Is Marshawn Lynch overrated? (1 Viewer)

[gianmarco]

Ok, so here goes. We've seen lots of top 10 and top 15 lists and Lynch has appeared on virtually all of them, often in the top 10. According to the current FBG rankings from the 4 that have done them, Lynch is ranked #9. He's ahead of guys like MJD, Grant, McGahee, Bush, Parker, and LJ on those rankings (not trying to call FBG staff out, just using it as a reference as this has been the case on most other lists as well)

But, should he be? Now, I know he's young. I know he has only played 1 year and has room to improve. And I know he played for the Bills and still did ok on a pretty bad offensive team. However, after looking up some things from another thread, these are some things I found.



1) Only three 100 yd games all year. One for 153 vs. Cincy, another for 107 vs. Miami, and week 17 vs. Philly for 105. Not too impressive considering the teams he did it against and the last 2 required 22 and 23 carries.

2) At the same time, he had 18+ carries in EVERY game he played (13 games). With 18+ carries, he failed to reach 100 yds in 10 of those 13 games.

3) He had ZERO multi-TD games. While he scored 7 TDs, he never scored more than 1 in a game.

4) He only had 18 catches for 184 yds and 0 TDs. Despite popular opinion, he was not very active in passing game. In fact, Fred Jackson had 4 more receptions than Lynch had all year in limited duty. That is concerning.

5) In my PPR league, he scored 32 fantasy points vs. Cincy. However, other than that one week, he never topped 18 pts.

6) He had a 3.9 ypc for the year.

Here is his game log

Again, I understand there is room for improvement, but are those really the #'s of a top 10 dynasty RB? Top 10 would usually indicate to me he should be considered a #1 RB and I don't think that should be the case at all. Is his value so high because of what he did on the field or because of his age? Is it because he's the unquestioned starter or because of what he was able to do in such a lousy situation?

I'll admit that I probably would have considered him a top 10 dynasty RB as well, but now, after looking closer, I think he's much closer to the #15-16 spot. I don't know if there's anything from last year that would give me reason to believe he will significantly improve on those #'s. And unless he does, I don't see how he cracks the top 15 let alone the top 10. Add in how well Fred Jackson did in his absense, and I think Lynch is probably being way overrated at this point. I don't know if I've really seen anything negative about him on these boards and this may be the first. If I owned him right now, I would seriously consider selling to be honest since he's commanding a pretty lofty price tag and I think a lot of it is due to his youth.

ETA--I missed week 17 as I was looking on my fantasy site and it wasn't included. Updated above.

 

[King of the Jungle]

I think this is a well thought out post and am looking forward to reading the responses. As a Lynch owner, I tend to think he is being overrated to a certain degree. He is a talented player who would benefit from a consistent passing game as well as being more involved in the passing attack himself.

 

[switz]

I think much of the reason Lynch was not as successful as he can be, is due to his surrounding cast. The Bills plain out stunk. Edwards looks like he has the makings of a great QB, but he's young, and because of that, most defenses will gear up against the run, and let Edwards try to beat them.

As Edwards improves, the running game will open up. Until then, Lynch will not be as good as he has the potential to be.

Does that mean he's overrated? I don't know... perhaps as an FF prospect, yes. As an NFL RB, I don't think he's overrated.

Edited to add dynast impact - Lynch has the ability to be great, and so he does rank highly in a dynasty. Higher than redraft.

 

[LarryAllen'sJockstrap]

I have no problem with him ranked #9 if you are talking non-ppr dynasty; even ppr dynasty, you could make the case for a top-ten pick. He's obviously a really good young player, and in the long term, you can't worry so much about the current state of the team and his supporting cast (see LT season 1).

In a redraft, I would have a hard time taking him as my RB1 (round 1). I would take him as a RB2 with no hesitation, regardless of where I am picking in the second; also, I would take him as my RB1 if I went another position in round 1.

Individual rankings really don't matter as much as people make them out to. I personally look at each player and tier them, and say would I take player x as QB1, RB, RB2... then draft accordingly. I'm no FF master, but I've stuck true to that philosohpy for a long time and it has worked well for me.

Random example; in 2006, the two RBs finished as below:

10th: Duece McAllister - 12 PPG

20th: Edgerrin James - 10.85 PPG

If you had done preseason rankings and had correctly predicted Duece to finish 10th and Edge to finish 20th, there would be no way you would ever draft Edge first; the 20th ranked RB over the 10th would be absurd.

In reality, you would have only been costing yourself 1.15 PPG. Not really that big of a deal.

Bottom line is if you think the guy is going to be a stud, draft him early. If not, wait, and I'm sure someone else will. Like I said, I think he's RB1 material in a dynasty; RB2 material in a re-draft.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

In all due respect to a well thought OP, this is what happens when you look at only stats, and not game tape. I don't think too many RBs could have done more with what opportunity Lynch was given. The team had serious QB issues and really could not threaten defenses in the passing game enough to open up running lanes. He looked great getting that 3.9 YPC, getting as much as he could from what was there.

LT had a 3.6 YPC his first year...

 

[big country]

I think much of the reason Lynch was not as successful as he can be, is due to his surrounding cast. The Bills plain out stunk. Edwards looks like he has the makings of a great QB, but he's young, and because of that, most defenses will gear up against the run, and let Edwards try to beat them.As Edwards improves, the running game will open up. Until then, Lynch will not be as good as he has the potential to be.Does that mean he's overrated? I don't know... perhaps as an FF prospect, yes. As an NFL RB, I don't think he's overrated.Edited to add dynast impact - Lynch has the ability to be great, and so he does rank highly in a dynasty. Higher than redraft.

The Bills offense STUNK last season. IMO Lynch can be a top 4 RB this season and many to come.

 

[EBF]

I don't think so. There's a tendency to overrate sophomore RBs. We saw it with guys like Caddy, Ronnie, KJ, Julius, Maroney, and A-Train. Those guys didn't deserve the hype, but I think Lynch's perceived value is actually very close to his true value. He's a starting caliber RB on a team that's headed in the right direction. He may never be a stud, but he won't be a bust unless he gets injured. I view him as a top 8-15 type dynasty RB who makes an excellent RB2 in both redraft and dynasty leagues.

I agree with comments about the supporting cast. He played well for the Bills last season. The only reason his numbers look mediocre is because he had no help.

 

[gianmarco]

In all due respect to a well thought OP, this is what happens when you look at only stats, and not game tape. I don't think too many RBs could have done more with what opportunity Lynch was given. The team had serious QB issues and really could not threaten defenses in the passing game enough to open up running lanes. He looked great getting that 3.9 YPC, getting as much as he could from what was there.LT had a 3.6 YPC his first year...

Couldn't agree more. In fact, I took those points from what I posted in another thread and in that I specifically stated that he looked pretty good on the field. Much better than I thought he would, to be honest. Nothing mind-blowing, but definitely above average. And if that's the reason to have him ranked highly, I have no issue with that at all. In fact, that's why I had him originally that high.At the same time, there are worrisome things that I pointed out above. We've seen other guys in just as bad of situations at least show SOME flashes of greatness, i.e. Gore in SF. He may not have been able to do much, but he occasionally put up some monster games. Lynch really only did that once all year. I think I would just like a little more potential for explosiveness from a top 10 fantasy RB. At this point, I think he's a great #2 RB, but I wouldn't want to count on him as a #1. I also think it's going to take a lot to exceed his current ranking given his current situation and that has to be taken into account.I can see him being a great sell-high right now and getting good value and then reacquiring him in 2-3 yrs when he slips some but could possibly move to a different situation. And yes, I know LT had a 3.6 ypc his first year. But so have many other RB's that failed. And I don't think his talent on the field, at least what I saw, compares to LT. I wonder if that's what you're suggesting, although I'm sure it's not. Numbers don't tell the whole story, but I also think they shouldn't be completely ignored.

