FBG Projections: Wood (1 Viewer)

[Jason Wood]

I'm mirroring Maurile and Bob's threads...

Please feel free to ask questions or pose thoughts relative to my site projections. They are constantly in motion and I'm in no way 100% locked into any player at any position right now. I'm sure there are some absolutely whiffs in the current batch and I'm always open to hearing about them.

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2008/c...proj-phi-50.php

 

[higgins]

Jason Wood projections for 2008 -- 253 att, 140 cmp, 1626 yds, 10 TDs, 14 INT.

 

[AnonymousBob]

I absolutely love that some of you staffers are doing this. I'm not sure if it's a new fbg thing or if you guys just started doing it yourself but it's fantastic - the rankings are one thing but the real knowledge comes from the discussions.

I'll go over your list later but this is just fantastic.

 

[Musesboy]

Derek Anderson is 11th in your redraft rankings but not listed under the Browns' projections.

 

[Musesboy]

Mario Manningham to sit the entire year?

 

[Jason Wood]

I absolutely love that some of you staffers are doing this. I'm not sure if it's a new fbg thing or if you guys just started doing it yourself but it's fantastic - the rankings are one thing but the real knowledge comes from the discussions.I'll go over your list later but this is just fantastic.

Derek Anderson is 11th in your redraft rankings but not listed under the Browns' projections.

Mario Manningham to sit the entire year?

Ah...my first set of projections had about a dozen incorrect player IDs when I sent Dodds my files. I sent him the updated files yesterday and assumed the projections were uploaded and updated. But I see now that the last time my files were updated was May 30th...so these are stale. Check back later today and you'll see that DA and Manningham are not projected to miss the season.

 

[Musesboy]

Ah...my first set of projections had about a dozen incorrect player IDs when I sent Dodds my files. I sent him the updated files yesterday and assumed the projections were uploaded and updated. But I see now that the last time my files were updated was May 30th...so these are stale. Check back later today and you'll see that DA and Manningham are not projected to miss the season. :X

 

[Jason Wood]

I absolutely love that some of you staffers are doing this. I'm not sure if it's a new fbg thing or if you guys just started doing it yourself but it's fantastic - the rankings are one thing but the real knowledge comes from the discussions.I'll go over your list later but this is just fantastic.

All the credit goes to Bob for starting up his thread. Upon seeing his thread I figured I would piggyback of his idea once my projections were live; and it seems Maurile had similar thoughts. Much props to Bob Henry! Not that he needs any more affirmation

 

[a_troll00]

I think you got Cutler ranked too high. Could you bump down his projections some, like to QB 23 please? He's gonna be terrible this year, just terrible.

 

[travdogg]

It's nice to see someone who hasn't forgotten what a great WR Torry Holt can be when he doesn't have to play for a JV team.

Why so low on Heap? Cameron has said he plans to use Heap like he used Gates in SD, now while I don't expect Gates-like numbers, I would think a top-10 finish should be easy.

 

[David Yudkin]

AFC observations . . .

Does Todd Heap get hurt again (not that it would be surprising)?

Stallworth to have a career worst season?

Why so low on DEN rushing totals . . . do you expect them to add someone else and are waiting to see who?

Andre Johnson has averaged over 6.5 receptions a game the past 2 years . . . you have him down for 70 catches.

JAX adds Porter but their WR fantasy production will drop 40 points?

NE to lose 700 passing yards? I agree they will lose TDs, but why so few yards?

In the BB era, NE has not come close to the ypc you are pegging them at for 2008.

OAK adds McFadden and Walker and has Russell ready to go . . . and they do not gain at all in terms of team fantasy production?

LT to get 350 carries coming off an injury when he hasn't hit the total in 6 years?

 

[Verbal Kint]

Can you elaborate on why you think Ricky Williams will see so many touches. You seem to have him eating into Brown's carries much more so than the other staffers.

Much props to you guys for doing this.

 

[Jason Wood]

It's nice to see someone who hasn't forgotten what a great WR Torry Holt can be when he doesn't have to play for a JV team.Why so low on Heap? Cameron has said he plans to use Heap like he used Gates in SD, now while I don't expect Gates-like numbers, I would think a top-10 finish should be easy.

Couple things...1) I don't believe he can stay healthy. Debates about predictability of injuries aside, he's found too many ways to stay off the field for me to confidently project a 16-game season2) The QB situation could be a trainwreck. As it stands right now I have Troy Smith starting 8 games, Flacco starting 63) The offensive line is SKETCHY. The line isn't what it used to be; and either Heap is going to have to stay in and block or his backups are going to see the field more oftenTruth be told, if Heap is fully healthy throughout camp and makes plays in practice and against 1st teams in the preseason game action; I will tweak him higher. But for now, he stays where he's currently projected.

 

[travdogg]

It's nice to see someone who hasn't forgotten what a great WR Torry Holt can be when he doesn't have to play for a JV team.Why so low on Heap? Cameron has said he plans to use Heap like he used Gates in SD, now while I don't expect Gates-like numbers, I would think a top-10 finish should be easy.

