Dynasty Rankings (15 Viewers)

[SSOG]

Slaton is as good as Portis........and Terrell Davis. I don't see where people are getting that this kid is just your run-of-the-mill RB.

whoa-oa-oa there, now. There's a big-time difference between "he's no Clinton Portis" and "he's just your run-of-the-mill RB". Slaton had a very nice year last year. He averaged 103.7 yards per game, and managed 10 TDs. His ypc was an impeccable 4.8. Of course, Portis averaged 117.1 yards per game @ 5.5 yards per carry his rookie year, and tacked 17 TDs on top, despite the fact that he only started 12 games (vs. 15 for Slaton). His sophomore year, Portis put up 146.6 yards per game (again at 5.5 ypc). Portis has also topped 103 yards per game in 4 of his 5 seasons in Washington. Slaton's a good RB, but he's no Clinton Portis.And Terrell Davis? We're talking about a guy who's a 3-time first-team All Pro, a two-time OPoY, a league and SB MVP, the greatest postseason rusher in NFL history (no argument possible). A guy who rushed for 2000 yards in essentially 14 games (because he sat out the second half of four contests that were already blowouts). A guy who put up perhaps the most dominant rushing season of all time in a year when rushing yardage in the NFL was at an all-time low. A guy who is arguably a Hall of Famer based entirely on four seasons in the league. The only back better than Barry Sanders when Barry Sanders was in his prime. I suppose Slaton's as good as Gale Sayers and Bo Jackson, too, right?

Nope, he's not.....those guys were phenomenal athletic specimens. Portis and Davis are very good football players, but not anywhere near what I'd consider some of the most prime talent to ever play the game, and the position of RB (aside from the two you mentioned, Jim Brown, Barry, OJ, Payton, Dickerson, LT, Peterson.......yeah, this list ain't that long).But I certainly believe that Slaton is just as good as Portis AND Terrell. And if he plays on teams like Portis and Terrell that highlight and utilize his talents, and he can hold up over time, then yes, he could pretty much match what they do. Now when you consider Portis' consistency over the years, or Davis' high-production few years' run, no, it won't be easy for Slaton to match either. But I'm going strictly off of ability and what he can produce in the next few seasons. I'd certainly put a healthy Ahman Green, Priest Holmes, even Ricky Williams when he was motivated, in the same class as Portis and Terrell. Final numbers production is irrelevant, I'm talking about in the overall big picture, if Green/Holmes/Ricky don't get hurt and/or lose their marbles, then they too could have been just as productive as Davis/Portis based on similar abilities and talent level. My primary point is that these two guys (Porits/Davis) are/were not all-world talents. It is what it is. Talented, yes. Amongst the elite talents of their own generations, no.....And with this conclusion of mine, I won't even mention of All-Time.

So, in my eyes, from what I've seen of Slaton as a rookie, and Davis/Portis as rookies in this similar system, I have no doubt Slaton is just as good as either one of them and his work ethic and displayed maturity only gives me more assurance that he will be very successful in the next few years, barring injury, of course.

Davis wasn't an all-world talent? I suppose he got that league MVP during "everybody gets a trophy" day at the ballpark, then. He got that SB MVP trophy and set SB rushing records despite only playing 3 quarters because people felt bad for him, what with his migraines and all. That whole 160 yards and 1.5 TDs per game in the playoffs against some of the best rush defenses of the past decade thing must have just been a pretty good day at the office for a solid-but-unspectacular back like Terrell Davis. He's probably getting so much HoF consideration despite what was essentially a 4-year career because of the Mile High Salute- HoF voters love players who support the troops!I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that, even in the perfect situation, Steve Slaton couldn't rush for 2000 yards, or win a league MVP, or average the equivalent of a 2500 yards, 24 TD season against elite competition in the playoffs, or earn a Hall of Fame spot in 4 years. So no, I really don't think that Steve Slaton could "pretty much match" what Terrell Davis did.

 

[kremenull]

Slaton is as good as Portis........and Terrell Davis. I don't see where people are getting that this kid is just your run-of-the-mill RB.

whoa-oa-oa there, now. There's a big-time difference between "he's no Clinton Portis" and "he's just your run-of-the-mill RB". Slaton had a very nice year last year. He averaged 103.7 yards per game, and managed 10 TDs. His ypc was an impeccable 4.8. Of course, Portis averaged 117.1 yards per game @ 5.5 yards per carry his rookie year, and tacked 17 TDs on top, despite the fact that he only started 12 games (vs. 15 for Slaton). His sophomore year, Portis put up 146.6 yards per game (again at 5.5 ypc). Portis has also topped 103 yards per game in 4 of his 5 seasons in Washington. Slaton's a good RB, but he's no Clinton Portis.And Terrell Davis? We're talking about a guy who's a 3-time first-team All Pro, a two-time OPoY, a league and SB MVP, the greatest postseason rusher in NFL history (no argument possible). A guy who rushed for 2000 yards in essentially 14 games (because he sat out the second half of four contests that were already blowouts). A guy who put up perhaps the most dominant rushing season of all time in a year when rushing yardage in the NFL was at an all-time low. A guy who is arguably a Hall of Famer based entirely on four seasons in the league. The only back better than Barry Sanders when Barry Sanders was in his prime. I suppose Slaton's as good as Gale Sayers and Bo Jackson, too, right?

Nope, he's not.....those guys were phenomenal athletic specimens. Portis and Davis are very good football players, but not anywhere near what I'd consider some of the most prime talent to ever play the game, and the position of RB (aside from the two you mentioned, Jim Brown, Barry, OJ, Payton, Dickerson, LT, Peterson.......yeah, this list ain't that long).But I certainly believe that Slaton is just as good as Portis AND Terrell. And if he plays on teams like Portis and Terrell that highlight and utilize his talents, and he can hold up over time, then yes, he could pretty much match what they do. Now when you consider Portis' consistency over the years, or Davis' high-production few years' run, no, it won't be easy for Slaton to match either. But I'm going strictly off of ability and what he can produce in the next few seasons. I'd certainly put a healthy Ahman Green, Priest Holmes, even Ricky Williams when he was motivated, in the same class as Portis and Terrell. Final numbers production is irrelevant, I'm talking about in the overall big picture, if Green/Holmes/Ricky don't get hurt and/or lose their marbles, then they too could have been just as productive as Davis/Portis based on similar abilities and talent level. My primary point is that these two guys (Porits/Davis) are/were not all-world talents. It is what it is. Talented, yes. Amongst the elite talents of their own generations, no.....And with this conclusion of mine, I won't even mention of All-Time.

So, in my eyes, from what I've seen of Slaton as a rookie, and Davis/Portis as rookies in this similar system, I have no doubt Slaton is just as good as either one of them and his work ethic and displayed maturity only gives me more assurance that he will be very successful in the next few years, barring injury, of course.

Davis wasn't an all-world talent? I suppose he got that league MVP during "everybody gets a trophy" day at the ballpark, then. He got that SB MVP trophy and set SB rushing records despite only playing 3 quarters because people felt bad for him, what with his migraines and all. That whole 160 yards and 1.5 TDs per game in the playoffs against some of the best rush defenses of the past decade thing must have just been a pretty good day at the office for a solid-but-unspectacular back like Terrell Davis. He's probably getting so much HoF consideration despite what was essentially a 4-year career because of the Mile High Salute- HoF voters love players who support the troops!I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that, even in the perfect situation, Steve Slaton couldn't rush for 2000 yards, or win a league MVP, or average the equivalent of a 2500 yards, 24 TD season against elite competition in the playoffs, or earn a Hall of Fame spot in 4 years. So no, I really don't think that Steve Slaton could "pretty much match" what Terrell Davis did.

Correct....He wasn't. One or two very good seasons don't make you an all-world talent. DeA just had a phenomenal season and should have easily won the MVP award over Peyton Manning and anyone else last year. So I guess he should pretty much get his reservation ready for the HoF if he has one or two more very good seasons, right? Jamal Lewis ran for 2,000 yds, Corey Dillon has held the single-game rushing record,. Moments, whether it be a game or a season or two, don't put you in the HoF. Willie Parker has run very well in the playoffs as well, if I recall, and has two Super Bowl rings. I expect his final career rushing numbers to probably be fairly close to Terrell Davis' in the end. HoF right? Davis, IMHO, is in no uncertain terms, NOT a HoFer. If he gets in it will be because the media loves him. Look at his overall numbers and the fact that he wasn't a jaw-dropping talent, and no, he doesn't merit HoF. Now if there is another guy outside of Gale Sayers who should be in the HoF without the numbers to truly justify it, simply cause there is no disputing his "All-Worldness"....It's Bo Jackson. If Bo doesn't get hurt to end his career, Terrell is an afterthought as this would have been another contemporary who totally blows him away.

Let me toss out a couple more names of guys who are easily......not even a question.....as good as (or probably even better pure RBs than) Portis/Davis.

Fred Taylor

Larry Johnson

Now who's careers will look better in the rearview mirror. Yeah, Davis and Portis. So, back to the point. When I'm evaluating talent for my fantasy team or just in general, right now, I have to make a call on Slaton and how good of a player he is with respect to his overall talent level, situation going forward, and expected production. And right now, his prospects going forward put him on par to be as good a player as either Portis/Davis (is and/or used to be) over the next few years. Whether it's 2000 yd seasons or not, that is irrelevent, but he will be amongst the most productive of his contemporaries, I believe, over these next few years. And talent-wise, he's in Portis'/Davis' class......without any doubt!

 

[benm3218]

Slaton is as good as Portis........and Terrell Davis. I don't see where people are getting that this kid is just your run-of-the-mill RB.

whoa-oa-oa there, now. There's a big-time difference between "he's no Clinton Portis" and "he's just your run-of-the-mill RB". Slaton had a very nice year last year. He averaged 103.7 yards per game, and managed 10 TDs. His ypc was an impeccable 4.8. Of course, Portis averaged 117.1 yards per game @ 5.5 yards per carry his rookie year, and tacked 17 TDs on top, despite the fact that he only started 12 games (vs. 15 for Slaton). His sophomore year, Portis put up 146.6 yards per game (again at 5.5 ypc). Portis has also topped 103 yards per game in 4 of his 5 seasons in Washington. Slaton's a good RB, but he's no Clinton Portis.And Terrell Davis? We're talking about a guy who's a 3-time first-team All Pro, a two-time OPoY, a league and SB MVP, the greatest postseason rusher in NFL history (no argument possible). A guy who rushed for 2000 yards in essentially 14 games (because he sat out the second half of four contests that were already blowouts). A guy who put up perhaps the most dominant rushing season of all time in a year when rushing yardage in the NFL was at an all-time low. A guy who is arguably a Hall of Famer based entirely on four seasons in the league. The only back better than Barry Sanders when Barry Sanders was in his prime. I suppose Slaton's as good as Gale Sayers and Bo Jackson, too, right?

