his bad games happened to occur without Edwards? I think that's interesting to note.With the exception of Oak and Cin (which Droughns didn't play well against either time) the quality of defenses were much better in the w/o Edwards comparison. Do you really think he made that much of a difference?
The discouraging thing is that he sucked down the stretch, but I don't think Edwards had anything to do with it. More so, the defenses he was up against. I would have hated to have him in the playoffs....would've left a sour taste in my mouth.
I value your opinion, but almost always disagree with what you are saying.
Last edited:
Deuce'sWild
Footballguy
Study the teams he did good against, the quality of their defense, and the teams he struggled against, the quality of their defense. Then see if you can tell me it was Braylon, and NOT the defenses that mattered the most. This is an unproven WR we are talking about, not a TO, Moss, Harrison or Holt who demands that defenses respect them, and can take away a couple defenders...maybe even a strong safety who normally helps stop the run. I doubt many defenses are that scared of Edwards, even if he was one of the only threats on the team.You don't think that's at least a slightly coincidental trend, that all of his bad games happened to occur without Edwards? I think that's interesting to note.With the exception of Oak and Cin (which Droughns didn't play well against either time) the quality of defenses were much better in the w/o Edwards comparison. Do you really think he made that much of a difference?
The discouraging thing is that he sucked down the stretch, but I don't think Edwards had anything to do with it. More so, the defenses he was up against. I would have hated to have him in the playoffs....would've left a sour taste in my mouth.
I value your opinion, but almost always disagree with what you are saying.
Take a better look
Deuce'sWild
Footballguy
Best games of the year: Det, Hou, Ten, Mia
Worst games of the year: Bal x2, Pit x2, Chi, GB
See a trend??
Worst games of the year: Bal x2, Pit x2, Chi, GB
See a trend??
M
MLBrandow
Guest
With Edwards, average D rush rank - 19, Without Edwards - 13
Guess you can make of that what you will, but if you're going to assert that it's the defense and not the loss of Edwards as the primary reason, just look at the closer D-ranked games
With
CIN (20) - 6.5ypc, 110 total yards
GB (23) - 2.5ypc, 79 total yards
HOU (22) - 6.5ypc, 189 total yards
Without
CIN (20) - 3.5ypc, 78 total yards
OAK (25) - 2.9ypc, 84 total yards
Agreeing with you though, as I don't even like Edwards, but when your only deep threat is gone, defenses will concentrate on stuffing the run.
With Edwards out for half the season, it does not bode well Droughns.
Guess you can make of that what you will, but if you're going to assert that it's the defense and not the loss of Edwards as the primary reason, just look at the closer D-ranked games
With
CIN (20) - 6.5ypc, 110 total yards
GB (23) - 2.5ypc, 79 total yards
HOU (22) - 6.5ypc, 189 total yards
Without
CIN (20) - 3.5ypc, 78 total yards
OAK (25) - 2.9ypc, 84 total yards
Agreeing with you though, as I don't even like Edwards, but when your only deep threat is gone, defenses will concentrate on stuffing the run.
With Edwards out for half the season, it does not bode well Droughns.
Last edited:
Chaos Commish
Footballguy
I think it's a 100% coincidental trend.
Don't forget that games 14-17 had a rookie QB starting. The 2nd half of that season was brutal for the Browns. Braylon injured, out of the playoffs with nothing to play for, playing top defenses down the stretch, and a rookie QB starting. I don't think any RB would have performed well.
What remains to be seen is how much these factors are relevant to the coming season. The QB is no longer a rookie and gets a hopefully "stud" TE added to the offense. Edwards is likely out for the 1st half of the season. The OL has been improved, but its hard to say how much yet. The schedule has changed from 8 games against middle of the road defenses to half tough defenses and half push-overs.
I'm still thinking Droughns is good for about 1300-1400 combined yards and probably 2-4 TD's. Somwhere in the late teen's for RB's.
What remains to be seen is how much these factors are relevant to the coming season. The QB is no longer a rookie and gets a hopefully "stud" TE added to the offense. Edwards is likely out for the 1st half of the season. The OL has been improved, but its hard to say how much yet. The schedule has changed from 8 games against middle of the road defenses to half tough defenses and half push-overs.
I'm still thinking Droughns is good for about 1300-1400 combined yards and probably 2-4 TD's. Somwhere in the late teen's for RB's.
Deuce'sWild
Footballguy
Edwards may be the deep threat, but Winslow MAY attract more def attention than Edwards. He'll be able to occupy a LB, especially if they use him in multiple looks, w/motion, split, etc.
