Martin, Blaylock, Houston, Washington (1 Viewer)

[phillzphan]

They improved their line, their QB situation can't get worse than last year and they have 3 talented RBs behind CuMart.

Will Mangini give Martin the rock until he can't hold it anymore? If Martin goes down then, who gets the call?

Who do you think is the likely candidate to break out in 06.

 

[Richard_Simmons]

Martin will lead the team with 800 yards. They will draft a RB early in 2007.

 

[Chase Stuart]

If Pennington and Martin both play 16 games, I think Martin clears 1,000 yards without breaking a sweat. Of course, those two scenarios don't seem incredibly likely.

I like Blaylock a lot. People are high on Cedric Houston, and I think they're wrong. Blaylock's a better fit for the offense and might be the best (only?) big play threat the Jets have. He looked very good in TC last year, so I expect him to look good in TC again this year. And since there's a new coaching staff in place, how you look in TC will be a big factor in where you sit on the depth chart. I expect Blaylock to be the number two guy and to spell Martin quite a bit.

Blaylock's very underrated and isn't as injury prone or as small as people seem to think. Jack of all trades guy too (special teams, etc.) that I think Mangini will like.

 

[MLBrandow]

"Talented" RBs behind him is a bit much I think. Talented to me implies a guy who is a lock for 1k+ if he gets a starting job. Perry is a talented backup. Washington is the most likely to approoach those numbers, followed by Blaylock and Houston.

Pennington/Martin is the combo here.

People are making a big deal about something that's not.

Martin will see the portly share of the load, and I predict he'll crack 1200, if for no other reason than because he'll be fighting to rise to #3 on the alltime rushing list.

One bad year and suddenly he's washed up. He has great value as an RB2 for the price of a fringe RB3/4.

 

[Gargoylez]

I will take my chances on Leon Washington. Kid has some skills and some speed. Not going to say hes a lock, but the rest don't nearly have the potential that Leon has.

A late round grab so the cost is real low.

 

[David Yudkin]

I posted a thread last week where there were whispers of Martin taking on a reduced role and that the team allegedly was not going to use Martin like in the past. (Beat writer's story in The Sporting News).

 

[Birdie048]

OK... First off, I am a fan of Cedric Houston. I own both C Mart & Houston in a contract/keeper league. I had Blaylock at some time on my roster last year too, but his injuries allowed me to drop him without concern.

I like Houston over Blaylock for the "Big Play" ability he demonstrated last year. He has the potential to move the pile and go between the tackles. He played well late in the season as a replacement for both Martin & Blaylock.

Week 14 vs Oak 28 carries 74 yards 1 TD

Week 15 at Mia 15 carries 84 yards 4 rec 40 yards

Week 17 vs Buff 16 carries 55 yard 1 TD 1 rec 6

Ended with a meager 302 yards on 81 carries (3.73 ypc) and 8 rec for 66 yards. But for a rookie who was not expected to be used as a starter, I believe in him.

Blaylock is smaller and does not appear to have the physical ability to handle to work load of 20 touchs a game. Curtis Martin has played for 11 seasons. He is near the end of his career. The new coaching staff may respect what he has done, they will also require him to do more for them than he might be physically able. Houston is the new breed of NYJ RB.

Curtis Martin 5'11" 216lb

Derrick Blaylock 5'9" 203 lb

Cedric Houston 6'0" 221 lb

Leon Washington 5'8" 210 lb

I was under the impression that Brian Schottenheimer was more a Power Running game system OC. We still do not know what Eric Mangini will install, but will he allow his OC freedom?

I vote for Cedric Houston!

 

[Chase Stuart]

Blaylock is smaller and does not appear to have the physical ability to handle to work load of 20 touchs a game.

For starters, with three solid RBs, including one of the best workhorses in NFL history, I don't see the need for Blaylock to be able to hand a heavy load. That being said, Blaylock's career high number of carries for one game, consecutive games, three straight games, and four straight games are all higher than Houston's, and he's got more yards during those games well. Hard to say that Houston's shown a better ability to handle a workload than Blaylock, who seems just as capable but was buried behind Priest Holmes his whole career.

 

[T Man]

Martin will lead the team with 800 yards. They will draft a RB early in 2007.

I agree. In redraft leagues, there is little to no value after Martin and maybe Houston.NYJ will address the RB spot next year in the draft or FA. Martin will still be the primary carrier this year, but it will be more of an RBBC then ever before in NY.

 

[ashybaby]

I think Houston will get another shot at some time and once again will play well. Considering the state of the Jets last year, he was a nice surprise. Watched every game and he by far looked like the best back the Jets had last year. Blaylock can't go more than a couple games without getting hurt.

