My Pats Projections (1 Viewer)

[David Yudkin]

Brady 370-555-4420-34-10, 30-50-1

Hoyer 15-25-150-1-1, 10-0-0

BJGE 175-780-10, 10-75-0

Woodhead 100-450-3, 30-270-1

Faulk 25-100-0, 10-80-1

Vereen 75-350-2, 5-60-0

Ridley 40-160-1, 5-45-0

Welker 85-975-7

Ochocinco 50-600-5

Branch 45-540-4

Edelman 10-125-1

Price 20-325-2

Hernandez 70-900-4

Gronkowski 40-525-9

Others Receiving 5-50-1

Totals:

385-580-4570-35-11 Passing

455-1890-17 Rushing

385-4570-35 Receiving

 

[rizzler]

Proud Brady owner, right here.

 

[TD Ryan]

no reason to doubt those numbers, but you've made some clear statements with them David:

1. Ridley does not emerge

despite the preseason hype, Ridley doesn't take over for the non-fumbling BJGE

2. Ocho doesn't catch on

you buy into the notion that Ocho is struggling with the playbook/terminology - so do I.

3. Brady tears it up

despite Ocho struggling, the Pats are loaded with weapons for Brady

4. Gronk/Hernandez

The TEs are now like the WRs, some are yardage guys, some are goal line guys. Gronk and Hernandez have both had great camps.

 

[Sabertooth]

Very good projection IMO. Hernandez is a steal.

 

[ponchsox]

I highly doubt Vereen ends with better numbers then Ridley after missing all of camp.

 

[Stealthycat]

Faulk 25-100-0, 10-80-1

Vereen 75-350-2, 5-60-0

Ridley 40-160-1, 5-45-0

Ridley takes msot of what Vereen and Faulk would have gotten ....... that's what Ridley does, he's been a beast in camp, in pre-season and The Patriots will reward that with playing time

 

[CentralPA]

Just because Ochocinco is having trouble right now with the playbook doesn't mean he won't figure it out. I think he is going to score between 7-9 TDs. Didn't Welker hurt his neck or isn't it that bad?

 

[David Yudkin]

Faulk 25-100-0, 10-80-1Vereen 75-350-2, 5-60-0Ridley 40-160-1, 5-45-0Ridley takes msot of what Vereen and Faulk would have gotten ....... that's what Ridley does, he's been a beast in camp, in pre-season and The Patriots will reward that with playing time

Vereen will end up missing 2-3 weeks of camp. Halfway through the season, it will be like it never happened. I don't see why they brought back Faulk unless it was to mentor the younger guys. They will probably throw him in the lineup on some key third down situations but I don't see how he gets used much (and he will probably start the year on the PUP list).The Pats haven't seen Vereen much against live competition, which is why I think he might see some end of game mop up duty to see what the kid's got to offer. As you said, they have had a glipde of Ridley, but he has yet to face a starting defense. He's played against second and third stringers. Yes, he's looked good, but in the past BJGE looked like a beast too and until last year did not get much regular playing time. IMO, what Ridely did is probably cost Morris a roster spot.Juggle the production of these three guys however you want, the bottom line is that it's mostly table scraps divied up among three guys (unless they dump Faulk which would make less sense at this point than bringing him back in the first place). I don't see any of them being fantasy relevant this year unless BJGE or Woodhead gets hurt (or unless they get into game action and go absolutely nuts and BJGE and Woodehead underperform).

 

[Vision6]

Interesting Hernandez prediction. Whenever I see that guy play he looks special, love him as a TE2 this year.

 

[KeithKow]

Interesting Hernandez prediction. Whenever I see that guy play he looks special, love him as a TE2 this year.

I love him as a TE1 this year. WR slotted in at the TE spot? Yes, please.

 

[Vision6]

Interesting Hernandez prediction. Whenever I see that guy play he looks special, love him as a TE2 this year.

I love him as a TE1 this year. WR slotted in at the TE spot? Yes, please.

2 late picks on Jared Cook + Hernandez =

 

[Banger]

Just because Ochocinco is having trouble right now with the playbook doesn't mean he won't figure it out. I think he is going to score between 7-9 TDs. Didn't Welker hurt his neck or isn't it that bad?

