INJURY TO PORTIS - Right Hand Broken (1 Viewer)

[WarRedbirds]

I'm not happy that Portis is hurt, cause that's not how I roll. But this injury has a huge impact on the fantasy landscape. With Betts ability to catch the ball out of the backfield (better than Portis), and with the offense that the Redskins employ, Betts has Top 10 potential the rest of the year.

Every year, there seems to be a season changing event for owners that propels them to fantasy championships (Larry Johnson after Priests injury, Shaun Alexander after Ricky Watters injury)

This has the potential to be one of those events.

 

[dgreen]

I'm not happy that Portis is hurt, cause that's not how I roll. But this injury has a huge impact on the fantasy landscape. With Betts ability to catch the ball out of the backfield (better than Portis), and with the offense that the Redskins employ, Betts has Top 10 potential the rest of the year.Every year, there seems to be a season changing event for owners that propels them to fantasy championships (Larry Johnson after Priests injury, Shaun Alexander after Ricky Watters injury)This has the potential to be one of those events.

But, Betts doesn't have that nose for the endzone. (Hopefully I didn't botch that cliche.)In 485 career touches, he has 7 TDs.

 

[redman]

I'm not happy that Portis is hurt, cause that's not how I roll. But this injury has a huge impact on the fantasy landscape. With Betts ability to catch the ball out of the backfield (better than Portis), and with the offense that the Redskins employ, Betts has Top 10 potential the rest of the year.Every year, there seems to be a season changing event for owners that propels them to fantasy championships (Larry Johnson after Priests injury, Shaun Alexander after Ricky Watters injury)This has the potential to be one of those events.

But, Betts doesn't have that nose for the endzone. (Hopefully I didn't botch that cliche.)In 485 career touches, he has 7 TDs.

Well, he's no different than most 3rd down/long yardage backs in that regard. The truth is he's really not been used much down there. OTOH, when the Redskins were having problems punching the ball into the end zone in 2004, he didn't emerge as a solution then either. In addition, Duckett - known for being a good short yardage ball carrier - figures to get that work from here on out. I think Betts' numbers are going to be more similar to than different from what he's done to date, with maybe five more carries per game and another reception or two. Duckett's the big beneficiary from Portis' injury.

 

[One]

I'm not happy that Portis is hurt, cause that's not how I roll. But this injury has a huge impact on the fantasy landscape. With Betts ability to catch the ball out of the backfield (better than Portis), and with the offense that the Redskins employ, Betts has Top 10 potential the rest of the year.

Every year, there seems to be a season changing event for owners that propels them to fantasy championships (Larry Johnson after Priests injury, Shaun Alexander after Ricky Watters injury)

This has the potential to be one of those events.

But, Betts doesn't have that nose for the endzone. (Hopefully I didn't botch that cliche.)In 485 career touches, he has 7 TDs.

Well, he's no different than most 3rd down/long yardage backs in that regard. The truth is he's really not been used much down there. OTOH, when the Redskins were having problems punching the ball into the end zone in 2004, he didn't emerge as a solution then either. In addition, Duckett - known for being a good short yardage ball carrier - figures to get that work from here on out.

I think Betts' numbers are going to be more similar to than different from what he's done to date, with maybe five more carries per game and another reception or two. Duckett's the big beneficiary from Portis' injury.

I couldn't disagree more. Time will tell.

 

[Kip Dynamite]

I'm not happy that Portis is hurt, cause that's not how I roll. But this injury has a huge impact on the fantasy landscape. With Betts ability to catch the ball out of the backfield (better than Portis), and with the offense that the Redskins employ, Betts has Top 10 potential the rest of the year.Every year, there seems to be a season changing event for owners that propels them to fantasy championships (Larry Johnson after Priests injury, Shaun Alexander after Ricky Watters injury)This has the potential to be one of those events.

But, Betts doesn't have that nose for the endzone. (Hopefully I didn't botch that cliche.)In 485 career touches, he has 7 TDs.

