What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Kffl Blog: Temper enthusiasm on Mark Ingram (1 Viewer)

Faust

MVP
'Faust said:
Three and out: Ingram, Thomas could share work

...

The New Orleans Times-Picayune is reporting that Ingram and Pierre Thomas have shared first-team reps during training camp.
The FFB blogosphere is whiffing on this one pretty badly. See posts #165-172 in Ingram's Spotlight thread.I'll reiterate some of what I wrote in that thread:

A lot of people will read that article as "the final number of rushing attempts will likely be similar ...", just like the Rotoworld headline writer did. They'll ignore that Ingram's role will likely allow him to smoke Thomas in fantasy points over the course of the season. All Jeff Duncan wrote is that Ingram and Thomas are sharing first-team reps in camp right now. That's no surprise, as Thomas' reps in the first week of camp were limited (no link) and now he needs the work.

Some things in Ingram's favor:

1) Ingram has the Saints' goal-line role right now. He also has the Saints' red-zone RB role right now -- IOW, they're not just going to wave Ingram in when the ball's inside the 3.

2) The Saints traded their best goal-line RB of the Payton era to the Dolphins. Yep, Reggie Bush actually was deadly and efficient inside the 5. Someone is getting some extra work to fill the gap, and it's going to be mostly Ingram.

3) The Saints RBs, combined, scored 28 rush/rcv TDs in 2008, and 26 in 2009. When the RB corps is not a MASH unit and Sean Payton can allocate the rush/pass percentages the way he prefers, there's plenty of opportunity for a RB to rack up TDs.

4) Pierre Thomas himself scored 12 TDs in 2008 (in 160 touches!) despite playing part time and sharing a backfield with two goal-line backs par excellence in Deuce McAllister and Reggie Bush.
:goodposting:

 

Doug B

Footballguy
im not gonna dig it up but a few weeks ago pierre himself admitted he "wasnt 100%." ofc, this was in response to glowing praise from his teammates and media who said he looked great on the practice field. pierre said something like, i can be better, i know myself and im not quite there.
Good memory -- your recall helped me locate a link (from three weeks ago):
New Orleans Saints tailback Pierre Thomas labels himself "85 percent" healthy

Published: Friday, July 29, 2011

By Mike Triplett, The Times-Picayune NOLA.com

New Orleans Saints tailback Pierre Thomas fully participated in the team's first training camp practice Friday, though he labeled himself at just "85 percent" recovered from offseason ankle surgery ...

Thomas said he felt good and was able to cut and run at full speed. He said the extra 15 percent he needs to improve is just his strength in the left ankle.

"Guys told me I looked good. Other people would probably say I'm 100 percent," Thomas said. "But I just know myself, and I know I need to get my strength all the way back."
 

-jb-

Footballguy
'Faust said:
Three and out: Ingram, Thomas could share work

...

The New Orleans Times-Picayune is reporting that Ingram and Pierre Thomas have shared first-team reps during training camp.
The FFB blogosphere is whiffing on this one pretty badly. See posts #165-172 in Ingram's Spotlight thread.I'll reiterate some of what I wrote in that thread:

A lot of people will read that article as "the final number of rushing attempts will likely be similar ...", just like the Rotoworld headline writer did. They'll ignore that Ingram's role will likely allow him to smoke Thomas in fantasy points over the course of the season. All Jeff Duncan wrote is that Ingram and Thomas are sharing first-team reps in camp right now. That's no surprise, as Thomas' reps in the first week of camp were limited (no link) and now he needs the work.

Some things in Ingram's favor:

1) Ingram has the Saints' goal-line role right now. He also has the Saints' red-zone RB role right now -- IOW, they're not just going to wave Ingram in when the ball's inside the 3.

2) The Saints traded their best goal-line RB of the Payton era to the Dolphins. Yep, Reggie Bush actually was deadly and efficient inside the 5. Someone is getting some extra work to fill the gap, and it's going to be mostly Ingram.

3) The Saints RBs, combined, scored 28 rush/rcv TDs in 2008, and 26 in 2009. When the RB corps is not a MASH unit and Sean Payton can allocate the rush/pass percentages the way he prefers, there's plenty of opportunity for a RB to rack up TDs.