I thought he was done when they got him and he's done nothing to change my mind. It's the best possible landing place because he can hide amongst all the weapons but I stayed about 100 miles from him in all my drafts.

 

[az_prof]

Interesting Hernandez prediction. Whenever I see that guy play he looks special, love him as a TE2 this year.

I love him as a TE1 this year. WR slotted in at the TE spot? Yes, please.

I think overall the numbers are believable. I do tend to think that OCHO will steal more looks from Branch than this projects though and he will score a few more TDs. I see Branch as being closer to 30 receptions and Ocho being closer to 65. He still have two weeks to learn the system and he is a veteran who understands football. I think Branch will be the loser here.

 

[KeithKow]

Just because Ochocinco is having trouble right now with the playbook doesn't mean he won't figure it out. I think he is going to score between 7-9 TDs. Didn't Welker hurt his neck or isn't it that bad?

Welker expected to be fine. Spoke with media today, which never happens with the Pats if there is a serious injury.

 

[David Yudkin]

Interesting Hernandez prediction. Whenever I see that guy play he looks special, love him as a TE2 this year.

I love him as a TE1 this year. WR slotted in at the TE spot? Yes, please.

I think overall the numbers are believable. I do tend to think that OCHO will steal more looks from Branch than this projects though and he will score a few more TDs. I see Branch as being closer to 30 receptions and Ocho being closer to 65. He still have two weeks to learn the system and he is a veteran who understands football. I think Branch will be the loser here.

I tend to disagree if only because we already know how Brady and Branch work together and Branch put up very good numbers once he came back to NE. We don't know how well Ocho and Brady will work together and so far it's been one tick above a disaster. From people I know that have seen Ocho as a Pat, in addition to whatever confusion he may be facing, they also have said he has lost a step and is not getting much seperation.Obviously we have no idea when, if, and how long it might take to get Ocho up to speed. But from the sounds of things it does not sound like the Bengals ran a system anywhere near similar to what the Pats run. Again, I think the Pats are probably smart enough to scale down the playbook and initally give Ocho say 20 plays to learn and leave the rest of the playbook for later. But overall, I don't see a rebirth a la Randy Moss by any stretch. The Pats have way more weapons than the Bengals did (or at least used). Too many options will likely repress all the Pats fantasy numbers save fro Brady.

 

[Possum]

Very good projection IMO. Hernandez is a steal.

I even think DY's TD totals for him are a little low - he had 6 last year on >50 catches, so I'd expect 7-8 if he can get to 70 catches.

 

[Banger]

Interesting Hernandez prediction. Whenever I see that guy play he looks special, love him as a TE2 this year.

I love him as a TE1 this year. WR slotted in at the TE spot? Yes, please.

I think overall the numbers are believable. I do tend to think that OCHO will steal more looks from Branch than this projects though and he will score a few more TDs. I see Branch as being closer to 30 receptions and Ocho being closer to 65. He still have two weeks to learn the system and he is a veteran who understands football. I think Branch will be the loser here.

I tend to disagree if only because we already know how Brady and Branch work together and Branch put up very good numbers once he came back to NE. We don't know how well Ocho and Brady will work together and so far it's been one tick above a disaster. From people I know that have seen Ocho as a Pat, in addition to whatever confusion he may be facing, they also have said he has lost a step and is not getting much seperation.Obviously we have no idea when, if, and how long it might take to get Ocho up to speed. But from the sounds of things it does not sound like the Bengals ran a system anywhere near similar to what the Pats run. Again, I think the Pats are probably smart enough to scale down the playbook and initally give Ocho say 20 plays to learn and leave the rest of the playbook for later. But overall, I don't see a rebirth a la Randy Moss by any stretch. The Pats have way more weapons than the Bengals did (or at least used). Too many options will likely repress all the Pats fantasy numbers save fro Brady.

That's what I thought last year. He was an explosive wr and his RAC seemed to have disappeared which was a big part of his game. Owens while older was the much better wr. Randy was a guy that was coasting but still ultra-talented, Ocho is a guy that was talented.

 

[zoonation]

Interesting Hernandez prediction. Whenever I see that guy play he looks special, love him as a TE2 this year.

I love him as a TE1 this year. WR slotted in at the TE spot? Yes, please.

