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

[Anthony Borbely]

The Saints gave up quite a bit to move up in the draft to select Ingram. I don't think they would have done that for a RBBC back...especially with them having so many needs on defense. He may not play many 3rd downs with Sproles there (I do think there will be 3rd downs with both Ingram and Sproles), but he is almost a lock to be the goal line RB. One more things that I don't recall seeing is that the Saints need a RB to put teams away late in games so they don't have to pass as much and thus risk a clock-stopping incompletion.

I think 250 carries is his floor to be honest.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

It's subscriber content, but in the Mark Ingram Spotlight, Jason Wood presents an excellent article debunking a couple of the KFFL claims. Wood states 1) that Sean Payton has run RBBC recently not out of philosophy, but out of necessity, between injuries and never having had a back of Ingram's talent; and 2) that the NO offense is not too pass happy to have a workhorse RB, and that the coaching staff has realized NO has had the best team results (a Super Bowl win and a NFC Championship Game loss) when the team has had a more balanced offensive attack than when they've been more pass-oriented.

Not that I disagree, but I don't see how this "debunks" anything.The idea that Payton has only used RBBC out of necessity is just as much a guess as the idea that he uses it because he thinks it's a great philosophy.Likewise, the idea that he'll come out running more is just as much speculation as the idea that they'll keep passing as much as they did last year. Sure, they won the Super Bowl when they ran more. *Most* Super Bowl winning teams have good run/pass balance, and most teams have more success when they run more. Every team is aware of this, and every team says they want to run more. Yet every team still doesn't just run the ball on every play. It's often just as much effect as it is cause (more leads = more running late in the game = stats look like you're running more) and it's also dictated by how much your defense allows you to do it. Remeber, the *only* year that the Saints defense has been fantasy relevant was the year that they won the Super Bowl. It's no coincidence that was the same year they ran more often. Their defense gave them that option.Getting back to the RBBC thing. You don't have to have a dominant or even workhorse type back to run a workhorse in your system. Ryan Grant is not a special back. Willie Parker was not a workhorse type back. There are plenty of mediocre running backs that carry the load because that's the way their coach prefers to run the offense. This idea that Payton has always wanted a guy to give the ball to 350 times and just hasn't had a guy that's been able to step up and do it is completely concocted out of thin air. It may end up being true, but right now it's just a guess.When Payton was the OC for the Giants Tiki Barber got 42%, 62%, and 39% of the team's carries in those three seasons. For 2004-2006, with Payton gone, he got 76%, 76%, and 72% of the team's carries. For all we know, had Payton stayed in New York Tiki might have continued with a smaller percentage of the carries and we'd all be sitting here saying that Payton never had a guy who should be the workhorse back and using Tiki as one of those examples.I'm not saying that Ingram won't be a workhorse and that New Orleans won't run more. It certainly seems possible and logically, it even makes sense. But let's stop pretending that this is some obvious thing as if we were having dinner with Sean Payton last night and he told us these things straight up. Let's call it like it is. It's a guess.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Don't forget that the Saints were 23rd in turnover differential last year and below average against the run. With Franklin, Rogers, Jordan and improved OLBs, expect both of those numbers to improve in 2011. That should mean significantly fewer passes for Brees, and more rush attempts for the offense.

Now maybe Ingram doesn't steal all the carries. It's possible that Thomas, Ivory or Bell eats into his carry total, or Sproles ends up being more than just a COP back. But Saints RBs were 5th in carries and 6th in rushing yards in 2009; the pie is there for Ingram, and I think he'll end up taking however large a slice he can stomach. So I think it ultimately comes down to how you view Ingram's ability. If you think he's a future star, 275+ carries is a legitimate projection. If you think he's just an average rookie RB, I can see projecting him with under 200 carries.

 

[TheFanatic]

Ingram could be good and maybe I'll take him as an RB2. But when I see all but a few FBGs ranking him ten, twenty, thirty spots ahead of backs who are locks for 270+ touches I don't see value.

How many RB's are locks for 270 touches? Not many, and the number seems to go down every year...

 

[32 Counter Pass]

It's a ridiculous theory. You could hardly have picked a better situation in the entire league for Ingram than the saints.

I too am on the Engram band wagon, but I can't help but think back to this exact same talk about Ryan Mathews last season and how he couldn't have landed in a better situation.

And if Mathews had stayed healthy, we'd be discussing him among in the first two rounds this year.

And if monkeys had wings they could fly.

Not every animal with wings can fly. Bloom's point is that you poster used a really poor example.

FixedAnd my point was that Mathews has yet to prove he is durable. I am sure Bloom violated some law of logic with his statement but I am too lazy to research it.

Carry on.

 

[eoMMan]

It's subscriber content, but in the Mark Ingram Spotlight, Jason Wood presents an excellent article debunking a couple of the KFFL claims. Wood states 1) that Sean Payton has run RBBC recently not out of philosophy, but out of necessity, between injuries and never having had a back of Ingram's talent; and 2) that the NO offense is not too pass happy to have a workhorse RB, and that the coaching staff has realized NO has had the best team results (a Super Bowl win and a NFC Championship Game loss) when the team has had a more balanced offensive attack than when they've been more pass-oriented.