 

[gianmarco]

I think much of the reason Lynch was not as successful as he can be, is due to his surrounding cast. The Bills plain out stunk. Edwards looks like he has the makings of a great QB, but he's young, and because of that, most defenses will gear up against the run, and let Edwards try to beat them.As Edwards improves, the running game will open up. Until then, Lynch will not be as good as he has the potential to be.Does that mean he's overrated? I don't know... perhaps as an FF prospect, yes. As an NFL RB, I don't think he's overrated.Edited to add dynast impact - Lynch has the ability to be great, and so he does rank highly in a dynasty. Higher than redraft.

The Bills offense STUNK last season. IMO Lynch can be a top 4 RB this season and many to come.

Are they not going to stink this year? And what specifically makes you think he's going to be top 4? Something you saw? Major changes in the Bills offense? I mean, I can predict that Ryan Grant is going to be a top 3 RB this year, but it's nicer if there's some reasoning or "proof" behind that statement.

 

[Buckna]

I will echo some of the other comments. A solid #2, but not much upside beyond that. Buffalo had a great run back in the 90's, but I have no faith in the current organization to build much of an offense around Lynch. Much like when McGahee and Henry were there, I think he'll continue to have a low ypc around 4.0, 1200~1400 total yds and 6~8 TD's.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

In all due respect to a well thought OP, this is what happens when you look at only stats, and not game tape. I don't think too many RBs could have done more with what opportunity Lynch was given. The team had serious QB issues and really could not threaten defenses in the passing game enough to open up running lanes. He looked great getting that 3.9 YPC, getting as much as he could from what was there.LT had a 3.6 YPC his first year...

Couldn't agree more. In fact, I took those points from what I posted in another thread and in that I specifically stated that he looked pretty good on the field. Much better than I thought he would, to be honest. Nothing mind-blowing, but definitely above average. And if that's the reason to have him ranked highly, I have no issue with that at all. In fact, that's why I had him originally that high.At the same time, there are worrisome things that I pointed out above. We've seen other guys in just as bad of situations at least show SOME flashes of greatness, i.e. Gore in SF. He may not have been able to do much, but he occasionally put up some monster games. Lynch really only did that once all year. I think I would just like a little more potential for explosiveness from a top 10 fantasy RB. At this point, I think he's a great #2 RB, but I wouldn't want to count on him as a #1. I also think it's going to take a lot to exceed his current ranking given his current situation and that has to be taken into account.I can see him being a great sell-high right now and getting good value and then reacquiring him in 2-3 yrs when he slips some but could possibly move to a different situation. And yes, I know LT had a 3.6 ypc his first year. But so have many other RB's that failed. And I don't think his talent on the field, at least what I saw, compares to LT. I wonder if that's what you're suggesting, although I'm sure it's not. Numbers don't tell the whole story, but I also think they shouldn't be completely ignored.

I saw some flashes of greatness in Lynch's ability to break tackles and get yards after contact, and yes that game clincher against the Bengals. I understand the reluctance to make him a #1, your first round pick - Trent Edwards wasn't exactly an ironman at Stanford.The reason I brought up LT was more to draw a comparison between the situations - that a rookie who is asked to carry a subpar offense is going to struggle no matter how good he is going to be in the future, unless of course, that rookie's name is Adrian Peterson (and he went to Oklahoma)

 

[Boston]

Being an AFC East guy I've seen Lynch play a lot. I also saw him live against the Pats and feel very confident he's going to be a legit stud. He runs real hard and is very shifty in traffic and he's always going after that extra yard. After the Patriot/Bills game we had dinner with a Patriot (who's a friend of my buddy) and he said Lynch is going to be one of the better RBs for year's to come. He said he was "the real deal" and was real impressed that he was still bringing it even though the game wasn't close.

As far as fantasy goes it's tough to make a call on him if you're going to look at his 2007 #'s. Quite frankly how much historical data is there when you're talking about a rookie RB playing with a rookie QB? That's not a situation you see too often. The fact that Lynch ended up with 1,115 yards rushing and 7 TDs in 13 games in that situation is pretty impressive. The kid had a bullseye on him, didn't have a veteran QB to take pressure off of him and was still productive. One other thing that I find positive about him is he didn't have one game with less than 60 yards rushing and only three with less than 70. He looks like he's going to be real steady on a week-to-week basis.

Valuewise I think you need to separate redraft from keeper/dynasty. Long term I think the kid has the potential to be a big time producer and there's not many RBs I'd take over him in keeper/dynasty formats. If you think Edwards is the answer for the Bills that should only solidify that thinking. Redraftwise he's a guy I would not want as my #1 due to his situation (it's not bad but it does have potential downside) but I would love him as a high-end #2.

One last thing...he'll only be 22 in a few weeks. That's never a bad thing in the keeper/dynasty world.

 

[jwb]

There have been some good points made about Lynch, especially in regards to his surrounding cast - he put these numbers up with a fairly bad team with few other weapons.

But the other big thing that Lynch really has going for him is he's the guy there. Of course, it's impossible to predict 100%, but by all accounts, Lynch is BUF's RB1 for the next 5 years. You can be reasonably sure of him getting those 280 carries (at a minimum) every year. That counts for something when drafting.

 

[mdog1967]

In all due respect to a well thought OP, this is what happens when you look at only stats, and not game tape. I don't think too many RBs could have done more with what opportunity Lynch was given. The team had serious QB issues and really could not threaten defenses in the passing game enough to open up running lanes. He looked great getting that 3.9 YPC, getting as much as he could from what was there.

LT had a 3.6 YPC his first year...

Couldn't agree more. In fact, I took those points from what I posted in another thread and in that I specifically stated that he looked pretty good on the field. Much better than I thought he would, to be honest. Nothing mind-blowing, but definitely above average. And if that's the reason to have him ranked highly, I have no issue with that at all. In fact, that's why I had him originally that high.At the same time, there are worrisome things that I pointed out above. We've seen other guys in just as bad of situations at least show SOME flashes of greatness, i.e. Gore in SF. He may not have been able to do much, but he occasionally put up some monster games. Lynch really only did that once all year. I think I would just like a little more potential for explosiveness from a top 10 fantasy RB. At this point, I think he's a great #2 RB, but I wouldn't want to count on him as a #1. I also think it's going to take a lot to exceed his current ranking given his current situation and that has to be taken into account.

I can see him being a great sell-high right now and getting good value and then reacquiring him in 2-3 yrs when he slips some but could possibly move to a different situation.

And yes, I know LT had a 3.6 ypc his first year. But so have many other RB's that failed. And I don't think his talent on the field, at least what I saw, compares to LT. I wonder if that's what you're suggesting, although I'm sure it's not. Numbers don't tell the whole story, but I also think they shouldn't be completely ignored.