Couple things...1) I don't believe he can stay healthy. Debates about predictability of injuries aside, he's found too many ways to stay off the field for me to confidently project a 16-game season2) The QB situation could be a trainwreck. As it stands right now I have Troy Smith starting 8 games, Flacco starting 63) The offensive line is SKETCHY. The line isn't what it used to be; and either Heap is going to have to stay in and block or his backups are going to see the field more oftenTruth be told, if Heap is fully healthy throughout camp and makes plays in practice and against 1st teams in the preseason game action; I will tweak him higher. But for now, he stays where he's currently projected.

1.Heap tore his hamstring last year and dislocated his ankle 4 years ago. Other than that what injuries has he had? 2.When hasn't the Ravens QB situation been a trainwreck?3.I agree the o-line is sketchy, but don't you think that will lead to more dump offs to Heap and probably McGahee?

 

[Jason Wood]

AFC observations . . .

Does Todd Heap get hurt again (not that it would be surprising)?...See my last post

Stallworth to have a career worst season?...I need to re-examine that. Basically I have Cleveland with 318 completions and don't se how a healthy Edwards or Winslow catch less than 80. I don't think Jurevicius (30 catches) or the RBs (57 recs combined) will be ignored which doesn't leave a ton of receptions for Stallworth. But you're right, I don't think it makes sense for him to only catch 40 balls; I need to study my CLE assumptions and re-jigger things.

Why so low on DEN rushing totals . . . do you expect them to add someone else and are waiting to see who? That's just a reflection of my latest set of tweaks not being input. I removed Travis Henry and re-allocated but the projections on the site aren't showing the reallocation yet, but HAVE removed Henry. For those wondering, I have the rushing totals projected as follows:

Jay Cutler -- 25 rushes for 90 yards, 1 TD

Selvin Young -- 160 / 650 / 4.1 / 4 / 20 / 130 / 6.5 / 1 / 128

Ryan Torain -- 150 / 675 / 4.5 / 4 / 20 / 105 / 5.3 / 122

Andre Hall -- 110 / 420 / 3.8 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 60

Michael Pittman -- 60 / 225 / 3.8 / 1 / 10 / 50 / 5.0 / 44

My total rushing projections for Denver are:

505 rushes for 2,060 yards (4.1 per carry) and 13 TDs; with 50 receptions for 285 yards and 1 receiving TD; well within 5-year Denver norms.

Andre Johnson has averaged over 6.5 receptions a game the past 2 years . . . you have him down for 70 catches. The May knee scope gives me pause. If healthy, AJ will assuredly smash through this current set of projections but no way do I forecast him for a healthy 16-game season in late May, early June based on what we know today. If he really is back at full speed to start camp; I'll happily move him up my draft board.

JAX adds Porter but their WR fantasy production will drop 40 points? I'm not a believer in Garrard like Chase is...I don't see the conservative Jaguars passing game yielding 28 TDs and only 8 INTs again this year; so for now I'm comfortable projecting a down year in aggregate for the receiving corps. The most telling is that I model Reggie Williams for just 2 TDs this year, after having 10 a season ago.

NE to lose 700 passing yards? I agree they will lose TDs, but why so few yards? They had the best offense in the history of the league a year ago; I'm a big believer in regression to the mean. Over the last five seasons the Patriots have thrown for 4731, 3590, 4322, 3750 and 3651; averaging 4,009 yards. I'm still projecting them to have almost 4,200 yards and lead the league in TD passes. Add to that the fact Belichick, perhaps moreso than any other coach, is willing to dramatically reshape the way his team goes about winning games, and I fully expect the team to have more offensive balance this year. If anything, I feel that I need to beef up the projected rushing totals for NE, as I look at them now they seem far too low.

In the BB era, NE has not come close to the ypc you are pegging them at for 2008. ??? I have them at 4.3 per carry...they've averaged 4.1, 3.9, 3.4, 4.1 and 3.4 over the last five years. Hardly seems like I'm being overly aggressive. But as I said in the post above, I don't have the team with enough carries or TDs and that will likely tweak the team project YPC down to 4.2 or so.

OAK adds McFadden and Walker and has Russell ready to go . . . and they do not gain at all in terms of team fantasy production? Oakland has room for upside but I'm not at all a believer that the dysfunctional situation in Oakland is going to end well this year. Russell being "ready to go" is by no means a guaranteed improvement IMHO, nor am I particularly a believer in Walker given his injury history and the fact he's got plenty of guaranteed $$$ in his pocket already. I'm also not as high on McFadden as some others; and project him for less than 1000 yards rushing. All tolled, I agree this has room for upward revision but not until I see some indications that things are working out according to plan. Let's see McFadden get signed and into camp, let's see Javon practice, let's see that Russell is in shape, and let's hear that Kiffin isn't a 0-3 start away from being fired.

LT to get 350 carries coming off an injury when he hasn't hit the total in 6 years? When my new projections are posted later today, you'll see that I had already tweaked this downward.

Good stuff, thanks David.

 

[Jason Wood]

It's nice to see someone who hasn't forgotten what a great WR Torry Holt can be when he doesn't have to play for a JV team.Why so low on Heap? Cameron has said he plans to use Heap like he used Gates in SD, now while I don't expect Gates-like numbers, I would think a top-10 finish should be easy.