 

[Mystery Achiever]

Uh, I think Martin already broke out. (yes, i know what you meant) I think he'll still get a lot of work this year.

For anyone interested in Jets info Sat July 29, Jody MacDonald (ESPN) is do his 10am show from Jets camp. Anyone not in the area can listen at 1050espnradio.com

 

[rascal]

I posted a thread last week where there were whispers of Martin taking on a reduced role and that the team allegedly was not going to use Martin like in the past. (Beat writer's story in The Sporting News).

But is it true?

 

[Rovers]

Blaylock is smaller and does not appear to have the physical ability to handle to work load of 20 touchs a game. 

For starters, with three solid RBs, including one of the best workhorses in NFL history, I don't see the need for Blaylock to be able to hand a heavy load. That being said, Blaylock's career high number of carries for one game, consecutive games, three straight games, and four straight games are all higher than Houston's, and he's got more yards during those games well. Hard to say that Houston's shown a better ability to handle a workload than Blaylock, who seems just as capable but was buried behind Priest Holmes his whole career.

How could you possibly compare Houston, behind one of the worst O lines that ever played in the NFL to what Blaylock did behind one of the best ever at KC? I quote:

Blaylock's career high number of carries for one game, consecutive games, three straight games, and four straight games are all higher than Houston's, and he's got more yards during those games well.

That is about as pointless a comparison I've ever seen. ANY RB would have gotten more yards than Houston had behind that KC O line.

Houston did not get hurt, but agreed, the data sample is too small to declare him as "durable", but Blaylock has gone down what, two years in a row now? That, as a minimum is a red flag on Blaylock's abilty to stay healthy even in a limited role.... after all, he has always had a limited role in terms of a full season, yet has gotten injured anyway. There is good reason to suspect Blaylock is at best a COP and 3rd down RB, but there is no data to support the idea that Houston CAN'T be.

I also have to question why the Jets drafted Washington, a guy with a very similar skill set as Blaylock's. Remember, it was cheaper to keep Blaylock than to cut him this year.

Add it all together, and I see Houston as the most likely to both be Martin's replacement if he gets injured, and as the guy most likely to spell him. Tannenbaum came right out and said that Martin's days of 350 carries are gone. I'm convinced that Mangini will get Martin the ball enough to show the HoF'r some respect, but that's about it. The Jets will use this year to evaluate the RB's they have, and start thinking about next year's first round pick.

Remeber too, that Houston was a long term projection as a second rounder after his junior year. Then, the thyroid condition severely limited him on his senior year. In addition, it often takes the doctors a good 6 months to get the thyroid med cocktail right. It's a best guess, wait a month, blood tests, adjust, wait a month.... it's a sort of trial and error approach, until they get it right. Then, Houston would need some time to get back into football shape.

I'm convinced we haven't seen enough of Houston to make a judgement, and especially not behind that putrid offensive line. Aside from that, Houston is the best between the tackles runner of the whole group. He doesn't have the same sort of outside speed, but that is in fact where he got most of his yardage in those 3 games, because the O line was so awful. Washington is the wild card.

 

[Chase Stuart]

How could you possibly compare Houston, behind one of the worst O lines that ever played in the NFL to what Blaylock did behind one of the best ever at KC?

That is about as pointless a comparison I've ever seen. ANY RB would have gotten more yards than Houston had behind that KC O line.

We get it. You like Houston. But your superlatives don't mask the truth or sound convincing.For starters, Mike Cloud ran 49 times for 115 yards in 2002 for the Chiefs. Apparently not ANY RB could have done well.

And how well did Houston do as a starter? You're all over Houston because of four games, his work as a starter from weeks 14-17. He ran 64 times for 227 yards, 3.55 YPC. During those four weeks the other Jets RBs (Derrick Blaylock and BJ Askew) ran 20 times for 93 yards, 4.65 YPC. So Houston ran an extra 44 times and gained an additional 134 yards (3.05 YPC).

And you're ripping on Blaylock's work with KC why?

2004

All three RBs had between 118 and 196 carries and 19 and 25 catches.

Priest Holmes: 4.6 YPC, 9.8 YPR, 1 TD every 14 carries

Larry Johnson: 4.8 YPC, 12.6 YPR, 1 TD every 13.3 carries

Derrick Blaylock: 4.6 YPC, 9.8 YPR, 1 TD every 14.7 carries

So Derrick Blaylock more than held his own against two of the very best RBs in the league in 2005. Surely if Blaylock was just a product of the Chiefs OL, he would have looked much worse than Larry Johnson and Priest Holmes.