I think overall the numbers are believable. I do tend to think that OCHO will steal more looks from Branch than this projects though and he will score a few more TDs. I see Branch as being closer to 30 receptions and Ocho being closer to 65. He still have two weeks to learn the system and he is a veteran who understands football. I think Branch will be the loser here.

I tend to disagree if only because we already know how Brady and Branch work together and Branch put up very good numbers once he came back to NE. We don't know how well Ocho and Brady will work together and so far it's been one tick above a disaster. From people I know that have seen Ocho as a Pat, in addition to whatever confusion he may be facing, they also have said he has lost a step and is not getting much seperation.Obviously we have no idea when, if, and how long it might take to get Ocho up to speed. But from the sounds of things it does not sound like the Bengals ran a system anywhere near similar to what the Pats run. Again, I think the Pats are probably smart enough to scale down the playbook and initally give Ocho say 20 plays to learn and leave the rest of the playbook for later. But overall, I don't see a rebirth a la Randy Moss by any stretch. The Pats have way more weapons than the Bengals did (or at least used). Too many options will likely repress all the Pats fantasy numbers save fro Brady.

I would not call your numbers for Hernandez "repressive".

 

[Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub]

Agree 1000000% on Ocho and Branch having similar numbers. I think the Ocho owners are in for a rude rude awakening if they expect a Moss-like impact (not the level of the impact obviously, but I think most ARE expacting 1000 yards) with changing teams.

Nice projections all around IMO.

 

[Otis]

Why do you hate studly rookies?

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Why are you expecting Gronkowski to regress in receptions?

He had 42 last year, and you are only projecting 40 receptions for him this year?

ETA: Those numbers you are projecting for Hernandez are top 5 TE numbers

 

[Sudoku_in_the_Bathtub]

Why do you hate studly rookies?

Not studs.More likely to blow assignments on their franchise QB. Barring injury, BJGE and Woody are the leaders this year in the backfield.Tomahawked.

 

[David Yudkin]

Why are you expecting Gronkowski to regress in receptions?He had 42 last year, and you are only projecting 40 receptions for him this year?ETA: Those numbers you are projecting for Hernandez are top 5 TE numbers

The first half of last year, Hernandez was on pace for 70-900. Halfway through the season, he got hurt and did not play as much or as well the rest of the season. At that point (8 games), Gronk had 14 receptions. I only took away 2 receptions, it's not like I took away half his production. Why does he half to do better? Aren't doing the same or slightly worse options?

 

[Dawg Pound 69]

So you have B Tate getting cut, which is consistent with what's been reported. Was curious what you think his problem is. The Pats offense just too difficult for him to learn, or is his route running just that poor ?

Thanks.

 

[David Yudkin]

So you have B Tate getting cut, which is consistent with what's been reported. Was curious what you think his problem is. The Pats offense just too difficult for him to learn, or is his route running just that poor ?Thanks.

Tate's value was in kickoff returns, but there will be half as many kic returns this year. It's not so much that he is a terrible option on offense, but is behind the vets and the other two young guys who have utility as returners as well. Price has more upside as a deep threat and Edelman fills the Welker role when needed. They can't keep everyone, and the only other option is Slater, who at this point is a force on all special teams plays.

 

[Otis]

Yudkin severely underestimating the two rooks here.

 

[The Gunslinger]

Yudkin severely underestimating the two rooks here.

Yes because if anything is known about Bellicheck, it's that he hates to play old experienced runningbacks like Morris, Taylor, and Faulk in favor of hot shot rookies......Vereen has a shot to supplant Woodhead but Ridley won't see the field without an injury to Law firm because they are virtually the same player.

 

[PhantomJB]

I dunno. They looked kinda lost against the Lions last week as well as end of last year losing to the Jets in the playoffs. I have Brady #1 QB but may need some homer reassurance beyond "Yeah, yeah, preseason, etc." Questions are emerging as to whether that offense can function as smoothly when faced with high-pressure defenses.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Woodhead undervalued by everyone

 

[David Yudkin]

Woodhead undervalued by everyone

With fewer RBs on the roster last year, Woodhead averaged 7 carries and 2.5 receptions a game once he joined the Pats. Over 16 games, that would be 112 carries and 40 receptions. This year there are three more backs to fight for touches with (Faulk, Vereen, and Ridley).What workload and production level are you suggesting he will get?