I saw some flashes of greatness in Lynch's ability to break tackles and get yards after contact, and yes that game clincher against the Bengals. I understand the reluctance to make him a #1, your first round pick - Trent Edwards wasn't exactly an ironman at Stanford.The reason I brought up LT was more to draw a comparison between the situations - that a rookie who is asked to carry a subpar offense is going to struggle no matter how good he is going to be in the future, unless of course, that rookie's name is Adrian Peterson (and he went to Oklahoma)

Great post Sig but WOhh, Edwards was an Ironman at Stanford, played on one of the worse College teams period. Edwards got swatted around like a ping pong ball, beat up, trampled on and basically came out of most games looking like the Bride of Frankenstein after a getting rode hard and put up wet. Yeah he got a little injured but I don't think anyone could have stood up to the abuse as well as he did. The Edwards/Lynch Combo could turn out very, very well for the Bills in the years to come. I completely agree with your assessment of Lynch.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

In all due respect to a well thought OP, this is what happens when you look at only stats, and not game tape. I don't think too many RBs could have done more with what opportunity Lynch was given. The team had serious QB issues and really could not threaten defenses in the passing game enough to open up running lanes. He looked great getting that 3.9 YPC, getting as much as he could from what was there.

LT had a 3.6 YPC his first year...

Couldn't agree more. In fact, I took those points from what I posted in another thread and in that I specifically stated that he looked pretty good on the field. Much better than I thought he would, to be honest. Nothing mind-blowing, but definitely above average. And if that's the reason to have him ranked highly, I have no issue with that at all. In fact, that's why I had him originally that high.At the same time, there are worrisome things that I pointed out above. We've seen other guys in just as bad of situations at least show SOME flashes of greatness, i.e. Gore in SF. He may not have been able to do much, but he occasionally put up some monster games. Lynch really only did that once all year. I think I would just like a little more potential for explosiveness from a top 10 fantasy RB. At this point, I think he's a great #2 RB, but I wouldn't want to count on him as a #1. I also think it's going to take a lot to exceed his current ranking given his current situation and that has to be taken into account.

I can see him being a great sell-high right now and getting good value and then reacquiring him in 2-3 yrs when he slips some but could possibly move to a different situation.

And yes, I know LT had a 3.6 ypc his first year. But so have many other RB's that failed. And I don't think his talent on the field, at least what I saw, compares to LT. I wonder if that's what you're suggesting, although I'm sure it's not. Numbers don't tell the whole story, but I also think they shouldn't be completely ignored.

I saw some flashes of greatness in Lynch's ability to break tackles and get yards after contact, and yes that game clincher against the Bengals. I understand the reluctance to make him a #1, your first round pick - Trent Edwards wasn't exactly an ironman at Stanford.The reason I brought up LT was more to draw a comparison between the situations - that a rookie who is asked to carry a subpar offense is going to struggle no matter how good he is going to be in the future, unless of course, that rookie's name is Adrian Peterson (and he went to Oklahoma)

Great post Sig but WOhh, Edwards was an Ironman at Stanford, played on one of the worse College teams period. Edwards got swatted around like a ping pong ball, beat up, trampled on and basically came out of most games looking like the Bride of Frankenstein after a getting rode hard and put up wet. Yeah he got a little injured but I don't think anyone could have stood up to the abuse as well as he did. The Edwards/Lynch Combo could turn out very, very well for the Bills in the years to come. I completely agree with your assessment of Lynch.

I hear ya, he definitely had a lot of courage, but he had injuries that caused him to miss multiple games in 3 of his 4 seasons at Stanford. You could argue that any QB would have been broken on those teams, but we don't know that for sure, and until then we have to consider Edwards as a higher injury risk than a typical QB.

 

[EBF]

My parents have Stanford season tickets and I sometimes check out the games, so I know a thing or two about that situation. Edwards played on some of the worst teams in Stanford history. That was a dark, dark time for the program. The coaching was horrible and the overall talent level was worse. Some onlookers said the OL would've been a below average group for a Division II school.

Edwards was a gutty leader. Almost to the point of stupidity since he didn't seem to know when to slide. He's not a dumb guy though and I'd expect him to eventually develop average durability for the position. He'll never have the bulk of McNabb or Roethlisberger, but he's not a twig.

 

[twitch]

Lynch has a couple of things going for him. First, Trent Edwards is no longer a rookie. He'll be a 2nd year guy with knowledge of the O and experience. And he's a smart kid, coming from Stanford. He doesnt have a big arm, which imo means that he wont risk deep downfield passes looking to make plays he's not capable of making. I think he'll be a good QB. But more of a Chad Pennington type. Bottom line is I think he'll be looking for the RB on a ton of checkdowns, and Lynch will have serious receiving #s as a result. Secondly, Lynch is an every down-type back, which in itself is a rare commodity these days. He seems to be a goalline guy as well as fully capable of catching 70 or so balls. Finally, the kid's just flat out dynamic. He's got energy and attitude. Im sure that line will be improved, and the entire O will step it up a notch. Definitely top 5 potential, imo.

 

[mdog1967]

In all due respect to a well thought OP, this is what happens when you look at only stats, and not game tape. I don't think too many RBs could have done more with what opportunity Lynch was given. The team had serious QB issues and really could not threaten defenses in the passing game enough to open up running lanes. He looked great getting that 3.9 YPC, getting as much as he could from what was there.

LT had a 3.6 YPC his first year...

Couldn't agree more. In fact, I took those points from what I posted in another thread and in that I specifically stated that he looked pretty good on the field. Much better than I thought he would, to be honest. Nothing mind-blowing, but definitely above average. And if that's the reason to have him ranked highly, I have no issue with that at all. In fact, that's why I had him originally that high.At the same time, there are worrisome things that I pointed out above. We've seen other guys in just as bad of situations at least show SOME flashes of greatness, i.e. Gore in SF. He may not have been able to do much, but he occasionally put up some monster games. Lynch really only did that once all year. I think I would just like a little more potential for explosiveness from a top 10 fantasy RB. At this point, I think he's a great #2 RB, but I wouldn't want to count on him as a #1. I also think it's going to take a lot to exceed his current ranking given his current situation and that has to be taken into account.

I can see him being a great sell-high right now and getting good value and then reacquiring him in 2-3 yrs when he slips some but could possibly move to a different situation.

And yes, I know LT had a 3.6 ypc his first year. But so have many other RB's that failed. And I don't think his talent on the field, at least what I saw, compares to LT. I wonder if that's what you're suggesting, although I'm sure it's not. Numbers don't tell the whole story, but I also think they shouldn't be completely ignored.

I saw some flashes of greatness in Lynch's ability to break tackles and get yards after contact, and yes that game clincher against the Bengals. I understand the reluctance to make him a #1, your first round pick - Trent Edwards wasn't exactly an ironman at Stanford.The reason I brought up LT was more to draw a comparison between the situations - that a rookie who is asked to carry a subpar offense is going to struggle no matter how good he is going to be in the future, unless of course, that rookie's name is Adrian Peterson (and he went to Oklahoma)

Great post Sig but WOhh, Edwards was an Ironman at Stanford, played on one of the worse College teams period. Edwards got swatted around like a ping pong ball, beat up, trampled on and basically came out of most games looking like the Bride of Frankenstein after a getting rode hard and put up wet. Yeah he got a little injured but I don't think anyone could have stood up to the abuse as well as he did. The Edwards/Lynch Combo could turn out very, very well for the Bills in the years to come. I completely agree with your assessment of Lynch.

I hear ya, he definitely had a lot of courage, but he had injuries that caused him to miss multiple games in 3 of his 4 seasons at Stanford. You could argue that any QB would have been broken on those teams, but we don't know that for sure, and until then we have to consider Edwards as a higher injury risk than a typical QB.

Roger that Bloom, a qualified point.

 

[az_prof]

I don't think so. There's a tendency to overrate sophomore RBs. We saw it with guys like Caddy, Ronnie, KJ, Julius, Maroney, and A-Train. Those guys didn't deserve the hype, but I think Lynch's perceived value is actually very close to his true value. He's a starting caliber RB on a team that's headed in the right direction. He may never be a stud, but he won't be a bust unless he gets injured. I view him as a top 8-15 type dynasty RB who makes an excellent RB2 in both redraft and dynasty leagues. I agree with comments about the supporting cast. He played well for the Bills last season. The only reason his numbers look mediocre is because he had no help.