Couple things...1) I don't believe he can stay healthy. Debates about predictability of injuries aside, he's found too many ways to stay off the field for me to confidently project a 16-game season2) The QB situation could be a trainwreck. As it stands right now I have Troy Smith starting 8 games, Flacco starting 63) The offensive line is SKETCHY. The line isn't what it used to be; and either Heap is going to have to stay in and block or his backups are going to see the field more oftenTruth be told, if Heap is fully healthy throughout camp and makes plays in practice and against 1st teams in the preseason game action; I will tweak him higher. But for now, he stays where he's currently projected.

1.Heap tore his hamstring last year and dislocated his ankle 4 years ago. Other than that what injuries has he had? 2.When hasn't the Ravens QB situation been a trainwreck?3.I agree the o-line is sketchy, but don't you think that will lead to more dump offs to Heap and probably McGahee?

All fair points. You'll find that I'm very conservative in my early projections when it comes to a) players returning from injury and b ) major coaching changes. As the preseason wears on, I will tweak upwards if there's indications that said players are healthy and/or the teams have stability.

 

[David Yudkin]

NE to lose 700 passing yards? I agree they will lose TDs, but why so few yards? They had the best offense in the history of the league a year ago; I'm a big believer in regression to the mean. Over the last five seasons the Patriots have thrown for 4731, 3590, 4322, 3750 and 3651; averaging 4,009 yards. I'm still projecting them to have almost 4,200 yards and lead the league in TD passes. Add to that the fact Belichick, perhaps moreso than any other coach, is willing to dramatically reshape the way his team goes about winning games, and I fully expect the team to have more offensive balance this year. If anything, I feel that I need to beef up the projected rushing totals for NE, as I look at them now they seem far too low.

In the BB era, NE has not come close to the ypc you are pegging them at for 2008. ??? I have them at 4.3 per carry...they've averaged 4.1, 3.9, 3.4, 4.1 and 3.4 over the last five years. Hardly seems like I'm being overly aggressive. But as I said in the post above, I don't have the team with enough carries or TDs and that will likely tweak the team project YPC down to 4.2 or so.

I think people are misreading the Pats situation (read my PS on Maroney for a breakdown on the running game). So while it appeared that they ran more later in the year last year, they actually ran LESS than they did the first half of the season.I think there are a couple of things that people are missing . . .

1) While people are thinking the Pats will return to the run, they never had the receiving options that they have now, so the 5 year average argument on their passing production really does not account for that at all. Like averaging in the Rams passing totals before they had Bruce and Holt.

2) In the years (actual year singular) where they put up decent rushing totals (2004), they were probably stronger defensively than they are now. The defense is starting to look old in spots and they lost some talent this offseason. I don't think the defense will be terrible, but I don't think they will be as good as in prior years and don't see them as a shutdown defense. There may be a few games that may be closer scoring wise to Week 17 against the Giants than the 52-14 games they had last year.

3) My sources close to the team have indicated that the plan is to repeat what worked for the most part last year and again rely heavily on the passing game. That could be a total misread by the people I know, but there does not at this point (June 1) appear to be a clamoring to retool the offense and focus more on the run.

So while you may want to increase the Pats running totals, I would have suggested that they were too high. The only way I see the Pats really getting a lot more RB production is if they get way ahead and this year opt to run almost exclusively in the 4th quarter.

 

[Jason Wood]

NE to lose 700 passing yards? I agree they will lose TDs, but why so few yards? They had the best offense in the history of the league a year ago; I'm a big believer in regression to the mean. Over the last five seasons the Patriots have thrown for 4731, 3590, 4322, 3750 and 3651; averaging 4,009 yards. I'm still projecting them to have almost 4,200 yards and lead the league in TD passes. Add to that the fact Belichick, perhaps moreso than any other coach, is willing to dramatically reshape the way his team goes about winning games, and I fully expect the team to have more offensive balance this year. If anything, I feel that I need to beef up the projected rushing totals for NE, as I look at them now they seem far too low.

In the BB era, NE has not come close to the ypc you are pegging them at for 2008. ??? I have them at 4.3 per carry...they've averaged 4.1, 3.9, 3.4, 4.1 and 3.4 over the last five years. Hardly seems like I'm being overly aggressive. But as I said in the post above, I don't have the team with enough carries or TDs and that will likely tweak the team project YPC down to 4.2 or so.

I think people are misreading the Pats situation (read my PS on Maroney for a breakdown on the running game). So while it appeared that they ran more later in the year last year, they actually ran LESS than they did the first half of the season.I think there are a couple of things that people are missing . . .

1) While people are thinking the Pats will return to the run, they never had the receiving options that they have now, so the 5 year average argument on their passing production really does not account for that at all. Like averaging in the Rams passing totals before they had Bruce and Holt.