Not that I disagree, but I don't see how this "debunks" anything.The idea that Payton has only used RBBC out of necessity is just as much a guess as the idea that he uses it because he thinks it's a great philosophy.Likewise, the idea that he'll come out running more is just as much speculation as the idea that they'll keep passing as much as they did last year. Sure, they won the Super Bowl when they ran more. *Most* Super Bowl winning teams have good run/pass balance, and most teams have more success when they run more. Every team is aware of this, and every team says they want to run more. Yet every team still doesn't just run the ball on every play. It's often just as much effect as it is cause (more leads = more running late in the game = stats look like you're running more) and it's also dictated by how much your defense allows you to do it. Remeber, the *only* year that the Saints defense has been fantasy relevant was the year that they won the Super Bowl. It's no coincidence that was the same year they ran more often. Their defense gave them that option.Getting back to the RBBC thing. You don't have to have a dominant or even workhorse type back to run a workhorse in your system. Ryan Grant is not a special back. Willie Parker was not a workhorse type back. There are plenty of mediocre running backs that carry the load because that's the way their coach prefers to run the offense. This idea that Payton has always wanted a guy to give the ball to 350 times and just hasn't had a guy that's been able to step up and do it is completely concocted out of thin air. It may end up being true, but right now it's just a guess.When Payton was the OC for the Giants Tiki Barber got 42%, 62%, and 39% of the team's carries in those three seasons. For 2004-2006, with Payton gone, he got 76%, 76%, and 72% of the team's carries. For all we know, had Payton stayed in New York Tiki might have continued with a smaller percentage of the carries and we'd all be sitting here saying that Payton never had a guy who should be the workhorse back and using Tiki as one of those examples.I'm not saying that Ingram won't be a workhorse and that New Orleans won't run more. It certainly seems possible and logically, it even makes sense. But let's stop pretending that this is some obvious thing as if we were having dinner with Sean Payton last night and he told us these things straight up. Let's call it like it is. It's a guess.

Missed out on Ingram, huh?It's not just a guess that Ingram will be heavily involved in this offense. You don't move up to draft a player just to have him in some RBBC. If Payton thought RBBC was a great philosphy, they would have used that pick elsewhere and signed someone like McGahee, Bradshaw, Ronnie Brown, etc.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Missed out on Ingram, huh?

The opposite, in fact.One of my leagues does a slow draft on the forums so we started early, back before all the Ingram hype really started to pick up. I employed the "Julius Jones draft" or sorts, only with Ingram. I drafted him as my RB1 in round 5.I *think* that Payton will use Ingram as a bellcow this year. But that doesn't mean that I'm going to be unrealistic about it like so many here. It is FAR from a guarantee, and is more of a toss-up. All of the theories that point to it are just that, theories, based on nothing more than speculation and stuff that makes logical sense in our heads (which as any worthwhile FF player knows, leads to the exact opposite just as often as it leads to what it's pointing to).Ingram is worth the risk of a 50/50 shot of him being the bellcow because if he is, then you've just gotten yourself a top 5 RB at a bargain price, and if he's not then you still got an adequate producer. But it's still a 50/50 shot. New Orleans' defense is unlikely to be as good as they were in their Super Bowl year and unlikely to be nursing many big 4th quarter leads. Payton has had stud running backs before and not used them as bell cows. Even last season, while Chris Ivory is no stud he averaged 5.2ypc while Julius Jones averaged 3.7ypc and Jones still ate into Ivory's carries.

It's not just a guess that Ingram will be heavily involved in this offense. You don't move up to draft a player just to have him in some RBBC. If Payton thought RBBC was a great philosphy, they would have used that pick elsewhere and signed someone like McGahee, Bradshaw, Ronnie Brown, etc.

Sure they do, it happens plenty nowadays.Carolina drafted Jonathan Stewart with the 13th overall pick and stuck him straight into a RBBC. The Texans traded up for Ben Tate and he wouldn't have been the workhorse even had he not gotten hurt. Beanie Wells, Felix Jones, CJ Spiller, Donald Brown, and plenty of others were 1st round selections that didn't even come close to being "workhorses" right out of the gates. Even Ryan Matthews, who people like to throw out because he got hurt, still only got 62% of the carries when he was healthy (which ironically, is the most Payton has ever given a running back), and that was with supposedly the biggest supporter of workhorse backs in the league as his coach. DeAngelo Williams just signed a huge contract to be a RBBC back. While Bradshaw's wasn't nearly as huge, it was still a lot of money as well...to be in a RBBC.This discussion isn't about Ingram being "involved" in the offense. It's about him being the workhorse, the bellcow. Just because a team drafts a RB early or trades up to get him doesn't mean they intend to make him a 350 carry guy in year 1. In fact, it rarely means that, and the numbers back that up."Arizona didn't draft Beanie Wells in the 1st round to share carries with Tim Hightower this year"."Dallas didn't draft Felix Jones in the 1st round to be a CoP back this year".Heck, Sean Payton HIMSELF has had two 1st round running backs before and stuck both of them straight into a RBBC. Sure, Bush doesn't really count because of the type of player he is, but Ron Dayne was selected 11th overall in 2000, presumably to be the workhorse, and Payton gave him 228 and 180 carries his first two years.The bottom line is that people here are going way overboard by acting like anyone that doesn't think Ingram will be a sure-fire, workhorse, 350 carry back this year are just too guppy to see the writing on the wall. The reality is that they're just as big of guppies for believing it's a sure thing because they're not paying attention to the fact that we, not Sean Payton, are the ones writing it.