Nope, he's not.....those guys were phenomenal athletic specimens. Portis and Davis are very good football players, but not anywhere near what I'd consider some of the most prime talent to ever play the game, and the position of RB (aside from the two you mentioned, Jim Brown, Barry, OJ, Payton, Dickerson, LT, Peterson.......yeah, this list ain't that long).But I certainly believe that Slaton is just as good as Portis AND Terrell. And if he plays on teams like Portis and Terrell that highlight and utilize his talents, and he can hold up over time, then yes, he could pretty much match what they do. Now when you consider Portis' consistency over the years, or Davis' high-production few years' run, no, it won't be easy for Slaton to match either. But I'm going strictly off of ability and what he can produce in the next few seasons. I'd certainly put a healthy Ahman Green, Priest Holmes, even Ricky Williams when he was motivated, in the same class as Portis and Terrell. Final numbers production is irrelevant, I'm talking about in the overall big picture, if Green/Holmes/Ricky don't get hurt and/or lose their marbles, then they too could have been just as productive as Davis/Portis based on similar abilities and talent level. My primary point is that these two guys (Porits/Davis) are/were not all-world talents. It is what it is. Talented, yes. Amongst the elite talents of their own generations, no.....And with this conclusion of mine, I won't even mention of All-Time.

So, in my eyes, from what I've seen of Slaton as a rookie, and Davis/Portis as rookies in this similar system, I have no doubt Slaton is just as good as either one of them and his work ethic and displayed maturity only gives me more assurance that he will be very successful in the next few years, barring injury, of course.

Davis wasn't an all-world talent? I suppose he got that league MVP during "everybody gets a trophy" day at the ballpark, then. He got that SB MVP trophy and set SB rushing records despite only playing 3 quarters because people felt bad for him, what with his migraines and all. That whole 160 yards and 1.5 TDs per game in the playoffs against some of the best rush defenses of the past decade thing must have just been a pretty good day at the office for a solid-but-unspectacular back like Terrell Davis. He's probably getting so much HoF consideration despite what was essentially a 4-year career because of the Mile High Salute- HoF voters love players who support the troops!I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that, even in the perfect situation, Steve Slaton couldn't rush for 2000 yards, or win a league MVP, or average the equivalent of a 2500 yards, 24 TD season against elite competition in the playoffs, or earn a Hall of Fame spot in 4 years. So no, I really don't think that Steve Slaton could "pretty much match" what Terrell Davis did.

Correct....He wasn't. One or two very good seasons don't make you an all-world talent. DeA just had a phenomenal season and should have easily won the MVP award over Peyton Manning and anyone else last year. So I guess he should pretty much get his reservation ready for the HoF if he has one or two more very good seasons, right? Jamal Lewis ran for 2,000 yds, Corey Dillon has held the single-game rushing record,. Moments, whether it be a game or a season or two, don't put you in the HoF. Willie Parker has run very well in the playoffs as well, if I recall, and has two Super Bowl rings. I expect his final career rushing numbers to probably be fairly close to Terrell Davis' in the end. HoF right? Davis, IMHO, is in no uncertain terms, NOT a HoFer. If he gets in it will be because the media loves him. Look at his overall numbers and the fact that he wasn't a jaw-dropping talent, and no, he doesn't merit HoF. Now if there is another guy outside of Gale Sayers who should be in the HoF without the numbers to truly justify it, simply cause there is no disputing his "All-Worldness"....It's Bo Jackson. If Bo doesn't get hurt to end his career, Terrell is an afterthought as this would have been another contemporary who totally blows him away.

Let me toss out a couple more names of guys who are easily......not even a question.....as good as (or probably even better pure RBs than) Portis/Davis.

Fred Taylor

Larry Johnson

Now who's careers will look better in the rearview mirror. Yeah, Davis and Portis. So, back to the point. When I'm evaluating talent for my fantasy team or just in general, right now, I have to make a call on Slaton and how good of a player he is with respect to his overall talent level, situation going forward, and expected production. And right now, his prospects going forward put him on par to be as good a player as either Portis/Davis (is and/or used to be) over the next few years. Whether it's 2000 yd seasons or not, that is irrelevent, but he will be amongst the most productive of his contemporaries, I believe, over these next few years. And talent-wise, he's in Portis'/Davis' class......without any doubt!

man you need to create your own thread for this stuff so we can all enjoy that. *edit to add - I am not saying you should leave the discussion of dynasty players. I mean I would LOVE to see you create a thread on Terrel Davis and Steve Slaton and make it a poll. I think it might help you to see what the results were.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Wow, did you have Slaton's baby or something?

 

[Burning Sensation]

Wow, did you have Slaton's baby or something?

Why, because he believes Steve Slaton is talented? The bigger question is did Slaton punch F&L's baby?

 

[SSOG]

Correct....He wasn't. One or two very good seasons don't make you an all-world talent. DeA just had a phenomenal season and should have easily won the MVP award over Peyton Manning and anyone else last year. So I guess he should pretty much get his reservation ready for the HoF if he has one or two more very good seasons, right? Jamal Lewis ran for 2,000 yds, Corey Dillon has held the single-game rushing record,. Moments, whether it be a game or a season or two, don't put you in the HoF. Willie Parker has run very well in the playoffs as well, if I recall, and has two Super Bowl rings. I expect his final career rushing numbers to probably be fairly close to Terrell Davis' in the end. HoF right? Davis, IMHO, is in no uncertain terms, NOT a HoFer. If he gets in it will be because the media loves him. Look at his overall numbers and the fact that he wasn't a jaw-dropping talent, and no, he doesn't merit HoF. Now if there is another guy outside of Gale Sayers who should be in the HoF without the numbers to truly justify it, simply cause there is no disputing his "All-Worldness"....It's Bo Jackson. If Bo doesn't get hurt to end his career, Terrell is an afterthought as this would have been another contemporary who totally blows him away.Let me toss out a couple more names of guys who are easily......not even a question.....as good as (or probably even better pure RBs than) Portis/Davis.Fred TaylorLarry JohnsonNow who's careers will look better in the rearview mirror. Yeah, Davis and Portis. So, back to the point. When I'm evaluating talent for my fantasy team or just in general, right now, I have to make a call on Slaton and how good of a player he is with respect to his overall talent level, situation going forward, and expected production. And right now, his prospects going forward put him on par to be as good a player as either Portis/Davis (is and/or used to be) over the next few years. Whether it's 2000 yd seasons or not, that is irrelevent, but he will be amongst the most productive of his contemporaries, I believe, over these next few years. And talent-wise, he's in Portis'/Davis' class......without any doubt!

Alright, this is my last post on the subject because Terrell Davis isn't really relevant to dynasty league discussions anymore (unless you have a starting TV personality position), but if you really equate an MVP, two OPoYs, three first-team AP All Pros, two superbowl rings, a superbowl MVP, and every meaningful postseason rushing record in four years to "one or two very good seasons", then there's nothing I can do for you. If you think that Willie Parker, his 2 SB rings as a complementary piece, and his 78 yards per game of offense in the playoffs is remotely comparable to Davis, his 2 SB rings as the driving force of the offense, his SB MVP, and his 160 yards per game of offense (yeah, that's right- 160, as in more than double Parker's 78), then you're beyond reason. If you really think that DeAngelo Williams putting up 1630 yards and 20 TDs in one season is the same as Terrell Davis putting up 1850/15... then following it up with 2030/15... then following it up with 2220/23... then there's no hope.It's one thing to have some contrarian beliefs and to go against the herd... but it's another thing to pass the point of sanity and turn into a caricature.

 

[benm3218]

Correct....He wasn't. One or two very good seasons don't make you an all-world talent. DeA just had a phenomenal season and should have easily won the MVP award over Peyton Manning and anyone else last year. So I guess he should pretty much get his reservation ready for the HoF if he has one or two more very good seasons, right? Jamal Lewis ran for 2,000 yds, Corey Dillon has held the single-game rushing record,. Moments, whether it be a game or a season or two, don't put you in the HoF. Willie Parker has run very well in the playoffs as well, if I recall, and has two Super Bowl rings. I expect his final career rushing numbers to probably be fairly close to Terrell Davis' in the end. HoF right? Davis, IMHO, is in no uncertain terms, NOT a HoFer. If he gets in it will be because the media loves him. Look at his overall numbers and the fact that he wasn't a jaw-dropping talent, and no, he doesn't merit HoF. Now if there is another guy outside of Gale Sayers who should be in the HoF without the numbers to truly justify it, simply cause there is no disputing his "All-Worldness"....It's Bo Jackson. If Bo doesn't get hurt to end his career, Terrell is an afterthought as this would have been another contemporary who totally blows him away.Let me toss out a couple more names of guys who are easily......not even a question.....as good as (or probably even better pure RBs than) Portis/Davis.Fred TaylorLarry JohnsonNow who's careers will look better in the rearview mirror. Yeah, Davis and Portis. So, back to the point. When I'm evaluating talent for my fantasy team or just in general, right now, I have to make a call on Slaton and how good of a player he is with respect to his overall talent level, situation going forward, and expected production. And right now, his prospects going forward put him on par to be as good a player as either Portis/Davis (is and/or used to be) over the next few years. Whether it's 2000 yd seasons or not, that is irrelevent, but he will be amongst the most productive of his contemporaries, I believe, over these next few years. And talent-wise, he's in Portis'/Davis' class......without any doubt!

Alright, this is my last post on the subject because Terrell Davis isn't really relevant to dynasty league discussions anymore (unless you have a starting TV personality position), but if you really equate an MVP, two OPoYs, three first-team AP All Pros, two superbowl rings, a superbowl MVP, and every meaningful postseason rushing record in four years to "one or two very good seasons", then there's nothing I can do for you. If you think that Willie Parker, his 2 SB rings as a complementary piece, and his 78 yards per game of offense in the playoffs is remotely comparable to Davis, his 2 SB rings as the driving force of the offense, his SB MVP, and his 160 yards per game of offense (yeah, that's right- 160, as in more than double Parker's 78), then you're beyond reason. If you really think that DeAngelo Williams putting up 1630 yards and 20 TDs in one season is the same as Terrell Davis putting up 1850/15... then following it up with 2030/15... then following it up with 2220/23... then there's no hope.It's one thing to have some contrarian beliefs and to go against the herd... but it's another thing to pass the point of sanity and turn into a caricature.

Thank you. You expressed this so much better than I could have.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Correct....He wasn't. One or two very good seasons don't make you an all-world talent. DeA just had a phenomenal season and should have easily won the MVP award over Peyton Manning and anyone else last year. So I guess he should pretty much get his reservation ready for the HoF if he has one or two more very good seasons, right? Jamal Lewis ran for 2,000 yds, Corey Dillon has held the single-game rushing record,. Moments, whether it be a game or a season or two, don't put you in the HoF. Willie Parker has run very well in the playoffs as well, if I recall, and has two Super Bowl rings. I expect his final career rushing numbers to probably be fairly close to Terrell Davis' in the end. HoF right? Davis, IMHO, is in no uncertain terms, NOT a HoFer. If he gets in it will be because the media loves him. Look at his overall numbers and the fact that he wasn't a jaw-dropping talent, and no, he doesn't merit HoF. Now if there is another guy outside of Gale Sayers who should be in the HoF without the numbers to truly justify it, simply cause there is no disputing his "All-Worldness"....It's Bo Jackson. If Bo doesn't get hurt to end his career, Terrell is an afterthought as this would have been another contemporary who totally blows him away.Let me toss out a couple more names of guys who are easily......not even a question.....as good as (or probably even better pure RBs than) Portis/Davis.Fred TaylorLarry JohnsonNow who's careers will look better in the rearview mirror. Yeah, Davis and Portis. So, back to the point. When I'm evaluating talent for my fantasy team or just in general, right now, I have to make a call on Slaton and how good of a player he is with respect to his overall talent level, situation going forward, and expected production. And right now, his prospects going forward put him on par to be as good a player as either Portis/Davis (is and/or used to be) over the next few years. Whether it's 2000 yd seasons or not, that is irrelevent, but he will be amongst the most productive of his contemporaries, I believe, over these next few years. And talent-wise, he's in Portis'/Davis' class......without any doubt!