I agree the passing game is atrocious and will affect RD production, but I think with your analysis it was more the def.
We can disagree though, it's ok.
M
MLBrandow
Guest
I agree.But when I'm drafting an RB2 like that, I'd rather have a hit or miss guy than one who consistently puts up like 7 or 8 points.
add: and I'm not even sold that he beats out Lee Suggs enough to rid RBBC.
Last edited:
I think we can all agree that whether you draft someone or not is going to depend on where you are drafting and the other options available at the time.As I stated earlier, I'd probably shy away in the early 3rd. I usually have a glut of similar lower tier RB options in that spot and top players at other positions are generally better value. Late 3rd, early 4th is where I think Droughns presents a great option. The guy who posted that he took him in the late 4th in an initial dynasty got a steal IMHO.
Last edited by a moderator:
tribecalledjeff
Footballguy
??? Do you have a link to support this claim that the Browns will used an undersized, 3rd down type back on the goal line?
except for the fact that droughns proved himself last year.
i had dunn on multiple teams last year. but thanks for telling me what i watched.
Deuce'sWild
Footballguy
Drafting at #3, and looking at probably LT or SA....will make a difference for me. If I get SA, and RD and Dunn are there, I would probably have to take RD....since Dunn and SA have the same bye.
Frenchy Fuqua
Footballguy
For those that believe the Browns O has nowhere to go but up due to the O-line additions, what about the loss of the Browns top WR and QB from last year? Dilfer and Antonio Bryant weren't Pro Bowlers but their 2006 replacements won't likely approach the veterans 2005 production. The key skill players in the Browns O this year besides Droughns (Frye, Winslow & Edwards) have played in 19 NFL games. Besides youth, Edwards and Winslow are coming off major knee injuries. Joe Jurevicius is the big WR until Edwards returns, he's never been more than a complimentary player in the NFL. At 31 he's never topped 706 yards in a season. The Browns have certainly improved their O-line but I think inexperience at other positions limits the potential of their offense. Defenses will key on Droughns because the Browns have no other veteran playmakers or a proven QB to deliver them the ball. This was the case in the final 5 games of 2005 and is likely to play out again in 2006. The Browns difficult schedule will also make things tough on those who draft Droughns in the 3rd.
Frenchy Fuqua
Footballguy
Barlow "proved" himself so much in 2003 that he was viewed by many as a 1st rounder in 2004:2003 stats
16 games
201 carries for 1024 yards (5.1 AVG)
7 TD
35 receptions for 307 yards (8.8 AVG)
Pretty decent numbers despite splitting time with Hearst.
Last edited by a moderator:
Deuce'sWild
Footballguy
For those interested, I weighted the projections dominator to 25% for David, Bob, Jason, and Chris (no offense Maurile)....and here's what they have projected for Dunn and Droughns.
Droughns:
301 carries
1213 yd
6 Td
36 rec
283 yd rec
2 tds.............205 fp
Dunn:
268 carries
1205 yd
4 Td
29 rec
232 yd rec
1 td.................191 fp.
Droughns:
301 carries
1213 yd
6 Td
36 rec
283 yd rec
2 tds.............205 fp
Dunn:
268 carries
1205 yd
4 Td
29 rec
232 yd rec
1 td.................191 fp.
BigRed
Footballguy
Exactly. Well I'm not even sure I'd say 'significantly' higher ceiling either, unless Deuce blows out a knee early on or some such.Do not underestimate the "safe" pick.
It'll be interesting to see what he goes for in our auction. I might just bid him early to try and get him cheaply as one helluva RB3. Could maybe live w/him as RB2 even, if other positions are strong enough.
Last edited by a moderator:
BigRed
Footballguy
You say that like it's a fact. They have two VERY highly rated guys coming back from injury in Edwards and Winslow - even with the so-so Frye, IMO odds are at least one produces superior #s and both if even just w/the threat of their ability should take some real heat off the running game, at least in the 1st half.
You are kidding right?
CalBear
Footballguy
Between 2003 and 2004, Barlow lost TO and Garcia; Droughns is losing Dilfer and gaining Edwards. Barlow also started only four games in 2003; Droughns was a full-time starter in 2005. The situations aren't at all analagous.Barlow "proved" himself so much in 2003 that he was viewed by many as a 1st rounder in 2004:2003 stats
16 games
201 carries for 1024 yards (5.1 AVG)
7 TD
35 receptions for 307 yards (8.8 AVG)
Pretty decent numbers despite splitting time with Hearst.