 

[TheFanatic]

It's not just a guess that Ingram will be heavily involved in this offense. You don't move up to draft a player just to have him in some RBBC. If Payton thought RBBC was a great philosphy, they would have used that pick elsewhere and signed someone like McGahee, Bradshaw, Ronnie Brown, etc.

Sure they do, it happens plenty nowadays.Carolina drafted Jonathan Stewart with the 13th overall pick and stuck him straight into a RBBC. The Texans traded up for Ben Tate and he wouldn't have been the workhorse even had he not gotten hurt. Beanie Wells, Felix Jones, CJ Spiller, Donald Brown, and plenty of others were 1st round selections that didn't even come close to being "workhorses" right out of the gates. Even Ryan Matthews, who people like to throw out because he got hurt, still only got 62% of the carries when he was healthy (which ironically, is the most Payton has ever given a running back), and that was with supposedly the biggest supporter of workhorse backs in the league as his coach.

This is an excellent point. I've said many times that people don't move up/pick a guy that high to throw into a RBBC. I'm wrong on that front. It happens a lot.

 

[Doug B]

New Orleans' defense is unlikely to be as good as they were in their Super Bowl year and unlikely to be nursing many big 4th quarter leads.

The Saints' defense was statistically better in 2010 than in 2009 -- and they've upgraded their front seven a good bit going into this season.

 

[Jason Wood]

Ingram could be good and maybe I'll take him as an RB2. But when I see all but a few FBGs ranking him ten, twenty, thirty spots ahead of backs who are locks for 270+ touches I don't see value.

If anybody's cheatsheet has Ingram 20 to 30 spots ahead of backs that you view as a lock for 270+ touches this year then your projections are a Only 16 RB's had 270+ touches last year.

Do you think Ingram should be 30+ spots above Blount, for instance?I respect FBG projections (obv.) but they get a little frothy over rookie RBs every year.

As the guy who just wrote a huge defense of Ingram AND one of the peeps who does site projections, I'm not sure where you get this from.I currently have Blount and Ingram right next to each other in my rankings and projections (RB15 and RB16).

 

[gianmarco]

Missed out on Ingram, huh?

The opposite, in fact.One of my leagues does a slow draft on the forums so we started early, back before all the Ingram hype really started to pick up. I employed the "Julius Jones draft" or sorts, only with Ingram. I drafted him as my RB1 in round 5.I *think* that Payton will use Ingram as a bellcow this year. But that doesn't mean that I'm going to be unrealistic about it like so many here. It is FAR from a guarantee, and is more of a toss-up. All of the theories that point to it are just that, theories, based on nothing more than speculation and stuff that makes logical sense in our heads (which as any worthwhile FF player knows, leads to the exact opposite just as often as it leads to what it's pointing to).Ingram is worth the risk of a 50/50 shot of him being the bellcow because if he is, then you've just gotten yourself a top 5 RB at a bargain price, and if he's not then you still got an adequate producer. But it's still a 50/50 shot. New Orleans' defense is unlikely to be as good as they were in their Super Bowl year and unlikely to be nursing many big 4th quarter leads. Payton has had stud running backs before and not used them as bell cows. Even last season, while Chris Ivory is no stud he averaged 5.2ypc while Julius Jones averaged 3.7ypc and Jones still ate into Ivory's carries.

It's not just a guess that Ingram will be heavily involved in this offense. You don't move up to draft a player just to have him in some RBBC. If Payton thought RBBC was a great philosphy, they would have used that pick elsewhere and signed someone like McGahee, Bradshaw, Ronnie Brown, etc.