Houston did not get hurt, but agreed, the data sample is too small to declare him as "durable", but Blaylock has gone down what, two years in a row now? That, as a minimum is a red flag on Blaylock's abilty to stay healthy even in a limited role.... after all, he has always had a limited role in terms of a full season, yet has gotten injured anyway. There is good reason to suspect Blaylock is at best a COP and 3rd down RB, but there is no data to support the idea that Houston CAN'T be.

Blaylock broke his foot last year. As soon as you convince me that the bones in Derrick Blaylock's feet are inferior to those of the average NFL RB, I'll believe he's injury prone. I don't think there's very good reason to suspect that Blaylok is at best a COP at all, based on his 54 carries in consecutive games. But it's meaningless anyway, because there's no reason for him to rush 27 times a game when the Jets have Martin and Houston.

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

Historically speaking, all of these guys are longshots to have a significant fantasy impact.

I'd say the guys who have the best odds are Blaylock (capable backup, albeit for KC and he's had some injury issues) and Washington (4th rounders don't make impacts very often, but there have been a couple).

 

[Chase Stuart]

Historically speaking, all of these guys are longshots to have a significant fantasy impact.

I don't really know what this means. But I'm pretty sure Martin's history would tell you he's not a longshot to have a significant fantasy impact. He's not going to be a RB1, but he certainly isn't a longshot to finish in the top 24 RBs. His ADP is RB34, but if he stays healthy he should clear that without too much difficulty.

 

[Rovers]

How could you possibly compare Houston, behind one of the worst O lines that ever played in the NFL to what Blaylock did behind one of the best ever at KC?

That is about as pointless a comparison I've ever seen. ANY RB would have gotten more yards than Houston had behind that KC O line.

We get it. You like Houston. But your superlatives don't mask the truth or sound convincing.For starters, Mike Cloud ran 49 times for 115 yards in 2002 for the Chiefs. Apparently not ANY RB could have done well.

And how well did Houston do as a starter? You're all over Houston because of four games, his work as a starter from weeks 14-17. He ran 64 times for 227 yards, 3.55 YPC. During those four weeks the other Jets RBs (Derrick Blaylock and BJ Askew) ran 20 times for 93 yards, 4.65 YPC. So Houston ran an extra 44 times and gained an additional 134 yards (3.05 YPC).

And you're ripping on Blaylock's work with KC why?

2004

All three RBs had between 118 and 196 carries and 19 and 25 catches.

Priest Holmes: 4.6 YPC, 9.8 YPR, 1 TD every 14 carries

Larry Johnson: 4.8 YPC, 12.6 YPR, 1 TD every 13.3 carries

Derrick Blaylock: 4.6 YPC, 9.8 YPR, 1 TD every 14.7 carries

So Derrick Blaylock more than held his own against two of the very best RBs in the league in 2005. Surely if Blaylock was just a product of the Chiefs OL, he would have looked much worse than Larry Johnson and Priest Holmes.

Houston did not get hurt, but agreed, the data sample is too small to declare him as "durable", but Blaylock has gone down what, two years in a row now? That, as a minimum is a red flag on Blaylock's abilty to stay healthy even in a limited role.... after all, he has always had a limited role in terms of a full season, yet has gotten injured anyway. There is good reason to suspect Blaylock is at best a COP and 3rd down RB, but there is no data to support the idea that Houston CAN'T be.

Blaylock broke his foot last year. As soon as you convince me that the bones in Derrick Blaylock's feet are inferior to those of the average NFL RB, I'll believe he's injury prone. I don't think there's very good reason to suspect that Blaylok is at best a COP at all, based on his 54 carries in consecutive games. But it's meaningless anyway, because there's no reason for him to rush 27 times a game when the Jets have Martin and Houston.

"WE" get it? Um.... get what? Actually, I am not at all convinced Houston is, or should be the guy. I do believe that saying he can't be is a less objective position to take. Blaylock had 19 carries against Atlanta in 2004, and promptly got hurt the next week at Indy. He missed a week, and then returned to start the next 5 weeks, with 86 carries (only an average of 17 carries per game) before a season ending injury. He comes back with the Jets in 2005, and in limited action, again gets injured in week 5 and misses the next 9 games. Then, he didn't participate in team drills in the mini camp this year, he saw only limited time in the other aspects of OTA's. The Jets, less than forthcoming with info, just said he was resting due to a "minor" injury, type unamed.

Blaylock also missed 4 games in 2002, had only 23 carries in 2003, which was the only year that he's ever played 16 games. The last two years, he has missed 13 games out of 32. He is approaching DeS Foster territory, missing about 40% of the games, and was only a starter in six of the 20 games he did play in.

I get it.... you like Blaylock.

 

[diesel7982]

If Pennington and Martin both play 16 games, I think Martin clears 1,000 yards without breaking a sweat. Of course, those two scenarios don't seem incredibly likely.