 

[werdnoynek]

according to the twitter-verse faulk said he will likely start the season on the PUP list. not that it makes a whole lot of difference but still something to note.

ETA: i think retirement is calling his name...

 

[drfeelgood]

Woodhead undervalued by everyone

With fewer RBs on the roster last year, Woodhead averaged 7 carries and 2.5 receptions a game once he joined the Pats. Over 16 games, that would be 112 carries and 40 receptions. This year there are three more backs to fight for touches with (Faulk, Vereen, and Ridley).What workload and production level are you suggesting he will get?

Last year you said no Pat RB was worth owning even though people challenged you saying Law Firm was after having had a good second half of the 2009 season behind him, and as they predicted he also had a good 2010.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

Woodhead undervalued by everyone

With fewer RBs on the roster last year, Woodhead averaged 7 carries and 2.5 receptions a game once he joined the Pats. Over 16 games, that would be 112 carries and 40 receptions. This year there are three more backs to fight for touches with (Faulk, Vereen, and Ridley).What workload and production level are you suggesting he will get?

Woodhead's workload last year:97 carries34 receptionsHe didn't play weeks 1-2. Barely played week 3. Barely played week 17 (like most key members of the squad). Seems reasonable to strip out those weeks.So in weeks 4-16 (12 games, week 5 bye) Woodhead had:92 carries (7.7 per game)34 receptions (2.9 per game)That projects to 123 carries, 45 receptions over the span of 16 games. Yes, I'm nitpicking, but it's important to at least have a logical starting point.Projection: 120 carries (7.5 per game)4.5 ypc540 yards4 TDs48 receptions (3 per game)9 ypr430 yards2 TDsTotal: 970 yards, 6 TDsThose are my projections. Lofty? Perhaps. BTW, why are people assuming that Vereen/Ridley will steal touches from Woodhead? Why not from BJGE? Vereen barely had time to learn the playbook - given BB's track record with rookies, why should we assume that he even gets on the field more than a handful of snaps? Ridley produced against a bunch of stiffs. How does that translate against actual NFL-caliber players? Faulk is old.....probably doesn't belong on an NFL roster anymore. We'll see if he makes the squad.Woodhead looked good in preseason. Looked like he deserved a role this year. Hard to see that role getting smaller. Think he offers more flexibility than BJGE. Wouldn't be surprised to see his role mildly increase.Edit to add: David, you know I'm a huge fan of your Pats team insights. If you've heard specific things that tell you "Woodhead's role is definitely set to decline" then I'm all ears. But that's not what I've seen you saying so far. Rather, I've seen mostly speculation. Again, very open to other info, so please clarify if I've misinterpreted. Very much appreciate your perspective.

 

[David Yudkin]

Woodhead undervalued by everyone

With fewer RBs on the roster last year, Woodhead averaged 7 carries and 2.5 receptions a game once he joined the Pats. Over 16 games, that would be 112 carries and 40 receptions. This year there are three more backs to fight for touches with (Faulk, Vereen, and Ridley).What workload and production level are you suggesting he will get?

Last year you said no Pat RB was worth owning even though people challenged you saying Law Firm was after having had a good second half of the 2009 season behind him, and as they predicted he also had a good 2010.

What does this have to do with Woodhead?I initially said (as I say every year), that the Pats generally use so many backs that there usually is not a defined guy to start each week IF ALL THE RUNNING BACKS ARE HEALTHY.At the start of last year, the Pats had: Maroney, Faulk, Taylor, Morris, and BJGE. So, yes, recommending BJGE when he was low man on the totem pole did not seem to make a ton of sense. Maroney then got traded. Faulk went on IR, Taylor got hurt and missed most of the season. The Pats even surprised Brady, who held a press conference where even he answered question after question on Morris being able to carry the load . . . and then they left him at fullback and on special teams.Yes, BJGE did very well when given the chance. And I still believe if the Pats suit up 5 RB that they will all be used in some way, shape, or form. So I will again give the same spiel. If it ever gets to the point where there is one guy left standing and everyone else is out, PLAY THAT GUY. Even if there are only two men standing, they probably would merit consideration.

 

[eakfootball]

Yudkin severely underestimating the two rooks here.

