You make excellent points, particularly on statistical performance.Still, I view Jackson's 1,400 rushing yard performance last year on a god-awful team as more impressive from an actual NFL performance standpoint than gore's roughly 1,000 yards rushing for each of the last three years. As you mention, part of the difference in net yearly performance is the fact that Jackson missed four games each in 2008 and 2007. The team's overall TD total didn't help his fantasy value either, but I don't think they'll be that bad forever.When he's in the game, you can count on him producing. He's averaged about 89 rushing yards per game over the last 3 years. Gore's last three years have been 74, 74, and 80. Overall, Jackson doesn't seem like a guy who's winding down to me, whereas Gore hasn't been dominant since 2006. Also, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Gore end up in a semi-RBBC situation at some pint soon whereas I don't think that's likely for sJax. I think the Rams would love to drop his touches a bit, but more in a "let's get a better backup" way rather than a "let's put him in a committee" way. Just a hunch.As for injuries, again another good point that Jackson has missed more NFL games than Gore, and most of Gore's big injuries were quite a while ago. But (there's always a but), I personally tend to think knee reconstructions (which Gore has had several of) tend to reduce the life span of the joint. Every time you go in there to do something significant, that's just a little more creakiness a little earlier in the career. Jackson hasn't had anything like that. The scariest thing for him is the back.
Jackson's performance might have been more impressive from an NFL standpoint... but Gore's was far more impressive from a fantasy standpoint. You keep mentioning the rushing yards, but when last I checked, receiving yards count the same. Gore's 109 yards per game last year were only slightly behind Jackson's 116 ypg, but Gore had 13 TDs in 14 games (a per-game scoring average Jackson has only touched once in his career), while Jackson had 4 TDs in 15 games. I don't know why you keep trying to minimize Gore's season last year. He was RB5 despite missing 2 games. He outscored Ray Rice in PPG by three quarters of a point... and that's despite the fact that in one of his games he got hurt on the very first carry and finished with just 4 yards. If you toss out that one game and just go by the 13 games where he received more than 1 carry, Gore scored 17.71 PPG, which ranks him THIRD, just behind Peterson (18.16), just ahead of MJD (17.03), and TWO POINTS ahead of Ray Rice (15.76). He was also FOUR AND A HALF POINTS PER GAME better than Steven Jackson.You want to talk about how Jackson produces when he's in the game? I'm with you 100%- go check out the Deangelo Williams vs. Steven Jackson thread last offseason and you'll see it's littered with posts where I defended SJax to the hilt. He's a stud... but so is Frank Gore. Over the last three years, SJax has scored 14.26 points per game. That's fantastic production when healthy. It's also only seven hundredths of a point more than Gore has scored per game over the same span- and if you discount the game where Gore got hurt on his very first carry, he's actually scored a quarter-point more per game than SJax over that span. If Jackson produces when he's healthy, then Gore does, too- and to the exact same degree.Gore was DOMINANT last season, scoring on par with Peterson and Jones-Drew on a per-game basis. And he's been consistently good since 2006, just like Jackson. He produces every bit as much as Jackson, he's just a lot less heralded because, as EBF is fond of saying, Jackson is more "freaky good" while Gore is more "sneaky good".As for reconstructive surgeries hampering Gore... a lot of times, knees are stronger after reconstructive surgery than they were before the surgery. If Gore hasn't shown ANY ill effects in over 5 years, then I think it's really silly to still keep holding those against him. Plenty of players have undergone reconstructive surgery on their knees and the stigma is gone within a year, but for some crazy reason, this whole "Gore is an injury risk" thing is still haunting him more than a half decade after his last major injury. If something were going to go wrong, it would have gone wrong by now. SJax is far and away the bigger risk right now, partly because he needs more touches to score his points (and every touch represents a chance to get hurt), and partly because he's the one currently nursing an injury.I love SJax. He's a stud. But let's give Gore his due, here. To be perfectly honest, I don't know how SJax could be rated above Gore in dynasty right now. And again, this is coming from one of the biggest SJax fans on the board. Gore's done the whole "stud RB carrying a terrible offense" thing just like SJax has ... but Gore's also now logged TWO YEARS as a fantasy uberstud compared to Jackson's 1, and Gore is healthier, has less mileage, and is playing in a better offense. His career ypc is a half yard better than Jackson's, and their receiving numbers are almost identical (3.1 r/g @ 8.2 ypr for Gore, 3.3 r/g @ 8.1 ypr for SJax).
the number of carries they have is quite a difference as well. mjd was splitting carries up until last year and adp as well. i think this will bode well for both in the long-term.
I'm with you on the broader point - 27 years isn't a death sentence, and SJax is a talented guy. My concern with him is that his team is in shambles, so by the time the are decent he's 28 or 29. By then, it's too late to sell. By keeping him (or trading for him) you are basically placing a bet that the Rams turn things around enough in 2010 that he is top-5 again.
I'm with you on the broader point - 27 years isn't a death sentence, and SJax is a talented guy. My concern with him is that his team is in shambles, so by the time the are decent he's 28 or 29. By then, it's too late to sell. By keeping him (or trading for him) you are basically placing a bet that the Rams turn things around enough in 2010 that he is top-5 again.