Well, he's no different than most 3rd down/long yardage backs in that regard. The truth is he's really not been used much down there. OTOH, when the Redskins were having problems punching the ball into the end zone in 2004, he didn't emerge as a solution then either. In addition, Duckett - known for being a good short yardage ball carrier - figures to get that work from here on out. I think Betts' numbers are going to be more similar to than different from what he's done to date, with maybe five more carries per game and another reception or two. Duckett's the big beneficiary from Portis' injury.

Betts is not an everydown back. I am going to stay clear from that situation.I guess its time to go 4-wide.

 

[One]

So, if he's out for the year Betts becomes the man? Any chance for Duckett to take over that role?

Slim to none without an injury.

I'm not sure why you say that. While I don't quite see Duckett taking the number of carries that Portis was getting during the second half of last year, it would actually make a lot of sense to essentially keep Betts doing what he's presently doing and to essentially put Duckett into the Portis role. For example, a 60/40 split between Duckett and Betts on carries doesn't seem ridiculous, with Duckett averaging 15-20 carries per game and Betts getting 10-12 (plus receptions). At this point we're only left to guess. The first direct indication here will be Gibbs' presser in about 4 hours.

Looking at the two running styles, do you really think Duckett's downhill approach is even similar to Clinton Portis?I will say this though.. there is no way Betts can carry a full load without help.

It's not similar to Portis' running style, but I'm reminded a lot of LJ, who hasn't done badly in Saunders' system . . .

But LJ has talent.

 

[WarRedbirds]

I'm not happy that Portis is hurt, cause that's not how I roll. But this injury has a huge impact on the fantasy landscape. With Betts ability to catch the ball out of the backfield (better than Portis), and with the offense that the Redskins employ, Betts has Top 10 potential the rest of the year.Every year, there seems to be a season changing event for owners that propels them to fantasy championships (Larry Johnson after Priests injury, Shaun Alexander after Ricky Watters injury)This has the potential to be one of those events.

But, Betts doesn't have that nose for the endzone. (Hopefully I didn't botch that cliche.)In 485 career touches, he has 7 TDs.

Well, he's no different than most 3rd down/long yardage backs in that regard. The truth is he's really not been used much down there. OTOH, when the Redskins were having problems punching the ball into the end zone in 2004, he didn't emerge as a solution then either. In addition, Duckett - known for being a good short yardage ball carrier - figures to get that work from here on out. I think Betts' numbers are going to be more similar to than different from what he's done to date, with maybe five more carries per game and another reception or two. Duckett's the big beneficiary from Portis' injury.

Betts is not an everydown back. I am going to stay clear from that situation.I guess its time to go 4-wide.

He's 5'10, 220, what gives you the impression that he's not an everydown back?

 

[3C's]

Att Yards Y/A TD

559 2215 4.0 31

That's really not that bad.

 

[dgreen]

Betts is not an everydown back. I am going to stay clear from that situation.I guess its time to go 4-wide.

He's 5'10, 220, what gives you the impression that he's not an everydown back?

A) His vision isn't great. He needs holes right in front of him, and where they are supposed to be, in order to produce.B) He can't break a tackle. He gets tripped up by small amounts of contact.C) His blocking isn't great. Then again, maybe I'm unfairly comparing him to Porits, who is an excellent blocker.

 

[redman]

Betts is not an everydown back. I am going to stay clear from that situation.I guess its time to go 4-wide.

He's 5'10, 220, what gives you the impression that he's not an everydown back?

A) His vision isn't great. He needs holes right in front of him, and where they are supposed to be, in order to produce.B) He can't break a tackle. He gets tripped up by small amounts of contact.C) His blocking isn't great. Then again, maybe I'm unfairly comparing him to Porits, who is an excellent blocker.

I kind of agree. Betts is one of those guys who shines in limited action and can even have a start or two with some success, but who seems unable over time to create yards when plays don't go as planned. It's the last part that separates the merely good RB's from the great ones. I think Betts is on par with guys like Rhodes, Barlow, A-Train, Mike Bell, Marion Barber, Buckhalter, and a few others - not in terms of his or their particular skill sets, but rather in terms of their overall NFL potential. When you play those guys too much, they start breaking down and showing their limitations and flaws.