Sure they do, it happens plenty nowadays.Carolina drafted Jonathan Stewart with the 13th overall pick and stuck him straight into a RBBC. The Texans traded up for Ben Tate and he wouldn't have been the workhorse even had he not gotten hurt. Beanie Wells, Felix Jones, CJ Spiller, Donald Brown, and plenty of others were 1st round selections that didn't even come close to being "workhorses" right out of the gates. Even Ryan Matthews, who people like to throw out because he got hurt, still only got 62% of the carries when he was healthy (which ironically, is the most Payton has ever given a running back), and that was with supposedly the biggest supporter of workhorse backs in the league as his coach. DeAngelo Williams just signed a huge contract to be a RBBC back. While Bradshaw's wasn't nearly as huge, it was still a lot of money as well...to be in a RBBC.This discussion isn't about Ingram being "involved" in the offense. It's about him being the workhorse, the bellcow. Just because a team drafts a RB early or trades up to get him doesn't mean they intend to make him a 350 carry guy in year 1. In fact, it rarely means that, and the numbers back that up."Arizona didn't draft Beanie Wells in the 1st round to share carries with Tim Hightower this year"."Dallas didn't draft Felix Jones in the 1st round to be a CoP back this year".Heck, Sean Payton HIMSELF has had two 1st round running backs before and stuck both of them straight into a RBBC. Sure, Bush doesn't really count because of the type of player he is, but Ron Dayne was selected 11th overall in 2000, presumably to be the workhorse, and Payton gave him 228 and 180 carries his first two years.The bottom line is that people here are going way overboard by acting like anyone that doesn't think Ingram will be a sure-fire, workhorse, 350 carry back this year are just too guppy to see the writing on the wall. The reality is that they're just as big of guppies for believing it's a sure thing because they're not paying attention to the fact that we, not Sean Payton, are the ones writing it.

Couldn't agree any more. This post and the one above. This idea that teams who "move up" for a player and intend to use them to their fullest extent is the most incorrect and oft-repeated ideas here. Teams "move up" all throughout the draft. It does not mean every time they do so it's because they are going to stick that rookie in as a full-time guy.

 

[drater]

New Orleans' defense is unlikely to be as good as they were in their Super Bowl year and unlikely to be nursing many big 4th quarter leads.

The Saints' defense was statistically better in 2010 than in 2009 -- and they've upgraded their front seven a good bit going into this season.

Defensive line should challenge for best in the league, health permitting. If anything, there should be more "4 minute back" carries to go around this year than in previous NO era Peyton seasons. Not even going to throw out a guess at how they'll be split up. Just did a quick look and in 5/7 dynasty leagues, I have multiple Saints RB, and one in the other two. None of them are Ingram but if I'd been blessed with any top 2 picks, I'd have grabbed him. The shark move for 2011 might just be grab Ingram at his ADP and handcuff him with one of Sproles/Thomas/Ivory late.

 

[Tau837]

It's not just a guess that Ingram will be heavily involved in this offense. You don't move up to draft a player just to have him in some RBBC. If Payton thought RBBC was a great philosphy, they would have used that pick elsewhere and signed someone like McGahee, Bradshaw, Ronnie Brown, etc.

Sure they do, it happens plenty nowadays.Carolina drafted Jonathan Stewart with the 13th overall pick and stuck him straight into a RBBC. The Texans traded up for Ben Tate and he wouldn't have been the workhorse even had he not gotten hurt. Beanie Wells, Felix Jones, CJ Spiller, Donald Brown, and plenty of others were 1st round selections that didn't even come close to being "workhorses" right out of the gates. Even Ryan Matthews, who people like to throw out because he got hurt, still only got 62% of the carries when he was healthy (which ironically, is the most Payton has ever given a running back), and that was with supposedly the biggest supporter of workhorse backs in the league as his coach. DeAngelo Williams just signed a huge contract to be a RBBC back. While Bradshaw's wasn't nearly as huge, it was still a lot of money as well...to be in a RBBC.

Small nitpick. The bolded is incorrect. Mathews sustained a high ankle sprain late in the first quarter of game 2 last year, and he wasn't fully healthy the rest of the season. Up until that point, he had 25 carries, and other Chargers RBs had 8. That's 76%.

 

[Tau837]

Don't forget that the Saints were 23rd in turnover differential last year and below average against the run. With Franklin, Rogers, Jordan and improved OLBs, expect both of those numbers to improve in 2011. That should mean significantly fewer passes for Brees, and more rush attempts for the offense.

Now maybe Ingram doesn't steal all the carries. It's possible that Thomas, Ivory or Bell eats into his carry total, or Sproles ends up being more than just a COP back. But Saints RBs were 5th in carries and 6th in rushing yards in 2009; the pie is there for Ingram, and I think he'll end up taking however large a slice he can stomach. So I think it ultimately comes down to how you view Ingram's ability. If you think he's a future star, 275+ carries is a legitimate projection. If you think he's just an average rookie RB, I can see projecting him with under 200 carries.

Good info here.

 

[Andrew Garda]

One thing to consider - how bad off is Marques Colston? Will Graham recapture what he had last year? Can Sproles fill that scatback role Bush used to excel at?

The passing offense might not be as solid as it has in the past.

Just something to factor in....

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

Do you think Ingram should be 30+ spots above Blount, for instance?I respect FBG projections (obv.) but they get a little frothy over rookie RBs every year.