4) Pierre Thomas himself scored 12 TDs in 2008 (in 160 touches!) despite playing part time and sharing a backfield with two goal-line backs par excellence in Deuce McAllister and Reggie Bush.
I will preface this by saying I am in the camp that believes Ingram will do well and plan on drafting him if it works out.However, you use the phrase "right now" twice. When you use it for Pierre, you immediately follow it with your belief that it will change. When you use it for Mark, you immediately follow it with your belief that it won't. It's conjecture.

Regarding GL duty, you mention that Reggie was the best they had, but ouldn't the Reggie departure have been based more on Reggie's deficiency as a runner rather than Ingram's yet-to-be-proven GL prowess?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Doug B

Footballguy
However, you use the phrase "right now" twice. When you use it for Pierre, you immediately follow it with your belief that it will change. When you use it for Mark, you immediately follow it with your belief that it won't. It's conjecture.
All I was really getting at was that I don't believe the allocation of training camp reps are going to correlate with the allocation of regular-season touches.I did use "right now" twice, yes, but not to denote permanence in either situation. Once the regular season starts, if Ingram gets fumblitis or starts making a lot mental errors, then yes - of course he could lose workload.
 

Doug B

Footballguy
Regarding GL duty, you mention that Reggie was the best they had, but ouldn't the Reggie departure have been based more on Reggie's deficiency as a runner rather than Ingram's yet-to-be-proven GL prowess?
Didn't mean to imply that Ingram has self-evident abilities as a pro short-yardage that made Bush completely expendable in Sean Payton's eyes. Bush left primarily because of money, and almost certainly would have been gone even if the Saints had not drafted a RB (now, there's some conjecture :D ).What I was getting at, though, was that Bush's departure necessarily leaves open some inside-the-5 work for another back to pick up.
 

nysportsfan

Footballguy
'Anthony Borbely said:
I think people are grossly underestimating Ingram's talent.
Not sure if you can answer, but where would you take him? There's no way I take him 2nd, but 4th seems good value, IMO.
 

-jb-

Footballguy
'Anthony Borbely said:
I think people are grossly underestimating Ingram's talent.
Not sure if you can answer, but where would you take him? There's no way I take him 2nd, but 4th seems good value, IMO.
This is where I hope to get him, too. I'm essentially looking at the mid round RBs for some value. In my most competitive league, QBs go early, so I hope that provides me enough buffer to push him into the 4th. I would be happy with Javhid or Ingram, but am prepared to settle on a few others.
 

Faust

MVP
Another take on the Saints backfield situation:

Saints RB Thomas: Odd man out or committee approach in 2011?

The Saints' rushing attack is arguably the team's deepest area, although their WR corps may disagree. Once a fantasy darling, still a role model, veteran RB Pierre Thomas has shown us what hard work can accomplish as the team re-signed him to a four-year, $12 million contract. Many are happy for him; he did have an up-and-down offseason as injury concerns and the possibility of a trade have dogged him.

Thomas' 2010 season was a bust, as he played in only six games, rushing for 269 yards and only two touchdowns. However, he's an all-purpose back who added 29 receptions for 201 yards. Always a plus in point-per-reception (PPR) leagues.

After arthroscopic surgery on his left ankle, the team knew it would linger into the summer, excluding him from offseason activities. However, the lockout reduced his time missed.

The team also understands his value as Reggie Bush (now a Dolphin) and Chris Ivory could not pick up the load when Thomas went down. As a result, it signed him to a four-year deal that averages $2.8 million per year. Although it's a well-deserved contract, there was still speculation the team would trade him. The Saints claim they weren't shopping him, and that talk has died down. Thomas is now back, healthy, playing and ready to contribute despite this year's fantasy darling, Mark Ingram, having already been anointed featured-back status by many fantasy owners.