 

[Ditka is God]

Betts is not an everydown back. I am going to stay clear from that situation.I guess its time to go 4-wide.

He's 5'10, 220, what gives you the impression that he's not an everydown back?

A) His vision isn't great. He needs holes right in front of him, and where they are supposed to be, in order to produce.B) He can't break a tackle. He gets tripped up by small amounts of contact.C) His blocking isn't great. Then again, maybe I'm unfairly comparing him to Porits, who is an excellent blocker.

These same statements could also easily be applied to Duckett.

 

[djb916420]

Betts is not an everydown back. I am going to stay clear from that situation.I guess its time to go 4-wide.

He's 5'10, 220, what gives you the impression that he's not an everydown back?

A) His vision isn't great. He needs holes right in front of him, and where they are supposed to be, in order to produce.B) He can't break a tackle. He gets tripped up by small amounts of contact.C) His blocking isn't great. Then again, maybe I'm unfairly comparing him to Porits, who is an excellent blocker.

I kind of agree. Betts is one of those guys who shines in limited action and can even have a start or two with some success, but who seems unable over time to create yards when plays don't go as planned. It's the last part that separates the merely good RB's from the great ones. I think Betts is on par with guys like Rhodes, Barlow, A-Train, Mike Bell, Marion Barber, Buckhalter, and a few others - not in terms of his or their particular skill sets, but rather in terms of their overall NFL potential. When you play those guys too much, they start breaking down and showing their limitations and flaws.

i think u made a mistake putting MB3 in this post

 

[redman]

Betts is not an everydown back. I am going to stay clear from that situation.I guess its time to go 4-wide.

He's 5'10, 220, what gives you the impression that he's not an everydown back?

A) His vision isn't great. He needs holes right in front of him, and where they are supposed to be, in order to produce.B) He can't break a tackle. He gets tripped up by small amounts of contact.C) His blocking isn't great. Then again, maybe I'm unfairly comparing him to Porits, who is an excellent blocker.

I kind of agree. Betts is one of those guys who shines in limited action and can even have a start or two with some success, but who seems unable over time to create yards when plays don't go as planned. It's the last part that separates the merely good RB's from the great ones. I think Betts is on par with guys like Rhodes, Barlow, A-Train, Mike Bell, Marion Barber, Buckhalter, and a few others - not in terms of his or their particular skill sets, but rather in terms of their overall NFL potential. When you play those guys too much, they start breaking down and showing their limitations and flaws.

i think u made a mistake putting MB3 in this post

I agree he's more debateable than the rest, but I was just trying to give a general idea.

 

[Deranged Hermit]

Just skimmed over the thread so this might be old news, but I just found this:

Clinton Portis, RB WAS

News: Washington RB Clinton Portis likely will miss about a month with a broken right hand, an injury that could end what has been a decidedly uneven season for him and his team, the Washington Post reported after Portis was hurt against Philadelphia. Bubba Tyer, the Redskins' director of sports medicine, said Portis would undergo surgery as soon as Monday to repair the fourth metacarpal bone in his right hand, which is the bone that runs below the ring finger. Tyer said Portis would have screws inserted to stabilize the bone, but that the injury would be particularly difficult for Portis, because as a running back he must be comfortable gripping the football. Portis is right-handed. "It could be as long as four weeks, three or four, something like that," Tyer said. "He needs to be able to use his hands and function and be secure what he does with the football."

 

[Bri]

how come 3-4 weeks=season?

 

[One]

how come 3-4 weeks=season?

all speculation at this point. everybody has their own opinions.

 

[shuke]

how come 3-4 weeks=season?

6-8 weeks is typical healing time for a fracture. 3-4 weeks is probably "best case scenario", but the way their season is going, I doubt they'll push him.