Alright, this is my last post on the subject because Terrell Davis isn't really relevant to dynasty league discussions anymore (unless you have a starting TV personality position), but if you really equate an MVP, two OPoYs, three first-team AP All Pros, two superbowl rings, a superbowl MVP, and every meaningful postseason rushing record in four years to "one or two very good seasons", then there's nothing I can do for you. If you think that Willie Parker, his 2 SB rings as a complementary piece, and his 78 yards per game of offense in the playoffs is remotely comparable to Davis, his 2 SB rings as the driving force of the offense, his SB MVP, and his 160 yards per game of offense (yeah, that's right- 160, as in more than double Parker's 78), then you're beyond reason. If you really think that DeAngelo Williams putting up 1630 yards and 20 TDs in one season is the same as Terrell Davis putting up 1850/15... then following it up with 2030/15... then following it up with 2220/23... then there's no hope.It's one thing to have some contrarian beliefs and to go against the herd... but it's another thing to pass the point of sanity and turn into a caricature.

I cant speak for him, but i think he is saying that Davis was a very good RB, but alot of those numbers were due to his situation. Let me ask you this, do you think Terrell Davis puts up those numbers if he was drafted by the Cardinals?Also, if you are going to use stats to evaluate talent, here is a statistic for you. Terrell Davis - 237 att. 1,117 rush 4.7 ypc. 7 TD's, 367 rec. yards, 1 TDSteve Slaton - 268 att. 1,282 rush 4.8 YPC, 9 TD's, 377 rec. yards, 1 TDThose are each players rookie stats. So how can anyone say it is impossible for Slaton to not be as talented as Davis, or at least call somebody crazy for suggesting it? Davis also put up his numbers behind maybe one of the best Olines/blocking schemes in the history of football. Im not suggesting that Slaton will put up the numbers TD did, but if someone would have told you that Terrell Davis was going to put up Jim Brown type numbers after his rookie season, what would you have said?I am not sure what everyone has against Slaton, but if you watched him last year, there is no way you can say that he is not a very good RB. I think what happens is that guys just stick to their guns and dont want to admit they might have been wrong with their preseason thoughts about him last year. I also think there are 11 out of 12 dynasty owners who want to hate Slaton because they passed on him in their rookie drafts for players like Malcolm Kelly, Limas Sweed, etc. One more thing, it is certainly possible to add weight and maintain or even increase your speed.

 

[SSOG]

I cant speak for him, but i think he is saying that Davis was a very good RB, but alot of those numbers were due to his situation. Let me ask you this, do you think Terrell Davis puts up those numbers if he was drafted by the Cardinals?

The playoff numbers and the SB MVPs? No. The rushing numbers? Sure. Maybe not a 2,000 yard season, but 1,700 or 1,800 yard seasons, definitely. It's not like Denver was this rushing juggernaut before Davis arrived- they ranked 23rd (out of 28) in yards rushing and 24th (out of 28) in ypc the year before Davis came to town. They ranked 18th and 18th the year before that. They ranked 25th and 21st the year before that. In Davis' first season, they ranked 5th in yards rushing and 2nd ypc. That's three straight years of bottom-10 rushing performances giving way to top-5 rushing performances overnight. Houston's running essentially the same blocking scheme that Denver ran, but Houston's had years to install and teach it (and Kubiak has had a decade to perfect it), while Denver was making it up as they went along and putting it in place for the first time. His situation was certainly no better than DeAngelo Williams's or Willie Parker's or Jamaal Lewis's or any of these other after-the-fact comparisons. People assume that Davis is a product of the system because by the time he went down, the system was good... but I'd argue that Davis wasn't so much a product of the system as the system was a product of Davis.

Also, if you are going to use stats to evaluate talent, here is a statistic for you.

Terrell Davis - 237 att. 1,117 rush 4.7 ypc. 7 TD's, 367 rec. yards, 1 TD

Steve Slaton - 268 att. 1,282 rush 4.8 YPC, 9 TD's, 377 rec. yards, 1 TD

Those are each players rookie stats. So how can anyone say it is impossible for Slaton to not be as talented as Davis, or at least call somebody crazy for suggesting it? Davis also put up his numbers behind maybe one of the best Olines/blocking schemes in the history of football. Im not suggesting that Slaton will put up the numbers TD did, but if someone would have told you that Terrell Davis was going to put up Jim Brown type numbers after his rookie season, what would you have said?

I had a problem with two claims. I had a problem with the claim that Terrell Davis wasn't an all-world talent (the results speak for themselves), and I had a problem with the claim that Steve Slaton was as talented as Terrell Davis (who was an all-world talent). Steve Slaton *ISN'T* as talented is Terrell Davis. It's not a question of whether it's impossible for Slaton to be as talented as Davis, it's a matter of Slaton simply not being as talented as Davis.If someone had told me that Terrell Davis was going to put up Jim Brown numbers after his rookie season, I would have said "it wouldn't surprise me". Terrell Davis burst onto the scene on a downright bad running team and turned them into one of the top 5 rushing offenses in the NFL overnight. He posted 100 yards per game as a rookie despite playing behind a maligned line in the process of switching schemes. His 4.7 ypc was also a lot more impressive than Slaton's 4.8, because Davis wasn't inflating his ypc with five plays of 40+ yards.

You want to play the stats game and compare Davis's rookie season to Slaton's? Fine. Terrell Davis ranked 2nd in DYAR, 4th in DVOA, and 7th in Success Rate as a rookie. The stats objectively bear out what my eyes subjectively told me- that Terrell Davis was consistent, reliable, and dominant as a rookie. Slaton on the other hand, finished 9th in DYAR, 16th in DVOA, and 35th in success rate. Again, the numbers confirm my subjective opinion of Slaton as a good RB, but not a dominant RB, and a guy whose slugging percentage was much higher than his on-base percentage. Those same numbers also tell me that, after his rookie season, Terrell Davis was essentially in a 3-way tie for first in DYAR his second season, better than Barry Sanders in his third season (remember, that was when Sanders rushed for 2,000), and flat out unstoppable in his fourth season (more than doubling the second place RB's DYAR total and almost TRIPLING the second place RB's DVOA%- far and away the most dominant showing of any RB in DVOA history).

I am not sure what everyone has against Slaton, but if you watched him last year, there is no way you can say that he is not a very good RB. I think what happens is that guys just stick to their guns and dont want to admit they might have been wrong with their preseason thoughts about him last year. I also think there are 11 out of 12 dynasty owners who want to hate Slaton because they passed on him in their rookie drafts for players like Malcolm Kelly, Limas Sweed, etc.

I never said Slaton wasn't a very good RB. I said one's opinion of Slaton is going to depend on whether you think he's closer in terms of talent to Mike Anderson (a good RB) or to Clinton Portis (an elite RB). The very comparison suggests that I think that Slaton is, at the very least, a good RB. The only thing I find ludicrous is suggestions that Steve Slaton is as talented as Terrell Davis. To me, that's like Basketball's perpetual habit of declaring everyone "the next Michael Jordon". If Steve Slaton wants to have his name mentioned in the same breath as Terrell Davis, he's going to have to give me a helluvalot more than 1600 yards and 10 TDs.

One more thing, it is certainly possible to add weight and maintain or even increase your speed.

For a layperson, yeah. For a world-class athlete? Not really. Maybe 5 pounds, but not 25 (or 18 or 9, depending on which reports you believe). No NFL player is so far from his physical peak that he can increase his mass by 5+% without losing speed.

 

[Sabertooth]

Can we reel this back in a touch? I'd like to hear some thoughts on Shonn Greene. What are his short and long term prospects? I mean is he LenDale White redux with Leon Washington there? I don't think Thomas Jones is going to worry about him too much this season.

What was his talent level like in college? He's a bruiser, does he have any wiggle ala Bettis?

 

[Burning Sensation]

I cant speak for him, but i think he is saying that Davis was a very good RB, but alot of those numbers were due to his situation. Let me ask you this, do you think Terrell Davis puts up those numbers if he was drafted by the Cardinals?

The playoff numbers and the SB MVPs? No. The rushing numbers? Sure. Maybe not a 2,000 yard season, but 1,700 or 1,800 yard seasons, definitely. It's not like Denver was this rushing juggernaut before Davis arrived- they ranked 23rd (out of 28) in yards rushing and 24th (out of 28) in ypc the year before Davis came to town. They ranked 18th and 18th the year before that. They ranked 25th and 21st the year before that. In Davis' first season, they ranked 5th in yards rushing and 2nd ypc. That's three straight years of bottom-10 rushing performances giving way to top-5 rushing performances overnight. Houston's running essentially the same blocking scheme that Denver ran, but Houston's had years to install and teach it (and Kubiak has had a decade to perfect it), while Denver was making it up as they went along and putting it in place for the first time. His situation was certainly no better than DeAngelo Williams's or Willie Parker's or Jamaal Lewis's or any of these other after-the-fact comparisons. People assume that Davis is a product of the system because by the time he went down, the system was good... but I'd argue that Davis wasn't so much a product of the system as the system was a product of Davis.

Also, if you are going to use stats to evaluate talent, here is a statistic for you.

Terrell Davis - 237 att. 1,117 rush 4.7 ypc. 7 TD's, 367 rec. yards, 1 TD

Steve Slaton - 268 att. 1,282 rush 4.8 YPC, 9 TD's, 377 rec. yards, 1 TD

Those are each players rookie stats. So how can anyone say it is impossible for Slaton to not be as talented as Davis, or at least call somebody crazy for suggesting it? Davis also put up his numbers behind maybe one of the best Olines/blocking schemes in the history of football. Im not suggesting that Slaton will put up the numbers TD did, but if someone would have told you that Terrell Davis was going to put up Jim Brown type numbers after his rookie season, what would you have said?

I had a problem with two claims. I had a problem with the claim that Terrell Davis wasn't an all-world talent (the results speak for themselves), and I had a problem with the claim that Steve Slaton was as talented as Terrell Davis (who was an all-world talent). Steve Slaton *ISN'T* as talented is Terrell Davis. It's not a question of whether it's impossible for Slaton to be as talented as Davis, it's a matter of Slaton simply not being as talented as Davis.If someone had told me that Terrell Davis was going to put up Jim Brown numbers after his rookie season, I would have said "it wouldn't surprise me". Terrell Davis burst onto the scene on a downright bad running team and turned them into one of the top 5 rushing offenses in the NFL overnight. He posted 100 yards per game as a rookie despite playing behind a maligned line in the process of switching schemes. His 4.7 ypc was also a lot more impressive than Slaton's 4.8, because Davis wasn't inflating his ypc with five plays of 40+ yards.