As the guy who just wrote a huge defense of Ingram AND one of the peeps who does site projections, I'm not sure where you get this from.I currently have Blount and Ingram right next to each other in my rankings and projections (RB15 and RB16).

I'm looking at "Redraft Overall Ranking" individual Top 60s or whatever.My point is not to argue with rankings, anyway. If I didn't detect any "blind spots" in FBG rankings they wouldn't help me fix my own blind spots in other areas of the draft. They are quite useful to me. But it's a highly subjective business after all.And I'll probably draft Ingram at some point anyway.

 

[FantasyTrader]

This discussion isn't about Ingram being "involved" in the offense. It's about him being the workhorse, the bellcow. Just because a team drafts a RB early or trades up to get him doesn't mean they intend to make him a 350 carry guy in year 1. In fact, it rarely means that, and the numbers back that up."Arizona didn't draft Beanie Wells in the 1st round to share carries with Tim Hightower this year"."Dallas didn't draft Felix Jones in the 1st round to be a CoP back this year".Heck, Sean Payton HIMSELF has had two 1st round running backs before and stuck both of them straight into a RBBC. Sure, Bush doesn't really count because of the type of player he is, but Ron Dayne was selected 11th overall in 2000, presumably to be the workhorse, and Payton gave him 228 and 180 carries his first two years.The bottom line is that people here are going way overboard by acting like anyone that doesn't think Ingram will be a sure-fire, workhorse, 350 carry back this year are just too guppy to see the writing on the wall. The reality is that they're just as big of guppies for believing it's a sure thing because they're not paying attention to the fact that we, not Sean Payton, are the ones writing it.

Whoa! How did we get up to 350 carries?! All I've seen the vast majority of us on the Ingram bandwagon saying in here is that KFFL's assertion of 170 carries is out of whack. That it should be more along the lines of 250. I think you're putting words in the mouth of the pro-Ingram crowd to support your argument here. Though I'll admit, you provided a great counter-point.

 

[eoMMan]

Carolina drafted Jonathan Stewart with the 13th overall pick and stuck him straight into a RBBC. The Texans traded up for Ben Tate and he wouldn't have been the workhorse even had he not gotten hurt. Beanie Wells, Felix Jones, CJ Spiller, Donald Brown, and plenty of others were 1st round selections that didn't even come close to being "workhorses" right out of the gates. Even Ryan Matthews, who people like to throw out because he got hurt, still only got 62% of the carries when he was healthy (which ironically, is the most Payton has ever given a running back), and that was with supposedly the biggest supporter of workhorse backs in the league as his coach. DeAngelo Williams just signed a huge contract to be a RBBC back. While Bradshaw's wasn't nearly as huge, it was still a lot of money as well...to be in a RBBC.

To be fair though, Stewart was sharing carries with another 1st round pick, DeAngelo Williams, in a very run heavy offense. It wasn't like he was sharing carries with some Joe Schmoe. A lot of your other examples have shown they can't really stay healthy to handle workhorse type carries and maybe the coaches saw that. That, or maybe they just weren't good enough to handle the whole load and the coaches saw that too.

 

[FantasyTrader]

Carolina drafted Jonathan Stewart with the 13th overall pick and stuck him straight into a RBBC. The Texans traded up for Ben Tate and he wouldn't have been the workhorse even had he not gotten hurt. Beanie Wells, Felix Jones, CJ Spiller, Donald Brown, and plenty of others were 1st round selections that didn't even come close to being "workhorses" right out of the gates. Even Ryan Matthews, who people like to throw out because he got hurt, still only got 62% of the carries when he was healthy (which ironically, is the most Payton has ever given a running back), and that was with supposedly the biggest supporter of workhorse backs in the league as his coach. DeAngelo Williams just signed a huge contract to be a RBBC back. While Bradshaw's wasn't nearly as huge, it was still a lot of money as well...to be in a RBBC.

To be fair though, Stewart was sharing carries with another 1st round pick, DeAngelo Williams, in a very run heavy offense. It wasn't like he was sharing carries with some Joe Schmoe. A lot of your other examples have shown they can't really stay healthy to handle workhorse type carries and maybe the coaches saw that. That, or maybe they just weren't good enough to handle the whole load and the coaches saw that too.

I remember when Stewart was drafted. He wasn't drafted to be a 1b in RBBC. DeAngelo had major issues with staying off the IR and was, himslef, in a timeshare with DeShaun Foster. When the Panthers drafted Stewart they had begun to sour on DeAngelo. A lot of this also depends on the health of Pierre Thomas. IMO, that's the major reason Ingram was drafted is because all trust for Pierre is gone. Now if Thomas comes out running like a demon beast (ala DeAngelo v.2008) that WILL eat into Ingram's role, but it won't change the reason he was drafted.

 

[Short Corner]

It's not just a guess that Ingram will be heavily involved in this offense. You don't move up to draft a player just to have him in some RBBC. If Payton thought RBBC was a great philosphy, they would have used that pick elsewhere and signed someone like McGahee, Bradshaw, Ronnie Brown, etc.