Fair enough but why did the unheralded Jackson do better then?

 

[kremenull]

Ehhh, numbers schmumbers......In evaluating young guys, especially RBs, I tend to look at the big picture and not just some numbers from a small sample, and yes, 1 year is still a small sample. And the things that stand out to me are......

1. The # of carries to me suggests that this guy is capable of handling a full-time load in the NFL. To have this confirmed after 1 year is a big plus for me, as it gives me the comfort of knowing that this guy will be a focal point of this offense going forward......300-340+ carries, no problem. I can't say that about uh-hem MJ..uh-hmm...D......some players.....Workhorse, when combined with very good talent, more than likely equates to fantasy stud-dom.

2. As some have already mentioned, supporting cast can only get better and thus should help Lynch's production....better passing game, including more weapons, should open up more running lanes.....

3. The Bills o-line has very good potential, especially in the running game. I would not be surprised to see this unit among the best (at least at run blocking) in the very near future. They are huge, relatively young, and athletic up front and can only improve as they work and grow together as a unit......several new faces among the o-line were introduced last year, so they have yet to really jell, IMO.

4. Lynch was severely underutilized in the passing game last season. Could be a multitude of reasons, possibly pass protection issues on his part, scheme, also QB play was instrumental. Given his credentials, and scouting report entering the league, as a fine route-runner and natural receiver, I believe his involvement in the pass game will increase to possibly the Thurman Thomas type level......and that's saying a whole lot

In fantasy, and I would add especially dynasty, sometimes a guy needs to be rated rather high on what you project, and not really what he's produced to date. Sure, you can go for the more "tried and tested" type of guys in the top 10, but I'd love to be drafting behind these types of owners.......If we want to say that this guy (Lynch) is overrated, then how can we (most of us, at least) claim that "AD" is the #1 RB when his overall production has yet to merit that distinction.

 

[Buckna]

Those predicting all these catches for him, he had 18 grabs in 13 games last year. Did they limit his opportunities on 3rd down last year? If so, was it because he was a rook and they wanted someone that could pass protect better? Is it because Buffalo just doesn't throw to their main RB much? Is it because he's not as good a pass catcher as we think?

Honest question, what makes you think he'll be grabbing a large number of balls any time soon?

 

[Gottabesweet]

I'm a Bills season ticket holder, and own Lynch. I love the kid, I think he's overrated but still very good. He runs hard and that worries me, he takes a beating and unlike LT he will go out of his way and continue churning those legs for extra yards, he has to learn when to take a hit and when to go out of bounds.

 

[Thorpe]

Lynch has great skills and determination, but I thought he had a hard time finding the hole and being patient to wait for the hole to open. You'd think another year in the league will help him there. Also, Fairchild had no imagination as a Off Coordinator last year. He's gone, so maybe the playbook will open up.

Jackson put up a lot of numbers when it didn't count, but he will get his carries, especially on 3rd down. Lynch is unselfish almost to a fault, and he has no problem sharing the football with another RB. At Cal, he took himself out of the game at halftime when the Bears were up big.

The Bill's O Line is in great shape now, and next year could be top 5 or 10 in the year if they stay healthy.

 

[gianmarco]

Here is my only issue with what's being posted. It seems the vast majority are indeed high on him and I expected that. However, an overriding theme is how awful the Bills were and that is a good explanation for his overall mediocre #'s. That very well may be the case. However, is the Bills offense really on the rise that much? Are you guys really expecting a significant change in the offense for his production to go up that much? As someone else pointed out, what do you make of Fred Jackson's decent performance under the same circumstances. Small sample size, I know, but nevertheless there.

Also, it seems that many of these replies either didn't read some things I posted above or just didn't care to respond to them. It seems some saw "Lynch overrated" and came here to make sure that wasn't the case. As bad as the Bills were, don't any of you find it at all concerning that he had only one "explosive" game all year? Other RB's have put up much better #'s in just as bad of offenses. Gore in SF. Jordan in Oakland. Even S. Jax in StL last year. If the only reason is because of how he looked on the field and most of you aren't concerned about the rest of that stuff, then I guess so be it. That may very well be the case. I guess my main point is despite how he looked, there are some things that are a concern in his stats and I'm not as optimistic as others that his situation is going to change enough to make that big of a difference.

Finally, as I tried to say above, as high as he's being ranked and what seems like a ranking that many of you agree with, he actually, no matter how good, will have a hard time meeting those expectations let alone surpass them but I can easily see him falling short. It's one thing to think a player is going to be a top 5 RB and actually ranking him that high before he merits it. I'm not trying to suggest that he's not talented nor that he won't ever be a top 5 RB. I can definitely see it. But I think his high ranking may be a bit premature and may be overrated......at least for now.

 

[BBRULE]

Ehhh, numbers schmumbers......In evaluating young guys, especially RBs, I tend to look at the big picture and not just some numbers from a small sample, and yes, 1 year is still a small sample. And the things that stand out to me are......

1. The # of carries to me suggests that this guy is capable of handling a full-time load in the NFL. To have this confirmed after 1 year is a big plus for me, as it gives me the comfort of knowing that this guy will be a focal point of this offense going forward......300-340+ carries, no problem. I can't say that about uh-hem MJ..uh-hmm...D......some players.....Workhorse, when combined with very good talent, more than likely equates to fantasy stud-dom.

2. As some have already mentioned, supporting cast can only get better and thus should help Lynch's production....better passing game, including more weapons, should open up more running lanes.....

3. The Bills o-line has very good potential, especially in the running game. I would not be surprised to see this unit among the best (at least at run blocking) in the very near future. They are huge, relatively young, and athletic up front and can only improve as they work and grow together as a unit......several new faces among the o-line were introduced last year, so they have yet to really jell, IMO.

4. Lynch was severely underutilized in the passing game last season. Could be a multitude of reasons, possibly pass protection issues on his part, scheme, also QB play was instrumental. Given his credentials, and scouting report entering the league, as a fine route-runner and natural receiver, I believe his involvement in the pass game will increase to possibly the Thurman Thomas type level......and that's saying a whole lot

In fantasy, and I would add especially dynasty, sometimes a guy needs to be rated rather high on what you project, and not really what he's produced to date. Sure, you can go for the more "tried and tested" type of guys in the top 10, but I'd love to be drafting behind these types of owners.......If we want to say that this guy (Lynch) is overrated, then how can we (most of us, at least) claim that "AD" is the #1 RB when his overall production has yet to merit that distinction.

As a Bills fan this bolded part is my biggest concern. Can he really handle the load? Broken leg, seperated shoulder, torn Acl, mcl etc., are injuries that force a player to miss time but Lynch missed 3 games last year why? Dinged up, didn't want to or was unable to play through pain which implies to me he CANNOT handle a full load at the NFL level since to do so you have to play while hurt but not injured.

 

[twitch]

Here is my only issue with what's being posted. It seems the vast majority are indeed high on him and I expected that. However, an overriding theme is how awful the Bills were and that is a good explanation for his overall mediocre #'s. That very well may be the case. However, is the Bills offense really on the rise that much? Are you guys really expecting a significant change in the offense for his production to go up that much? As someone else pointed out, what do you make of Fred Jackson's decent performance under the same circumstances. Small sample size, I know, but nevertheless there.