So where does Thomas fit, or what is his role? The team moved up to grab Ingram in the first round, and that alone says much about its expectations, leading many fantasy owners to believe he will be a featured back. You don't draft a running back in the first round to sit him and let him learn. The team also has Ivory, although he has his own slate of injuries — first, Lisfranc surgery and now a sports hernia that will take about three weeks to heal. We're nearing the end of the three-week rehab period, so keep an eye on how he performs. When the team signed Darren Sproles, it was understood he would fill the role Reggie Bush once had as a change-of-pace back.

Ingram has the talent and skills to become the primary back, but does that mean there's no room for Thomas? No! The team loves him, he is proven — their leading rusher in 2008 and 2009 — and they gave him a fair contract that was not backloaded and has incentives. More importantly, the Saints understand they need to have quality depth because although they are a pass-first team, they need a running back who can control the clock. Ingram and Thomas can do that. Ivory has the size, but you should view him more as a goal-line back.

Obviously, Ingram's the present and future, but he's a rookie who has to adapt to the NFL, a bigger and faster version of college. Specifically, he has to learn to pick up the blitz and show solid pass-blocking skills. According to a report, teammates say he's handling that, but let's not count on what teammates say. Colts RB Donald Brown's strength coming into the league was his pass-blocking ability, but the reality of the NFL had Brown struggling with that task. I'm not ready to say he's a solid pass blocker yet. I don't think the team will, either, at least not right away. This is a pass-first team, and head coach Sean Payton will not risk the engine that drives this team, QB Drew Brees, to unnecessary injury.

Both players have alternated their reps with the first team. Expect Payton to use a committee approach — to an extent — to keep both players healthy. Look for Thomas to be in pass-protection formations, which means he could vulture some of Darren Sproles' check-down passes. As an FYI, Sproles is a solid enough pass blocker, as I watched him extensively out here in San Diego, so I expect a few deception plays inside the 10 that utilizes Brees' arm to vulture a few touchdowns this year. Why? To the chagrin of LaDainian Tomlinson owners, the Chargers did that more than once with Sproles and QB Philip Rivers.

Per reports, Ingram outperformed Thomas in the first preseason game, but with 10 total rushing attempts between the two, right now it's much ado about nothing. As time goes on, many expect Ingram's talent to make him the featured back. I agree with that assessment, but don't look for that in 2011. I say this because of the rookie wall. The rookie wall is no joke and legit. Once Week 10 comes around, you begin to see rookies slowing down because they're just not used to a long season.

Ingram, per Pro Football Weekly's 2011 Draft Preview, is a solid back but is not a game-changing playmaker, nor does he show some of the skills of elite backs. Can this change? Sure, Emmitt Smith is a great example of exceeding expectations, but for this season, look for Ingram and Thomas to share the carries.

The Alabama Crimson Tide did not utilize Ingram much in the passing game. He has questionable hands and does not run sharp routes. Look for Sproles and, at times, Thomas in the backfield when it's a clear passing down. However, Ingram, who is short, compact and can move a pile, will make a great goal-line back. In 2009, the year he won the Heisman Trophy, 1,075 of his 1,992 yards came after contact. That ability creates a clear separation in value between the two. Sure, Thomas and Ivory will vulture some touchdowns, but I can't see the team not utilizing Ingram inside the five.

Look for a split of 60-40 in favor of Ingram, with Ivory and Sproles stealing a few attempts and receptions per game. View Ingram as a solid No. 2 fantasy back, with Thomas being the handcuff with No. 3 fantasy upside but more of an injury or bye-week fill-in. Sproles and Ivory are not worth roster spots outside the deepest leagues. They'll have their moments, but not that frequently.
 

krugoh

Footballguy
I like the 4th round value... unfortunately I don't have a 4th round pick due to a keeper.

That being said, I'm looking more along the lines of DeAngelo or a Boldin/Manningham/Maclin/Holmes WR in the 3rd... much better value IMO than Ingram here.

If he's available in the 5th, I'll do a happy dance and take him as my RB3 (Mendenhall and Bradshaw being 1 and 2 respectively).