Sure they do, it happens plenty nowadays.Carolina drafted Jonathan Stewart with the 13th overall pick and stuck him straight into a RBBC. The Texans traded up for Ben Tate and he wouldn't have been the workhorse even had he not gotten hurt. Beanie Wells, Felix Jones, CJ Spiller, Donald Brown, and plenty of others were 1st round selections that didn't even come close to being "workhorses" right out of the gates. Even Ryan Matthews, who people like to throw out because he got hurt, still only got 62% of the carries when he was healthy (which ironically, is the most Payton has ever given a running back), and that was with supposedly the biggest supporter of workhorse backs in the league as his coach. DeAngelo Williams just signed a huge contract to be a RBBC back. While Bradshaw's wasn't nearly as huge, it was still a lot of money as well...to be in a RBBC.

Small nitpick. The bolded is incorrect. Mathews sustained a high ankle sprain late in the first quarter of game 2 last year, and he wasn't fully healthy the rest of the season. Up until that point, he had 25 carries, and other Chargers RBs had 8. That's 76%.

Right. He got 76% of the carries and was dinged up from the get go. If NO is truly riding this guy to improve their Super Bowl chances, they are going to make sure he is healthy when it matters. I see him at 200-220 carries, depending on when he starts seeing regular action. I still don't see the coaching staff putting him out there in passing situations until they are comfortable that he can pick up blitz packages. He could be a quick learner, but the lack of OTAs and a short camp are going to be a big factor here.

 

[Sabertooth]

Ingram could be good and maybe I'll take him as an RB2. But when I see all but a few FBGs ranking him ten, twenty, thirty spots ahead of backs who are locks for 270+ touches I don't see value.

Like who?

 

[lazyike]

I guess I just can't help but think of how both Thomas (when not injured) and Ivory did a great job for Payton. I just can't imagine him not giving them both a sizable enough of a percentage of carries for each game along with Sproles to cut too much into making Ingram anything more than a 200 carry back. Why rely on one stud(Ingram) too much and risk wearing him down when you others who can play significant and successful roles.

While less talented I see Danny Thomas having a much better chance to be a top 10-15 RB than Ingram simply because the opportunity is there.

 

[jdoggydogg]

The Rams had a pass-happy offense. How'd that work out for Marshall Faulk?

 

[LHUCKS]

Ingram could be good and maybe I'll take him as an RB2. But when I see all but a few FBGs ranking him ten, twenty, thirty spots ahead of backs who are locks for 270+ touches I don't see value.

Exactly

 

[comfortably numb]

The Rams had a pass-happy offense. How'd that work out for Marshall Faulk?

He had 4 straight 80+ rec years, something only Colston has done twice in 5 years

 

[Pnishthm]

One thing that I like about Payton is that he doesn't seem to bs much. I recall a couple of years ago him saying flat out that P. Thomas will share carries with M. Bell and as a Saints fan there was no way that I believed that because I knew Thomas was head and shoulders better than Bell. Well Payton kept to his word and Thomas and Bell shared carries. So if Payton comes out and says that he will feature Ingram I will move him way up my board. If Payton says he will get all RBs into the mix then I will move him down.

 

[Andrew Garda]

Ingram could be good and maybe I'll take him as an RB2. But when I see all but a few FBGs ranking him ten, twenty, thirty spots ahead of backs who are locks for 270+ touches I don't see value.

Like who?

Yeah I'm curious as well.

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

As I mentioned: like Blount, who only one of your dudes ranks higher than #35 overall in non-ppr. Most have him closer to 50th.

 

[Doug B]

Blount catches very few passes, though, and that limits his value a lot unless he becomes a short-TD-scoring freak. IMHO, it wouldn't be a particularly big deal at all for Ingram to score more fantasy points than Blount this season.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Ingram should produce fine, they didnt trade up to get him to give him 150 touches.

I think this is key. The Saints feel they really lucked out by getting Ingram.

 

[Truman]

If anything, we should temper our enthusiasm for the Bonini's opinions. They are embarrassingly bad.

KFFL is horrible for fantasy analysis. I've been avoiding Ingram in redrafts, but if KFFL are down on him maybe I need to look at him as a RB2.

 

[LHUCKS]

He'll need 280 carries and plenty of Tds to live up to his 2nd round ADP.

Easiest sell high ever

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

He'll need 280 carries and plenty of Tds to live up to his 2nd round ADP.Easiest sell high ever

where are you seeing 2nd round ADP?

 

[Doug B]

He'll need 280 carries and plenty of Tds to live up to his 2nd round ADP.

Disagree. In today's NFL, 1200 yds from scrimmage and 10 TDs is plenty of production for a starting FFB RB2. Even 8 TDs is good if they're spread out over 6 or 7 games.Not too many fantasy owners in 2011 will be trotting out two guys with 1600 yds from scrimmage and 15 TDs apiece.