I like Blaylock a lot. People are high on Cedric Houston, and I think they're wrong. Blaylock's a better fit for the offense and might be the best (only?) big play threat the Jets have. He looked very good in TC last year, so I expect him to look good in TC again this year. And since there's a new coaching staff in place, how you look in TC will be a big factor in where you sit on the depth chart. I expect Blaylock to be the number two guy and to spell Martin quite a bit.

Blaylock's very underrated and isn't as injury prone or as small as people seem to think. Jack of all trades guy too (special teams, etc.) that I think Mangini will like.

Came here to post about the exact same thing.

 

[MLBrandow]

Blaylock also missed 4 games in 2002, had only 23 carries in 2003, which was the only year that he's ever played 16 games. The last two years, he has missed 13 games out of 32. He is approaching DeS Foster territory, missing about 40% of the games, and was only a starter in six of the 20 games he did play in.

I get it.... you like Blaylock.

Thought I'd point out that the last paragraph of your analysis is silly, because he was pretty much relegated to the practice squad in 2002, and barely graduated in 2003.His games were not missed due to being injured, but due to not being on the active roster, hence the "did not play".

 

[Rovers]

Blaylock also missed 4 games in 2002, had only 23 carries in 2003, which was the only year that he's ever played 16 games. The last two years, he has missed 13 games out of 32. He is approaching DeS Foster territory, missing about 40% of the games, and was only a starter in six of the 20 games he did play in. 

I get it.... you like Blaylock.

Thought I'd point out that the last paragraph of your analysis is silly, because he was pretty much relegated to the practice squad in 2002, and barely graduated in 2003.His games were not missed due to being injured, but due to not being on the active roster, hence the "did not play".

He was inactive in 2001, and you could well be right about 2002, as to why he did not play in 4 games. OK, so now, what is silly about missing 40% of games in the last two years due to injury? Ah, I gotchya.... it was silly to mention he played in every game in 2003 because he wasn't on the field.... is that it?

 

[MLBrandow]

Blaylock also missed 4 games in 2002, had only 23 carries in 2003, which was the only year that he's ever played 16 games. The last two years, he has missed 13 games out of 32. He is approaching DeS Foster territory, missing about 40% of the games, and was only a starter in six of the 20 games he did play in.  

I get it.... you like Blaylock.

Thought I'd point out that the last paragraph of your analysis is silly, because he was pretty much relegated to the practice squad in 2002, and barely graduated in 2003.His games were not missed due to being injured, but due to not being on the active roster, hence the "did not play".

He was inactive in 2001, and you could well be right about 2002, as to why he did not play in 4 games. OK, so now, what is silly about missing 40% of games in the last two years due to injury? Ah, I gotchya.... it was silly to mention he played in every game in 2003 because he wasn't on the field.... is that it?

Yeah pretty much.The point you're trying to make (at least I think) is that he's not durable enough to be a starting RB.

The point it looks like you end up with though is "look at this guy he only starts 40% of the time".

The former tells me he's an injury risk, and the latter just tells me he's a backup RB, which we all already knew.

If it makes you feel any better, you've convinced me that if Martin goes down and I can get my hands on Blaylock, to use him and then trade him away as fast as possible, then proceed to grab Cedric Houston or Leon Washington (whomever wins the depth chart battle).

 

[Traders2001]

If Pennington and Martin both play 16 games, I think Martin clears 1,000 yards without breaking a sweat. Of course, those two scenarios don't seem incredibly likely.

I like Blaylock a lot. People are high on Cedric Houston, and I think they're wrong. Blaylock's a better fit for the offense and might be the best (only?) big play threat the Jets have. He looked very good in TC last year, so I expect him to look good in TC again this year. And since there's a new coaching staff in place, how you look in TC will be a big factor in where you sit on the depth chart. I expect Blaylock to be the number two guy and to spell Martin quite a bit.

Blaylock's very underrated and isn't as injury prone or as small as people seem to think. Jack of all trades guy too (special teams, etc.) that I think Mangini will like.

Blaylock has nt been healthy for two years in a row , and by the way he still is nt ready to practice. Blaylock is a non factor . There is only 1 guy besides Martin who can carry the load and it s Houston.

 

[diesel7982]

If Pennington and Martin both play 16 games, I think Martin clears 1,000 yards without breaking a sweat. Of course, those two scenarios don't seem incredibly likely.

I like Blaylock a lot. People are high on Cedric Houston, and I think they're wrong. Blaylock's a better fit for the offense and might be the best (only?) big play threat the Jets have. He looked very good in TC last year, so I expect him to look good in TC again this year. And since there's a new coaching staff in place, how you look in TC will be a big factor in where you sit on the depth chart. I expect Blaylock to be the number two guy and to spell Martin quite a bit.

Blaylock's very underrated and isn't as injury prone or as small as people seem to think. Jack of all trades guy too (special teams, etc.) that I think Mangini will like.

Blaylock has nt been healthy for two years in a row , and by the way he still is nt ready to practice. Blaylock is a non factor . There is only 1 guy besides Martin who can carry the load and it s Houston.

You feel comfortable making this assumption based off 4 games, when Houston couldnt "carry the load" in college?

 

[KnowledgeReignsSupreme]

There is only 1 guy besides Martin who can carry the load and it s Houston.

Has anyone currently on the Jets roster proven they are the guy who can carry the load besides Martin?

 

[Rovers]

Blaylock also missed 4 games in 2002, had only 23 carries in 2003, which was the only year that he's ever played 16 games. The last two years, he has missed 13 games out of 32. He is approaching DeS Foster territory, missing about 40% of the games, and was only a starter in six of the 20 games he did play in.  

I get it.... you like Blaylock.

Thought I'd point out that the last paragraph of your analysis is silly, because he was pretty much relegated to the practice squad in 2002, and barely graduated in 2003.His games were not missed due to being injured, but due to not being on the active roster, hence the "did not play".

He was inactive in 2001, and you could well be right about 2002, as to why he did not play in 4 games. OK, so now, what is silly about missing 40% of games in the last two years due to injury? Ah, I gotchya.... it was silly to mention he played in every game in 2003 because he wasn't on the field.... is that it?

Yeah pretty much.The point you're trying to make (at least I think) is that he's not durable enough to be a starting RB.

The point it looks like you end up with though is "look at this guy he only starts 40% of the time".

The former tells me he's an injury risk, and the latter just tells me he's a backup RB, which we all already knew.

If it makes you feel any better, you've convinced me that if Martin goes down and I can get my hands on Blaylock, to use him and then trade him away as fast as possible, then proceed to grab Cedric Houston or Leon Washington (whomever wins the depth chart battle).

OK, let me clear this up, as apparently I haven't made myself clear. First, I have nothing against Blaylock, I'm a die hard Jets homer. Talent wise, I think he is presently the best RB on the roster. I wish he were more durable. He isn't.

In the last two years, he's missed 40% of his games due to injuries, and that was in a very limited role, starting in only 6 of the 19 games he did play in, missing a total of 13 games and parts of 3 more out of 32. Even though he did come back last year, he probably pushed it. Is the foot still the problem that caused him to be held out of the OTA's this spring? I don't know, and the Jets aren't talking.

You've got a talented guy, with a documented injury history who is still injured. If some people have a different take, that's fine by me.

The truth is we are talking about fourth tier RB's here, including Martin. (and I love the guy). I'll lay dollars to doughnuts that no Jet RB cracks the top 30. This is a team in total rebuild, who's RB of the future is now in his last year in college. There is a VERY good chance that the Jets 1st round pick next year will be the dynasty league rookie draft concensus number one next year.

I would not want to have any Jets RB this year as a #1,2 or 3 RB in a start two league. Martin is still probably the only viable #4 RB. Just MHO.

 

[Chase Stuart]

To those who think Blaylock is a nonfactor, two questions:

1) Do you think a RBs that are not durable are more likely to break bones in their feet than RBs that are durable?

2) What do you make of Blaylock posting nearly identical numbers to both Larry Johnson and Priest Holmes, two of the best RBs in the NFL the last three years.

 

[David Yudkin]

One bad year and suddenly he's washed up.

History would tend to say this statement is pretty accurate. Total number of 1,000 yard rushing seasons by RB 33 or older since the merger (1970): 3.John Riggins 1983 1347John Riggins 1984 1239 Franco Harris 1983 1007 Those are the only two RB that fell out of the 1,000 RB and returned later on to have a 1,000 yard rushing seasons at 33 or older. And there were 68 RB that suited up at 33 years old in that timeframe.On the bright side, there were 11 times where a RB 33 or older scored at least 140 fantasy points.John Riggins 1983 281.60 John Riggins 1984 212.20 Marcus Allen 1993 190.20 Franco Harris 1983 170.50 Larry Csonka 1979 169.20 Marcus Allen 1996 164.00 Emmitt Smith 2004 163.25 MacArthur Lane 1976 158.80 Ottis Anderson 1990 158.30 Marcus Allen 1994 147.80 Marcus Allen 1995 140.00 Riggins is the only one to get over 300 carries (which he did twice). Only Emmitt and Franco Harris could get to 250 carries.IMO, the best Martin owners could hope for would be a season similar to Emmitt's last year (ended up as the #23 RB). I'm not saying that Martin couldn't get to 1,000 yards again, but I just don't see it happening.