 

Anthony Borbely

Footballguy
'Anthony Borbely said:
I think people are grossly underestimating Ingram's talent.
Not sure if you can answer, but where would you take him? There's no way I take him 2nd, but 4th seems good value, IMO.
Since I am very high on Ingram, I would absolutely take him in the 4th. It depends on how many touches you think he will get. I doubt Ingram goes in the 2nd in many drafts, but if I want him bad enough, I would not hesitate to take him in the 3rd. That is based in my belief that he gets a good 250 carries, a few receptions, and 10 TDs.
 

FreeBaGeL

Footballguy
Where are people getting the notion that Ingram is the sure-fire goaline back? Has that been the way it's worked in camp or has Payton said it or something?

It seems like Payton has never really used a goaline back. When he uses a committee he seems to pretty much do it without any change in things once you get inside the 10. If he does change RBs in there, it seems to be random, not always one guy. Mike Bell's specialty was supposed to be the goaline and he wasn't used in that way when you really look at it. Even in New York when he had an undersized RB (Tiki) and a big guy that seemed like he would be the obvious choice around the goaline (Dayne), he didn't use one over the other around the goaline.

It seems like people are talking about it as if it's a foregone conclusion that every time New Orleans gets inside the 10 Ingram will be coming into the game. What has there been to indicate that?

 

timschochet

Footballguy
Here's what I'm trying to figure out: my draft is this Sunday night. According to FBG, when the time comes for me to consider drafting Michael Turner sometime late in the 2nd round or early in the 3rd, I should take Ingram instead. And at this point I'm not sure why. Sure, Turner may have slowed down and Ingram is a young talent, but isn't Turner guaranteed to get 250-300 carries this year vs. we don't know how many for Ingram, but 250 is probably his ceiling?

This is not an argument on my part. I'd love to take Ingram in that situation. But I need convincing that it is the right choice.

 

saintfool

Dead sexy
Here's what I'm trying to figure out: my draft is this Sunday night. According to FBG, when the time comes for me to consider drafting Michael Turner sometime late in the 2nd round or early in the 3rd, I should take Ingram instead. And at this point I'm not sure why. Sure, Turner may have slowed down and Ingram is a young talent, but isn't Turner guaranteed to get 250-300 carries this year vs. we don't know how many for Ingram, but 250 is probably his ceiling? This is not an argument on my part. I'd love to take Ingram in that situation. But I need convincing that it is the right choice.
Turner might see fewer touches with Snelling and Rodgers there. Moreover, the chatter is about how ATL will be a more passing team with the addition of Jones. They didn't have the weapons last year, apparently.I make no claim about choosing Turner over Ingram.
 

Anthony Borbely

Footballguy
Here's what I'm trying to figure out: my draft is this Sunday night. According to FBG, when the time comes for me to consider drafting Michael Turner sometime late in the 2nd round or early in the 3rd, I should take Ingram instead. And at this point I'm not sure why. Sure, Turner may have slowed down and Ingram is a young talent, but isn't Turner guaranteed to get 250-300 carries this year vs. we don't know how many for Ingram, but 250 is probably his ceiling? This is not an argument on my part. I'd love to take Ingram in that situation. But I need convincing that it is the right choice.
I am as big on Ingram as anyone, but there is no way I would take him over Michael Turner.
 

Faust

MVP
Depth could make Saints' RBs better

If you go back and look at the film of New Orleans playing Houston in Saturdays preseason game, it quickly becomes apparent the Saints dont have a featured running back. They have three.

Rookie Mark Ingram, Pierre Thomas and Darren Sproles all got work with the first-team offense. Thats not some sort of competition or preseason experiment. The Saints are likely to use all three in a similar rotation during the regular season.

I think its a great trio, quarterback Drew Brees said. When you look at all their strengths and their abilities with the diverse group we have, its hard when you give a defense that 1-2-3 punch because all of them can do so many good things and youre able to rotate them and keep them fresh, and thats only going to help us and our offense and how complex were going to be and what were going to be with formations and personnel groups. Its really becomes a great weapon for us.

Although the trade of Reggie Bush made headlines, Ill make a case that the Saints are better off at running back now than at any time since the 2006 season. Thats the last real productive year the Saints had from Deuce McAllister before age and injuries caught up to the veteran. That also was Bushs rookie year, and he might have had his best season as he was used in tandem with McAllister.