Also, it seems that many of these replies either didn't read some things I posted above or just didn't care to respond to them. It seems some saw "Lynch overrated" and came here to make sure that wasn't the case. As bad as the Bills were, don't any of you find it at all concerning that he had only one "explosive" game all year? Other RB's have put up much better #'s in just as bad of offenses. Gore in SF. Jordan in Oakland. Even S. Jax in StL last year. If the only reason is because of how he looked on the field and most of you aren't concerned about the rest of that stuff, then I guess so be it. That may very well be the case. I guess my main point is despite how he looked, there are some things that are a concern in his stats and I'm not as optimistic as others that his situation is going to change enough to make that big of a difference.

Finally, as I tried to say above, as high as he's being ranked and what seems like a ranking that many of you agree with, he actually, no matter how good, will have a hard time meeting those expectations let alone surpass them but I can easily see him falling short. It's one thing to think a player is going to be a top 5 RB and actually ranking him that high before he merits it. I'm not trying to suggest that he's not talented nor that he won't ever be a top 5 RB. I can definitely see it. But I think his high ranking may be a bit premature and may be overrated......at least for now.

Look, g. Expecting top 5 performance and actually drafting in that position are two separate trains of logic. I dont know that Id ever draft him top 5 in an '08 draft. Though Id still anticipate those #s as a possibility. So, sitting in the 8-12 hole of a draft, he'd be near the top of my list of considerations. But if Lynch is #10 in the RB rankings, then he'd very possibly get drafted as low as 15th in a draft. He'd potentially be drafted behind 9 other RBs, atleast 2 QBs(Manning, Brady), probably behind atleast 2 receivers(Moss, Owens, possibly Edwards), and maybe even behind Romo. So, dont sweat where he'll be going in drafts or how much he'll be overrated. Understand that his draft day value is really mid-2nd round imo, which really represents value from a guy who could be a top 5 RB. I just dont see many guys actually drafting him as a top 5 back no matter how much they may expect that level of production.

 

[Couch Potato]

Those predicting all these catches for him, he had 18 grabs in 13 games last year. Did they limit his opportunities on 3rd down last year? If so, was it because he was a rook and they wanted someone that could pass protect better? Is it because Buffalo just doesn't throw to their main RB much? Is it because he's not as good a pass catcher as we think?

Honest question, what makes you think he'll be grabbing a large number of balls any time soon?

New OC Turk Schonert plans to expand his role now that he has a year under his belt.http://www.buffalobills.com/blog/index.jsp?post_id=2802

January 16, 2008

Posted By: Chris Brown | Time: 2:34 PM

EXPECT MORE CATCHES FOR LYNCH: Here's what Turk Schonert had to say today when asked if Marshawn Lynch would factor more into the passing game this coming season after having just 18 receptions last year.

"Anticipate him being in on 3rd-down a lot more," said Schonert of Lynch. "We held him back and Anthony Thomas did that in the beginning of the season because we didn’t want to throw to much at him. But he’s had a year, he understands the protections now and I think this year he’ll be an integral part of our third down package."

 

[CalBear]

Check out this

it includes several of his TD runs, including three where he basically scored due to nothing more than his own will. Lynch is a serious player, who didn't get many opportunities at the goal line in 2007; if he gets more opportunities, he will easily be a top-10 RB. Now, Buffalo is likely to still stink in 2008, so I would temper my enthusiasm for this year. Still, it's hard to see a downside, even this year, and you're looking at a legit RB who is likely to get 300+ carries; I don't see how that can be anything but an RB1.

 

[kremenull]

Ehhh, numbers schmumbers......In evaluating young guys, especially RBs, I tend to look at the big picture and not just some numbers from a small sample, and yes, 1 year is still a small sample. And the things that stand out to me are......

1. The # of carries to me suggests that this guy is capable of handling a full-time load in the NFL. To have this confirmed after 1 year is a big plus for me, as it gives me the comfort of knowing that this guy will be a focal point of this offense going forward......300-340+ carries, no problem. I can't say that about uh-hem MJ..uh-hmm...D......some players.....Workhorse, when combined with very good talent, more than likely equates to fantasy stud-dom.

2. As some have already mentioned, supporting cast can only get better and thus should help Lynch's production....better passing game, including more weapons, should open up more running lanes.....

3. The Bills o-line has very good potential, especially in the running game. I would not be surprised to see this unit among the best (at least at run blocking) in the very near future. They are huge, relatively young, and athletic up front and can only improve as they work and grow together as a unit......several new faces among the o-line were introduced last year, so they have yet to really jell, IMO.

4. Lynch was severely underutilized in the passing game last season. Could be a multitude of reasons, possibly pass protection issues on his part, scheme, also QB play was instrumental. Given his credentials, and scouting report entering the league, as a fine route-runner and natural receiver, I believe his involvement in the pass game will increase to possibly the Thurman Thomas type level......and that's saying a whole lot

In fantasy, and I would add especially dynasty, sometimes a guy needs to be rated rather high on what you project, and not really what he's produced to date. Sure, you can go for the more "tried and tested" type of guys in the top 10, but I'd love to be drafting behind these types of owners.......If we want to say that this guy (Lynch) is overrated, then how can we (most of us, at least) claim that "AD" is the #1 RB when his overall production has yet to merit that distinction.

As a Bills fan this bolded part is my biggest concern. Can he really handle the load? Broken leg, seperated shoulder, torn Acl, mcl etc., are injuries that force a player to miss time but Lynch missed 3 games last year why? Dinged up, didn't want to or was unable to play through pain which implies to me he CANNOT handle a full load at the NFL level since to do so you have to play while hurt but not injured.

I'm not sure of your definition of full-time load, but 21 carries per game fits my definition. Anyone can get hurt and miss a game or two, and IIRC, he did encounter a high ankle sprain, which is nothing to sneeze at, especially for a RB. In my book, it's the carries per game with regards to full-time load capability, not the fact that he missed some games, which could be discussion for another issue, durability.

 

[The Man with the Plan]

Marshawn Lynch had only 18 catches last season but he averaged more than 10 yards on each reception. I think only MJD and AD had a higher average. He's shown that when he's a receiver he can make big plays. He didn't have a lot of receptions in college as his highest amount was 38. He caught 18 passes on 26 targets in 2007 so he caught most of the balls that went his way. He's not Brian Westbrook but he's not Rudi Johnson either.

Also the Bills played some really tough run defenses last season. They played the Steelers, Cowboys, Ravens, and the Patriots twice. He ran hard in each of those games and still put up decent numbers. Not many running backs ypc average will look good after having 5 games against those teams. He impressed me though. I think he's a good player.

I'm not sure that he could be a top-5 fantasy running back (probably won't have enough total yards or touchdowns) but he can easily be in the top-10 next season.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

Jackson put up a lot of numbers when it didn't count,

This is a complete joke. Jackson got a significant number of carries in 2 games - weeks 13 and 14. In week 13, they played Washington, the #4 against the run, where he put up 16 for 82 for over 5 yards per carry. He added another 4 catches for 69 yards. He played the whole game in a game where they won 17-16. No garbage time and it all counted.In week 14, he split time with Lynch and got 115 yards on 15 carries (Lynch, by the way, had 23 for 107) and played the whole game on all downs in all quarters. In fact, he got 80 of those yards in the 1st half, when it really counted (Lynch's was split 66/41).Doesn't it bother anyone that Lynch was outplayed by Jackson, granted in limited time, with all the same deficiencies that plagued Lynch? It's not like Jackson was an experienced veteran.