TLEF316
Footballguy
great discussion guys. As someone who is looking at droughns with my 2 first round picks in my rookie/non keeper draft, its very helpful to hear more opinions.
I think droughns is a decent talent, but compared to the other starting RB's, he is below average. Another poster named all the RB's he'd rather have based on pure talent, and i tend to agree.
As far as where he represents value, i think you need to look at the rst of your team. If you have a top 3 pick and you go RB/Wr with your first two picks, i think you can afford to take drougjns on the early 3rd. You know you'll get solid yardage production, a decent amount of receptions and questionable TD's (which are almost unpredictable anyway)
However, if you have a mid-late pick, id probably shy away. His upside is low, and those that miss out on the super-stud RB's tend to have to go for a little more upside with their other cornerstones. Personally, id rather take a shot on a top WR with some upside (chambers maybe) or a RB with a little higher ceiling. i dont buy the argument that an upgraded O-line is going to make his TD totals respectable. He'll see 8 man fronts all year unless Winslow/edwards come back and makes an impact.
Droughns is a nice player, but not somebody ill be targeting.
I think droughns is a decent talent, but compared to the other starting RB's, he is below average. Another poster named all the RB's he'd rather have based on pure talent, and i tend to agree.
As far as where he represents value, i think you need to look at the rst of your team. If you have a top 3 pick and you go RB/Wr with your first two picks, i think you can afford to take drougjns on the early 3rd. You know you'll get solid yardage production, a decent amount of receptions and questionable TD's (which are almost unpredictable anyway)
However, if you have a mid-late pick, id probably shy away. His upside is low, and those that miss out on the super-stud RB's tend to have to go for a little more upside with their other cornerstones. Personally, id rather take a shot on a top WR with some upside (chambers maybe) or a RB with a little higher ceiling. i dont buy the argument that an upgraded O-line is going to make his TD totals respectable. He'll see 8 man fronts all year unless Winslow/edwards come back and makes an impact.
Droughns is a nice player, but not somebody ill be targeting.
Last edited by a moderator:
Frenchy Fuqua
Footballguy
Droughns is losing his top QB and WR from 2005 (Dilfer and Bryant). It's already been proven that his numbers suffer considerably with Frye at QB. Eventually he will get Edwards back this year but only after he has recovered from knee reconstruction. My point is that Barlow had talent but was surrounded by a very inexperienced cast, Droughns is in an analogous boat. Besides Droughns the top 3 skill players in the Browns offense have played in 19 NFL games with two of the three coming off major knee injuries. Those expecting 1200-1300 yards rushing and 7-8 TDs from Droughns will be very disappointed in my opinion.Between 2003 and 2004, Barlow lost TO and Garcia; Droughns is losing Dilfer and gaining Edwards. Barlow also started only four games in 2003; Droughns was a full-time starter in 2005. The situations aren't at all analagous.Barlow "proved" himself so much in 2003 that he was viewed by many as a 1st rounder in 2004:2003 stats
16 games
201 carries for 1024 yards (5.1 AVG)
7 TD
35 receptions for 307 yards (8.8 AVG)
Pretty decent numbers despite splitting time with Hearst.
Last edited by a moderator:
Leroy's Aces
Footballguy
They lose Bryant, who had 1000 yards with a mess at QB, and they get back Winslow, who MAY be decent, or he may not be. Then, they get back Edwards in October, POSSIBLY, after the bye week, in a best case scenario. There is no guarantee that either will have any impact and the receivers could conceivably be worse, even with Joe J. Even if they are better, they are not a really good group, UNLESS Joe J does great, Winslow is very good and Edwards comes back earlier than expected. That is asking a lot, plus Frye still sucks.No, I am not kidding. There are not too many question marks "in comparison."
1. Roy Williams now has 2 capable QBs, no #2 WR of note, plus a WR friendly offense.
2. Reggie Wayne is younger than Harrison and catches passes from Manning. He is in his prime and will likely be the #1 WR in Indy this year. Last year he was productive while dinged up at times.
3. Gates is a stud and is getting better. Even if Rivers stuggles, he will look to Gates most of the time.
4. Chambers has done well with average QBs and gets Culpepper. He is the feature WR on the team. He does have a ? mark if Harrington has to play a lot.
Any of the wide receivers listed above have a reasonable shot to be a top 5 wide receiver. Gates already is the #1 tight end. Does Reuben Droughns have a shot to be a top 5 running back? No, not even close! His chances of being a top 5 running back are probably 30 to 1. Drafting studs at their positions is one great way to win your league, or win/place highly in national contests, not taking the running back that 11 other teams passed on three times. Most great fantasy teams have 3-4 studs, and 3-4 other average guys. Which one is Droughns? If you take Gates, which one is he? Or Wayne in 2006? Or possibly Roy Williams?