I expect Ridley to get about 105/450/4 on the ground and 25/175/1 in the air. And Vereen to go about 85/399/1 rushing and 27/202/1 receiving.

 

[David Yudkin]

Woodhead undervalued by everyone

With fewer RBs on the roster last year, Woodhead averaged 7 carries and 2.5 receptions a game once he joined the Pats. Over 16 games, that would be 112 carries and 40 receptions. This year there are three more backs to fight for touches with (Faulk, Vereen, and Ridley).What workload and production level are you suggesting he will get?

Woodhead's workload last year:97 carries34 receptionsHe didn't play weeks 1-2. Barely played week 3. Barely played week 17 (like most key members of the squad). Seems reasonable to strip out those weeks.So in weeks 4-16 (12 games, week 5 bye) Woodhead had:92 carries (7.7 per game)34 receptions (2.9 per game)That projects to 123 carries, 45 receptions over the span of 16 games. Yes, I'm nitpicking, but it's important to at least have a logical starting point.Projection: 120 carries (7.5 per game)4.5 ypc540 yards4 TDs48 receptions (3 per game)9 ypr430 yards2 TDsTotal: 970 yards, 6 TDsThose are my projections. Lofty? Perhaps. BTW, why are people assuming that Vereen/Ridley will steal touches from Woodhead? Why not from BJGE? Vereen barely had time to learn the playbook - given BB's track record with rookies, why should we assume that he even gets on the field more than a handful of snaps? Ridley produced against a bunch of stiffs. How does that translate against actual NFL-caliber players? Faulk is old.....probably doesn't belong on an NFL roster anymore. We'll see if he makes the squad.Woodhead looked good in preseason. Looked like he deserved a role this year. Hard to see that role getting smaller. Think he offers more flexibility than BJGE. Wouldn't be surprised to see his role mildly increase.Edit to add: David, you know I'm a huge fan of your Pats team insights. If you've heard specific things that tell you "Woodhead's role is definitely set to decline" then I'm all ears. But that's not what I've seen you saying so far. Rather, I've seen mostly speculation. Again, very open to other info, so please clarify if I've misinterpreted. Very much appreciate your perspective.

As I mentioned above, last year boiled down to basically BJGE and Woodhead and no other RB options. This year (at least at the moment), they have Faulk, Vereen, and Ridley to add into the mix. We don't know what we don't know, but IMO it may make some sense to think that if the Pats burned a 2nd and a 3rd round pick on RBs that they probably plan to get them some action during the season. Maybe not a ton, but some. Faulk will probably miss the first 5 games, and if he comes back that's another mouth to feed.As for cutting back the workload of BJGE, I did . . . by 50-55 carries.IMO, Woodhead is not built to see a lotmore action or he might break into a thousand pieces. Don't get me wrong, he's a good little player . . . with little being one of the key phrases.

 

[David Yudkin]

Yudkin severely underestimating the two rooks here.

I expect Ridley to get about 105/450/4 on the ground and 25/175/1 in the air. And Vereen to go about 85/399/1 rushing and 27/202/1 receiving.

Let's flesh this out some.That's 190 carries, 850 rushing yards, 5 rushing TD, 52 receptions, 377 receiving yards, and 2 receiving TD for the rookies.

Last year, the RB corps totaled 403-1828-18 on the ground. Assuming close to similar production levels, that would leave 213 carries, 978 yards, and 13 TD left over for BJGE and Woodhead to split. The two combined for 326 carries, 1555 rushing yards, and 18 rushing TD last year. Who loses production out of those two to the levels I just mentioned.

Through the air, the Pats RBs as a whole totaled 61-609-1. You just doled out 52 receptions to rookies . . . so BJGE, Woodhead, and Faulk split the remaining 9 receptions and 232 yards? BJGE and Woodhead combined for 46 receptions, 464 yards, and a TD. Does that just go away? Does Faulk get 0 carries and 0 receptions?

Sure, it's great to throw out numbers for isolated players, but people need to present projections for ALL the players to have them make any sense. Please post the production breadown for BJGE, Woodhead, and Faulk to go along with the rookies.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Yudkin severely underestimating the two rooks here.

Yes because if anything is known about Bellicheck, it's that he hates to play old experienced runningbacks like Morris, Taylor, and Faulk in favor of hot shot rookies......Vereen has a shot to supplant Woodhead but Ridley won't see the field without an injury to Law firm because they are virtually the same player.

wut?