You want to play the stats game and compare Davis's rookie season to Slaton's? Fine. Terrell Davis ranked 2nd in DYAR, 4th in DVOA, and 7th in Success Rate as a rookie. The stats objectively bear out what my eyes subjectively told me- that Terrell Davis was consistent, reliable, and dominant as a rookie. Slaton on the other hand, finished 9th in DYAR, 16th in DVOA, and 35th in success rate. Again, the numbers confirm my subjective opinion of Slaton as a good RB, but not a dominant RB, and a guy whose slugging percentage was much higher than his on-base percentage. Those same numbers also tell me that, after his rookie season, Terrell Davis was essentially in a 3-way tie for first in DYAR his second season, better than Barry Sanders in his third season (remember, that was when Sanders rushed for 2,000), and flat out unstoppable in his fourth season (more than doubling the second place RB's DYAR total and almost TRIPLING the second place RB's DVOA%- far and away the most dominant showing of any RB in DVOA history).

I am not sure what everyone has against Slaton, but if you watched him last year, there is no way you can say that he is not a very good RB. I think what happens is that guys just stick to their guns and dont want to admit they might have been wrong with their preseason thoughts about him last year. I also think there are 11 out of 12 dynasty owners who want to hate Slaton because they passed on him in their rookie drafts for players like Malcolm Kelly, Limas Sweed, etc.

I never said Slaton wasn't a very good RB. I said one's opinion of Slaton is going to depend on whether you think he's closer in terms of talent to Mike Anderson (a good RB) or to Clinton Portis (an elite RB). The very comparison suggests that I think that Slaton is, at the very least, a good RB. The only thing I find ludicrous is suggestions that Steve Slaton is as talented as Terrell Davis. To me, that's like Basketball's perpetual habit of declaring everyone "the next Michael Jordon". If Steve Slaton wants to have his name mentioned in the same breath as Terrell Davis, he's going to have to give me a helluvalot more than 1600 yards and 10 TDs.

One more thing, it is certainly possible to add weight and maintain or even increase your speed.

For a layperson, yeah. For a world-class athlete? Not really. Maybe 5 pounds, but not 25 (or 18 or 9, depending on which reports you believe). No NFL player is so far from his physical peak that he can increase his mass by 5+% without losing speed.

You do know who elses rookie year it was in Denver other than Terrell Davis in 1995, right? Do you think it is a coincidence that Mike Shanahan took over as the Head coach during Terrell Davis rookie year? Do you think maybe that had something to do with the Broncos running game improving. What happened to the Broncos running game after Davis? I dont think you need to look any further than what happened to Clinton Portis after he left the Broncos to know the system has something to do with Broncos RB's success. Unless you think Orlandis Gary, Mike Anderson, Rueben Droughns, the journeymen from last year, etc. were all great RB's. Anyway, i am not going to argue that Slaton is as good as or better than Davis. I just dont thnk it is "crazy" for someone to suggest that Slaton might be.

What i do know however is that it is most certainly possible for someone(yes, even an athlete) to put on 10-12 lbs. and maintain their speed. Also, anyone who thinks Slaton weighed less than 200 lb's last season obviously didnt see him play. I read reports that he was 207 during OTA's. I also linked a report somewhere in the Sharkpool during last season that he was over 210. Assuming Slaton weighed 210 lbs last year and was 8% body fat. He could add 15 lbs. of muscle while losing 4 lbs. of fat. This would leave him at 221 lbs, and 6% body fat, assuming the muscle weight was evenly distributed through his body, he could easily maintain his 210 speed, and possibly increase it. Unless you think it is impossible for a 5'9 220 lb man to run a 4.4 forty. Disclaimer, i am not saying this is what happened with Slaton, but just an example of what can physically be done.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Couple more things to add:

If someone had told me that Terrell Davis was going to put up Jim Brown numbers after his rookie season, I would have said "it wouldn't surprise me".

Had you said this on this message board you would have been called insane, just like you did when Krem compared Slaton to Davis.

Steve Slaton *ISN'T* as talented is Terrell Davis.

This is an opinion, not a fact.

His 4.7 ypc was also a lot more impressive than Slaton's 4.8, because Davis wasn't inflating his ypc with five plays of 40+ yards.

This is just silly, are you really arguing that Slaton is less talented than Davis because he has breakaway speed? The fact that Davis averaged 4.7 YPC without breaking long runs could have alot to do with a stellar offensive line and blocking scheme.

 

[benm3218]

This is an opinion, not a fact.

Just because you didn't believe Peyton Manning was more talented than Daunte Culpepper wouldn't make it an opinion... It would just make you wrong.Certain things are facts regardless of whether or not a handful of people agree on them.

This is just silly, are you really arguing that Slaton is less talented than Davis because he has breakaway speed? The fact that Davis averaged 4.7 YPC without breaking long runs could have alot to do with a stellar offensive line and blocking scheme.

He already addressed the fact that their line wasn't great as proven by the previous years rushing totals and stats etc.

 

[Burning Sensation]

This is an opinion, not a fact.

Just because you didn't believe Peyton Manning was more talented than Daunte Culpepper wouldn't make it an opinion... It would just make you wrong.Certain things are facts regardless of whether or not a handful of people agree on them.

This is just silly, are you really arguing that Slaton is less talented than Davis because he has breakaway speed? The fact that Davis averaged 4.7 YPC without breaking long runs could have alot to do with a stellar offensive line and blocking scheme.

He already addressed the fact that their line wasn't great as proven by the previous years rushing totals and stats etc.

That didnt prove anythimg. Like i said in the previous post. Their rushing success had more to do with Shanahan taking over as head coach. Which was proven by the success Denver had rushing the ball after Davis was gone.Its also easy to say Manning is better than Culpepper, their careers are almost over, so thats a pretty bad comparison.

 

[benm3218]

This is an opinion, not a fact.

Just because you didn't believe Peyton Manning was more talented than Daunte Culpepper wouldn't make it an opinion... It would just make you wrong.Certain things are facts regardless of whether or not a handful of people agree on them.

This is just silly, are you really arguing that Slaton is less talented than Davis because he has breakaway speed? The fact that Davis averaged 4.7 YPC without breaking long runs could have alot to do with a stellar offensive line and blocking scheme.

He already addressed the fact that their line wasn't great as proven by the previous years rushing totals and stats etc.

That didnt prove anythimg. Like i said in the previous post. Their rushing success had more to do with Shanahan taking over as head coach. Which was proven by the success Denver had rushing the ball after Davis was gone.Its also easy to say Manning is better than Culpepper, their careers are almost over, so thats a pretty bad comparison.

The point is, just because you don't agree with something doesn't mean it is necessarily a matter of opinion. It sometimes means that you are just wrong on the facts. Terrel Davis was more talented than Steve Slaton. The comparison is ludicrous.

 

[EBF]

Can we reel this back in a touch? I'd like to hear some thoughts on Shonn Greene. What are his short and long term prospects? I mean is he LenDale White redux with Leon Washington there? I don't think Thomas Jones is going to worry about him too much this season.

What was his talent level like in college? He's a bruiser, does he have any wiggle ala Bettis?

Did someone say Shonn Greene? Greene is one of my favorite players in this class. I like him so much that I took him at RB2 in one rookie draft and even considered him over Moreno in another league. He's an old-fashioned grinder in the mold of Rudi Johnson. He's not going to give you a lot of highlight reel plays or home runs, but he's a solid workhorse back who should make a great tandem with Leon Washington.

Greene just looks like a RB is supposed to look. He has an excellent frame with a low center of gravity and a powerful base. He's not explosive by NFL RB standards, but he has fluid hips and nimble feet for a bigger back. I think his style will translate very well to the pro game. I look for him to carve out a significant role for the Jets in the near future. At worst his production should mirror what we've seen from LenDale White in recent years. At best he could be like another Rudi Johnson or a slightly lesser Michael Turner. He doesn't have superstar potential, but he has a high floor and he looks like one of the safer picks in this draft class.

Good highlights here:

The lack of sheer speed will turn people off, but his long speed is better than advertised and his overall package of skills helps compensate for his mediocre explosiveness. Remember that this guy carried a mediocre offense on his back and totally dominated his competition, racking up more than 100 rushing yards in every single game last year.

 

[benm3218]

What about Leshon McCoy? I have Westbrook and I am hesitant to go after McCoy in my league because I think Westbrook is a very special RB on a team that doesn't run too much. I think a normal Eagles RB wouldn't be too productive... AM I wrong? Should I target McCoy?

 

[EBF]

I don't have a great read on McCoy. I like his shiftiness and his potential in the passing game. I worry about his lack of power and bulk. At one point he was high on my rookie list, but he slipped a lot. I didn't draft him in any of my leagues. That says something about my lack of confidence in his prospects.

At the same time, I think he certainly has the potential to pay dividends. He was an effective player in college and he's in a great system for his skill set. There's some upside there. The problem is that I see a very wide range of potential outcomes. He could be great or he could be utter crap.

 

[SSOG]

You do know who elses rookie year it was in Denver other than Terrell Davis in 1995, right? Do you think it is a coincidence that Mike Shanahan took over as the Head coach during Terrell Davis rookie year? Do you think maybe that had something to do with the Broncos running game improving. What happened to the Broncos running game after Davis? I dont think you need to look any further than what happened to Clinton Portis after he left the Broncos to know the system has something to do with Broncos RB's success. Unless you think Orlandis Gary, Mike Anderson, Rueben Droughns, the journeymen from last year, etc. were all great RB's. Anyway, i am not going to argue that Slaton is as good as or better than Davis. I just dont thnk it is "crazy" for someone to suggest that Slaton might be.

Actually, I know EXACTLY what happened to Denver's running game when Terrell Davis and Clinton Portis left town. The real question is, do you?In 1998, Denver rushed for 2468/26 @ 4.7 ypc. Those values ranked 2nd, 1st, and 2nd in the league. In 1999, Denver rushed for 1864/13 @ 4.0 ypc. Those values ranked 12th, 10th, and 14th in the league. That's a drop of 600 yards, 13 TDs, and .7 yards per carry. Basically, before Davis came, Denver was one of the bottom 10 rushing offenses in the league. For the duration of Davis's 4-year run, Denver was one of the top 3 rushing offenses in the league. When Davis went down, the "system" didn't keep plugging along- it dropped from the best running game in the league to a league average running game.Let's talk about Clinton Portis, shall we? The year before Portis came to town, Denver rushed for 1877/7 @ 3.9 yards per carry (10th, 30th, and 19th in the league, respectively). In Portis's first year, Denver went for 2266/21 @ 5.0 ypc. That's an increase of 400 yards, 14 TDs, and over a full yard per carry. Those totals ranked 5th, 5th, and 3rd in the league, meaning Denver once again went from a below-average rushing offense to one of the league's elite rushing offenses... and Portis didn't even start the entire season! In 2003 (when Portis *DID* start the entire season), Denver went off for 2629/20 @ 4.8 (2nd, 3rd, and 4th in the league). In 2004, when Portis left, Denver dropped to 2333/13 @ 4.4 (4th, 15th, and 8th). You know what was constant during all those changes? Mike Shanahan and the ZBS. If you think that Davis and Portis were system backs, kindly explain to me why the Broncos team ypc increased more than a full ypc between 1994 and 1995, and again between 2001 and 2002. Explain to me why the average ranking of Denver's rushing offense in the 4 years immediately before and after Davis and Portis accounted for an average of 1874 yards, while in the first and last years of the Davis/Portis eras they accounted for an average of 2329 yards? Or why the ypcs without Portis/Davis were 3.4, 4.0, 3.9, and 4.4 (avg = 3.9), while the ypcs WITH Portis/Davis were 4.5, 4.7, 5.0, and 4.9 (avg = 4.8)?In Denver, anyone can rush for 1,000 yards (provided they can hold on to the ball and provided they make one cut and go), but just because an RB is rushing for 1,000 yards doesn't mean the running game is elite. Olandis Gary can rush for 1,000 yards, but it takes a Terrell Davis or a Clinton Portis in order to take the running game to league-leading levels.