2) In the years (actual year singular) where they put up decent rushing totals (2004), they were probably stronger defensively than they are now. The defense is starting to look old in spots and they lost some talent this offseason. I don't think the defense will be terrible, but I don't think they will be as good as in prior years and don't see them as a shutdown defense. There may be a few games that may be closer scoring wise to Week 17 against the Giants than the 52-14 games they had last year.

3) My sources close to the team have indicated that the plan is to repeat what worked for the most part last year and again rely heavily on the passing game. That could be a total misread by the people I know, but there does not at this point (June 1) appear to be a clamoring to retool the offense and focus more on the run.

So while you may want to increase the Pats running totals, I would have suggested that they were too high. The only way I see the Pats really getting a lot more RB production is if they get way ahead and this year opt to run almost exclusively in the 4th quarter.

Fair points, I'm still uncomfortable projecting them anywhere close to 4,700 yards passing again. I could tweak it up a bit more from where I have it, but I suspect that NO ONE knows what Bill and his offensive coaches have planned. While it wouldn't shock me to see them throw on almost every down, it also wouldn't shock me to see them be MUCH more balanced in 2008. Too much variability to comfortably put them back up an historic levels in back to back seasons.

 

[DoubleG]

Jason Wood projections for 2008 -- 253 att, 140 cmp, 1626 yds, 10 TDs, 14 INT.

I was actually going to post what I think Kerry Wood's pitching stats will look like by the end of the year, but this was better.

 

[Jason Wood]

Jason Wood projections for 2008 -- 253 att, 140 cmp, 1626 yds, 10 TDs, 14 INT.

I'm all about protecting the ball Higgins! I may dump it off to my backs quite a bit, but no WAY am I throwing more picks than TDs.

 

[Dirty Weasel]

Although I am a Chargers nut and love LT, I don't see 350 carries in his future. He's only hit that mark once in his career, back when he was 23 years old. I think he will hit 350 carries in 2008, but it will be in his 2nd playoff game.

 

[Real Man of Genius]

Andre Johnson seems really low to me, but I guess you are predicting he will miss time this year. In PPR last year, he was WR2 in PPG (9 games), with 7 of 9 games over 20 points

 

[Jason Wood]

Although I am a Chargers nut and love LT, I don't see 350 carries in his future. He's only hit that mark once in his career, back when he was 23 years old. I think he will hit 350 carries in 2008, but it will be in his 2nd playoff game.

I agree...as I said, that's already been changed in the set of projections I sent in yesterday.

 

[Jason Wood]

Andre Johnson seems really low to me, but I guess you are predicting he will miss time this year. In PPR last year, he was WR2 in PPG (9 games), with 7 of 9 games over 20 points

As I mentioned in a previous post, that assumes some missed time. He had his knee scoped in May after really struggling last year with injury. If he's back on the practice field full speed with no other setbacks, I'll bump him up proportionately as the preseason wears on.

 

[Verbal Kint]

Can you elaborate on why you think Ricky Williams will see so many touches. You seem to have him eating into Brown's carries much more so than the other staffers. Much props to you guys for doing this.

 

[Jason Wood]

Can you elaborate on why you think Ricky Williams will see so many touches. You seem to have him eating into Brown's carries much more so than the other staffers. Much props to you guys for doing this.

Hey Verbal...sorry I hadn't seen that. Bill Parcells and Tony Sparano are both clearly advocates of a committee approach; and from everything I've heard, Williams is back into prime time shape. I just don't see Brown getting anything close to 300 carries, healthy or not. But that doesn't mean I don't think both RBs will be much more productive in aggregate than some believe.

 

[Verbal Kint]

Can you elaborate on why you think Ricky Williams will see so many touches. You seem to have him eating into Brown's carries much more so than the other staffers. Much props to you guys for doing this.

Hey Verbal...sorry I hadn't seen that. Bill Parcells and Tony Sparano are both clearly advocates of a committee approach; and from everything I've heard, Williams is back into prime time shape. I just don't see Brown getting anything close to 300 carries, healthy or not. But that doesn't mean I don't think both RBs will be much more productive in aggregate than some believe.

Thanks Woodrow. Appreciate the insight.

 

[bcr8f]

You have Chauncey Washington highly rated in rookies. Much higher than anyone else. Care to divulge?

 

[Andy Herron]

Quarterbacks-

Unless you're anticipating a Matt Ryan injury, not real sure why you're ranking Redman higher.

You realize Ryan will be the starter from the get-go, right?

The Falcons already have him signed and their intentions are clear.

If Troy Smith wins the starting position, I'd bump him up about 12-15 spots. He'll deliver.

Regardless of who wins the job in SF, a Mike Martz QB has to be higher than 28th, doesn't he? (I'm watching for Shaun Hill myself)

Don't want to pick too much, it's tough to pick the back half at this point in the year.

 

[Jason Wood]

Quarterbacks-

Unless you're anticipating a Matt Ryan injury, not real sure why you're ranking Redman higher.

I have Ryan starting 11 games, that's hardly taking a conservative approach for a freshman signal caller. If (when?) the Falcons declare Ryan the opening day starter, I'll adjust upward but, truth be told, I probably wouldn't move him much up my redraft rankings. Rookies not named Peyton Manning have been awful as fantasy starters, regardless of their long term potential.