Since then, the Saints have used a committee of running backs that has included the likes of Bush, Thomas, Mike Bell and Chris Ivory. Theyve won a lot of games, but the play of the running backs has been decent, not great.

With Ingram, Thomas and Sproles, things should change for the better. Ingram might be the most complete back the Saints have had since McAllister. At 5-foot-9, hes built low to the ground, but hes powerful. Hes also shown good speed and was able to catch the ball out of the backfield in college. That skill could be utilized even more in New Orleans offense.

But the Saints dont need Ingram to do everything. Thomas is similar in a lot of ways -- he can run inside and outside and catch passes. Thomas was limited to six games last season, but was the closest thing the Saints had to a consistent running threat in 2009 when he averaged 5.4 yards per carry.

Ingram and Thomas are likely to split most of the carries out of the backfield, but the Saints didnt go all out in recruiting the free-agent Sproles to have him come in and be a decoration. Hes going to be part of the backfield rotation with Ingram and Thomas.

Sproles will take on many of the roles Bush had. Hell be used as a change-of-pace back, often going in motion and being used as a receiver. Sproles has the same kind of dynamic speed Bush had, but he might be better in some ways. Bush had trouble staying healthy throughout his time in New Orleans.

In his past three seasons in San Diego, Sproles did not miss a game. He also handled return duties.

Tampa Bay (LeGarrette Blount), Atlanta (Michael Turner) and Carolina (DeAngelo Williams and Jonathan Stewart) might have better individual running backs than the Saints. But put Ingram, Thomas and Sproles together and the Saints have a triumvirate of running backs that could make their offense more complete than its been since the days when McAllister still was going strong.
 

Andrew Garda

Moderator
Here's what I'm trying to figure out: my draft is this Sunday night. According to FBG, when the time comes for me to consider drafting Michael Turner sometime late in the 2nd round or early in the 3rd, I should take Ingram instead. And at this point I'm not sure why. Sure, Turner may have slowed down and Ingram is a young talent, but isn't Turner guaranteed to get 250-300 carries this year vs. we don't know how many for Ingram, but 250 is probably his ceiling? This is not an argument on my part. I'd love to take Ingram in that situation. But I need convincing that it is the right choice.
I am as big on Ingram as anyone, but there is no way I would take him over Michael Turner.
Only one person on staff has him ranked like that in nonppr. A few more in PPR, which I don't but I can see where you might think he'll get catches where Turner won't.
 

Raiderfan32904

Footballguy
Here's what I'm trying to figure out: my draft is this Sunday night. According to FBG, when the time comes for me to consider drafting Michael Turner sometime late in the 2nd round or early in the 3rd, I should take Ingram instead. And at this point I'm not sure why. Sure, Turner may have slowed down and Ingram is a young talent, but isn't Turner guaranteed to get 250-300 carries this year vs. we don't know how many for Ingram, but 250 is probably his ceiling? This is not an argument on my part. I'd love to take Ingram in that situation. But I need convincing that it is the right choice.
Turner is a guy that has a lot of wear and tear on him, and I don't see him as a guaranteed 300 carry back anymore. Just not feeling it. Also, the Falcons will be shifting their focus to a pass oriented team with all their weapons they have provided Matt Ryan. If you are in the early 3rd, and staring at Turner or Ingram, flinch and pick DJAX or Brandon Lloyd. Save Ingram for your 4th round pick. Get as much value as possible by taking players at their cheapest.
 

LHUCKS

Footballguy
Another take on the Saints backfield situation:

Saints RB Thomas: Odd man out or committee approach in 2011?

Look for a split of 60-40 in favor of Ingram, with Ivory and Sproles stealing a few attempts and receptions per game. View Ingram as a solid No. 2 fantasy back, with Thomas being the handcuff with No. 3 fantasy upside but more of an injury or bye-week fill-in. Sproles and Ivory are not worth roster spots outside the deepest leagues. They'll have their moments, but not that frequently.
So then it's not really 60/40 then is it.
 