I don't have a great read on McCoy. I like his shiftiness and his potential in the passing game. I worry about his lack of power and bulk. At one point he was high on my rookie list, but he slipped a lot. I didn't draft him in any of my leagues. That says something about my lack of confidence in his prospects.At the same time, I think he certainly has the potential to pay dividends. He was an effective player in college and he's in a great system for his skill set. There's some upside there. The problem is that I see a very wide range of potential outcomes. He could be great or he could be utter crap.

I take a naturally skeptical view of McCoy. Just because an RB is small like Westbrook does not mean an RB is the next Brian Westbrook. Brian Westbrooks are far, far, far rarer than small shift RBs. And McCoy is significantly smaller than Westy (at least on a BMI scale).

 

[Inspiration]

F&L:

On your blog you have Westbrook ranked above Tomlinson (although by only a single spot). Both players appear to be in position for strong 2009 campaigns, but my impression is that Tomlinson still has a few productive seasons left, whereas Westbrook might simply "disappear" when his contract expires after this season as many aging players have done before him (ie at best he will split touches with another back. Worst case is the Shaun Alexander route). I have no concrete evidence to support those opinions, so I would be interested to hear your reasoning behind the rankings (as well as your thoughts on Tomlinson and Westbrook's dynasty outlooks in general).

 

[SSOG]

I take a naturally skeptical view of McCoy. Just because an RB is small like Westbrook does not mean an RB is the next Brian Westbrook. Brian Westbrooks are far, far, far rarer than small shift RBs. And McCoy is significantly smaller than Westy (at least on a BMI scale).

To expound upon this... I don't think that player comparisons are useless. I think comparisons are a very effective tool when it comes to quickly and accurately describing a player's skillset and potential ceiling. I just think that CERTAIN player comparisons are useless, because they're overused so often that you can never tell if it's a genuinely accurate comparison, or if its just another cliche.For instance, every small back that enters the league is a "Brian Westbrook type", even when their skillset is completely different from Brian Westbrooks. When MJD was a rookie, I even heard HIM described as a "Brian Westbrook type back". MJD is built like a freaking tank and at his best when he's initiating contact! He couldn't possibly be MORE different from Westbrook in terms of running style! He's probably got more in common with Jerome Bettis than with Brian Westbrook!In the same manner, if a WR is called an Anquan Boldin type, that's usually a meaningful comparison that suggests that the WR is large, lacking top-end speed, and makes his living with RAC skills. On the other hand, if a WR is called a Randy Moss type, that tells me nothing, because generally those "Randy Moss type" WRs are just guys who put up great stats in college, regardless of their actual style of play or manner of accumulating value. And if a WR is an "Eddie McCaffrey" or a "Brandon Stokley", that tells me nothing other than that they're white. I heard Matt Jones described as an Eddie McCaffrey coming into the league. Matt Jones is a 6'6" WR with bad hands who runs terrible routes but possesses sub-4.4 speed. If he's anything, he's a tall Ashley Lelie. He couldn't possibly be LESS like Eddie McCaffrey, outside of the whole susceptible to sunburns thing.Anyway, long story short, some player comparisons are meaningful... but "Brian Westbrook" is not one of them, because that comparison gets liberally applied to any back under 210 pounds. As a result, when all I've heard about McCoy is that he's the next Brian Westbrook, that really doesn't tell me anything other than that he's skinny. In fact, McCoy's significantly smaller than Westbrook, at least in terms of what matters for the NFL. He's the same weight, but two inches taller, which makes him significantly skinnier and less compact.

F&L:On your blog you have Westbrook ranked above Tomlinson (although by only a single spot). Both players appear to be in position for strong 2009 campaigns, but my impression is that Tomlinson still has a few productive seasons left, whereas Westbrook might simply "disappear" when his contract expires after this season as many aging players have done before him (ie at best he will split touches with another back. Worst case is the Shaun Alexander route). I have no concrete evidence to support those opinions, so I would be interested to hear your reasoning behind the rankings (as well as your thoughts on Tomlinson and Westbrook's dynasty outlooks in general).

I think it's just F&L finally realizing I was right two years ago . Westbrook's as talented as Tomlinson, Westbrook's as integral to his team's offense as Tomlinson, and Westbrook is as much of a fantasy stud as Tomlinson. Westbrook's also 3 months younger and has less than half as many career carries, and his receptions mean he's likely to age more gracefully than Tomlinson. He was certainly a better fantasy player than Tomlinson was last year. I expect Westy to hang around a year longer than Tomlinson does. They're pretty close in value, but Westbrook is like a Tomlinson who hit his stride later in his career, leading to less hype... and less mileage.

 

[kremenull]

Can we reel this back in a touch? I'd like to hear some thoughts on Shonn Greene. What are his short and long term prospects? I mean is he LenDale White redux with Leon Washington there? I don't think Thomas Jones is going to worry about him too much this season.

What was his talent level like in college? He's a bruiser, does he have any wiggle ala Bettis?

Did someone say Shonn Greene? Greene is one of my favorite players in this class. I like him so much that I took him at RB2 in one rookie draft and even considered him over Moreno in another league. He's an old-fashioned grinder in the mold of Rudi Johnson. He's not going to give you a lot of highlight reel plays or home runs, but he's a solid workhorse back who should make a great tandem with Leon Washington.

Greene just looks like a RB is supposed to look. He has an excellent frame with a low center of gravity and a powerful base. He's not explosive by NFL RB standards, but he has fluid hips and nimble feet for a bigger back. I think his style will translate very well to the pro game. I look for him to carve out a significant role for the Jets in the near future. At worst his production should mirror what we've seen from LenDale White in recent years. At best he could be like another Rudi Johnson or a slightly lesser Michael Turner. He doesn't have superstar potential, but he has a high floor and he looks like one of the safer picks in this draft class.

Good highlights here:

LenDale >> Greene......way more talented. And now that he (White) has trimmed down and gotten into excellent shape, his true ability will come to the forefront. I'm not impressed by Greene one bit. Rudi was successful because he received 300+ carries all those years. With Leon in town, no way Greene sees anything close to 300 carries. I'd be more inclined to say that Washington will eventually be the full-time RB and have a meteoric rise ala Tiki and Westbrook did about this point in their careers, leaving relatively little for Greene other than short-yardage and goal line. This guy is more Ron Dayne-like, not even close to Turner. I'm not buying.....

 

[kremenull]

You do know who elses rookie year it was in Denver other than Terrell Davis in 1995, right? Do you think it is a coincidence that Mike Shanahan took over as the Head coach during Terrell Davis rookie year? Do you think maybe that had something to do with the Broncos running game improving. What happened to the Broncos running game after Davis? I dont think you need to look any further than what happened to Clinton Portis after he left the Broncos to know the system has something to do with Broncos RB's success. Unless you think Orlandis Gary, Mike Anderson, Rueben Droughns, the journeymen from last year, etc. were all great RB's. Anyway, i am not going to argue that Slaton is as good as or better than Davis. I just dont thnk it is "crazy" for someone to suggest that Slaton might be.

Actually, I know EXACTLY what happened to Denver's running game when Terrell Davis and Clinton Portis left town. The real question is, do you?In 1998, Denver rushed for 2468/26 @ 4.7 ypc. Those values ranked 2nd, 1st, and 2nd in the league. In 1999, Denver rushed for 1864/13 @ 4.0 ypc. Those values ranked 12th, 10th, and 14th in the league. That's a drop of 600 yards, 13 TDs, and .7 yards per carry. Basically, before Davis came, Denver was one of the bottom 10 rushing offenses in the league. For the duration of Davis's 4-year run, Denver was one of the top 3 rushing offenses in the league. When Davis went down, the "system" didn't keep plugging along- it dropped from the best running game in the league to a league average running game.Let's talk about Clinton Portis, shall we? The year before Portis came to town, Denver rushed for 1877/7 @ 3.9 yards per carry (10th, 30th, and 19th in the league, respectively). In Portis's first year, Denver went for 2266/21 @ 5.0 ypc. That's an increase of 400 yards, 14 TDs, and over a full yard per carry. Those totals ranked 5th, 5th, and 3rd in the league, meaning Denver once again went from a below-average rushing offense to one of the league's elite rushing offenses... and Portis didn't even start the entire season! In 2003 (when Portis *DID* start the entire season), Denver went off for 2629/20 @ 4.8 (2nd, 3rd, and 4th in the league). In 2004, when Portis left, Denver dropped to 2333/13 @ 4.4 (4th, 15th, and 8th). You know what was constant during all those changes? Mike Shanahan and the ZBS. If you think that Davis and Portis were system backs, kindly explain to me why the Broncos team ypc increased more than a full ypc between 1994 and 1995, and again between 2001 and 2002. Explain to me why the average ranking of Denver's rushing offense in the 4 years immediately before and after Davis and Portis accounted for an average of 1874 yards, while in the first and last years of the Davis/Portis eras they accounted for an average of 2329 yards? Or why the ypcs without Portis/Davis were 3.4, 4.0, 3.9, and 4.4 (avg = 3.9), while the ypcs WITH Portis/Davis were 4.5, 4.7, 5.0, and 4.9 (avg = 4.8)?In Denver, anyone can rush for 1,000 yards (provided they can hold on to the ball and provided they make one cut and go), but just because an RB is rushing for 1,000 yards doesn't mean the running game is elite. Olandis Gary can rush for 1,000 yards, but it takes a Terrell Davis or a Clinton Portis in order to take the running game to league-leading levels.

I don't have a great read on McCoy. I like his shiftiness and his potential in the passing game. I worry about his lack of power and bulk. At one point he was high on my rookie list, but he slipped a lot. I didn't draft him in any of my leagues. That says something about my lack of confidence in his prospects.At the same time, I think he certainly has the potential to pay dividends. He was an effective player in college and he's in a great system for his skill set. There's some upside there. The problem is that I see a very wide range of potential outcomes. He could be great or he could be utter crap.

I take a naturally skeptical view of McCoy. Just because an RB is small like Westbrook does not mean an RB is the next Brian Westbrook. Brian Westbrooks are far, far, far rarer than small shift RBs. And McCoy is significantly smaller than Westy (at least on a BMI scale).