To make my initial argument, I should have listed Hines Ward. and Driver, as they are more proven guys than Roy Williams, but the point is this:
It is your decision to take the #19-20 RB selected while others take the #9-12 WRs or the #1-2 TEs. Look at what average value theory (buy Z-Men's book, lol) and value based drafting say when you do that. Even if Droughns outperfoms that average draft status, you have to draft very well to match the comparative production of a #10 WR or the #1 or 2 TE. This is assuming a point per reception league.
But hey, if you have Droughns ranked as a top 10 or 12 running back, by all means draft him. I just don't have him ranked that high, so I would not take him in the late 3rd.
Dave
Leroy's Aces
Last edited by a moderator:
CalBear
Footballguy
You're comparing losing Terrell Owens and Jeff Garcia to losing Antonio Bryant and Trent Dilfer? No wonder you have to resort to a spelling correction.And you know, it's just possible that Frye might do better running the offense in his second year. Sometimes that happens with second-year QBs. Five meaningless games at the end of a rookie season do not constitute "proof" of anything.
M
MLBrandow
Guest
Mike Martz
BigRed
Footballguy
Yes and we all know WRs and TEs are as valuable as RBs.
cmon. And who said anything about Droughns needing to be a top 5 back?
(etc etc) Even presuming all your rankings and justifications are right (debatable obviously), I won't bother getting into all the "FF theory" bits, except to say that while RBs aren't the be-all/end-all, having consistent ones IS very important to winning, and WRs are notoriously less consistent than RBs on average, that's my point. So generally, yes I easily will take a slightly lesser RB over a WR most days. PS while it's also debatable (in fact I'm still debating it myself), I'm currently looking to bid more aggressively for Gates than I would most years for the top TE.
Frenchy Fuqua
Footballguy
Actually I was comparing Tim Rattay/Kevan Barlow/Brandon Lloyd/Eric Johnson 0f 2004 with Charlie Frye/Reuben Droughns/Braylon Edwards/Kellen Winslow Jr of 2006. A pretty fair analogy I'd say.
Last edited by a moderator:
SteelerMurf
Footballguy
Droughns schedule alone should put him below some of the guys mentioned already. It is brutal.
Steelers 2 x
Baltimore 2 x
Denver
TB
Carolina
San Diego
KC (surprisingly tough vs. run statistically last year)
That is 9 really though matchups. Sure Winslow, Edwards and Frye may end up being future stars, but I think they will need another year to get there. THere will be lots of 8 men in the box daring Frye to throw.
Steelers 2 x
Baltimore 2 x
Denver
TB
Carolina
San Diego
KC (surprisingly tough vs. run statistically last year)
That is 9 really though matchups. Sure Winslow, Edwards and Frye may end up being future stars, but I think they will need another year to get there. THere will be lots of 8 men in the box daring Frye to throw.
stanmarino13
Footballguy
The only stat that made the KC defense look ok is the number of rushes against. They still gave up over 4 yards per carry.
SteelerMurf
Footballguy
Probably true, I was just going off of complete final stats, no averages, etc. But this does not negate that Droughns has a tough schedule.Low rushing attempts vs. KC is cause they are so high scoring you have to pass to keep up with them....something Cleveland will probably have to do too.
Leroy's Aces
Footballguy
Yes and we all know WRs and TEs are as valuable as RBs.
A lot of it depends on your league and scoring. In a league without PPR and starting 2 RBs and 2 WRs, then I can see your point, I guess. In a PPR league with 2 RBs, 3 WRs and a flex like WCOFF, then those WRs become much more valuable than Droughns at that spot.
Droughns does not need to be a top 5 back. The point there is that he has no shot to be a top 5 back, unlike any of the receivers listed. And Gates already is the #1 TE. If you are okay with taking middle of the road running backs in the late 3rd vs. a top 10 WR or the number one tight end, just because he is a "running back", then that is your choice. It is just not one that will lead to more points or a championship squad. It will help you get a nice, safe, middle of the road team. Safe teams do not win fantasy championships.
I do want to edit to say that if you think Droughns will have a 1400 yard season and improve his TDs into the 8-10 range and get into or near the top 10 of running backs, then by all means take him. I do not think that he will, so that is why I have advocated going another direction at that spot, instead of taking a guy like Droughns or even Dunn, who has little upside (since he no longer gets many ctahces, few TDs, and is aging.)
Last edited by a moderator:
