What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

LHUCKS Top 5 Undervalued ADP 76-125 (1 Viewer)

Benson will need 300 carries to get 1,000 yards. Will he get that in Green Bay? I doubt it.
300*3.8=1140
ok...will he get 263 carries in Green Bay's pass-happy system?
Packers should have about 425 rushing attempts this year. I think its plausible he gets 60%, so possibly.
Rascal is killing it here.
GB RUNNING BACK carries have been declining. 374 --> 347 --> 318 last year. I don't particularly think Benson is anything but a glorified battering ram at this point. If they get 3.6 or 3.7 ypc out of him they should be happy. I don't see the Pack feeding him the ball either. He's not dynamic and utlimately giving the ball to a plodded is going to hurt the offense. 200-220 carries max in my book. Starks and Green (and Saine and Kuhn) are still there.Benson is probably still worth taking a shot on as his cost will be low enough, but I dhon't see the workload or the numbers that some are guesstimating.
His cost is a roster spot and the opportunity cost of another player - that's significant.And what do you mean the pats get their rb nicked up?
 
I think the gamble is overstated with Williams. But I do agree that in formats where it costs too much to take risks, Williams might not be your guy. However, I think we're talking about 1600 total yards upside here.
I agree that if 2009 Ryan Williams shows up, he might be a 1600 YFS player in the NFL in the right situation. Unfortunately, that guy hasn't made an appearance in more than 2 1/2 years now. When / if Williams gets back to that level is anybody's guess. I'd also say that the 2012 Cardinal's are definitely NOT the right situation from which to expect that type of production. It's really not even a given that all rostered RBs combined pit up 1600 total YFS.
 
I think the gamble is overstated with Williams. But I do agree that in formats where it costs too much to take risks, Williams might not be your guy. However, I think we're talking about 1600 total yards upside here.
I agree that if 2009 Ryan Williams shows up, he might be a 1600 YFS player in the NFL in the right situation. Unfortunately, that guy hasn't made an appearance in more than 2 1/2 years now. When / if Williams gets back to that level is anybody's guess. I'd also say that the 2012 Cardinal's are definitely NOT the right situation from which to expect that type of production. It's really not even a given that all rostered RBs combined pit up 1600 total YFS.
 
Benson:

when GB gets a lead...which they probably will quite a bit...I see them using him to grind it out....he signed cheap...they don't care if they run him into the ground so to speak....he would probably love to stay on this team that has a shot at the super bowl every year....he is on a winner...I think he produces...so he can resign....I see him being pretty fired up after some nice carries, etc...some leaps in his future...

fantasy stats sometimes = talent + opportunity + motivation......I see all 3 here....

he has been a 1,000 yard rusher the last 3-4 years...very little competition for carries...and in a winnning environment with a crappy contract that he would like to improve on...it's almost the perfect storm even tho they throw a ton....

 
Last edited by a moderator:
re: heyward-bey

my vague recollection is they benched this guy around the middle of the season and were rolling ford and moore out as starters in the 2 wide packages.

week 11 moore sprained his ankle and missed a few weeks, while ford also sprained his foot, or something, around this time.

those 2 guys going down opened the door for bey, leading to 29 targets in weeks 12-14, but only 12 catches -- that's not so good.

week 14 - 5 catches and 78 yards on 11 targets as the only game in town against possibly the worst pass defense in the league.

week 15 - ford still out, moore starting to work back in, and bey has a huge game against a team that gave up, like, 700/7 to matt flynn and back ups.

week 16 - ford still out, moore back in action (4/94/1), bey starts to lose ground here with a mediocre 4/70/0

week 17 - I'll give you this one huge game - 9 catches for 130/1 on 17 targets.

doucet caught 8 balls on 16 targets one week, too -- he's not on my short list.

bottom line, I think the guy had one giant game in week 17 and was lucky ford and moore both happened to get injured.

however, as moore and ford are both currently injured again, I suppose he could have some value, but I'm not passing up guys like lance moore, who cash 8 td/year for a guy who has caught 6 td in his 3 yr career.

 
And what do you mean the pats get their rb nicked up?
Look at their rosters the last few years. For the most part, their RB have spent short and long stints injured.
And you think that's something the pats are doing to them?
No. But the Pats have had an inordinate amount of RB injuries.
first of all, I 100% agree with your strategy, and have already done it a couple times for pretty much the stated reasons, but don't you think other rb around the league get hurt?is there some kind of pats curse?
 
'12punch said:
re: heyward-beymy vague recollection is they benched this guy around the middle of the season and were rolling ford and moore out as starters in the 2 wide packages.week 11 moore sprained his ankle and missed a few weeks, while ford also sprained his foot, or something, around this time. those 2 guys going down opened the door for bey, leading to 29 targets in weeks 12-14, but only 12 catches -- that's not so good.week 14 - 5 catches and 78 yards on 11 targets as the only game in town against possibly the worst pass defense in the league.week 15 - ford still out, moore starting to work back in, and bey has a huge game against a team that gave up, like, 700/7 to matt flynn and back ups.week 16 - ford still out, moore back in action (4/94/1), bey starts to lose ground here with a mediocre 4/70/0week 17 - I'll give you this one huge game - 9 catches for 130/1 on 17 targets.doucet caught 8 balls on 16 targets one week, too -- he's not on my short list.bottom line, I think the guy had one giant game in week 17 and was lucky ford and moore both happened to get injured.however, as moore and ford are both currently injured again, I suppose he could have some value, but I'm not passing up guys like lance moore, who cash 8 td/year for a guy who has caught 6 td in his 3 yr career.
Nice breakdown, that's how I recall it as well in terms of the personnel situation. However, you don't give much credit to DHB for puttng up numbers against weak defenses. He still gets to play weak defenses this year.I think you hit the nail on the head. Ford is always injured and Moore is injured now. DHB is locked in as a starter that has proven upside.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Now you have the threat of streator to slurp targets and IF moore is healthy i think he's the guy at wr in a knapp offense that will feature the rb.

Don't bank on the td, and bey has already proven to be a 4 catch guy even when targeted 10x.

He isn't playing the league's worst pass defense every week.

Why was he benched?

 
Moore, moore, holmes, crabtree, wright, simpson, royster, olsen, daniels

Are some other late rounders in 12 team ppr start 3+flex

How many of those guys do i take bey (and little) over?

 
Cedric Benson is officially the shark play, in particular since the game did not get any national coverage last night. At his adp of 102, he should score in the top 50 adp. That is a huge jump.

From today's Journal Sentinel

Say whatever you want to minimize Benson's debut with the Green Bay Packers Thursday night. The fact of the matter is, it was an impressive showing by a good back, a performance that certainly wasn't unexpected. At 29, Benson didn't gain 1,067 yards last season by accident. He still can play.

Several of the dozen personnel men scouting the Packers' 27-13 victory over the Bengals said without reservation that Benson makes one of the National Football League's most prolific offenses even better.

"He made me a little nervous," one scout said at halftime. "You think they're struggling there (running back), and then this. I know he's fresh, but he's still a quality player."

Benson returned to the field where he had three straight 1,000-yard seasons in his four years with the Bengals. Alex Green started, but Benson played extensively from the second series of the first quarter through the rest of the first half.

He rushed six times for 38 yards, an average of 6.3 that almost tripled the running backs' cumulative average of 2.15 yards in the first two games.

"He looked good - really good," another personnel man said. "Quick. He looks like he fits the offense well. Obviously, he'll start. He's much more consistent (than James Starks)."

The scout went so far as to say Benson had a legitimate chance to be the Packers' best back since 2006, which was Ahman Green' last productive season.

"He's always been talented," a third scout said. "Experienced. He's been through it. And, really, he's almost always been healthy.

Several observations.

Packers have officially switched from a zone blocking/one cut running scheme to a one back power running scheme - Benson and Green will get virtually all the carries at RB.

Stark is toast. Even if they keep him on the roster, and several beat writers are suggesting he will be cut, he no longer fits the Packers running scheme. Since he can't stay healthy and doesn't block worth beans, His value is approaching zero.

Benson is demonstrably superior to every other back on the roster, including Green (Alex).

1,200 yards, 8td. However in ppr leagues his value will be less than in td heavy leagues.

Benson seemed perfectly at home in shotgun formation. On his first carry, a play designed to go outside the right guard, Benson read the back side of the defense, stuck his foot in the ground quickly and burst through left guard for 8 yards.

In the second quarter, Benson made the same cut on what seemed to be the exact same play and found room on the back side for 8 more.

He also had a 9-yard rush in which he bounced off first contact just beyond the line of scrimmage, then made a tackler miss as he scooted ahead for 11 against a blitz.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm not at all sure that Benson is even a significant upgrade over Starks or the recent, used up version of Ryan Grant. He's able to give you bulk carries at or under 4 YPC, but he's not a good player at this point. I don't see any way GB slants the offense back toward running more based on adding Cedric Benson, and he's never been any good as a receiver. If he were still dirt cheap, I might be willing to roll the dice, but there are other guys I like way more in the 8th - 10th range where he is currently going.
I tend to agree with this. Benson is just a guy. He can get decent numbers on sheer volume, like he did with Cincy.He's not going to get that volume with the Packers, I'd guess.Seems like the shark play here is a later-round flyer on Green.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top