Mark Ingram, RB, New Orleans Saints (1 Viewer)

[LHUCKS]

I must have missed LHUCKS projections in this thread? ...and I'm not talking about one of his infamous "ranges" where he goes out on a giant limb by saying "Ingram will get between 160 and 220 touches and will rush for somewhere in the neighborhood of 640 and 1100 yards for 5-10 touchdowns."

215 Carries 870 yards, 9 TDs15 receptions 120 yards, 1 TD990 Total Yards, 10 TDsPutting him near Emmit Smith's rookie numbers.Good production for a rookie runningback, terrible production for an overhyped RB being reached on in the second and third round. I like my second and third rounders to have a high ceiling...not a low one.P.S. projecting static totals for ff purposes is an antiquated methodology

 

[dagwood]

I must have missed LHUCKS projections in this thread? ...and I'm not talking about one of his infamous "ranges" where he goes out on a giant limb by saying "Ingram will get between 160 and 220 touches and will rush for somewhere in the neighborhood of 640 and 1100 yards for 5-10 touchdowns."

215 Carries 870 yards, 9 TDs15 receptions 120 yards, 1 TD990 Total Yards, 10 TDsPutting him near Emmit Smith's rookie numbers.Good production for a rookie runningback, terrible production for an overhyped RB being reached on in the second and third round. I like my second and third rounders to have a high ceiling...not a low one.P.S. projecting static totals for ff purposes is an antiquated methodology

Agreed on the Ceiling and Floor Philosophy. Its a much better way to value players.

 

[[icon]]

Interesting... 4.0 Yards per carry eh?

Saints are quite consistent out of the backfield... averaging about 4.3ypc in recent history... never finishing below 4.2.

IMO you're a hair low on the touches... likely will be closer to 230 in my opinion with upside into the 250 range if he's effective and/or Ivory gets dinged.

IMO his style of running (Bruiser, hard to bring down) combined with his surrounding cast bodes well for his YPC. ~4.4 range is more likely to be expected.

I think you're quite close on TDs. 10 is a pretty good number there.

so 230 / 1000 / 10 is where I'd put him. Great RB3 and a serviceable RB2 in standard 12+ team leagues.

Most cases he's available in 5th or 6th round. I picked him up in the 8th this weekend as my RB3 and I couldn't be happier. The earliest I saw him go was late 4th in a 16 team non PPR league.

 

[[icon]]

I must have missed LHUCKS projections in this thread? ...and I'm not talking about one of his infamous "ranges" where he goes out on a giant limb by saying "Ingram will get between 160 and 220 touches and will rush for somewhere in the neighborhood of 640 and 1100 yards for 5-10 touchdowns."

215 Carries 870 yards, 9 TDs15 receptions 120 yards, 1 TD990 Total Yards, 10 TDsPutting him near Emmit Smith's rookie numbers.Good production for a rookie runningback, terrible production for an overhyped RB being reached on in the second and third round. I like my second and third rounders to have a high ceiling...not a low one.P.S. projecting static totals for ff purposes is an antiquated methodology

Agreed on the Ceiling and Floor Philosophy. Its a much better way to value players.

The jab wasn't at projecting ceiling/floors... just the LHUCKS method of storming into threads like he's got all the answers, then projects a range so broad it's borderline useless.

 

[LHUCKS]

Interesting... 4.0 Yards per carry eh?

correctEmmit Smmith, the alltime leading rusher in the history of the NFL, averaged 3.9 his rookie season...and Emmit's ypc wasn't watered down by a disproportionate amount of redzone carries...which is what Ingram will have.

 

[timschochet]

I grabbed him in the 5th round last night. I've read the entire thread here, and I have been impressed by the arguments made in favor of Ingram. Hoping for the best.

 

[Doug B]

FWIW, here are the RB touches and TDs breakdowns over all five seasons of the Payton era:

2010...RushAtt.Rcptns.Touches.TDs------.-------.------.-------.---RB.........351....111.....462..10Others......29....339.....368..32------.-------.------.-------.---...........380....450.....830..42....2009...RushAtt.Rcptns.Touches.TDs------.-------.------.-------.---RB.........431....107.....538..26Others......37....271.....308..29------.-------.------.-------.---...........468....378.....846..55....2008...RushAtt.Rcptns.Touches.TDs------.-------.------.-------.---RB.........371....122.....493..28Others......27....291.....318..26------.-------.------.-------.---...........398....413.....811..54....2007...RushAtt.Rcptns.Touches.TDs------.-------.------.-------.---RB.........359....143.....502..15Others......33....297.....330..27------.-------.------.-------.---...........392....440.....832..42....2006...RushAtt.Rcptns.Touches.TDs------.-------.------.-------.---RB.........427....158.....585..23Others......45....214.....259..23------.-------.------.-------.---...........472....372.....844..46In the Saints' most successful seasons (2006 & 2009), there were enough carries going around so that 45% of the carries was about 200 attempts.Also, for those that believe Payton is philosophically opposed to feeding one single RB a FFB RB1-2 workload, see 2006. Deuce McAllister got about 57% of the RB carries that year (244/427) and about 46% of the RB touches (274/585), racking up 1255 yfscrim and 10 TDs. Deuce finished 2006 as the 13th-ranked FFB RB. With only 46% of the team's real-life RB workload.

In 2008, Pierre Thomas finished as the 21st-ranked FFB RB, with 909 yfscrim and 12 TDs in a cool 160 touches (less than a third of the team's RB touches).

It's pretty clear to me that the opportunity is there for Ingram, even if there is something close to a 50-50 RB touches split (or even 40-40-10).

 

[Abraham]

Interesting that so many are predicting double-digit TDs but only a "marginal RB2, solid RB3/Flex." I quickly looked back over the last 15 years and there has not been a case of a RB with 200 carries and 10TDs that didn't finish in the top-20 of RBs. I'm sure digging in to it deeper would reveal that a minimum of 200 carries (which excludes goalline specialist types) and 10 touchdowns is more likely to finish in the top-15.

 

[Doug B]

Saints are quite consistent out of the backfield... averaging about 4.3ypc in recent history... never finishing below 4.2.

I did the team-wide figures and got slightly lower numbers (below), but that includes QB and WR carries. What's really good to see is that Payton's Saints' squads have trended upward in ypc from his first year with the team:2006: 3.7 ypc2007: 3.72008: 4.02009: 4.52010: 4.0And in 2010, that was with old & hurt Ladell Betts (3.3) and a hurt Pierre Thomas (3.2) bringing down the average. UFDA rookie Chris Ivory was at 5.2 last year. Reggie Bush was at 4.2 and an off-the-street Julius Jones managed an even 4.0 per rush.Another local tidbit -- 2006-10 starting RT Jonathan Stinchcomb was cut from camp last week. He's been having back trouble for over a year, and he had lost a lot of upper-body strength. He gutted out his 2010 starts, but was clearly not the same player he was in his 2009 Pro Bowl year. The Saints will go with road-grader Zach Strief at RT this season. Strief is the strongest player on the team, with good enough feet that he's been able to play situational TE. His pass blocking will not be as good as Stinchcomb's 2009 level, but the Saints' RBs will love having Strief in front of them.

 

[[icon]]

Interesting... 4.0 Yards per carry eh?

correctEmmit Smmith, the alltime leading rusher in the history of the NFL, averaged 3.9 his rookie season...and Emmit's ypc wasn't watered down by a disproportionate amount of redzone carries...which is what Ingram will have.

Yeah and Undrafted rookie Chris Ivory averaged 5.2 YPC in Payton's system last year. Which is more relevant... 21 year old stats from a different team in a different era... or another rookie RB coming into the same system one year later?

 

[Doug B]

Interesting that so many are predicting double-digit TDs but only a "marginal RB2, solid RB3/Flex." I quickly looked back over the last 15 years and there has not been a case of a RB with 200 carries and 10TDs that didn't finish in the top-20 of RBs. I'm sure digging in to it deeper would reveal that a minimum of 200 carries (which excludes goalline specialist types) and 10 touchdowns is more likely to finish in the top-15.

Even LHUCKs projection up above -- from someone down on Ingram yet -- puts him squarely in the RB2 tier in a 12-team league (around 18th-22nd).

 

[Sabertooth]

Interesting that so many are predicting double-digit TDs but only a "marginal RB2, solid RB3/Flex." I quickly looked back over the last 15 years and there has not been a case of a RB with 200 carries and 10TDs that didn't finish in the top-20 of RBs. I'm sure digging in to it deeper would reveal that a minimum of 200 carries (which excludes goalline specialist types) and 10 touchdowns is more likely to finish in the top-15.

Isn't Top 20 the very definition of marginal RB2 or RB3/flex?

 

[Abraham]

Interesting that so many are predicting double-digit TDs but only a "marginal RB2, solid RB3/Flex." I quickly looked back over the last 15 years and there has not been a case of a RB with 200 carries and 10TDs that didn't finish in the top-20 of RBs. I'm sure digging in to it deeper would reveal that a minimum of 200 carries (which excludes goalline specialist types) and 10 touchdowns is more likely to finish in the top-15.

Isn't Top 20 the very definition of marginal RB2 or RB3/flex?

Eh, maybe. Sure, yes. I guess. My point (that I guess I didn't make very well) is that "marginal RB2, solid RB3/Flex" is his absolute healthy DOWNSIDE if you believe he will get 200 carries and be the goalline back/in line for 10 touchdowns.

 

[Doug B]

Which is more relevant... 21 year old stats from a different team in a different era... or another rookie RB coming into the same system one year later?

Not only that, rookie Emmitt Smith was paired with a second-year Troy Aikman in 1990. Aikman threw 11 TDs, 18 INTs, and finished with a QB rating of 66.6. Michael Irvin was hurt for a good chunk of that year, leaving Kelvin Martin and Jay Novacek as the team's leading receivers.Suffice to say that Emmitt saw a lot of 8-man fronts that year. Smith still finished as the 7th-ranked FFB RB his rookie year -- a clear RB1....When people are comparing Ingram to Emmitt Smith, they mean height, weight, body type, and running style. No one's predicting a HOF career for Ingram just yet.

 

[LHUCKS]

I only used emmit to compare YPC.

As stated earlier, ingrams ypc will be watered down by disproportionate amount of redzone carries

 

[T with T]

I must have missed LHUCKS projections in this thread? ...and I'm not talking about one of his infamous "ranges" where he goes out on a giant limb by saying "Ingram will get between 160 and 220 touches and will rush for somewhere in the neighborhood of 640 and 1100 yards for 5-10 touchdowns."

215 Carries 870 yards, 9 TDs15 receptions 120 yards, 1 TD990 Total Yards, 10 TDsPutting him near Emmit Smith's rookie numbers.Good production for a rookie runningback, terrible production for an overhyped RB being reached on in the second and third round. I like my second and third rounders to have a high ceiling...not a low one.P.S. projecting static totals for ff purposes is an antiquated methodology

Agreed on the Ceiling and Floor Philosophy. Its a much better way to value players.

The jab wasn't at projecting ceiling/floors... just the LHUCKS method of storming into threads like he's got all the answers, then projects a range so broad it's borderline useless.

Agreed here is what saints beat writer saidMike Triplett of the New Orleans Times-Picayune is optimistic about Ingram's outlook this year, stating that he "looks capable of 1,000 yards rushing and 10 touchdowns."If Pthomas gets hurt I could see Ingram at 1200 and 200 rec and 12 tds.... 30 catches... with pthomas I say 1000 and 100 rec 15 catches and 10 tds

 

[T with T]

I grabbed him in the 5th round last night. I've read the entire thread here, and I have been impressed by the arguments made in favor of Ingram. Hoping for the best.

Me to bud grabbed him as my rb 3 in my redraft ppr behind Jcharles, J. Best. hope he gets 1200 and 15 tds lol

 

[T with T]

Interesting that so many are predicting double-digit TDs but only a "marginal RB2, solid RB3/Flex." I quickly looked back over the last 15 years and there has not been a case of a RB with 200 carries and 10TDs that didn't finish in the top-20 of RBs. I'm sure digging in to it deeper would reveal that a minimum of 200 carries (which excludes goalline specialist types) and 10 touchdowns is more likely to finish in the top-15.

what was Jonathan stewart ranked his rookie year he had 1000 and 10 with Dwill getting tons of carries.

 

[tenaka]

Interesting... 4.0 Yards per carry eh?

correctEmmit Smmith, the alltime leading rusher in the history of the NFL, averaged 3.9 his rookie season...and Emmit's ypc wasn't watered down by a disproportionate amount of redzone carries...which is what Ingram will have.

Emmitt Smith was also drafted by a team coming off a 1-15 season. Not exactly a great offensive line opening up huge running lanes and a monster passing attack to keep defenses honest. But other than that, yep they're exactly the same.

 

[Abraham]

Interesting that so many are predicting double-digit TDs but only a "marginal RB2, solid RB3/Flex." I quickly looked back over the last 15 years and there has not been a case of a RB with 200 carries and 10TDs that didn't finish in the top-20 of RBs. I'm sure digging in to it deeper would reveal that a minimum of 200 carries (which excludes goalline specialist types) and 10 touchdowns is more likely to finish in the top-15.

what was Jonathan stewart ranked his rookie year he had 1000 and 10 with Dwill getting tons of carries.

Stewart had 10tds and 880 total yards. He finished 24th.

 

[Doug B]

Me to bud grabbed him as my rb 3 in my redraft ppr behind Jcharles, J. Best. hope he gets 1200 and 15 tds lol

Jahvid Best is another one that a lot of people think is a no-brainer selection ahead of Ingram. I understand that line of thinking, especially with LeShoure out for the year. But Best just sustained another concussion this past weekend. How's Best going to hold up?

 

[Short Corner]

Interesting... 4.0 Yards per carry eh?

correctEmmit Smmith, the alltime leading rusher in the history of the NFL, averaged 3.9 his rookie season...and Emmit's ypc wasn't watered down by a disproportionate amount of redzone carries...which is what Ingram will have.

Emmitt Smith was also drafted by a team coming off a 1-15 season. Not exactly a great offensive line opening up huge running lanes and a monster passing attack to keep defenses honest. But other than that, yep they're exactly the same.

Yeah. He had a horrible offensive line that year.

 

[eoMMan]

Me to bud grabbed him as my rb 3 in my redraft ppr behind Jcharles, J. Best. hope he gets 1200 and 15 tds lol

Jahvid Best is another one that a lot of people think is a no-brainer selection ahead of Ingram. I understand that line of thinking, especially with LeShoure out for the year. But Best just sustained another concussion this past weekend. How's Best going to hold up?

I'm starting to think that Best will be a career 3rd down type back.

 

[[icon]]

I only used emmit to compare YPC. As stated earlier, ingrams ypc will be watered down by disproportionate amount of redzone carries

So you arbitrarily pick Emmit from over 20 years ago for what reason again exactly? If it's to prove that all rookies have low YPC their first year, it doesn't work.... so what's the point?

 

[LHUCKS]

Interesting... 4.0 Yards per carry eh?

correctEmmit Smmith, the alltime leading rusher in the history of the NFL, averaged 3.9 his rookie season...and Emmit's ypc wasn't watered down by a disproportionate amount of redzone carries...which is what Ingram will have.

Emmitt Smith was also drafted by a team coming off a 1-15 season. Not exactly a great offensive line opening up huge running lanes and a monster passing attack to keep defenses honest. But other than that, yep they're exactly the same.

Yeah. He had a horrible offensive line that year.

 

[LHUCKS]

I only used emmit to compare YPC. As stated earlier, ingrams ypc will be watered down by disproportionate amount of redzone carries

So you arbitrarily pick Emmit from over 20 years ago for what reason again exactly? If it's to prove that all rookies have low YPC their first year, it doesn't work.... so what's the point?

I did not arbitrarily pick Emmit Smith.

 

[LawFitz]

LHUCKS, is it safe to say that his floor is a 40/40/10 split (or close approximation thereof), but that he has a much higher ceiling that doesn't necessarily require an injury to Pierre? I am one of the opinion that the other Saints RBs are going to put up a good fight for playing time, especially early on, but I can easily see Ingram grabbing a bigger - even dare I say lion's share - by the time the fantasy playoffs roll around.

Early on I see him as a marginal RB2, especially considering the goal line opps, but late in the season when it really counts, I can see him sneaking into the top ten PPG RB range. I think that's why most people are drafting him earlier than his total expected season stats might justify.

 

[T with T]

Me to bud grabbed him as my rb 3 in my redraft ppr behind Jcharles, J. Best. hope he gets 1200 and 15 tds lol

Jahvid Best is another one that a lot of people think is a no-brainer selection ahead of Ingram. I understand that line of thinking, especially with LeShoure out for the year. But Best just sustained another concussion this past weekend. How's Best going to hold up?

I'm starting to think that Best will be a career 3rd down type back.

Don't think that, I think he can have the same kind of role of a Jamaal charles, Lesean mccoy

 

[[icon]]

I only used emmit to compare YPC. As stated earlier, ingrams ypc will be watered down by disproportionate amount of redzone carries

So you arbitrarily pick Emmit from over 20 years ago for what reason again exactly? If it's to prove that all rookies have low YPC their first year, it doesn't work.... so what's the point?

I did not arbitrarily pick Emmit Smith.

Okay captain vague.... care to outline your thought process on why you picked a comp from a different team over 20 years ago when so much has changed and there are more direct comparisons from a year or two prior and even one from the same team/system Ingram is entering himself?

 

[timschochet]

I only used emmit to compare YPC. As stated earlier, ingrams ypc will be watered down by disproportionate amount of redzone carries

So you arbitrarily pick Emmit from over 20 years ago for what reason again exactly? If it's to prove that all rookies have low YPC their first year, it doesn't work.... so what's the point?

I did not arbitrarily pick Emmit Smith.

Okay captain vague.... care to outline your thought process on why you picked a comp from a different team over 20 years ago when so much has changed and there are more direct comparisons from a year or two prior and even one from the same team/system Ingram is entering himself?

Why are you bothering? There are knowledgeable people on both sides of this debate that are worth paying attention to. Why devote your time discussing it with a guy whose sole motive is deride anyone who disagrees with him?

 

[[icon]]

Why are you bothering? There are knowledgeable people on both sides of this debate that are worth paying attention to. Why devote your time discussing it with a guy whose sole motive is deride anyone who disagrees with him?

Agreed.. there are definitely some folks bringing good discussion to both sides of the discussion... SHUCKS just isn't one of them. That and pointing out his seemingly endless string of unfounded assertions is an entertaining way to kill a few mins during slow patches at the office.

 

[Doug B]

Not that this has much to do with Mark Ingram, but:

Yeah. [Emmitt Smith] had a horrible offensive line that year.

Not a good posting. Dallas, in 1990, had guys that would go on to be name players but that were still developing. Their best 1990 lineman, Mark Tuinei, was 30 by then and solid at LT. Nate Newton was huge and bull-strong at RT, but also young and undisciplined -- he was somewhat out of position as well (later was a 6-time Pro-Bowler at guard). Mark Stepnoski was on board at C, but 1990 was his first year as a starter. The starting guards, Crawford Ker and John Gesek, were just adequate. Kevin Gogan -- later a multiple Pro-Bowler at guard -- was waiting in the wings, but in 1990 he had been demoted from his one-time starting RT spot in favor of Newton.All-90s tackle Erik Williams would be drafted the following season, and crack the starting line-up in 1992. This allowed Newton (immediately) and Gogan (later on) to successfully move back inside to their natural position.The 1990 Cowboys line, while possessing talent, was clearly a work in progress. They allowed 43 sacks, and blocked for a rushing attack that averaged 3.8 ypc. By 1992, that became 23 sacks allowed, and 4.2 ypc. Then, 29 sacks and 4.4 ypc in 1993, the year Emmitt Smith (5.3 ypc) held out for three regular season games.

 

[Vicktimized]

"RB Saints" is a fantasy football factory, provided the RB stays healthy. Bush had a bunch of fantasy-worthy stretches, as did Thomas, as did Ivory (though in a different situation). Even when splitting, Thomas has always been a solid enough play as a No. 2 RB provided he's not hurt or ineffective (as he was last year).

Look at the Super Bowl year, for example. The Saints lead rusher was usually pretty obvious, even though it indeed was a RBBC.

I'm listing total touches based on who was the guy thought to be the lead dog entering any given game.

Week 1 - Bell - 28-143 (Thomas out, Bush the COP)

Week 2 - Bell 18-95-1(Thomas out, Bush COP)

Week 3 - Thomas 14-126-2 (Bell hurt, Bush COP)

Week 4 - Thomas 23-132-1 (Bell out, Bush COP)

Week 5 - Thomas 15-72 (Bell back, Bush healthy)

Week 6 - Thomas 9-44 (All healthy, Saints in comeback mode)

Week 7 - Thomas 16-100-2 (all healthy Wk 14)

Week 8 - Thomas 18-81-1

Week 9 - Thomas 12-42

Week 10 - Thomas 14-103-0

Week 11 - Thomas 14-87-1

Week 12 - Thomas 14-82

Week 13 - Thomas - 19-100

Week 14 - Thomas 11-70 (Bush got hurt during the game)

Week 15 - Thomas 6-60-1 (played about a quarter before getting hurt; he'd have been the guy starting going in if you played anyone. Bush was out.)

Week 16 - Bell 17-28 (Week 17 scrub-fest with playoff position clinched)

There are some clunkers, sure. But even when Payton was using the full blown "committee" from week 5-13, Thomas was still a guy that averaged double figure fantasy points. Mike Bell was completely ineffective after week 2 that year - he averaged over 4 a carry once the rest of the year ... and six times got less than 3 ypc ... and still got double-digit carries to lead the team. When Payton had Deuce, he got 270 touches in 15 games. He tried to trade up to get Beanie Wells, gushed about Bell all preseason, and now trades up to get Ingram. Even his developmental guys like Ivory and before him Lynell Hamilton, projected more as bruisers, power backs.

Call it whatever you will, but Payton is obviously a guy that highly values having a powerful RB that can move the chains and convert short yardage. He really seems to favor those whenever he has them, which goes counter to what you'd think as his offenses are thought of as finesse and pass happy. If Ingram can add value in the receiving game ... and to be fair, I don't know if that's in the cards right now ... he has a chance to get a 'lot' of work.

Maybe Sean Payton is a true RBBC guy, who wants to split right down the middle, maybe not. He's never had a clear cut top rusher. With Deuce, they had just drafted Bush, so both were going to get work. With Thomas/Bush et al, neither were sturdy enough to take 20 carries a game. But personally, I'd be surprised if, by midseason, Thomas is getting near equal work. I don't think they make that kind of trade up if they didn't think they'd get a significant return.