Also, Elway left town as well during this time. Let's not leave that "small" fact out in discussing what happened to Denver's running game. With no Elway, opposing safeties aren't worried as much about protecting the deep middle/outside and they can creep in closer to the LOS to assist the run defense. Hey man, I have no problem discussing and debating opinions, and to each his own. Numbers don't always tell the story about talent. I pride myself in knowing what to look for when I'm evaluating talent, and I trust in that. Situations can have a very significant impact on final numbers. Earlier you mentioned Davis outplaying Barry Sanders (I assume you mean for that one year or so), and by looking at numbers, you may come to that conclusion. But now, frankly speaking, Davis couldn't sniff Sanders' jock, and you know that. Again, numbers do not fool me, the eyes tell the true story. Anybody who watched Barry, and watched Davis, will know who was better. And it's not even close. Like Burning Sensation pointed out, I initially stated that at this point in their respective careers, Slaton is as good as Portis/Davis. If you or anyone else believes that it is blasphemy to say that another player, who has shown that he is very talented, produced similar numbers in similar system, and appears to be improving, is as talented as Davis, then so be it. Still doesn't change my stance. I'm basing everything that I stand by here on the players' abilities (strengths, weaknesses as a runner) that I break down from watching them play. And these are some of the more relevant skills that I look for in a RB:And I'm not going to break down what exactly each one of these entails, as many people may use these terms but may not really understand what they are and/or how to recognize them.....Maybe you do, but I'm not giving up too much more to guys in here for free.....VisionAgilityPower.....leg drive, tackle breakingBurst/AccelerationBalancePatienceBody Lean.....pad levelInstinctsOverall AthleticismTop-end SpeedQuicknessHandsBlocking....Pass ProtectionAnyway, I'm done on the topic, nice debate.......Again, it's never personal on my end, so no harm no foul on whatever anyone says regarding my opinions/comments in here.....'Cause one thing you'll all come to know, if you don't already, I form my own opinions and stand by what I say, we can agree to disagree......I follow people's track record on what they say/believe about players, and I have no problems with anyone checking mine with regards to my talent evaluations on players.....

 

[Inspiration]

F&L:On your blog you have Westbrook ranked above Tomlinson (although by only a single spot). Both players appear to be in position for strong 2009 campaigns, but my impression is that Tomlinson still has a few productive seasons left, whereas Westbrook might simply "disappear" when his contract expires after this season as many aging players have done before him (ie at best he will split touches with another back. Worst case is the Shaun Alexander route). I have no concrete evidence to support those opinions, so I would be interested to hear your reasoning behind the rankings (as well as your thoughts on Tomlinson and Westbrook's dynasty outlooks in general).

I think it's just F&L finally realizing I was right two years ago . Westbrook's as talented as Tomlinson, Westbrook's as integral to his team's offense as Tomlinson, and Westbrook is as much of a fantasy stud as Tomlinson. Westbrook's also 3 months younger and has less than half as many career carries, and his receptions mean he's likely to age more gracefully than Tomlinson. He was certainly a better fantasy player than Tomlinson was last year. I expect Westy to hang around a year longer than Tomlinson does. They're pretty close in value, but Westbrook is like a Tomlinson who hit his stride later in his career, leading to less hype... and less mileage.

I've always wondered, though, is that necessarily true? Do running backs really accrue mileage and age faster because of it? I'm not saying you are wrong, but I am not convinced that a "high carry" back decreases in a ability faster than a similarly aged "low carry" back. At least to me, Westbrook's knee and ankle problems would seem to be more indicative of a future loss in ability than Tomlinson's carries.

 

[thriftyrocker]

At least to me, Westbrook's knee and ankle problems would seem to be more indicative of a future loss in ability than Tomlinson's carries.

But Westbrook is integral to the passing game. Even if he loses burst through the hole (which he didn't seem to have during the playoff run last year), his ability to catch passes and work in space will help him keep value as a committee back and a low #2/high #3. Like Reggie Bush is now. Once LT can't run anymore, he is on Dancing With the Stars.

 

[SSOG]

Also, Elway left town as well during this time. Let's not leave that "small" fact out in discussing what happened to Denver's running game. With no Elway, opposing safeties aren't worried as much about protecting the deep middle/outside and they can creep in closer to the LOS to assist the run defense.

Yes, Elway left from 1998 to 1999. Of course, I didn't address it... because I didn't think I had to, because it's pretty irrelevant. I posted FOUR TIMES when the Broncos went from an elite back to a non-elite back or from a non-elite back to an elite back, and in all four instances, there was a DRAMATIC across-the-board reduction in rushing stats. Yes, in one of those four instances, Elway left the team, too... but if the explanation for the drop in stats is "John Elway", then how do you explain the other three times? Did John Elway join the Broncos in 1995? Did he come out of retirement in 2002, and then retire a second time in 2003?

Hey man, I have no problem discussing and debating opinions, and to each his own. Numbers don't always tell the story about talent. I pride myself in knowing what to look for when I'm evaluating talent, and I trust in that. Situations can have a very significant impact on final numbers. Earlier you mentioned Davis outplaying Barry Sanders (I assume you mean for that one year or so), and by looking at numbers, you may come to that conclusion. But now, frankly speaking, Davis couldn't sniff Sanders' jock, and you know that. Again, numbers do not fool me, the eyes tell the true story. Anybody who watched Barry, and watched Davis, will know who was better. And it's not even close.

Actually, I mean for 3 out of the four years of his career. Davis won the OPoY award over Sanders in '96 and '98, and arguably outperformed Sanders again in '97 (though Sanders got the awards because he put up the gaudier stats that year). You say that I know that Davis couldn't sniff Sanders' jock, but in reality, I know nothing of the sort. Sanders and Davis represented pretty much the polar extremes in terms of style. In terms of style, Terrell Davis was Emmitt Smith, only better, and I'd say that it's not the slightest bit crazy to say that a better Emmitt Smith was as good as Barry Sanders. Some offenses would do better with Sanders than they would with Davis, but plenty of other offenses would be better off with Davis than they were with Sanders.

I've always wondered, though, is that necessarily true? Do running backs really accrue mileage and age faster because of it? I'm not saying you are wrong, but I am not convinced that a "high carry" back decreases in a ability faster than a similarly aged "low carry" back. At least to me, Westbrook's knee and ankle problems would seem to be more indicative of a future loss in ability than Tomlinson's carries.

Don't forget that Tomlinson's dealt with injury issues as well, he just hasn't missed any time.Anyway, as to whether mileage matters... I just played around with the Historical Data Dominator to see if there's anything to the theory. Here's what I've got.10 RBs have gone over 1000 yards rushing after turning 32. Here's the career number of carries they had PRIOR to their 1000 yard rushing season:1. 20382. 33713. 24134. 8265. 12636. 19497. 35378. 6269. 260210. 1320A couple of high-mileage guys managed to sneak onto the list (Peyton is #2, Emmitt Smith is #7, Franco Harris is #9), but a surprisingly high percentage of the productive 32+ year old RBs have been guys who were regarded as "low-mileage" (#1 and #3 are John Riggins in back-to-back years, #4 and #5 are John Henry Johnson, #6 is Ottis Anderson, #8 is Mike Anderson, #10 is James Brooks). Meanwhile, looking up 1000 yard rushers aged 30 or 31, "low-mileage" backs make up a substantially smaller percentage of the population.The presence of Peyton and Smith shows it's possible for Tomlinson to buck the mileage trend, but I still think Westbrook is the more likely candidate.

 

[Inspiration]

I've always wondered, though, is that necessarily true? Do running backs really accrue mileage and age faster because of it? I'm not saying you are wrong, but I am not convinced that a "high carry" back decreases in a ability faster than a similarly aged "low carry" back. At least to me, Westbrook's knee and ankle problems would seem to be more indicative of a future loss in ability than Tomlinson's carries.

Don't forget that Tomlinson's dealt with injury issues as well, he just hasn't missed any time.Anyway, as to whether mileage matters... I just played around with the Historical Data Dominator to see if there's anything to the theory. Here's what I've got.10 RBs have gone over 1000 yards rushing after turning 32. Here's the career number of carries they had PRIOR to their 1000 yard rushing season:1. 20382. 33713. 24134. 8265. 12636. 19497. 35378. 6269. 260210. 1320A couple of high-mileage guys managed to sneak onto the list (Peyton is #2, Emmitt Smith is #7, Franco Harris is #9), but a surprisingly high percentage of the productive 32+ year old RBs have been guys who were regarded as "low-mileage" (#1 and #3 are John Riggins in back-to-back years, #4 and #5 are John Henry Johnson, #6 is Ottis Anderson, #8 is Mike Anderson, #10 is James Brooks). Meanwhile, looking up 1000 yard rushers aged 30 or 31, "low-mileage" backs make up a substantially smaller percentage of the population.The presence of Peyton and Smith shows it's possible for Tomlinson to buck the mileage trend, but I still think Westbrook is the more likely candidate.

Interesting stats; thanks for digging those up. However, wouldn't it be important to know what percentage of all 1000 yard seasons were produced by those same high mileage players? Perhaps seven out of every ten 1000 season (by players of all ages) are produced by players who don't receive a large number of carries over their careers, thus making the 32+ group no different than the 'norm'. (I don't know if I am explaining this right. Please let me know if I am not making any sense). I don't know how to quantify this, but there does seem to be some missing information from your example. Again, I am not saying you are wrong; I simply just don't know.

 

[shader]

F&L is one of the least biased person on this board, but he is not perfect. I am not shocked when he hears that Slaton put on weight that he would automatically assume it was fat. I also heard he put on weight through weight traiing and hasnt lost a step. I also heard he did so to improve his short yardage abilities. I wonder if this off season conditioning program had something to do with the Texans not addressing the RB position in the offseason. I dont care how much you dislike Slaton, i dont see how anyone can believe Chris Brown or some undrafted rookies are going to be a threat.

I also dont understand what F&L or anyone else has against him anymore. The only real point i thought people may have had last year is the he was undersized. Even though i didnt think that was a big issue, i still understood why others did. I would like to hear a good argument against him now however. I love Chris Johnson, but the only real advantage i see he has over Slaton is speed. That however didnt stop Slaton from having more 40+ yard plays from scrimmage than CJ(5-3). So his speed certainly cant be the issue. Slaton also appears to be the better pass catcher.

I know this Slaton/CJ thing has been done before, but i would like to hear from F&L or any other Slaton doubters now that the Texans didnt add another back in the offseason and his recent weight gain.

Disclaimer - I love Chris Johnson, and am not suggesting Slaton is better than him, or vice versa.

A couple of points.First off, 25 pounds is a TON OF WEIGHT to pack on in an offseason. Like, a ridiculous, ludicrous, absurd amount of weight. If a 300 pound defensive tackle packs on 25 pounds, it's a big deal- if a 195 lb RB does it? That's a HUGE deal. That's almost a 13% increase in mass over a 6-month span, and I have a very hard time believing someone managed that and it was "all muscle". We're not talking about some out-of-shape kid who starts hitting the gym really hard and bulks up. Steve Slaton was an NFL player (and a good one, at that!). He was a finely tuned athletic machine in peak physical shape. Finely tuned athletic machines in peak physical shape simply don't add 25 more pounds of muscle in 6 months because they just woke up one morning and decided it'd be a good idea.