 

[LHUCKS]

ffcp

 

[aburt19]

He'll need 280 carries and plenty of Tds to live up to his 2nd round ADP.Easiest sell high ever

where are you seeing 2nd round ADP?

I agree. Current ADP are MFL 60th, Calc 53rd, RTS 46th, CBS 54th and ESPN 64th.I agree that I wouldn't take him in the 2nd round, but in the 4th he looks a lot better.

 

[Doug B]

He'll need 280 carries and plenty of Tds to live up to his 2nd round ADP.

where are you seeing 2nd round ADP?

Maybe he's doing live drafts in Saints territory I kid, but my main local live drafts are a week from Sunday ... and Ingram has no shot of making it to the third round. Probably will be some team's RB1.

 

[LHUCKS]

He'll need 280 carries and plenty of Tds to live up to his 2nd round ADP.

Disagree. In today's NFL, 1200 yds from scrimmage and 10 TDs is plenty of production for a starting FFB RB2. Even 8 TDs is good if they're spread out over 6 or 7 games.Not too many fantasy owners in 2011 will be trotting out two guys with 1600 yds from scrimmage and 15 TDs apiece.

he's going as a high number two now in expert leagues...which is of course ridiculous

 

[Truman]

Current ADP is round 5 (sample size: 1853)

http://fantasyfootballcalculator.com/adp.php

LHucks ADP is based on the fantasy draft he mentioned above (sample size: 1)

 

[Sweetness_34]

Ingram should produce fine, they didnt trade up to get him to give him 150 touches.

I think this is key. The Saints feel they really lucked out by getting Ingram.

But that does not mean they have to give him the workhorse load in the first year especially since he is coming off an injury. Teams do not care about your FF team; they care about winning now AND in the future. Saints would be better off splitting carries between Pierre Thomas and Ingram. That way they reduce Ingram further getting injured. Also, there is no way Ingram will be a better Brees protector compared to Pierre since he is a rookie with a very short off season. Ingram is a great pick up for a dynasty league but I agree with the original premise of the author of this article....temper your enthusiasm for the rookie year. And do not over-draft based on one preseason game....remember how good Spiller looked in preseason last year? I remember teams in my league drafting Spiller as RB1 or RB2 .... those teams finished at the bottom of my league.

 

[Sweetness_34]

Current ADP is round 5 (sample size: 1853)http://fantasyfootballcalculator.com/adp.phpLHucks ADP is based on the fantasy draft he mentioned above (sample size: 1)

He went early 2nd round in a FFPC draft I just did last week....ridiculous hype IMO. Especially when you consider that the FFPC just has a 11 week regular season. Ingram will not see the field a lot in the first 4 games given the short off season, especially in passing situations. So by the time he even gets more opportunities, your FFPC season is over....

 

[LHUCKS]

ask anybody drafting fcp, second round, mid third at the latest...pretty much all drafts now

The ADP data thrown around here Is atrocious

 

[Doug B]

he's going as a high number two now in expert leagues...which is of course ridiculous

We'll see.

 

[ty247]

In 2009, the saints had 1012 offensive plays, 544 passing and 468 rushing

A 53.75/46.25 ratio of pass to run

In 2010, the saints had 1041 offensive plays, 661 passing and 380 rushing

A 63.5/36.5 ratio of pass to run

If we take the average of the two play totals,

we would get 601.7 passing and 424.7 rusing, giving us a 58.6 and 41.4 pass to run split

Looking at those numbers, it's a very fair, realistic and balanced offensive split especially for a pass oriented team.

Drew Brees averages 20 rush attempts per year and its fairly consistent.

So take the initial 424 plays and reduce it by 20 right off the top.

Now let's just put it at an even 400, taking into account an occasional wide receiver reverse, gadget plays etc.

400 estimated rushing attempts.

Now the Saints are not totally devoid of talent at the running back position.

For Ingram to get 250 rushing attempts, he would have to receive 62.5% of the rushing attempts.

I'm not sure the Saints would lean on a rookie that significantly.. especially with some quality running backs in P.Thomas, Sproles and eventually Ivory getting their touches.

I'd look more at Adrian Peterson's rookie year as an example where he split carries in an almost straight up 50/50 split in rushing attempts.

So giving Ingram 50% of the rushing attempts by running backs, he'd have 200 rushing attempts.

As a team the Saints over the last 2 years have ran the ball at an average of 4.5 and 4.0 per rush respectively.

That puts Ingram anywhere from 800-900 yards rushing.

The pass catching stats would be extremely difficult to come up with considering injuries and such over the last few years to Bush and Pierre.

but I don't see 20-30 receptions at a 7.0 clip to be out of question.

That would lead me to believe that 140 to 210 receiving yards isn't ridiculous to think would happen.

That puts me at a 940 total yfs to 1010 total yfs as a realistic expectation, barring no missed time.

Touchdowns are variable but 6-10 would be a realistic expectation.