 

[Insein]

I must have missed LHUCKS projections in this thread? ...and I'm not talking about one of his infamous "ranges" where he goes out on a giant limb by saying "Ingram will get between 160 and 220 touches and will rush for somewhere in the neighborhood of 640 and 1100 yards for 5-10 touchdowns."

215 Carries 870 yards, 9 TDs15 receptions 120 yards, 1 TD990 Total Yards, 10 TDsPutting him near Emmit Smith's rookie numbers.Good production for a rookie runningback, terrible production for an overhyped RB being reached on in the second and third round. I like my second and third rounders to have a high ceiling...not a low one.P.S. projecting static totals for ff purposes is an antiquated methodology

I agree with Hucks. Imagine that. I'm not feeling the hype for Ingram. He may be pretty good for a rookie RB but he's not going to be top 15 for fantasy. People can talk all they want but the Saints have 4 starting calibur RB's. I just don't see them going overboard with Ingram because they don't have to.

 

[Doug B]

I agree with Hucks. Imagine that. I'm not feeling the hype for Ingram. He may be pretty good for a rookie RB but he's not going to be top 15 for fantasy. People can talk all they want but the Saints have 4 starting caliber RB's. I just don't see them going overboard with Ingram because they don't have to.

Not until Ivory comes off the PUP list. And he will be on it to open the season. Don't think he factors much into 2011.

 

[Sabertooth]

If he's just another back, why on Earth would they trade up for him?

 

[ChromeWeasel]

If he's just another back, why on Earth would they trade up for him?

He can be a great fit for their system and a special back to the Saints that helps them win another SB, while still being just another back in fantasy football. IE: Someone that scores from #12-25 in RB points over the season. The Saints don't care about our fantasy success and it makes sense for them to split up the carries. I'll still try to get Ingram on my team though.

 

[Insein]

If he's just another back, why on Earth would they trade up for him?

He's not just another back but he's not going to get more than 200 carries this season IMO because of 3 other options. Ivory may not factor in early but he will at some point. The guy proved he can play last season.

 

[Insein]

If he's just another back, why on Earth would they trade up for him?

He can be a great fit for their system and a special back to the Saints that helps them win another SB, while still being just another back in fantasy football. IE: Someone that scores from #12-25 in RB points over the season. The Saints don't care about our fantasy success and it makes sense for them to split up the carries. I'll still try to get Ingram on my team though.

Except for the last line, I agree with this statement. He'll be an effective back for the Saints but I don't think he'll be top 15 in fantasy which is what you're hoping for from a 3rd or 4th rounder.

 

[LHUCKS]

I just don't see them going overboard with Ingram because they don't have to.

This raises a good point...if Ingram is in fact as effective his rookie season as some are implying, there could be motivation to save him for the playoffs.The Eagles do it, the Pats do...a lot of teams do it.A fantasy playoff dropoff in production is a real possibility here.

 

[SproutDaddy]

I agree with Hucks. Imagine that. I'm not feeling the hype for Ingram. He may be pretty good for a rookie RB but he's not going to be top 15 for fantasy. People can talk all they want but the Saints have 4 starting caliber RB's. I just don't see them going overboard with Ingram because they don't have to.

Not until Ivory comes off the PUP list. And he will be on it to open the season. Don't think he factors much into 2011.

And Sproles, while a great addition and good at what he does, has never been starting caliber. As for Ivory, he didn't do much to get excited about last year. He had a good game against the Browns and some other crappy defense.....that's it. He also has issues with fumbling. I've never understood the love for him. As a Saints fan I'd rather he stay on the bench where he belongs. He isn't starting caliber either.

 

[Insein]

I agree with Hucks. Imagine that. I'm not feeling the hype for Ingram. He may be pretty good for a rookie RB but he's not going to be top 15 for fantasy. People can talk all they want but the Saints have 4 starting caliber RB's. I just don't see them going overboard with Ingram because they don't have to.

Not until Ivory comes off the PUP list. And he will be on it to open the season. Don't think he factors much into 2011.