Second off, I don't know where this whole "he added all this weight... and hasn't lost a step!" myth started, but it's ludicrous. If a pimply-faced 98 pound high school kid joins the track team, then I buy that he can add weight *AND* increase speed... but an NFL player? Again, he's an athletic specimen at peak physical condition. He's already at or very near his maximum speed potential. After that, adding weight is simple physics- more weight = more mass = more inertia. Inertia is very good when you've got a full head of steam and you're trying to grind out some tough extra yards after contact... but it's very, very bad when you're at a complete stop and trying to get to top speed. Even if his top speed is unaffected, adding 25 pounds will have a DRAMATIC impact on his acceleration, which is far more important to an NFL player than actual top-end speed, since the average play is a series of violent explosive starts and stops rather than a sustained sprint. And even if Steve Slaton is this magical mythical football unicorn who somehow managed to increase his mass by 13% without losing any top-end speed *OR* acceleration... inertia is also really, really bad in terms of change-of-direction, a skill which Slaton's game seems predicated on.

So, in other words, I guess you expect me to believe that an athletic specimen in peak physical condition managed to magically increase his mass by 13% in 6 months without adding any fat, and that this extra mass does not translate into any loss in speed, acceleration ("burst"), or change-of-direction skills ("shiftiness").

Some parts of that might be true, but there's no way it's all true. If athletes could add mass at will, and could do so without losing speed, burst, or shiftiness, then we'd be seeing a crop of 400 pound WRs breaking into the league. Obviously, there will be negative consequences to Slaton's extra mass. The question becomes whether the positive gains (better yardage after contact) outweigh the losses (more difficulty avoiding contact in the first place). It's possible that they will, but whenever an athlete is successful at something, I always regard any changes in body composition with skepticism. I've seen far too many times when players have added or lost weight only to see it take away the unique strength that made them such a good player in the first place. Not just in football, but in basketball and baseball, too. As such, I tend to regard drastic changes in body composition as negatives rather than positives (unless the player wasn't any good to begin with, in which case they have nowhere to go but up).

This is precisely what I've said about L. White and his offseason weight loss. It might end up being good for White in that he becomes a better, faster runner but right now his bread and butter is being able to move the pile with that big body. Will losing 30 pounds reduce his effectiveness to do the one thing that he's done so well? I think it may improve White's FA prospects but may hurt him this year in his job share with CJ.

A big misconception regarding Lendale is that he moves the pile. He really doesn't. I'd say between 50-70% of his goalline TD's were plays in which he went in untouched. I'd say there are 50 RB's in the league (including CJ) who could have scored 15 td's with the opportunities Lendale had last year.I'd be surprised if he broke ten tackles the entire year.

Lendale's strength is actually his vision. He is a very good running back who was completely out of shape. Losing weight will be nothing but positive for Lendale.

That being said, this is a dynasty thread, and as such, LW is untouchable in dynasty leagues UNLESS you can buy low now, and sell high at some point during the season.

 

[Sabertooth]

Was just able to acquire Josh Freeman in a 10 team dynasty. What can people tell me about him. I read Waldman's review and he stated that he may have more upside than any other player in the draft. That is why I took him.

I had a chance to take him or Nicks. I also could have select Henne. I hemmed and hawed on that quite a bit then decided on Freeman for the long term. I should mention that we start 2 QBs weekly in this 10-team league. He's my 5th guy right now.

Anyway, he appears to be floundering early on. I read for Quezilla in another thread that the coaches are giving more attention to the other two guys. I don't look at Leftwich and McCown as more than the journeymen they are and I feel when Freeman is ready, he ascend that depth chart pretty quickly.

 

[benm3218]

Speaking of Henne... Can anyone give me a few thought son him? Is he the man when Pennington leaves or goes down or is that QB not currently on their roster?

 

[Sabertooth]

Speaking of Henne... Can anyone give me a few thought son him? Is he the man when Pennington leaves or goes down or is that QB not currently on their roster?

I believe he the guy once Pennington isn't. He's got a great shot at becoming a good player in a good organization. I think Pat White is going to be more like a slash type guy. More like Kordell Stewart than Randal El though.

 

[EBF]

I have a bad feeling about Freeman. I think Tampa Bay is a rudderless organization destined for the cellar. Put a developmental QB in a losing environment with a potential revolving door in the front office and you have the recipe for a bust.

I also have some minor concerns about Freeman's character. Based on some comments he made after the draft, he seems like he might be a little immature and cocky. I would much rather have Nicks to be honest and I might even like Stephen McGee ahead of Freeman for the QB3 spot in this class. The one major positive Freeman has in his favor is his first round status. When a team uses a first round pick on a QB, he's guaranteed to get a long audition for the starting role sooner or later.

 

[SSOG]

Speaking of Henne... Can anyone give me a few thought son him? Is he the man when Pennington leaves or goes down or is that QB not currently on their roster?

I like Henne. I don't *LOVE* Henne, but he's the sort of guy who I'd sneakily try to get included as a throw-in on a larger trade. I might be remembering him a bit more fondly because, after grabbing him in last year's dynasty draft, I promptly snagged Pennington off of waivers to lock down the Miami QB position, just in case... which wound up working out really well for me.I think that QBs are often a crapshoot (I never expected Matt Ryan to be so good in the pros, for instance), but I never saw anything about Henne that screamed "bust" to me, so I took a chance on him. I think with the current trend developing today to take a rookie passer a little lower than you otherwise might and then let him ride the pine for a couple of years, I'm not as turned off by a rookie not wresting the starting job away from a journeyman vet as I used to be. I still think it's a bad sign when a rookie is given the job, and then later loses it to the vet (a la Leinart and Young), but if they're never given the job in the first place I don't hold that against them. The biggest advantage that Henne will have over any rookie QB when Pennington moves on is 2-3 years in the system, which is a pretty huge advantage, especially for a relatively highly drafted player. If you asked me who Miami's starting QB was going to be 3 years from now, my money would definitely be on him.Of course, I don't think that Miami's got the makings of an elite passing offense, so I think his upside is rather limited, but I think he makes a great dynasty QB3 or QB4- a guy with a strong shot of becoming a long-term dynasty QB2.

 

[SSOG]

Interesting stats; thanks for digging those up. However, wouldn't it be important to know what percentage of all 1000 yard seasons were produced by those same high mileage players? Perhaps seven out of every ten 1000 season (by players of all ages) are produced by players who don't receive a large number of carries over their careers, thus making the 32+ group no different than the 'norm'. (I don't know if I am explaining this right. Please let me know if I am not making any sense). I don't know how to quantify this, but there does seem to be some missing information from your example. Again, I am not saying you are wrong; I simply just don't know.

As I said, I looked at RBs aged 30 and 31 who rushed for 1000 yards, and the list showed a much higher proportion of guys who I thought of as "high mileage" players (guys like Curtis Martin, Emmitt Smith, Peyton, etc). It's anecdotal, but while I'm willing to go to pfr and calculate by hand how many carries 10 different players had had midway through their career, I am surprisingly less eager to repeat the same exercise once the sample size exceeds 60. If you have a FBGs subscription, I'd highly recommend playing with the historical data dominator and checking the results for yourself.In fact, I'd recommend the FBGs subscription for the data dominators alone. A *huge* percentage of my dynasty strategy is based on historical trends and the like. For instance, our initial dynasty draft was before the 2007 season. I took Owens high, reasoning that he was far less likely to decline due to age than people suspected (based on historical trends- stud WRs still produce at an elite level at age 34). After benefiting from his services all season, I made a concerted effort to move him, though... because, historically, stud WRs fall off of a cliff in at age 35 and 36. Unless you fully understand the historical effects of aging on certain positions, you can't turn around and use that knowledge to take advantage of owners who base age-related decisions on "their gut". I'll gladly acquire 30 year old WRs from "rebuilding" owners all day long and laugh as the WR remains productive when (and if) that owner reaches the playoffs next... but I won't touch a 35-year-old WR with a 10 foot pole. While many people will argue that historical trends are meaningless because Terrell Owens is a unique individual... I personally believe that forecasting is nothing more than playing the odds. It's like Vegas. Vegas doesn't bother trying to win every hand of Blackjack... they only care about winning more than they lose.It's the same thing with starting QBs. Generally, if a QB hasn't cracked the top 10 in fantasy within two years of first earning the starting job, that QB won't ever manage it, and it's time to unload him while people still hold out some hope for him (i.e. before his value falls off a cliff). There are some exceptions, sure. For instance, following the strategy religiously would have caused you to dump Drew Brees... but it also would have allowed you to get some value in return for J.P. Losman, Alex Smith, Joey Harrington, Kyle Boller, and any number of other busts. You'd be surprised at how easy it is to find people willing to give a highly drafted QB a third shot.

 

[shader]

I don't like Josh Freeman for a number of reasons. The biggest is that he was a Big 12 QB. The Big 12 is a joke of a conference when it comes to defense. This isn't to say that a good QB absolutely cannot come from the Big 12, just that it's hard to judge them when every team is putting up big numbers on a weekly basis.

Not many Big 12 QB's in the league...and when you factor in his immaturity, his lack of an impressive start in camp, and the fact that it's Tampa Bay....I'd stay away.

 

[Sabertooth]

I have a bad feeling about Freeman. I think Tampa Bay is a rudderless organization destined for the cellar. Put a developmental QB in a losing environment with a potential revolving door in the front office and you have the recipe for a bust.I also have some minor concerns about Freeman's character. Based on some comments he made after the draft, he seems like he might be a little immature and cocky. I would much rather have Nicks to be honest and I might even like Stephen McGee ahead of Freeman for the QB3 spot in this class. The one major positive Freeman has in his favor is his first round status. When a team uses a first round pick on a QB, he's guaranteed to get a long audition for the starting role sooner or later.

I agree with all of this. In a start 2 QB league though, the value is increased. I think he has very little between him and the starting gig.

 

[SSOG]

I don't like Josh Freeman for a number of reasons. The biggest is that he was a Big 12 QB. The Big 12 is a joke of a conference when it comes to defense. This isn't to say that a good QB absolutely cannot come from the Big 12, just that it's hard to judge them when every team is putting up big numbers on a weekly basis.Not many Big 12 QB's in the league...and when you factor in his immaturity, his lack of an impressive start in camp, and the fact that it's Tampa Bay....I'd stay away.

I don't think the quality of defenses a QB faces in college really matters. On the one hand, the MAC undoubtedly has SIGNIFICANTLY worse defenses than the BIGXII, but it still gave us guys like Roethlisberger, Leftwich, and Pennington in recent seasons. On the other end of the spectrum, the SEC has arguably the best defenses in college football, and it isn't known for its QBs at all (in recent years there's been... what, Jay Cutler, Jason Campbell, and Eli Manning?).

 

[shader]

I don't like Josh Freeman for a number of reasons. The biggest is that he was a Big 12 QB. The Big 12 is a joke of a conference when it comes to defense. This isn't to say that a good QB absolutely cannot come from the Big 12, just that it's hard to judge them when every team is putting up big numbers on a weekly basis.Not many Big 12 QB's in the league...and when you factor in his immaturity, his lack of an impressive start in camp, and the fact that it's Tampa Bay....I'd stay away.

I don't think the quality of defenses a QB faces in college really matters. On the one hand, the MAC undoubtedly has SIGNIFICANTLY worse defenses than the BIGXII, but it still gave us guys like Roethlisberger, Leftwich, and Pennington in recent seasons. On the other end of the spectrum, the SEC has arguably the best defenses in college football, and it isn't known for its QBs at all (in recent years there's been... what, Jay Cutler, Jason Campbell, and Eli Manning?).