Doug B

Footballguy
When a source mentions Ivory stealing carries from anyone, I know they've not done their homework. Hard to steal carries from the PUP list.

...

LHUCKS, maybe Sproles is stealing his carries from the 40% side of the equation :D In any case, I don't think Ingram has to get 60% of the Saints' RB touches to be a legit fantasy RB2. FWIW, here are the RB touches and TDs breakdowns over all five seasons of the Payton era:

Code:
2010...RushAtt.Rcptns.Touches.TDs ------.-------.------.-------.--- RB.........351....111.....462..10 Others......29....339.....368..32 ------.-------.------.-------.--- ...........380....450.....830..42  .... 2009...RushAtt.Rcptns.Touches.TDs ------.-------.------.-------.--- RB.........431....107.....538..26 Others......37....271.....308..29 ------.-------.------.-------.--- ...........468....378.....846..55  .... 2008...RushAtt.Rcptns.Touches.TDs ------.-------.------.-------.--- RB.........371....122.....493..28 Others......27....291.....318..26 ------.-------.------.-------.--- ...........398....413.....811..54  .... 2007...RushAtt.Rcptns.Touches.TDs ------.-------.------.-------.--- RB.........359....143.....502..15 Others......33....297.....330..27 ------.-------.------.-------.--- ...........392....440.....832..42  .... 2006...RushAtt.Rcptns.Touches.TDs ------.-------.------.-------.--- RB.........427....158.....585..23 Others......45....214.....259..23 ------.-------.------.-------.--- ...........472....372.....844..46[font="Arial"]
 
Last edited by a moderator:

LHUCKS

Footballguy
When a source mentions Ivory stealing carries from anyone, I know they've not done their homework. Hard to steal carries from the PUP list.

...

LHUCKS, maybe Sproles is stealing his carries from the 40% side of the equation :D In any case, I don't think Ingram has to get 60% of the Saints' RB touches to be a legit fantasy RB2.
When I draft fantasy RB#2s I want them to have RB#1 upside...that's my issue with Ingram.My summarized Ingram concerns are the following:

1) limited upside due to committee approach, and lack of receptions/receiving yardage

2) Dependence on high volume of TDs

3) Rookie fatigue

You may disagree with these arguments/concerns, but it appears those that are reaching on Ingram in the 2nd and 3rd rounds are not seeing the above. I personally don't have a problem with taking a shot on him in the 5th.(depending on the format)

 

Doug B

Footballguy
When I draft fantasy RB#2s I want them to have RB#1 upside...that's my issue with Ingram.
I think he's got clear RB1 upside. If he actually gets to the point where he regularly gets 60% of the RB touches, he'd be producing at something like #8-10 fantasy RB. Admittedly, this depends on the team having a 2006- or 2009-type season, where the RBs get more than 5 touches for every 3 the rest of the offense gets. But I think that's the ratio Payton is trying to get back to_On top of that: I realize that not everyone does injury projections, but I also have a lot of concerns about Thomas and Ivory (when he returns) holding up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

NeverEnough

Footballguy
I took Ingram in the 2nd in 1 of my dynasty leagues. Yes, I may have reached, but it is dynasty & I am very high on him.

 

Sigmund Bloom

Footballguy
Staff member
When I draft fantasy RB#2s I want them to have RB#1 upside...that's my issue with Ingram.
I think he's got clear RB1 upside. If he actually gets to the point where he regularly gets 60% of the RB touches, he'd be producing at something like #8-10 fantasy RB. Admittedly, this depends on the team having a 2006- or 2009-type season, where the RBs get more than 5 touches for every 3 the rest of the offense gets. But I think that's the ratio Payton is trying to get back to_On top of that: I realize that not everyone does injury projections, but I also have a lot of concerns about Thomas and Ivory (when he returns) holding up.
:goodposting: my thoughts exactly, if anything Im willing to reach for Ingram as my RB2 precisely because he has RB1 upside. Talent + situation + opportunity is all there for him. Saints backfield has been a goldmine in recent years without anyone of Ingram's caliber. could be a "fasten your seatbelts" situation.
 