And Sproles, while a great addition and good at what he does, has never been starting caliber. As for Ivory, he didn't do much to get excited about last year. He had a good game against the Browns and some other crappy defense.....that's it. He also has issues with fumbling. I've never understood the love for him. As a Saints fan I'd rather he stay on the bench where he belongs. He isn't starting caliber either.

Just another mouth to feed though. Right now it looks IMO, like Ingram will get 8-12 carries and 10-15 touches with the rest getting around 10-15 touches. Keeps Ingram fresh. He could potentially have results from that but I'm not spending a 3rd rounder on the hopes that he does.

 

[Doug B]

Just another mouth to feed though.

Unless Ingram disappoints a lot, I don't think a healthy Ivory demands carries assuming Ingram, Thomas, and Sproles are healthy. Ivory would basically be what Lynell Hamilton has been for the past two seasons.I'm higher on Ivory than Sprout Daddy, but SD is right about Ivory's fumbling. Part of it was from simply running the ball with reckless disregard for his body. And not only did that lead to fumbles, but also to shoulder separations. Ivory has guts and heart in spades, but has no real pro-level technique as a runner -- he needs to be coached into the kind of things that will help him hang onto the ball, avoid unnecessary punishment, and add to his longevity in the league.

 

[jurb26]

I just don't see them going overboard with Ingram because they don't have to.

This raises a good point...if Ingram is in fact as effective his rookie season as some are implying, there could be motivation to save him for the playoffs.The Eagles do it, the Pats do...a lot of teams do it.A fantasy playoff dropoff in production is a real possibility here.

That's only if NO can get to the playoffs and a high seed with room to spare. I don't think that's happening when they have both Atl and TB in their division. If NO needs Ingram on the field to give them the best chance at winning, he will be on the field. I'm sure they'd rather rest him on a playoff buy week than tempering his carries/touches and loosing.

 

[Abraham]

You guys expect your 3rd and 4th round rb picks to finish in the top 15 among his position?

Tough crowd.

The "if he stays healthy" argument is universal as is the "the coach doesn't care about your fantasy success" argument. Coaches care Bout winning. The titans don't spell Chris Johnson with javon ringer more then a few plays let game because getting Johnson te ball more increases their chance for success. Sean Payton isn't going to say, "you know, if we give Chris ivory the ball half a dozen times that will keep mark healthy for January". No, he's going to say "give Ingram the ### #### ball and run it down their throats!"

Thinking that by mid season there is going to be a four way rbbc is deluded. If Ingram isn't getting the ball 18-25 times a game after week 8 then I will eat my playbook.

 

[Mr Rodgers neighborhood]

I just don't see them going overboard with Ingram because they don't have to.

This raises a good point...if Ingram is in fact as effective his rookie season as some are implying, there could be motivation to save him for the playoffs.The Eagles do it, the Pats do...a lot of teams do it.A fantasy playoff dropoff in production is a real possibility here.

The Saints have two 10 win teams in there division. Not sure they'll be afforded that luxury or sitting guys.

 

[Abraham]

I would think the guy you would want rested for the playoffs would be the vet who helped win a super bowl, not the rookie.

 

[Short Corner]

I would think the guy you would want rested for the playoffs would be the vet who helped win a super bowl, not the rookie.

I want the guy who is going to help me win the SB to be rested more than the complimentary guy.

 

[Abraham]

I would think the guy you would want rested for the playoffs would be the vet who helped win a super bowl, not the rookie.

I want the guy who is going to help me win the SB to be rested more than the complimentary guy.

Just pointing out the absurdity of trying to gauge who will be rested as the season winds down.

 

[Short Corner]

I would think the guy you would want rested for the playoffs would be the vet who helped win a super bowl, not the rookie.

I want the guy who is going to help me win the SB to be rested more than the complimentary guy.

Just pointing out the absurdity of trying to gauge who will be rested as the season winds down.

I think 'rested' is less important than 'less worn down'