 

[Young 8]

Jackson put up a lot of numbers when it didn't count,

This is a complete joke. Jackson got a significant number of carries in 2 games - weeks 13 and 14. In week 13, they played Washington, the #4 against the run, where he put up 16 for 82 for over 5 yards per carry. He added another 4 catches for 69 yards. He played the whole game in a game where they won 17-16. No garbage time and it all counted.In week 14, he split time with Lynch and got 115 yards on 15 carries (Lynch, by the way, had 23 for 107) and played the whole game on all downs in all quarters. In fact, he got 80 of those yards in the 1st half, when it really counted (Lynch's was split 66/41).Doesn't it bother anyone that Lynch was outplayed by Jackson, granted in limited time, with all the same deficiencies that plagued Lynch? It's not like Jackson was an experienced veteran.

LMAOno, it doesn't bother because Lynch was coming back from a bad high ankle sprainin the last 3 games of the season Jackson barely touched the field...........

 

[FreeBaGeL]

One thing that seems to be continually overlooked in these kinds of threads (and threads about rookie RBs) is just how terribly RBs in their 2nd year coming off a strong rookie season have performed given where they've been drafted. These guys creep into the end of round 1 (even in redrafts) every year, and every year rookie RBs that are taken 3 rounds later not only end up having a ton more value, but they're often outperforming the guys straight up.

2004: We saw Kevin Jones and Julius Jones finish their rookie seasons very strongly, and both vaulted up draftboads into the late 1st round in 2005.

2005: KJ and JJ both fall flat on their face and are outperformed by rookies Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams.

2006: Ronnie Brown and Cadillac both vaulted into that same late 1st round zone, and while Brown performed decently it was still far from his draft status, and well behind a pair of rookies in Bush and MJD.

2007: Finally a pair of second year guys performed admirably, though probably not up to their draft spots and both were again outperformed by rookies.

This year, we once again have two 2nd year guys in the top 10. AD is the exception to the rule I believe, but two guys? Gonna be tough for that to happen.

 

[EBF]

One thing that seems to be continually overlooked in these kinds of threads (and threads about rookie RBs) is just how terribly RBs in their 2nd year coming off a strong rookie season have performed given where they've been drafted. These guys creep into the end of round 1 (even in redrafts) every year, and every year rookie RBs that are taken 3 rounds later not only end up having a ton more value, but they're often outperforming the guys straight up.2004: We saw Kevin Jones and Julius Jones finish their rookie seasons very strongly, and both vaulted up draftboads into the late 1st round in 2005.2005: KJ and JJ both fall flat on their face and are outperformed by rookies Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams.2006: Ronnie Brown and Cadillac both vaulted into that same late 1st round zone, and while Brown performed decently it was still far from his draft status, and well behind a pair of rookies in Bush and MJD.2007: Finally a pair of second year guys performed admirably, though probably not up to their draft spots and both were again outperformed by rookies.This year, we once again have two 2nd year guys in the top 10. AD is the exception to the rule I believe, but two guys? Gonna be tough for that to happen.

I honestly think these guys are an exception to that trend. Peterson may not be the second coming of Eric Dickerson and he might not rush for 2,000 yards next season, but I'll be shocked if he doesn't hang up another 1,200-1,600 yard season. My only real concern is the presence of Taylor and the durability issues. As for Lynch, I really think he's in a good position to at worst duplicate his 2007 season. I don't see the volatility there that I saw with someone like Maroney. There is no risk of Lynch losing significant touches to a backup and there's little reason to think he lacks talent. Buffalo will be running a lot this year since Jauron seems like the conservative "play not to lose" type. I think you'll be fine with Lynch as your RB2 although he's probably a slight reach as a RB1 in most leagues.

 

[az_prof]

Jackson put up a lot of numbers when it didn't count,

This is a complete joke. Jackson got a significant number of carries in 2 games - weeks 13 and 14. In week 13, they played Washington, the #4 against the run, where he put up 16 for 82 for over 5 yards per carry. He added another 4 catches for 69 yards. He played the whole game in a game where they won 17-16. No garbage time and it all counted.In week 14, he split time with Lynch and got 115 yards on 15 carries (Lynch, by the way, had 23 for 107) and played the whole game on all downs in all quarters. In fact, he got 80 of those yards in the 1st half, when it really counted (Lynch's was split 66/41).Doesn't it bother anyone that Lynch was outplayed by Jackson, granted in limited time, with all the same deficiencies that plagued Lynch? It's not like Jackson was an experienced veteran.

Obviously, it bothers me, which is why I wouldn't go out of my way to own Lynch and if I did I would want Jackson too. But he is young and had a good rookie season, so most people are going to ride his bandwagon until something happens to make them question him. That's to be expected. I can understand why his owners like him, but I would definitely NOT be buying if I didn't own him.

 

[Bri]

Marshawn Lynch had only 18 catches last season but he averaged more than 10 yards on each reception. I think only MJD and AD had a higher average. He's shown that when he's a receiver he can make big plays. He didn't have a lot of receptions in college as his highest amount was 38. He caught 18 passes on 26 targets in 2007 so he caught most of the balls that went his way. He's not Brian Westbrook but he's not Rudi Johnson either.Also the Bills played some really tough run defenses last season. They played the Steelers, Cowboys, Ravens, and the Patriots twice. He ran hard in each of those games and still put up decent numbers. Not many running backs ypc average will look good after having 5 games against those teams. He impressed me though. I think he's a good player.I'm not sure that he could be a top-5 fantasy running back (probably won't have enough total yards or touchdowns) but he can easily be in the top-10 next season.

when a player catches so few I wonder if the D is caught offguard and what will happen if he's a receiving threat more often.Marshawn missed 3 games but for some reason I feel like he's going to be quite reliable(injuries, FF starts week to week). I'm not quite sure what it is but young backs I've really liked recently have not been reliable. He doesn't give me that fear many FFers get. There's something real solid or tough about his game that makes me think so, can't quite put my finger on it though.

 

[Sabertooth]

I don't think so. There's a tendency to overrate sophomore RBs. We saw it with guys like Caddy, Ronnie, KJ, Julius, Maroney, and A-Train. Those guys didn't deserve the hype, but I think Lynch's perceived value is actually very close to his true value. He's a starting caliber RB on a team that's headed in the right direction. He may never be a stud, but he won't be a bust unless he gets injured. I view him as a top 8-15 type dynasty RB who makes an excellent RB2 in both redraft and dynasty leagues. I agree with comments about the supporting cast. He played well for the Bills last season. The only reason his numbers look mediocre is because he had no help.

Ronnie Brown finished with over 1000 yards rushing and 33 catches while missing 3 games in 2006. But your point still stands. Just not with Ronnie Brown, who has been the exception.

 

[Tanner9919]

Ok, so here goes. We've seen lots of top 10 and top 15 lists and Lynch has appeared on virtually all of them, often in the top 10. According to the current FBG rankings from the 4 that have done them, Lynch is ranked #9. He's ahead of guys like MJD, Grant, McGahee, Bush, Parker, and LJ on those rankings (not trying to call FBG staff out, just using it as a reference as this has been the case on most other lists as well)

But, should he be? Now, I know he's young. I know he has only played 1 year and has room to improve. And I know he played for the Bills and still did ok on a pretty bad offensive team. However, after looking up some things from another thread, these are some things I found.



1) Only three 100 yd games all year. One for 153 vs. Cincy, another for 107 vs. Miami, and week 17 vs. Philly for 105. Not too impressive considering the teams he did it against and the last 2 required 22 and 23 carries.

2) At the same time, he had 18+ carries in EVERY game he played (13 games). With 18+ carries, he failed to reach 100 yds in 10 of those 13 games.

3) He had ZERO multi-TD games. While he scored 7 TDs, he never scored more than 1 in a game.