ThePittbully

Footballguy
These arguments have already been presented and have been refuted. The only one that has any truth to it is that Payton likes to play matchups, but I seriously doubt that means Ingram won't be a major weapon every week. As far as the blocking goes Ingram has been excellent so far

 

Faust

MVP
Saints Training Camp: Oxnard Day Two

Excerpt:

Today, we have a lot of tweets, but definitely a lot of links and videos for you twitter haters out there (I'm looking at you cscmember). Not much news to report outside of Mark Ingram and Carl Nicks missing practice. Nicks looked fine and didn't have a limp, while Ingram wasn't on the scene at all.

Some news that may please the Pierre Thomas lovers, he's getting some looks during camp. The media covering Training Camp have said Pierre has been running hard and really running with a purpose out there. He's trying to show the team he was worth that contract he signed, and really trying to keep his starter position against Mark Ingram. This is good news for Saints fans.
I am very bullish on Mark Ingram's talent, situation, and work ethic but also want to temper my enthusiasm, as I know that Thomas will also work hard to carve out a role and Sproles will see a significant number of the RB receptions this year (assuming all 3 stay healthy).

 

Clifford

Footballguy
Now it the time to buy low. I saw some of his runs against Chicago and he was running really hard. I think the Saints will start to feature him more as the season goes on.

 

AmosMoses

Footballguy
Looking more and more like this guy was right. Leopards don't change their spots overnight.
Saints played arguably the 2 best defenses in the league. Let's wait until they play some average ones before we start to come to a conclusion.
 

Short Corner

Footballguy
Looking more and more like this guy was right. Leopards don't change their spots overnight.
Saints played arguably the 2 best defenses in the league. Let's wait until they play some average ones before we start to come to a conclusion.
Or until they trust in him in obvious passing situations. Pretty much every time he is in the game they are going off tackle or inside trap. Until he improves pass pro he is a marginal RB3
 
Looking more and more like this guy was right. Leopards don't change their spots overnight.
Saints played arguably the 2 best defenses in the league. Let's wait until they play some average ones before we start to come to a conclusion.
They were up a ton on CHI, that usually is where a 'bell cow'/innateley talented gets tons of touches to grind out the game. But instead it was more of the same 3 headed monster.Piere thomas is avg'ing 5.1 a carry and has taken 14 rushes through 2 weeks.Add to that Sproles getting as many snaps as he is, gonna be really hard to approach the numbers of carries that were tossed around this thread.(sproles has 19 targets through 2 weeks) Someone with a proffotballfocus acct might chime in on snaps, but it doesn't seem likely.Ingram is getting the majority of the carries, but once again I don't remember AP splitting this much time his rookie year. I think this is based more on Peytons schemes than Ingrams lack of talent.FWIW I drafted Ingram in a keeper league (where I also just lost JC for the yr) , so it's not like I am just jumping on him, but I am considering trading him if he has a 'breakout game'. I want this to be wrong, I just don't think it is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Truman

Footballguy
Looking more and more like this guy was right. Leopards don't change their spots overnight.
Saints played arguably the 2 best defenses in the league. Let's wait until they play some average ones before we start to come to a conclusion.
They were up a ton on CHI, that usually is where a 'bell cow'/innateley talented gets tons of touches to grind out the game. But instead it was more of the same 3 headed monster.Piere thomas is avg'ing 5.1 a carry and has taken 14 rushes through 2 weeks.

Add to that Sproles getting as many snaps as he is, gonna be really hard to approach the numbers of carries that were tossed around this thread.

(sproles has 19 targets through 2 weeks) Someone with a proffotballfocus acct might chime in on snaps, but it doesn't seem likely.

Ingram is getting the majority of the carries, but once again I don't remember AP splitting this much time his rookie year. I think this is based more on Peytons schemes than Ingrams lack of talent.

FWIW I drafted Ingram in a keeper league (where I also just lost JC for the yr) , so it's not like I am just jumping on him, but I am considering trading him if he has a 'breakout game'. I want this to be wrong, I just don't think it is.
Peterson spent a lot of time backing up Chester Taylor as a rookie.
 

packersfan

Footballguy
I like Ingram a lot but if people drafted him thinking he was the next Adrian Peterson I'd say their evaluation process needs some refining.