You realize Ryan will be the starter from the get-go, right?

The Falcons already have him signed and their intentions are clear.

If Troy Smith wins the starting position, I'd bump him up about 12-15 spots. He'll deliver. I have Smith starting 8 games right now, which is as much about reflecting that I think he's got a good chance of starting the season until he hands the reins over to Flacco as it is a hard and fast prediction on how things will actually turn out. Certainly if he were to win and start 16 games this season, he would be higher than 31st

Regardless of who wins the job in SF, a Mike Martz QB has to be higher than 28th, doesn't he? (I'm watching for Shaun Hill myself)

I have Shaun Hill starting nine games, so 28th is the right projection for him now. If he (or another 49er) were to start the majority of the season, obviously they would rank higher per your observation.

Don't want to pick too much, it's tough to pick the back half at this point in the year.

 

[Tau837]

Why so low on DEN rushing totals . . . do you expect them to add someone else and are waiting to see who? That's just a reflection of my latest set of tweaks not being input. I removed Travis Henry and re-allocated but the projections on the site aren't showing the reallocation yet, but HAVE removed Henry. For those wondering, I have the rushing totals projected as follows:

Jay Cutler -- 25 rushes for 90 yards, 1 TD

Selvin Young -- 160 / 650 / 4.1 / 4 / 20 / 130 / 6.5 / 1 / 128

Ryan Torain -- 150 / 675 / 4.5 / 4 / 20 / 105 / 5.3 / 122

Andre Hall -- 110 / 420 / 3.8 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 60

Michael Pittman -- 60 / 225 / 3.8 / 1 / 10 / 50 / 5.0 / 44

My total rushing projections for Denver are:

505 rushes for 2,060 yards (4.1 per carry) and 13 TDs; with 50 receptions for 285 yards and 1 receiving TD; well within 5-year Denver norms.

Questions on this:1. If they have 3 100+ carry RBs on the roster even without Pittman, why do you think they signed him? Particularly since you are not showing him as playing much of a third down back role, with only 10 receptions. For example, what is he offering that Mike Bell didn't offer?

2. On Pittman's receptions, why so few? Why only 5 ypr? He has been much more productive than this as a receiver, as recently as last year. I could see this if you felt he would basically have no role, but you're giving him 60 carries... roughly what he has averaged over the past 3 seasons, when he also averaged 36 catches.

3. Given you are showing Young at 4.1 ypc and Torain at 4.5 ypc, why do you think Shanny will give 170 carries to the others you show at 3.8 ypc? I assume you aren't projecting Hall or Pittman as goal line threats, since you show them with only 4 TDs in those 170 carries. Are you assuming injuries?

4. Why such a drastic reduction in Young's ypc? Last year he averaged 5.2 ypc on 140 carries, and you're only showing him with 20 more carries this year. I agree that he is unlikely to repeat 5.2 ypc, but you're showing quite a drop here.

5. Given Young had 35 catches last year, and, if anything, appears to have an increased overall role this year, why are you projecting him with only 20 catches? Again, you don't seem to be projecting that Pittman will steal them... are you expecting Torain to play on third downs, or just to generally split time? Or is this due to injury risk?

Thanks for making this thread. This and the Tremblay and Henry threads are providing a lot of great discussion.

This reminds me of a question I had meant to ask in the past: why don't we have Team Spotlight threads (or possibly Team Offense Spotlight threads) instead of or in addition to Player Spotlight threads? I often think in the Player Spotlights the posters fail to put the player in context with his teammates, which can easily lead to under- or over-projecting.

 

[Andy Herron]

This reminds me of a question I had meant to ask in the past: why don't we have Team Spotlight threads (or possibly Team Offense Spotlight threads) instead of or in addition to Player Spotlight threads? I often think in the Player Spotlights the posters fail to put the player in context with his teammates, which can easily lead to under- or over-projecting.

This is a very good point and well worth looking into. This isn't basketball.There are too many moving parts in an NFL offense to focus on 1/11 of it from any perspective.

 

[gheemony]

These threads are FREAKIN' AWESOME. What a great way to stimulate discussion between Staff and the Board. I like the idea of Team Spotlight threads. It would be a nice way to incorporate discussions about offensive philosophy, OL strength, D strength, etc. I've learned a lot from Yudkin's posts about NE and it would be great to give a forum for folks with similar in-depth insight on teams to post and discuss.

:thumbsup:

 

[Jason Wood]

This reminds me of a question I had meant to ask in the past: why don't we have Team Spotlight threads (or possibly Team Offense Spotlight threads) instead of or in addition to Player Spotlight threads? I often think in the Player Spotlights the posters fail to put the player in context with his teammates, which can easily lead to under- or over-projecting.

This is a very good point and well worth looking into. This isn't basketball.There are too many moving parts in an NFL offense to focus on 1/11 of it from any perspective.

We've talked about this before; probably not something we could implement this year but I'm all for pushing this kind of thing at our next planning session.