 

[eakfootball]

Yudkin severely underestimating the two rooks here.

I expect Ridley to get about 105/450/4 on the ground and 25/175/1 in the air. And Vereen to go about 85/399/1 rushing and 27/202/1 receiving.

Let's flesh this out some.That's 190 carries, 850 rushing yards, 5 rushing TD, 52 receptions, 377 receiving yards, and 2 receiving TD for the rookies.

Last year, the RB corps totaled 403-1828-18 on the ground. Assuming close to similar production levels, that would leave 213 carries, 978 yards, and 13 TD left over for BJGE and Woodhead to split. The two combined for 326 carries, 1555 rushing yards, and 18 rushing TD last year. Who loses production out of those two to the levels I just mentioned.

Through the air, the Pats RBs as a whole totaled 61-609-1. You just doled out 52 receptions to rookies . . . so BJGE, Woodhead, and Faulk split the remaining 9 receptions and 232 yards? BJGE and Woodhead combined for 46 receptions, 464 yards, and a TD. Does that just go away? Does Faulk get 0 carries and 0 receptions?

Sure, it's great to throw out numbers for isolated players, but people need to present projections for ALL the players to have them make any sense. Please post the production breadown for BJGE, Woodhead, and Faulk to go along with the rookies.

Alright, I tossed out too many receptions maybe 8-10 less for each player. I think Green-Ellis will total about 600 rushing yards and 8 TDs, with VERY few receptions. And Woodhead gets about 400 rushing 400 receiving with 3 rushing TDs. I also think Faulk doesn't make the team. And last years stats don't mean much. They drafted 2 rookies in the first 3 rounds because they felt they could get more out of the running back position.

 

[cvnpoka]

4 tds seems low for hernandez. he had 6 in 14 games last yr. 12 red zone targets in those 14 games. gronk, everyones red zone darling, had 16 in 16 games.

 

[David Yudkin]

They drafted 2 rookies in the first 3 rounds because they felt they could get more out of the running back position.

This is where I have to slightly disagree. IMO, they drafted two RBs because the guy they drafted highly was a bust (Maroney), their 3rd down back was on IR and ancient (Faulk), and they had two other guys that were well into their 30s (Taylor and Morris).They needed bodies, they needed depth, and they needed youth. BJGE and Woodhead aren't old by any stretch.I agree, in theory, that drafting two RBs would lead someone to think that they were eager to play them if they offered something better.But BJGE and Woodhead combined for a 4.8 ypc, 2019 yards from scrimmage, and 19 total TD. How much more production do they think they can get out of the RB position?I would tend to agree with you if the tandem had a 3.3 ypc, barely cracked 1000 yards between them, and could never get in the end zone. But the BJGE/Woodhead combo, as lack as glamorous as it was, but up Priest Holmes numbers. When you add in the fact that Green Ellis doesn't fumble, there is even less reason to make a serious recalibration and change in direction.The main issue seems to always be in NE . . . which guys get hurt and which guys can stay healthy. I think that axiom will hold true again. For now, both the rookies are the ones that are banged up and are working off of a limited preseason/training camp. I doubt that will help either of their causes.

 

[David Yudkin]

4 tds seems low for hernandez. he had 6 in 14 games last yr. 12 red zone targets in those 14 games. gronk, everyones red zone darling, had 16 in 16 games.

Receiving TD, more than any other stat, varies the most from year to year for some reason. I won't argue that the number might seem low, but some years some guys have 10 TDs and 2 or 3 the next and then shoot back up to 8 or 9 the following year. It's really hard to project TDs.

 

[David Yudkin]

Part of the challenge and the hardest part of an exercise like this one is to come up with a reasonable total for the team categories.

For example, some people will say Ocho will hit 1,000 yards. Or Welker will hit 1,000 yards. Or Branch might have 800. Or the two TE will combined for 1600 yards between them. Or the rookie RBs will each get 800 yards from scrimmage.

Before you know it, Brady will be projected to throw for 6,000 yards and the team will have 10,000 yards from scrimmage and score 700 points. There's only so much beer you can pour into a glass before it's full. The Pats each year seem to be one of those teams where without any checks and balances on paper look superhuman statwise if you're not careful.