 

[David Yudkin]

To those who think Blaylock is a nonfactor, two questions:

1) Do you think a RBs that are not durable are more likely to break bones in their feet than RBs that are durable?

2) What do you make of Blaylock posting nearly identical numbers to both Larry Johnson and Priest Holmes, two of the best RBs in the NFL the last three years.

I don't consider Blaylock a non-factor, but I'll answer anyway.1) I don't see how any player in a physical game such as football is more or less durable because he broke a foot. Someone I know broker a foot when his foot fell asleep and he stood up the wrong way and that's someone that works out all the time. Does that mean he's not durable?

2) Those opposed to Blaylock as a legit candidate to the RB workload in NY will say anyone could have posted big numbers running for KC. Remember, Larry Johnson + Chase Stuart were one of the best RB tandems over the course of the last 8 weeks of last season.

That being said, I think Blaylock is closer to Trung Canidate than Priest Holmes, but that doesn't mean he should not have a chance to at least show what he could do.

 

[Chase Stuart]

To those who think Blaylock is a nonfactor, two questions:

1) Do you think a RBs that are not durable are more likely to break bones in their feet than RBs that are durable?

2) What do you make of Blaylock posting nearly identical numbers to both Larry Johnson and Priest Holmes, two of the best RBs in the NFL the last three years.

I don't consider Blaylock a non-factor, but I'll answer anyway.1) I don't see how any player in a physical game such as football is more or less durable because he broke a foot. Someone I know broker a foot when his foot fell asleep and he stood up the wrong way and that's someone that works out all the time. Does that mean he's not durable?

2) Those opposed to Blaylock as a legit candidate to the RB workload in NY will say anyone could have posted big numbers running for KC. Remember, Larry Johnson + Chase Stuart were one of the best RB tandems over the course of the last 8 weeks of last season.

That being said, I think Blaylock is closer to Trung Canidate than Priest Holmes, but that doesn't mean he should not have a chance to at least show what he could do.

1) Well that was the point. I find it hard to ever say a broken bone -- but especially one of the ones in your feet or hands -- is the sign of durability.2) I understand that anyone could have posted big numbers, but it says something to me when a guy posts the same numbers. When Clinton Portis averages 5.5 YPC and Reuben Droughns avearges 4.5 YPC, sure we can say anyone can do well in Denver. But when Priest Holmes averages 4.6 YPC and scores a TD every 14 carries, and Derrick Blaylock averages 4.6 YPC and scorse a TD every 15 carries, that's a different story IMO. And I watched Blaylock in TC last year, and he was very good.

(FWIW, I don't think Trung was too bad -- on a bad Steve Spurrier team he still averaged over 4 YPC on 142 carries.)

Here's an article from last September in the New York Post.

GO ahead and try to wipe the smile off Derrick Blaylock's face. You'll have an easier time scoring a Saturday-night dinner reservation at Il Mulino. It's not going to happen.

Go ahead and try to find a teammate who doesn't have something good to say about Blaylock. That won't happen either.

You don't know Blaylock very well yet, because the former Chiefs' backup running back and special-teams ace, acquired by the Jets as a free agent in the offseason, had only a few preseason carries and you haven't yet seen him deployed in the Mike Heimerdinger offense or on special teams.

In time, though, you'll get to know him and you're going to like him. And, while you get to like him, the Chiefs will find out how badly they miss him. That, in fact, will start as quickly as Sunday, when the Jets play the Chiefs in Kansas City, where Blaylock will face his former mates.

When the Jets' schedule first came out, Blaylock took immediate notice and couldn't believe his eyes.

"I was like, 'Wow . . . opening up with my former team,' " Blaylock said. "I'm looking forward to it. I'm going to be pretty pumped up. Not too much to where I get myself out of sync. I'll calm down once I get in there."

As backup to Priest Holmes, Blaylock and the Kansas City running game never missed a beat whenever Holmes was sidelined by injury. He was the Jets' rapid-response answer to the loss of LaMont Jordan to free agency.

Don't, however, expect him to be Jordan or do the things Jordan did. He's a different kind of player, a different kind of weapon.

That doesn't make Blaylock any less valuable to the Jets than Jordan was, though. He, in fact, could end up being a lot more valuable.

The one thing you won't hear from Blaylock that you heard out of Jordan at times was grumbling about carries, playing time, etc.

Blaylock's embracing of his roles without complaint is one of the things that make him such a unique find. Imagine that: a high-quality backup who understands and accepts his role.

"The guy is a heck of a football player," Herman Edwards said. "He can run the ball. He's a good special-teams guy. He is a team guy. I mean, the guys on this team love the guy. He's a perfect fit for us. This guy's a good football player.

"He can run. He can catch the ball. He can do a lot of things that you anticipate a good back should be able to do. The thing he brings to the table, too, is he's an outstanding special-teams player."