 

SproutDaddy

Footballguy

Short Corner

Footballguy
Looking more and more like this guy was right. Leopards don't change their spots overnight.
I guess people forget how McFadden looked his first 2 years in the league.
Pretty sure the article that the thread is about made the statement about THIS season. I will keep that in mind for my 2013 redrafts though.
Thanks for pointing that out. :sarcasm:You're missing the point here.
Pretty sure you are the one missing the point. There is another thread about his long term value. This one is about his value THIS season.
 

SproutDaddy

Footballguy
Looking more and more like this guy was right. Leopards don't change their spots overnight.
I guess people forget how McFadden looked his first 2 years in the league.
Pretty sure the article that the thread is about made the statement about THIS season. I will keep that in mind for my 2013 redrafts though.
Thanks for pointing that out. :sarcasm:You're missing the point here.
Pretty sure you are the one missing the point. There is another thread about his long term value. This one is about his value THIS season.
Ooof. I guess i have to spell it out for you. Mcfadden was a non factor for 2 years. Then miraculously overnight he became a stud. Get it? It has nothing to do with dynasty. He could break out for 100 yard next week or 2 years from now.......or never. My point is things pretty much changed overnight.Carry on
 

nysportsfan

Footballguy
I think people are grossly underestimating Ingram's talent.
Not sure if you can answer, but where would you take him? There's no way I take him 2nd, but 4th seems good value, IMO.
Since I am very high on Ingram, I would absolutely take him in the 4th. It depends on how many touches you think he will get. I doubt Ingram goes in the 2nd in many drafts, but if I want him bad enough, I would not hesitate to take him in the 3rd. That is based in my belief that he gets a good 250 carries, a few receptions, and 10 TDs.
I know it's early, but I grabbed him round 4 and feel a bit down at the moment. I think he's faced a tough couple defenses but do we think he is really going to hit the 250 carry mark? I'm thinking 700/6, whereas I thought 1000/9 might be realistic. The kid is very good, but I'm losing a bit of faith here.
 

Doug B

Footballguy
I know it's early, but I grabbed him round 4 and feel a bit down at the moment. I think he's faced a tough couple defenses but do we think he is really going to hit the 250 carry mark?
Probably not 250 unless there's wholesale injuries ahead of him. However, Ingram is on pace for 216 carries. For comparison, Adrian Peterson had 238 as a rookie.
I'm thinking 700/6, whereas I thought 1000/9 might be realistic. The kid is very good, but I'm losing a bit of faith here.
I think Ingram can STILL get 1000/9 if you count yards from scrimmage. Not that he's catching passes yet, but Ingram should get some over the course of the season.
 
'Truman said:
'Hipple said:
'AmosMoses said:
'Hipple said:
Looking more and more like this guy was right. Leopards don't change their spots overnight.
Saints played arguably the 2 best defenses in the league. Let's wait until they play some average ones before we start to come to a conclusion.
They were up a ton on CHI, that usually is where a 'bell cow'/innateley talented gets tons of touches to grind out the game. But instead it was more of the same 3 headed monster.Piere thomas is avg'ing 5.1 a carry and has taken 14 rushes through 2 weeks.

Add to that Sproles getting as many snaps as he is, gonna be really hard to approach the numbers of carries that were tossed around this thread.

(sproles has 19 targets through 2 weeks) Someone with a proffotballfocus acct might chime in on snaps, but it doesn't seem likely.

Ingram is getting the majority of the carries, but once again I don't remember AP splitting this much time his rookie year. I think this is based more on Peytons schemes than Ingrams lack of talent.

FWIW I drafted Ingram in a keeper league (where I also just lost JC for the yr) , so it's not like I am just jumping on him, but I am considering trading him if he has a 'breakout game'. I want this to be wrong, I just don't think it is.
Peterson spent a lot of time backing up Chester Taylor as a rookie.
He had a bit of a split (65/35 iirc ), but nothing like this three headed monster.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top