 

[cvnpoka]

4 tds seems low for hernandez. he had 6 in 14 games last yr. 12 red zone targets in those 14 games. gronk, everyones red zone darling, had 16 in 16 games.

Receiving TD, more than any other stat, varies the most from year to year for some reason. I won't argue that the number might seem low, but some years some guys have 10 TDs and 2 or 3 the next and then shoot back up to 8 or 9 the following year. It's really hard to project TDs.

totally agree. seems that hernandez and gronk have been pigeonholed into their roles. gronk gets the tds, and hernandez the 20 to 20 catches. the evidence, at least from last year, doesnt support that. thought maybe you, being close to the situation, may have had some particulars to clarify the situation.

 

[⚡DEADHEAD⚡]

Yudkin solidly holding his own here.

 

[bigunreal]

It's hilarious to continue hearing all the "little," "tiny," etc. descriptions of Danny Woodhead. He is basically the same size as Ray Rice, who is somehow destined to be this year's NFL workhorse running back. He's bigger than Warrick Dunn was, who was a feature back for many years. He's not any smaller than Maurice Jones Drew, another workhorse. He is not fat like Rice or MJD, obviously, and is faster. At this point, since he's put on some weight (all muscle) and Knowshon Moreno is down to 200 lbs., Woodhead is at least as big as him. What about him, then, causes these constant derisive references to his diminutive size? Even tiny Darren Sproles is never referred to as being too small to play a larger role.

Last season, Woodhead was neck in neck with only Jamal Charles for most average yards per touch, among all RBs in the NFL. That certainly should have earned him much more playing time, and more touches, this season. Instead, the Patriots, with an awful defense, spent two early picks on running backs. Why would they do that? Why would the purposefully limit the touches of such an incredible playmaker? What other RB in recent memory had so many big plays on so few touches, and sported such a great ypc average, and had his role reduced the following season?

Woodhead suffers from a malady that he can't cure. It's too bad, because he has the potential to be a real star.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

4 tds seems low for hernandez. he had 6 in 14 games last yr. 12 red zone targets in those 14 games. gronk, everyones red zone darling, had 16 in 16 games.

Receiving TD, more than any other stat, varies the most from year to year for some reason. I won't argue that the number might seem low, but some years some guys have 10 TDs and 2 or 3 the next and then shoot back up to 8 or 9 the following year. It's really hard to project TDs.

And even the number of red zone targets from one year to the next is a stat that is all over the place. Projecting X number of TD stats for one guy is like subtracting Y number of stats for the next guy. It all has to go back to a reasonable estimate of what Brady as a QB can produce. Yudkin has put out a projection that is reasonably defended. Maybe it's Hernandez who gets 10 TD's and Gronk who gets 4. Maybe BJGE has a 1,000 yard year and the rooks rot on the bench? The only thing you can take the bank is that this offense will be high scoring in both reality and fantasy. Belicheck turns a lot of fantasy owners off, (and I bet he gets a chuckle out of it) with his game plans. If this team were run like the Colts, the Pats would be just as overdrafted, but they have all kinds of value because so many are every week. I think the fun and challenge is taking on players on a team like this is guessing where the fantasy riches lie.

 

[cobalt_27]

It's hilarious to continue hearing all the "little," "tiny," etc. descriptions of Danny Woodhead. He is basically the same size as Ray Rice, who is somehow destined to be this year's NFL workhorse running back.

Being the same height does not mean "same size." That 20 lb difference means a lot. They are not the same size at all.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Yudkin severely underestimating the two rooks here.

Yes because if anything is known about Bellicheck, it's that he hates to play old experienced runningbacks like Morris, Taylor, and Faulk in favor of hot shot rookies......Vereen has a shot to supplant Woodhead but Ridley won't see the field without an injury to Law firm because they are virtually the same player.

I drafted Vereen in two leagues (and don't have Woodhead in any), but I think people seriously under-estimate Danny Woodhead. The kid has elite level speed and runs very tough - at times he looked like the best player (outside of Brady of course) in the Pats offense last season.Of course you only said "has a shot" and I can agree with that in Vereen is a talented all around back, but I'm speaking in more general terms on how underrated Woodhead seems to be.