 

[Tau837]

This reminds me of a question I had meant to ask in the past: why don't we have Team Spotlight threads (or possibly Team Offense Spotlight threads) instead of or in addition to Player Spotlight threads? I often think in the Player Spotlights the posters fail to put the player in context with his teammates, which can easily lead to under- or over-projecting.

This is a very good point and well worth looking into. This isn't basketball.There are too many moving parts in an NFL offense to focus on 1/11 of it from any perspective.

We've talked about this before; probably not something we could implement this year but I'm all for pushing this kind of thing at our next planning session.

I think it would be ultimately even more useful than the Player Spotlights. Did you see my questions about the Denver RBs?

 

[Jason Wood]

Why so low on DEN rushing totals . . . do you expect them to add someone else and are waiting to see who? That's just a reflection of my latest set of tweaks not being input. I removed Travis Henry and re-allocated but the projections on the site aren't showing the reallocation yet, but HAVE removed Henry. For those wondering, I have the rushing totals projected as follows:

Jay Cutler -- 25 rushes for 90 yards, 1 TD

Selvin Young -- 160 / 650 / 4.1 / 4 / 20 / 130 / 6.5 / 1 / 128

Ryan Torain -- 150 / 675 / 4.5 / 4 / 20 / 105 / 5.3 / 122

Andre Hall -- 110 / 420 / 3.8 / 3 / 0 / 0 / 0.0 / 0 / 60

Michael Pittman -- 60 / 225 / 3.8 / 1 / 10 / 50 / 5.0 / 44

My total rushing projections for Denver are:

505 rushes for 2,060 yards (4.1 per carry) and 13 TDs; with 50 receptions for 285 yards and 1 receiving TD; well within 5-year Denver norms.

Questions on this:1. If they have 3 100+ carry RBs on the roster even without Pittman, why do you think they signed him? Particularly since you are not showing him as playing much of a third down back role, with only 10 receptions. For example, what is he offering that Mike Bell didn't offer? I'm not at all convinced Pittman will make the roster; his numbers are as much about making sure he's in my projections database right now as anything else.

2. On Pittman's receptions, why so few? Why only 5 ypr? He has been much more productive than this as a receiver, as recently as last year. I could see this if you felt he would basically have no role, but you're giving him 60 carries... roughly what he has averaged over the past 3 seasons, when he also averaged 36 catches. Again, I'm basically keeping him in as a placeholder right now; clearly my thoughts on the Denver RB situation are going to be fluid all offseason. If it becomes a situation where it looks like Young as RB1 and Pittman as RB2/3rd down, I will undoubtedly re-work my assumptions for him in a meaningful way.

3. Given you are showing Young at 4.1 ypc and Torain at 4.5 ypc, why do you think Shanny will give 170 carries to the others you show at 3.8 ypc? I assume you aren't projecting Hall or Pittman as goal line threats, since you show them with only 4 TDs in those 170 carries. Are you assuming injuries? This is more about reflecting the uncertainty of the situation right now; ultimately I think we'll have further shakeout of the RB stable and then we can start layering in more traditional RB1/RB2/RB3 projections.

4. Why such a drastic reduction in Young's ypc? Last year he averaged 5.2 ypc on 140 carries, and you're only showing him with 20 more carries this year. I agree that he is unlikely to repeat 5.2 ypc, but you're showing quite a drop here. I need to re-think that; thanks for making a note of this

5. Given Young had 35 catches last year, and, if anything, appears to have an increased overall role this year, why are you projecting him with only 20 catches? Again, you don't seem to be projecting that Pittman will steal them... are you expecting Torain to play on third downs, or just to generally split time? Or is this due to injury risk? Another good point

Thanks for making this thread. This and the Tremblay and Henry threads are providing a lot of great discussion.

This reminds me of a question I had meant to ask in the past: why don't we have Team Spotlight threads (or possibly Team Offense Spotlight threads) instead of or in addition to Player Spotlight threads? I often think in the Player Spotlights the posters fail to put the player in context with his teammates, which can easily lead to under- or over-projecting.

Sorry JWB...missed this last night.

 

[ATC1]

Wood, I have a question about the rookie rankings. You are the only one to comment on Chris Johnson and you say nothing but great things. Also, you say he will get tons of touches. How do you rank him as the #24 ranked rookie in dynasty drafts?

 

[AB in DC]

Wood, I have a question about the rookie rankings. You are the only one to comment on Chris Johnson and you say nothing but great things. Also, you say he will get tons of touches. How do you rank him as the #24 ranked rookie in dynasty drafts?

Now showing up as the #20 ranked rookie...is this another coding error? The comments certainly don't match the ranking.

 

[ATC1]

Wood, I have a question about the rookie rankings. You are the only one to comment on Chris Johnson and you say nothing but great things. Also, you say he will get tons of touches. How do you rank him as the #24 ranked rookie in dynasty drafts?

Now showing up as the #20 ranked rookie...is this another coding error? The comments certainly don't match the ranking.

My post was June 5th.His updated ranking is June 6th.20th still seems low for the comments he made about Johnson.

 

[switz]

Gotta ask:

Felix Jones YPC at 4.0?

Jerious Norwood at 5.4?

Am I missing something? Didn't Jones have one of the highest college YPC's ever? And isn't Norwood on a team with a rookie QB?