4) He only had 18 catches for 184 yds and 0 TDs. Despite popular opinion, he was not very active in passing game. In fact, Fred Jackson had 4 more receptions than Lynch had all year in limited duty. That is concerning.

5) In my PPR league, he scored 32 fantasy points vs. Cincy. However, other than that one week, he never topped 18 pts.

6) He had a 3.9 ypc for the year.

Here is his game log

Again, I understand there is room for improvement, but are those really the #'s of a top 10 dynasty RB? Top 10 would usually indicate to me he should be considered a #1 RB and I don't think that should be the case at all. Is his value so high because of what he did on the field or because of his age? Is it because he's the unquestioned starter or because of what he was able to do in such a lousy situation?

I'll admit that I probably would have considered him a top 10 dynasty RB as well, but now, after looking closer, I think he's much closer to the #15-16 spot. I don't know if there's anything from last year that would give me reason to believe he will significantly improve on those #'s. And unless he does, I don't see how he cracks the top 15 let alone the top 10. Add in how well Fred Jackson did in his absense, and I think Lynch is probably being way overrated at this point. I don't know if I've really seen anything negative about him on these boards and this may be the first. If I owned him right now, I would seriously consider selling to be honest since he's commanding a pretty lofty price tag and I think a lot of it is due to his youth.

ETA--I missed week 17 as I was looking on my fantasy site and it wasn't included. Updated above.

Fred Jackson made the case that he deserves more playing time..wouldn't be hard to imagine a RBBC in Buffalo in 2008.

 

[D_House]

Check out this

 

[BuckeyeArt]

Jackson put up a lot of numbers when it didn't count,

This is a complete joke. Jackson got a significant number of carries in 2 games - weeks 13 and 14. In week 13, they played Washington, the #4 against the run, where he put up 16 for 82 for over 5 yards per carry. He added another 4 catches for 69 yards. He played the whole game in a game where they won 17-16. No garbage time and it all counted.In week 14, he split time with Lynch and got 115 yards on 15 carries (Lynch, by the way, had 23 for 107) and played the whole game on all downs in all quarters. In fact, he got 80 of those yards in the 1st half, when it really counted (Lynch's was split 66/41).Doesn't it bother anyone that Lynch was outplayed by Jackson, granted in limited time, with all the same deficiencies that plagued Lynch? It's not like Jackson was an experienced veteran.

LMAOno, it doesn't bother because Lynch was coming back from a bad high ankle sprainin the last 3 games of the season Jackson barely touched the field...........

More strange and inaccurate comments. I'm not sure why you're laughing but if it's because you thought I was trying to make Jackson out to be some kind of stud, you completely missed my point. It was simply to show that Jackson, basically a rookie journeyman, performed better than Lynch in the same offense under conditions that mattered. It's not like Lynch had an ankle injury all year long, is it?And, by the way, in the last 3 games, Jackson got 27 touches or 1/3 of his season touches. Not only did he touch the field but it appears he touched the football as well. During the same 3 games, Lynch had 64 touches. So basically, Jackson got about 30% of the RB touches. Looks more like RBBC than barely touching the field.

 

[CalBear]

One thing that seems to be continually overlooked in these kinds of threads (and threads about rookie RBs) is just how terribly RBs in their 2nd year coming off a strong rookie season have performed given where they've been drafted. These guys creep into the end of round 1 (even in redrafts) every year, and every year rookie RBs that are taken 3 rounds later not only end up having a ton more value, but they're often outperforming the guys straight up.

You're cherry-picking. Among other things, you need to look at a lot more data than the last 4 years. Since 1990, here are top 5 rookie RBs by number of carries their rookie season: E.James, C.Martin, L.Tomlinson, E.George, M.Faulk. A rather nice group, don't you think? Avoiding them in their second seasons might have been unwise.There are 15 rookies from 2000-20006 with 200+ carries; that group includes Tomlinson, Jamal Lewis, Clinton Portis, Joseph Addai, and Travis Henry as clear successes, Ronnie Brown as a wash, and Anderson and Rhodes as injury scratches. A 50% success rate is almost exactly what you'd expect from the general population of NFL RBs; that's the typical turnover in the top 10, for example.

Also, you're noticing that some rookie RB performed better; not all rookie RBs; cherry-picking again.

I don't see any reason to avoid a player just because he had success as a rookie.

 

[gianmarco]

Jackson put up a lot of numbers when it didn't count,

This is a complete joke. Jackson got a significant number of carries in 2 games - weeks 13 and 14. In week 13, they played Washington, the #4 against the run, where he put up 16 for 82 for over 5 yards per carry. He added another 4 catches for 69 yards. He played the whole game in a game where they won 17-16. No garbage time and it all counted.In week 14, he split time with Lynch and got 115 yards on 15 carries (Lynch, by the way, had 23 for 107) and played the whole game on all downs in all quarters. In fact, he got 80 of those yards in the 1st half, when it really counted (Lynch's was split 66/41).Doesn't it bother anyone that Lynch was outplayed by Jackson, granted in limited time, with all the same deficiencies that plagued Lynch? It's not like Jackson was an experienced veteran.

LMAOno, it doesn't bother because Lynch was coming back from a bad high ankle sprainin the last 3 games of the season Jackson barely touched the field...........

More strange and inaccurate comments. I'm not sure why you're laughing but if it's because you thought I was trying to make Jackson out to be some kind of stud, you completely missed my point. It was simply to show that Jackson, basically a rookie journeyman, performed better than Lynch in the same offense under conditions that mattered. It's not like Lynch had an ankle injury all year long, is it?And, by the way, in the last 3 games, Jackson got 27 touches or 1/3 of his season touches. Not only did he touch the field but it appears he touched the football as well. During the same 3 games, Lynch had 64 touches. So basically, Jackson got about 30% of the RB touches. Looks more like RBBC than barely touching the field.

Gotta agree here. The fact that Jackson was able to put up as good and better #'s than Lynch in that offense could mean 1 of 2 things (or both). 1. Fred Jackson is far more talented than we think.2. Buffalo's situation isn't as bad as far as allowing a RB to be productive as we think.Again, granted it's a small sample size, but it's still there. If one or both of the above are actually true, I think that definitely hurts Lynch's value. It's at least something to be aware of.

 

[Ripleys]

I traded FOR Lynch and 2 different dynasty leagues this week. I sure hope he's not overrated.

Moved Maroney, Evans, 2.6 for Lynch and Meachem

Moved Graham, Parker, Cotchery, RB Chris Henry, 2.11 for Lynch, V.Davis, 1.7, 2.6

 

[chris1969]

On tape, no!

 

[BBRULE]

Ehhh, numbers schmumbers......In evaluating young guys, especially RBs, I tend to look at the big picture and not just some numbers from a small sample, and yes, 1 year is still a small sample. And the things that stand out to me are......

1. The # of carries to me suggests that this guy is capable of handling a full-time load in the NFL. To have this confirmed after 1 year is a big plus for me, as it gives me the comfort of knowing that this guy will be a focal point of this offense going forward......300-340+ carries, no problem. I can't say that about uh-hem MJ..uh-hmm...D......some players.....Workhorse, when combined with very good talent, more than likely equates to fantasy stud-dom.

2. As some have already mentioned, supporting cast can only get better and thus should help Lynch's production....better passing game, including more weapons, should open up more running lanes.....

3. The Bills o-line has very good potential, especially in the running game. I would not be surprised to see this unit among the best (at least at run blocking) in the very near future. They are huge, relatively young, and athletic up front and can only improve as they work and grow together as a unit......several new faces among the o-line were introduced last year, so they have yet to really jell, IMO.