Chiefs' kick returner Dante Hall, whose top blocker was Blaylock, remains one of Blaylock's close friends today.

As a key member of Mike Westhoff's special-teams punt and kick coverage teams, Blaylock is now one of those poor souls faced with trying to stop Hall from taking a return or two "to the house" on the Jets.

"Covering Dante, you've just got to break down and tackle Dante, because you never know what he's going to do," Blaylock said. "He's very shifty and unpredictable. They can have the wedge going one way and he'll go the other way. With him, you've just got to break down and make the play.

"Instead of blocking for him, I'm going to be one of those guys trying to tackle him," Blaylock said. "It's tough tackling him, but if you get guys around him it's easy. We've got to corral the ball."

Blaylock said his closest friends on the Chiefs include CB Dexter McCleon, FB Tony Richardson, Holmes and, of course, Hall.

"I have nothing but love for Kansas City," Blaylock said. "But come Sunday, we're going to have put that off."

 

[Rovers]

To those who think Blaylock is a nonfactor, two questions:

1) Do you think a RBs that are not durable are more likely to break bones in their feet than RBs that are durable?

2) What do you make of Blaylock posting nearly identical numbers to both Larry Johnson and Priest Holmes, two of the best RBs in the NFL the last three years.

1) No.2) The KC O line.

But, I do think that players, any position, that have missed big chunks of playing time over two years, due to several different injuries are certainly an injury risk.

IF he stays healthy, I do think there is a chance he could surprise. That is dependent on several things:

1) The Jets have moved towards a fast athletic offensive line, but not to zone blocking. If Mangini plans to use a lot of pulling, and "return" to the way the Jets used to run the ball, a lot of outside stuff, Blaylock has the speed to do well. This is how Martin got most of his yardage in NY, and both Ferguson and Mangold block well in space. Kendall can still get outside too. If Mangini wants to run between the tackles, Houston is a much better fit. The kid doesn't go down on first contact, but lacks the speed to be a real good outside RB.

2) Mangini will avoid being predictable in his play calling the way Herm Edwards was based on the RB in the backfield. When opposing D's saw Jordan, they knew it was most likely a between the tackles running play. I can see Blaylock being a good cut back RB, but he doesn't have Houstin's tackle breaking ability.

Houston may well offer less predictabilty. He doesn't have the outside speed of Blaylock or Washington, but he did show he could run outside and get yardage, but lacks that game breaking speed of the others.

If Blaylock is as good as LJ and Priest, which appears to be what you are saying here, why did KC let him walk? Injury concerns? The hope that Holmes has another 2 good years left? At 10X's the money?

 

[Chase Stuart]

Here's also what Curtis Martin had to say about Blaylock last year in Newsday:

"I like Blaylock," Martin said. "I like his attitude more than anything. I think he has the ability. He has that breakaway speed that LaMont had, also. But he's a different type of back. He's not necessarily a run-you-over-type guy like LaMont is, but he's a little quicker. I think we complement each other well."

 

[Chase Stuart]

2) The KC O line.

If Blaylock is as good as LJ and Priest, which appears to be what you are saying here, why did KC let him walk? Injury concerns? The hope that Holmes has another 2 good years left? At 10X's the money?

I still don't understand this. LJ, Priest and Blaylock played behind the same OL, so saying "The KC O line" doesn't advance things.Kansas City let Blaylock go for the same reason the Jets let Jordan go, and because they had the second best RB in the NFL on their bench.

 

[Rovers]

2) The KC O line.

If Blaylock is as good as LJ and Priest, which appears to be what you are saying here, why did KC let him walk? Injury concerns? The hope that Holmes has another 2 good years left? At 10X's the money? 

I still don't understand this. LJ, Priest and Blaylock played behind the same OL, so saying "The KC O line" doesn't advance things.Kansas City let Blaylock go for the same reason the Jets let Jordan go, and because they had the second best RB in the NFL on their bench.

Ah, c'mon now Chase! Jordan went to a situation where he would be the starter, no question, and for what, 4X's the money Blaylock got? LJ wasn't on the bench, he was starting, and with Holme's age, and yes, recent serious questions about HIS durabilty.... I also expanded on that response, (The KC O line), pehaps you missed it. Not much point in any continued participation in this thread, me thinks. Your reply didn't exactly advance the conversation either. I do have one question though, given your stallwort defense of Blaylock here, despite the fact that I believe I have been pretty objective, including comments like he could surprise, given his health, etc.... what do you project his stats at?

 

[MLBrandow]

I do have one question though, given your stallwort defense of Blaylock here, despite the fact that I believe I have been pretty objective, including comments like he could surprise, given his health, etc.... what do you project his stats at?