 

[Tanner9919]

I'm mirroring Maurile and Bob's threads...

Please feel free to ask questions or pose thoughts relative to my site projections. They are constantly in motion and I'm in no way 100% locked into any player at any position right now. I'm sure there are some absolutely whiffs in the current batch and I'm always open to hearing about them.

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2008/c...proj-phi-50.php

I like your predictions! you're low on Andre Johnson, and that makes sense, he's always hurt and doesn't score many TD's.as for Torry Holt, I think you're WAY over the top in love with this guy..IMO, the departure of Bruce will hurt that Rams' passing game as much as hiring Al Saunders does. Saunders loves running the ball, and SJax figures to be run into the ground in 2008..

not one single WR that Saunders coached while OC with the Chiefs, caught more than 68 passes.

In Washington ( 2006-7), not a single WR on the Redskins roster caught more than 61 balls...

Saunders favors a good-hands RB who catches the ball well ( Holmes, Portis, Betts) , a strong running game, and a big play TE ( Cooley, Gonzalez)

predicting 105 catches for Holt is about 25 more than he'll actually catch under Saunders, IMO..

 

[Tau837]

as for Torry Holt, I think you're WAY over the top in love with this guy..IMO, the departure of Bruce will hurt that Rams' passing game as much as hiring Al Saunders does. Saunders loves running the ball, and SJax figures to be run into the ground in 2008..not one single WR that Saunders coached while OC with the Chiefs, caught more than 68 passes.In Washington ( 2006-7), not a single WR onthe Redskins roster caught more than 61 balls...Saunders favors a good-hands RB who catches the ball well ( Holmes, Portis, Betts) , a strong running game, and a big play TE ( Cooley, Gonzalez)105 catches for Holt 25 more than he;ll actually catch under Saunders, IMO..

It's apples and oranges to compare Saunders' offenses with the Chiefs and Redskins to the one he'll have in St. Louis. He didn't have a Torry Holt caliber WR in KC or Washington, but he did have Gonzalez and Cooley. Now he has Torry Holt but doesn't have a great TE.

 

[Jason Wood]

Gotta ask:Felix Jones YPC at 4.0?Jerious Norwood at 5.4?Am I missing something? Didn't Jones have one of the highest college YPC's ever? And isn't Norwood on a team with a rookie QB?

Norwood is the only RB in NFL history to average more than 6 yards per rush with at least 200 career rushing attempts; the guy is too talented to keep on the bench. That said, I believe he will take a backseat to Turner; so I expect Norwood to be used in certain formations that will allow him to break off runs; whereas he'll almost never be used in short yardage or at the goal line where YPCs can get chipped away at by necessity. I also think the Falcons offensive line is much better at run blocking than people realize.As to Jones at 4.0? That could be higher; I really don't expect a ton from Jones this year to be honest. 4.4 or 4.0; makes no difference to me in terms of where I would draft him as long as Barber is healthy.

 

[Jason Wood]

as for Torry Holt, I think you're WAY over the top in love with this guy..IMO, the departure of Bruce will hurt that Rams' passing game as much as hiring Al Saunders does. Saunders loves running the ball, and SJax figures to be run into the ground in 2008..not one single WR that Saunders coached while OC with the Chiefs, caught more than 68 passes.In Washington ( 2006-7), not a single WR onthe Redskins roster caught more than 61 balls...Saunders favors a good-hands RB who catches the ball well ( Holmes, Portis, Betts) , a strong running game, and a big play TE ( Cooley, Gonzalez)105 catches for Holt 25 more than he;ll actually catch under Saunders, IMO..

It's apples and oranges to compare Saunders' offenses with the Chiefs and Redskins to the one he'll have in St. Louis. He didn't have a Torry Holt caliber WR in KC or Washington, but he did have Gonzalez and Cooley. Now he has Torry Holt but doesn't have a great TE.

Exactly.Holt is a Hall of Fame receiver with phenomenal hands and, as was stated, is now the ONLY surefire target for Marc Bulger. The guy could easily be the most targeted WR in the league this year and that means a LOT of catches. Is 105 a lot? Sure; that could get tweaked down but I expect he'll be up among the league leaders if healthy.

 

[Dope]

This isn't so much a Projections question, but a rankings question.

Why do you leave off Brian Brohm from your list of the top 40 rookies?

He's behind a guy who's never been a starter.

He's behind a guy who has a history of being injury prone.

If he were to take over, he'd be taking over an outstanding offense.

Yet, you have Chad Henne 14th.

Henne by my calculation is 3rd on the depth chart.

He's behind 2 guys with NFL experience.

The Dolphin offense is no where near as talented as green Bay's

Anyway, if this is the wrong place for this...my apologies. I really like your work, but this is confounding me. Maybe there is something I missed about Brohm.