I realize that lack of defense in the Big 12 doesn't mean a Big 12 QB can't succeed...just that it's kind of telling when a conference that is supposed to be elite keeps putting out NFL busts and guys who can't even compete for NFL jobs.Now Freeman did run a pro-style offense and he does have the size, so he's got that going for him.But when you watch the level of play in the Big 12, it's hard to get a read on how good a QB really is because of how pathetic the defenses are.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I recall you saying you didnt like him because he was too small and lacked the top speed to compensate for it. Also that he couldnt handle a full workload and was likely a 3rd down back. I think at this point all those things have been disproven. So i guess my question is what about his talent do you not like? Im not trying to win an argument, but if there is something i am missing about Slatons abilities, or lack of them, i would like to know what it is. This question isnt neccassarily directed at F&L, but to anyone who can point out something that i might be missing.

I may have stated that he had a low speed score coming into the league, which he did. Slaton was 21st among RBs drafted last season in speed score, which takes into account weight and 40-yard dash time. Early last season I don't recall harping at Slaton's physical talent as much as his size and college injury history. When I covered him during the first half of the season, I didn't think he could sustain a rushing attack by himself. He was arm-tackled too easily inside. I think the Texans coaches agreed, which is why they kept working Ahman Green back into the picture whenever he was healthy. Slaton did prove that he could sustain a rushing attack in a one-cut offense with a top-notch passing attack later in the season. I give him a lot of credit for his play down the stretch, but I also keep in mind context. We wouldn't be talking about him as a likely first-rounder this year if Ahman Green hadn't gotten hurt down the stretch. We also wouldn't be talking about him as an elite talent if he faced 8 or 9 defenders in the box.

I've covered what it is about Slaton that I don't like, but let's go through it again. He's probably not going to be used at the goal-line, so the question is this: Is he closer to Brian Westbrook/Chris Johnson, or is he closer Willie Parker/Joseph Addai? You obviously think it's Brian Westbrook and Chris Johnson, two special talents who carry their teams offenses. In fact, the offenses are dysfunctional without them. I don't see Slaton as that guy at all. I think Arian Foster or Chris Brown can step right in, and the Texans offense will be just fine. I saw Mewelde Moore step in for Willie Parker, and the Steelers offense was fine. I saw Kenton Keith and Dominic Rhodes step in for Joseph Addai, and the Colts offense was fine.

I think Foster/Brown will work their way into the picture this year, and I think that will continue to be the case in Houston into the future. They'll bring in even more talented runners. I think he's Willie Parker with more receptions, which means he may have a big year or two, but he'll constantly be fighting off competition from other runners.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Call him "Snacks Slaton" is painting the wrong picture. He committed himself to the weight program this offseason and is in tip-top shape.

http://www.texansbullpen.com/09photogaller...os/DSC_0054.JPG

http://www.texansbullpen.com/09photogaller...os/DSC_0055.JPG

http://texansbullpen.com/09photogallery/Pr...os/DSC_0244.JPG

http://texansbullpen.com/09photogallery/Pr...os/DSC_0245.JPG

http://texansbullpen.com/09photogallery/Pr...os/DSC_0246.JPG

I was just messing around with the guys who get on me about Slaton. Of course he's not up to 225 pounds. That's ridiculous.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

A lot of guys keep this thread going, and it's always great to have the initial guys (EBF & SSOG) humming along with the usual cast of characters. But I just wanted to take a second to thank kremenull for his contributions to the thread. He obviously has some coaching/scouting experience and a good eye for talent. Even when he mixes it up in a good knock-down/drag-out debate, he never takes it personally. He's just in it for the football talk.



I know how hard it is to hold in the testiness at times. I'm plenty guilty myself. Kudos for sticking to the debates and not losing your cool -- even when you're called out pretty fiercely.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I've been following your blog now religiously since I joined my first dynasty league a year ago. It has been a great help to me. Keep up the great work!

What can you tell me about Arian Foster? I can honestly say that I've never heard his name before. I tried to look him up on our FleaFlicker site, but he wasn't even listed so I guess he is in fact a deep sleeper. What makes you think so highly of him?

Thanks for the kind words.Re: Foster. If he had come out after his junior season at Tennessee, I've read that he would have been anywhere from a 1st to a 3rd round pick. Instead he stayed for a senior season that turned into Murphy's Law. He ended up getting a knee scope after the season that limited him early in the year, and he came down with a deep thigh bruise later in the season. Meanwhile, the team fell apart around him, the blocking was awful, and he ended losing a few key fumbles. That senior season performance was apparently bad enough to keep him out of the draft, but (unusual for a undrafted player) he was offered a two-year contract by the Texans.

So what do I like about him? First, he's a big back (6'1/220) with a down-hill, one-cut style perfectly suited for the Texans offense. He also has soft hands and is a very good receiver, especially for a bigger back. He does run slightly high, but the Texans are working on that. He also comes across as very intelligent and mature for his age with a high football IQ.

I think this youtube highlight reel (stay with it -- it starts out decent and keeps getting better) does a good job of showing his speed, power, vision, balance, one-cut ability, and receiving skills.

The other thing I like about him is situation. As I said, he's perfect for the offense, and he's already endeared himself to the coaches. It doesn't hurt that the No. 1 back is subpar in short-yardage and goal-line situations and has a questionable track record with injuries. IMO, there's a place for a bigger back in this offense. Chris Brown may end up filling that role to the start the season, but he's nothing more than a patch until his latest injury strikes. At that point, Foster will take over. It's up to him to run with it and expand the role.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I'm curious about Jamall Lee. From what I've read, Mike Goodson is the one to keep an eye on in CAR. Anybody got more info on Lee?

ETA--found a post on Lee with the search function (duh!):

Jamall Lee, RB, Bishop's College

This Canadian standout has drawn a lot of attention, especially after blazing a 4.39 in the 40-yard dash at the Canadian Football League combine earlier this month. It was the fastest 40 ever run at the CFL combine. What has made NFL scouts take notice is that Lee, son of CFL running back Orville Lee, is 6-1, 225 pounds. There are concerns about his ability to compete against NFL competition, even though he dominated in one of the higher level Canadian college leagues. He played out of a spread offense on a wide field, where he has more room to operate. Still, his speed and evasiveness is not being overlooked and his agent said he has some interviews lined up with NFL teams. Lee's YouTube highlight reel is, at the very least, entertaining.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...amall+lee\

Any more info? TIA.

You've pretty much got the picture there. His situation is bad with so much talent in front of him. But his athleticism is off the charts. He has the pedigree, the speed, and the size to make an impact down the road.In addition to setting the CFL combine record for speed (at 6'2/225!), he also set the combine record for vertical at 44 inches. Just a workout warrior? His father led the CFL in rushing in 1988, and Jamall's 4,296 yards are the Quebec University Football League's all-time record (whatever that means). I haven't seen any tape on him, but he sounds like a football freak ... the Canadian Adrian Peterson.

Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamall_Lee

 

[Fear & Loathing]

I don't have a great read on McCoy. I like his shiftiness and his potential in the passing game. I worry about his lack of power and bulk. At one point he was high on my rookie list, but he slipped a lot. I didn't draft him in any of my leagues. That says something about my lack of confidence in his prospects.At the same time, I think he certainly has the potential to pay dividends. He was an effective player in college and he's in a great system for his skill set. There's some upside there. The problem is that I see a very wide range of potential outcomes. He could be great or he could be utter crap.

Agree: It's the perfect system for his skill set. He was originally pretty low in my rookie rankings. There's definitely upside, but I agree about the wide range of outcomes.Disagree: I never liked his shiftiness. I think he runs side-to-side too much, and that won't work as well in the NFL. From what I saw of him, he wasn't a very efficient runner, always looking for the big play instead of moving the chains.You have to love the reports come out of Philly camp, especially regarding his blitz pickup and receiving skills. I just still wonder if he'll be an efficient enough runner once the games begin.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Was just able to acquire Josh Freeman in a 10 team dynasty. What can people tell me about him. I read Waldman's review and he stated that he may have more upside than any other player in the draft. That is why I took him.

I had a chance to take him or Nicks. I also could have select Henne. I hemmed and hawed on that quite a bit then decided on Freeman for the long term. I should mention that we start 2 QBs weekly in this 10-team league. He's my 5th guy right now.

Anyway, he appears to be floundering early on. I read for Quezilla in another thread that the coaches are giving more attention to the other two guys. I don't look at Leftwich and McCown as more than the journeymen they are and I feel when Freeman is ready, he ascend that depth chart pretty quickly.

I don't see him ascending the depth chart quickly because he's simply not ready. He's going to have a steep learning curve on reading defenses, making decisions, and throwing with NFL accuracy. I would also echo EBF's concern's about his situation in Tampa Bay.

I would have definitely taken Nicks and Henne over Freeman.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Speaking of Henne... Can anyone give me a few thought son him? Is he the man when Pennington leaves or goes down or is that QB not currently on their roster?

He's the heir apparent. Pennington is only signed thru this season, and the Dolphins have made it pretty clear that Henne is the 2010 starter. Penny would need another miracle season, and I don't see that happening considering his injury history and strength of schedule. He and the Dolphins feasted on one of the easiest schedules you'll ever see, and now they face one of the toughest in the league. You saw his limitations against good defenses when they faced the Ravens in the playoffs. I expect Henne to be starting by the end of the 2009 season.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Oh, one last thing before turning in for the night. I put this in the Hype Train thread, but it's worth posting here as well:

I offered Eddie Royal and my 2010 first-round pick for Percy Harvin in my long-time Dynasty league. I was turned down cold.



Stonewalled for now. I'll have to get more creative.

 

[Sebowski]

Why no love for Trent Edwards? He has great weapons and has been given more control of the offense. The Bills plan on running a lot of no-huddle. I see a huge season for him. What is the reasoning behind having Garrard and ShEli ahead of him?

 

[kremenull]

Thanks F&L!.....Lots of good, strong opinions and takes in this thread. Causing me to step up my game as well....

Peace to SSOG! It's all good my man, I respect the stance. But I'm not simply a contrarian voice. Before I take a stance with conviction, I will have done quite a bit of analysis before I put it out there for the record. And who knows, I could just as well be totally off the mark on this one, it wouldn't be the first nor the last time. But as the saying goes, only time will tell.

 

[Fear & Loathing]

Why no love for Trent Edwards? He has great weapons and has been given more control of the offense. The Bills plan on running a lot of no-huddle. I see a huge season for him. What is the reasoning behind having Garrard and ShEli ahead of him?

I love Trent Edwards. I could easily have him ahead of Eli.I have him with more 2009 value than ShEli, but ShEli has better long-term stability and is far less of an injury risk. What happens to Edwards' 2010 value if T.O. exits or severely declines?Garrard finished 9th in fantasy points last season and 13th in PPG. Pretty impressive when you consider that he lost all three of his interior lineman for almost the whole season. Even more impressive when you consider that his three top receivers from last season are currently out of football. They're all pretty close. It wouldn't bother me to put Edwards higher, but Garrard is severely underappreciated.