So if I'm looking at it realistically, 940 total yfs and 6 TD's would be my floor and 1010 total yfs and 10 TD's as my ceiling (This year).

 

[aburt19]

ask anybody drafting fcp, second round, mid third at the latest...pretty much all drafts nowThe ADP data thrown around here Is atrocious

The data given was what was shown on ADP by FBG. I would not be surprised to see his ADP rise to mid third round before the beginning of theseason.ETA: I checked on CBS Sportsline and the earliest that he was drafted was 39th.

 

[jdoggydogg]

He'll need 280 carries and plenty of Tds to live up to his 2nd round ADP.

Disagree. In today's NFL, 1200 yds from scrimmage and 10 TDs is plenty of production for a starting FFB RB2. Even 8 TDs is good if they're spread out over 6 or 7 games.Not too many fantasy owners in 2011 will be trotting out two guys with 1600 yds from scrimmage and 15 TDs apiece.

he's going as a high number two now in expert leagues...which is of course ridiculous

What's ridiculous is your overreaction. Based on the reports posted at FBG, Ingram's ADP is around 50 - which puts him behind the likes of Jahvid Best, Brandon Marshall, Ryan Mathews, LeGarrette Blount, Shonn Greene, DeAngelo Williams, Knowshon Moreno, and Brandon Lloyd.There are two major factors when we pick a player: 1) the stats, and 2) our belief in a player. If you believe that guys like Shonn and DeAngelo are better plays than Ingram, then more power to you. But Ingram's more talented than Greene, and he's on a far better offense than DeAngelo.

 

[ceo3west]

The ADP data thrown around here Is atrocious

The ADP data needs to be looked at. It includes drafts from months ago. Would be ideal if we could choose adp data from specific time periods, or at least identify the timeperiod the data is from. A lot of people incluing myself use this info.

 

[Sweetness_34]

The ADP data thrown around here Is atrocious

The ADP data needs to be looked at. It includes drafts from months ago. Would be ideal if we could choose adp data from specific time periods, or at least identify the timeperiod the data is from. A lot of people incluing myself use this info.

He was drafted in the 2nd round last week in the FFPC. I guarantee he is moving up draft voards after the 1st preseason game. I am happy since it means real value is slipping

 

[cvnpoka]

In 2009, the saints had 1012 offensive plays, 544 passing and 468 rushingA 53.75/46.25 ratio of pass to runIn 2010, the saints had 1041 offensive plays, 661 passing and 380 rushingA 63.5/36.5 ratio of pass to runIf we take the average of the two play totals, we would get 601.7 passing and 424.7 rusing, giving us a 58.6 and 41.4 pass to run splitLooking at those numbers, it's a very fair, realistic and balanced offensive split especially for a pass oriented team.Drew Brees averages 20 rush attempts per year and its fairly consistent.So take the initial 424 plays and reduce it by 20 right off the top.Now let's just put it at an even 400, taking into account an occasional wide receiver reverse, gadget plays etc.400 estimated rushing attempts.Now the Saints are not totally devoid of talent at the running back position.For Ingram to get 250 rushing attempts, he would have to receive 62.5% of the rushing attempts.I'm not sure the Saints would lean on a rookie that significantly.. especially with some quality running backs in P.Thomas, Sproles and eventually Ivory getting their touches.I'd look more at Adrian Peterson's rookie year as an example where he split carries in an almost straight up 50/50 split in rushing attempts.So giving Ingram 50% of the rushing attempts by running backs, he'd have 200 rushing attempts.As a team the Saints over the last 2 years have ran the ball at an average of 4.5 and 4.0 per rush respectively.That puts Ingram anywhere from 800-900 yards rushing.The pass catching stats would be extremely difficult to come up with considering injuries and such over the last few years to Bush and Pierre.but I don't see 20-30 receptions at a 7.0 clip to be out of question.That would lead me to believe that 140 to 210 receiving yards isn't ridiculous to think would happen.That puts me at a 940 total yfs to 1010 total yfs as a realistic expectation, barring no missed time.Touchdowns are variable but 6-10 would be a realistic expectation.So if I'm looking at it realistically, 940 total yfs and 6 TD's would be my floor and 1010 total yfs and 10 TD's as my ceiling (This year).

heh, i did this same little exercise and arrived at the same conclusions. tho its not out of the realm for sproles to get like only 30 carries and pierre 60 and ivory mop up 20. tough to say, but i guess im just still a believer in pierre to get 100-120 and thus drive ingram down to around 200.

 

[-jb-]

The ADP data thrown around here Is atrocious

The ADP data needs to be looked at. It includes drafts from months ago. Would be ideal if we could choose adp data from specific time periods, or at least identify the timeperiod the data is from. A lot of people incluing myself use this info.

He was drafted in the 2nd round last week in the FFPC. I guarantee he is moving up draft voards after the 1st preseason game. I am happy since it means real value is slipping

You won't even notice a difference.