 

[Jason Wood]

This isn't so much a Projections question, but a rankings question.Why do you leave off Brian Brohm from your list of the top 40 rookies?He's behind a guy who's never been a starter.He's behind a guy who has a history of being injury prone.If he were to take over, he'd be taking over an outstanding offense.Yet, you have Chad Henne 14th.Henne by my calculation is 3rd on the depth chart.He's behind 2 guys with NFL experience.The Dolphin offense is no where near as talented as green Bay'sAnyway, if this is the wrong place for this...my apologies. I really like your work, but this is confounding me. Maybe there is something I missed about Brohm.

Hey Dope (that sounds weird),Great question. Obviously rookie rankings are based on guesswork (educated or not) on how a player's career is going to turn out. I think Rodgers is very likely to establish himself as an excellent QB and, given his age, will keep Brohm as a backup for a long time (if not forever). Meanwhile Henne may be 3rd on the depth chart, but I've got exactly ZERO confidence in either McCown or Beck beyond this season. You also have to consider that offenses change over time. Wouldn't be at all surprised if the Fins offense in 2010 is much better while the Pack is less potent. Not saying it's going to happen that way, but I like Henne's odds of being a starter absent a major injury to someone else on the team than I do Brohm's.

 

[twr]

Gotta ask:

Felix Jones YPC at 4.0?

Jerious Norwood at 5.4?

Am I missing something? Didn't Jones have one of the highest college YPC's ever? And isn't Norwood on a team with a rookie QB?

Norwood is the only RB in NFL history to average more than 6 yards per rush with at least 200 career rushing attempts; the guy is too talented to keep on the bench. That said, I believe he will take a backseat to Turner; so I expect Norwood to be used in certain formations that will allow him to break off runs; whereas he'll almost never be used in short yardage or at the goal line where YPCs can get chipped away at by necessity. I also think the Falcons offensive line is much better at run blocking than people realize.As to Jones at 4.0? That could be higher; I really don't expect a ton from Jones this year to be honest. 4.4 or 4.0; makes no difference to me in terms of where I would draft him as long as Barber is healthy.

great post. people who dont follow the falcons will fail to realize this.personally i believe norwood will see MJD type action, hes super talented, and a one cut explosive runner. imo hes what reggie bush was suppost to be.

exclaimer- im actually a bush fan, and believe hes back to for like he was in his rookie season, im actually projecting 900+ rushing yards with over 600 receiving and 15 total TD's... people giving up on reggie will be in for a suprise.

 

[AnonymousBob]

The Niners had THE worst offense last season. This season they've added Mike Martz. The man may or may not be overrated but he's certainly an improvement over the bum they had in 2007.

Vernon Davis played in 14 games and had 509 yards, 4 touchdowns on 52 receptions. He averaged 36 yards per game.

You've projected Vernon Davis 50 receptions, 560 yards and 6 touchdowns. That's an average of 35 yards per game.

Unless you expect Vernon Davis to get hurt, why do you think he won't surpass last year's numbers? If his offense improves (how can it not???) then it seems reasonable to expect Vernon's numbers to increase as well.

 

[Jason Wood]

The Niners had THE worst offense last season. This season they've added Mike Martz. The man may or may not be overrated but he's certainly an improvement over the bum they had in 2007.

Vernon Davis played in 14 games and had 509 yards, 4 touchdowns on 52 receptions. He averaged 36 yards per game.

You've projected Vernon Davis 50 receptions, 560 yards and 6 touchdowns. That's an average of 35 yards per game.

Unless you expect Vernon Davis to get hurt, why do you think he won't surpass last year's numbers? If his offense improves (how can it not???) then it seems reasonable to expect Vernon's numbers to increase as well.

Funny that you bump this now Bob, I'm actually LOWERING my projections for Davis after keeping them intact for most of the last month following Mike Martz' recent comments:http://www.sacbee.com/static/weblogs/49ers...ves/014929.html

I'm probably going down to the 45 catch level, sounds to me like Martz plans on using Davis much in the way he's used his other TEs despite his obvious gifts as a receiver.

 

[AnonymousBob]

The comments that have lead JW to bump Vernon Davis down in the rankings:

RE: What about Vernon Davis, Coach? Would you like to see him get a little bit more involved? "Well, he will. I think that the numbers for Vernon, in terms of receptions, may or may not be there this year. It may fluctuate during the season. But what we expect from Vernon are big plays. He's a very, very substantial blocker, which really allows us to a lot of good things in the running game. There's no question about that. But, when we get him the ball we'd like to get him the ball down the field or get him the ball in the shallow routes and let him take off with it, so to speak. Sometimes the defenses will dictate how much you get the ball to him. He's done a very good job out here in practice and we haven't done a whole lot with him in the preseason games but we certainly practice him a lot." RE: Is he the guy you might move out into the slot if the receiver injuries dictate it? "Sure. We've already done that in practice. We've moved him around a little bit. But it takes away from some of the other things that he does really well. The hard thing about Vernon is that he's a very talented guy. The more you do with him, then you have to be careful about not doing anything really well. And there's some things that he really does exceptionally well and we want to keep him grounded to that."

He says they'll use Vernon to block but they'll also send him on deep routes or short passes and allow him to utilize his speed.Basically, he's not saying anything we didn't know. And yet you still think he'll do a worse job than last season when the San Francisco 49'ers had THE WORST offense in the entire league?