He's not going to start. Why project a backup's stats in a backup role?Do you mean if he started a game(s)?

 

[Chase Stuart]

2) The KC O line.

If Blaylock is as good as LJ and Priest, which appears to be what you are saying here, why did KC let him walk? Injury concerns? The hope that Holmes has another 2 good years left? At 10X's the money?

I still don't understand this. LJ, Priest and Blaylock played behind the same OL, so saying "The KC O line" doesn't advance things.Kansas City let Blaylock go for the same reason the Jets let Jordan go, and because they had the second best RB in the NFL on their bench.

Ah, c'mon now Chase! Jordan went to a situation where he would be the starter, no question, and for what, 4X's the money

That has nothing to do with why the Jets let Jordan go. The Jets let Jordan go because he was a FA. The Chiefs let Blaylock go because he was a FA. Neither team could afford to spend that much money on a backup RB. It's as simple as that.

 

[Rovers]

2) The KC O line.

If Blaylock is as good as LJ and Priest, which appears to be what you are saying here, why did KC let him walk? Injury concerns? The hope that Holmes has another 2 good years left? At 10X's the money? 

I still don't understand this. LJ, Priest and Blaylock played behind the same OL, so saying "The KC O line" doesn't advance things.Kansas City let Blaylock go for the same reason the Jets let Jordan go, and because they had the second best RB in the NFL on their bench.

Ah, c'mon now Chase! Jordan went to a situation where he would be the starter, no question, and for what, 4X's the money

That has nothing to do with why the Jets let Jordan go. The Jets let Jordan go because he was a FA. The Chiefs let Blaylock go because he was a FA. Neither team could afford to spend that much money on a backup RB. It's as simple as that.

OK, last post here for me, for sure..... Jordan left the Jets because he wanted OUT. He wanted to start somewhere, and got a huge contract, far, far more than what Blaylock got. The Jets wanted to KEEP Jordan but could not come ANYWHERE near the Oakland offer. Blaylock was relatively cheap, and as far as I know, KC made no effort to sign him, at the going rate for a quality backup 3rd down RB. See what Foster and Chester Taylor got as backups.... Blaylock was dirt cheap in comparison. Frankly, well, nevermind. Beating a dead horse.

 

[David Yudkin]

2) The KC O line.

If Blaylock is as good as LJ and Priest, which appears to be what you are saying here, why did KC let him walk? Injury concerns? The hope that Holmes has another 2 good years left? At 10X's the money? 

I still don't understand this. LJ, Priest and Blaylock played behind the same OL, so saying "The KC O line" doesn't advance things.Kansas City let Blaylock go for the same reason the Jets let Jordan go, and because they had the second best RB in the NFL on their bench.

Ah, c'mon now Chase! Jordan went to a situation where he would be the starter, no question, and for what, 4X's the money

That has nothing to do with why the Jets let Jordan go. The Jets let Jordan go because he was a FA. The Chiefs let Blaylock go because he was a FA. Neither team could afford to spend that much money on a backup RB. It's as simple as that.

OK, last post here for me, for sure..... Jordan left the Jets because he wanted OUT. He wanted to start somewhere, and got a huge contract, far, far more than what Blaylock got. The Jets wanted to KEEP Jordan but could not come ANYWHERE near the Oakland offer. Blaylock was relatively cheap, and as far as I know, KC made no effort to sign him, at the going rate for a quality backup 3rd down RB. See what Foster and Chester Taylor got as backups.... Blaylock was dirt cheap in comparison. Frankly, well, nevermind. Beating a dead horse.

KC at the time had Priest and LJ. I doubt they thought that a year later Holmes might not ever play again.

 

[Z-Dog]

A lot of you are getting lost in the numbers.

Curtis Martin is old, and not the answer for a rebuilding team. However, he is talented, and an important figure for the young guys. He will get work, and extend his career, but he will not be the feature back like he once was.

Derrick Blaylock will get the shot he never got last year. He is signed to a reasonable contract, and the Jets are hoping that last year was just bad luck. Blaylock was brought aboard as a possible successor to Martin, and as far as I can tell, a broken foot shouldn't change that.

Cedric Houston was a lottery ticket. He has paid off in that he appears to at least fill a role, and unlike most 6th-round picks, he looks like he'll have an NFL career. But let's not get carried away! He was playing in a lost season, in garbage time. The numbers he generated are meaningless. He looked decent as a runner, with more speed than I thought he would have. He will also be given an opportunity to win the job, but right now, he looks like a short-yardage back who will catch a few passes.

Washington should abrely even be in this conversation. The Jets may keep 4 RBs, but with BJ Askew also in the mix for carries, I'm waiting until this kid wins a roster spot.