4. Lynch was severely underutilized in the passing game last season. Could be a multitude of reasons, possibly pass protection issues on his part, scheme, also QB play was instrumental. Given his credentials, and scouting report entering the league, as a fine route-runner and natural receiver, I believe his involvement in the pass game will increase to possibly the Thurman Thomas type level......and that's saying a whole lot

In fantasy, and I would add especially dynasty, sometimes a guy needs to be rated rather high on what you project, and not really what he's produced to date. Sure, you can go for the more "tried and tested" type of guys in the top 10, but I'd love to be drafting behind these types of owners.......If we want to say that this guy (Lynch) is overrated, then how can we (most of us, at least) claim that "AD" is the #1 RB when his overall production has yet to merit that distinction.

As a Bills fan this bolded part is my biggest concern. Can he really handle the load? Broken leg, seperated shoulder, torn Acl, mcl etc., are injuries that force a player to miss time but Lynch missed 3 games last year why? Dinged up, didn't want to or was unable to play through pain which implies to me he CANNOT handle a full load at the NFL level since to do so you have to play while hurt but not injured.

I'm not sure of your definition of full-time load, but 21 carries per game fits my definition. Anyone can get hurt and miss a game or two, and IIRC, he did encounter a high ankle sprain, which is nothing to sneeze at, especially for a RB. In my book, it's the carries per game with regards to full-time load capability, not the fact that he missed some games, which could be discussion for another issue, durability.

Durability and ability to carry a full load are not the same thing? Carries per game indicates to me the Bills will feed him the rock as long as he's healthy which is great for his potential to accumulate yards and TDs. But if he can't stay healthy getting 21 carries a game then is he actually capable of handling a full load? I hope he can prove he is capable but he failed to do so in his 1st season IMO. I don't doubt his skill but his durability or ability to carry a full load, however you word it, is definitely in question.

 

[LBH]

after reading this thread, I have to admit Im a little less excited about Lynch, especially in redraft formats. OP made some pretty solid points

 

[SugarNuts]

I will echo some of the other comments. A solid #2, but not much upside beyond that. Buffalo had a great run back in the 90's, but I have no faith in the current organization to build much of an offense around Lynch. Much like when McGahee and Henry were there, I think he'll continue to have a low ypc around 4.0, 1200~1400 total yds and 6~8 TD's.

You obviously dont watch Bills games. In the past 15 years or so (since their glory days of the ealry 90s), they havent had anything consistent. No constent OL, QB, RB, coaching... Nothing. Now, they have a HC that has a plan, and is starting to show more, they have an OL that is one of the better ones in the league, they have qhat appears to be a competant QB, and obviously they drafted ML early to be their starting RB for many years. The biggest problem with this team is the WR position. Evans is a stud, but no one else is half as good. They need to have a good draft this year, and one of their 1st 2 picks has to be WR. They need someone that can make teams respect the passing game, so that the OL can open up more and bigger holes. I think all these things happen this year, and Lynch improves on a pretty good rookie year. He will slightly improve this year, and I think this team takes HUGE strides next year. He might be expensive now, but in a dynasty, me thinks you better get him now before he becomes untradeable.

 

[GroveDiesel]

I will echo some of the other comments. A solid #2, but not much upside beyond that. Buffalo had a great run back in the 90's, but I have no faith in the current organization to build much of an offense around Lynch. Much like when McGahee and Henry were there, I think he'll continue to have a low ypc around 4.0, 1200~1400 total yds and 6~8 TD's.

You obviously dont watch Bills games. In the past 15 years or so (since their glory days of the ealry 90s), they havent had anything consistent. No constent OL, QB, RB, coaching... Nothing. Now, they have a HC that has a plan, and is starting to show more, they have an OL that is one of the better ones in the league, they have qhat appears to be a competant QB, and obviously they drafted ML early to be their starting RB for many years. The biggest problem with this team is the WR position. Evans is a stud, but no one else is half as good. They need to have a good draft this year, and one of their 1st 2 picks has to be WR. They need someone that can make teams respect the passing game, so that the OL can open up more and bigger holes. I think all these things happen this year, and Lynch improves on a pretty good rookie year. He will slightly improve this year, and I think this team takes HUGE strides next year. He might be expensive now, but in a dynasty, me thinks you better get him now before he becomes untradeable.

I'm not even close to being convinced on this one. Having some continuity there this year at least is a step in the right direction. That line is going to have to play great though because this team isn't going anywhere if Edwards can't start throwing the ball deeper.

 

[SugarNuts]

I will echo some of the other comments. A solid #2, but not much upside beyond that. Buffalo had a great run back in the 90's, but I have no faith in the current organization to build much of an offense around Lynch. Much like when McGahee and Henry were there, I think he'll continue to have a low ypc around 4.0, 1200~1400 total yds and 6~8 TD's.

You obviously dont watch Bills games. In the past 15 years or so (since their glory days of the ealry 90s), they havent had anything consistent. No constent OL, QB, RB, coaching... Nothing. Now, they have a HC that has a plan, and is starting to show more, they have an OL that is one of the better ones in the league, they have qhat appears to be a competant QB, and obviously they drafted ML early to be their starting RB for many years. The biggest problem with this team is the WR position. Evans is a stud, but no one else is half as good. They need to have a good draft this year, and one of their 1st 2 picks has to be WR. They need someone that can make teams respect the passing game, so that the OL can open up more and bigger holes. I think all these things happen this year, and Lynch improves on a pretty good rookie year. He will slightly improve this year, and I think this team takes HUGE strides next year. He might be expensive now, but in a dynasty, me thinks you better get him now before he becomes untradeable.

I'm not even close to being convinced on this one. Having some continuity there this year at least is a step in the right direction. That line is going to have to play great though because this team isn't going anywhere if Edwards can't start throwing the ball deeper.

Oh Im not trying to convince anyone of anything. Im just stating what Ive observed. If Lynch can run for 1100 yards behind a line on a team that couldnt pass the ball for crap, I think that speaks for itself.

 

[gianmarco]

I will echo some of the other comments. A solid #2, but not much upside beyond that. Buffalo had a great run back in the 90's, but I have no faith in the current organization to build much of an offense around Lynch. Much like when McGahee and Henry were there, I think he'll continue to have a low ypc around 4.0, 1200~1400 total yds and 6~8 TD's.

You obviously dont watch Bills games. In the past 15 years or so (since their glory days of the ealry 90s), they havent had anything consistent. No constent OL, QB, RB, coaching... Nothing. Now, they have a HC that has a plan, and is starting to show more, they have an OL that is one of the better ones in the league, they have qhat appears to be a competant QB, and obviously they drafted ML early to be their starting RB for many years. The biggest problem with this team is the WR position. Evans is a stud, but no one else is half as good. They need to have a good draft this year, and one of their 1st 2 picks has to be WR. They need someone that can make teams respect the passing game, so that the OL can open up more and bigger holes. I think all these things happen this year, and Lynch improves on a pretty good rookie year. He will slightly improve this year, and I think this team takes HUGE strides next year. He might be expensive now, but in a dynasty, me thinks you better get him now before he becomes untradeable.

I'm not even close to being convinced on this one. Having some continuity there this year at least is a step in the right direction. That line is going to have to play great though because this team isn't going anywhere if Edwards can't start throwing the ball deeper.

Oh Im not trying to convince anyone of anything. Im just stating what Ive observed. If Lynch can run for 1100 yards behind a line on a team that couldnt pass the ball for crap, I think that speaks for itself.

With 280 carries, I would hope he can run for 1100 yds. 3.9 ypc isn't the worst I've seen, but it's definitely not good enough to start raving about his 1100 yds.