What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Player Spotlight: David Wilson, RB, New York Giants (1 Viewer)

Andre Brittle Brown is not a threat for significant carries or for goal line touches. The guy is as brittle as they come. Do you really want him fighting for the tough yards? He did pretty well at it last year........ UNTIL..... wait for it..... he got hurt.
I think Andre Brown is a threat for goal line touches, and he will get additional carries too. I think it's likely that Wilson will get the most carries. I don't think it matters how brittle Brown is. They will use him for what he is good at. It can be said that Nicks is brittle. Do you think they will just use Nicks sparingly? I think they will use the players that give them the best chance to score and win.

 
Wilson is a playmaker. All he needs is a hole or a lane, and his speed will take care of the rest. He also has good moves and enough of a shoulder to get extra yards.

Andre Brown is just a guy. He probably has some nice value this year. But he's just a guy, and if I'm a Wilson owner I'm not worried about him.
A.Brown is "just some guy" with a career avg of 4.7 yards per carry (granted Wilson's is higher).

But, If I were a Wilson owner, I would have hoped "this guy" (Brown) was a little worse than his stats indicate.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wilson is a playmaker. All he needs is a hole or a lane, and his speed will take care of the rest. He also has good moves and enough of a shoulder to get extra yards.

Andre Brown is just a guy. He probably has some nice value this year. But he's just a guy, and if I'm a Wilson owner I'm not worried about him.
A.Brown is "just some guy" with a career avg of 4.7 yards per carry (granted Wilson's is higher).

But, If I were a Wilson owner, I would have hoped "this guy" (Brown) was a little worse than his stats indicate.
Yeah, and 75 CAREER carries since 2010 and being on SIX different teams.

 
Wilson is a playmaker. All he needs is a hole or a lane, and his speed will take care of the rest. He also has good moves and enough of a shoulder to get extra yards.

Andre Brown is just a guy. He probably has some nice value this year. But he's just a guy, and if I'm a Wilson owner I'm not worried about him.
A.Brown is "just some guy" with a career avg of 4.7 yards per carry (granted Wilson's is higher).

But, If I were a Wilson owner, I would have hoped "this guy" (Brown) was a little worse than his stats indicate.
Yeah, and 75 CAREER carries since 2010 and being on SIX different teams.
And? The point is if his YPC were <4.0 with 75 carries, Wilson owners would feel better, no? (but to your point, Brown has only CARRIED the ball with TWO teams for his CAREER, with 97% of his carries with the GIANTS).

Anyhow, with the Giants, Brown's: ypc is 5.3 ;) (all last season).

Brown's stats seem to indicate that he is better than most of you think. That is not a knock against Wilson. I am merely suggesting that as a Wilson owner, I would have preferred if Brown's stats were worse than they currently are.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
silentcoach said:
gianmarco said:
silentcoach said:
Rick James said:
Wilson is a playmaker. All he needs is a hole or a lane, and his speed will take care of the rest. He also has good moves and enough of a shoulder to get extra yards.

Andre Brown is just a guy. He probably has some nice value this year. But he's just a guy, and if I'm a Wilson owner I'm not worried about him.
A.Brown is "just some guy" with a career avg of 4.7 yards per carry (granted Wilson's is higher).

But, If I were a Wilson owner, I would have hoped "this guy" (Brown) was a little worse than his stats indicate.
Yeah, and 75 CAREER carries since 2010 and being on SIX different teams.
And? The point is if his YPC were <4.0 with 75 carries, Wilson owners would feel better, no? (but to your point, Brown has only CARRIED the ball with TWO teams for his CAREER, with 97% of his carries with the GIANTS).

Anyhow, with the Giants, Brown's: ypc is 5.3 ;) (all last season).

Brown's stats seem to indicate that he is better than most of you think. That is not a knock against Wilson. I am merely suggesting that as a Wilson owner, I would have preferred if Brown's stats were worse than they currently are.
Andre Brown is "just a guy". You quoting a career 4.7 ypc to go against that is silly when they guy has 75 total career carries. I can show you a huge list of guys with an inflated ypc over such a small sample size that aren't very good at all. I don't need his ypc to be <4.0 to know he's "just a guy". His 75 career carries and 6 different teams over the last 3 years tells me a lot more. His ypc over that timeframe could be 10 ypc and it still wouldn't change anything.

So no, his stats don't seem to indicate he is better than most of us think. 4.7 ypc over such a small sample size given the big picture is pretty meaningless, IMO. It's not difficult for RBs to look good over a short stretch of time. That doesn't mean they are any good. As a Wilson owner, what Brown's ypc is over the course of his sparse career is meaningless to me.

Here's a short list of some guys who posted anywhere from 60-100 carries in a season with some very nice ypcs.

J. Forsett 63/375 (6 ypc)

Woodhead 97/547 (5.6 ypc)

T. Choice 92/472 (5.1 ypc)

R. Jennings 84/459 (5.4 ypc)

J. Bell 82/414 (5.1 ypc)

Leon Washington 76/448 (5.9 ypc)

Mewelde Moore 65/379 (5.9 ypc)

Do you think if you owned the guys that started ahead of them that you should be worried just because of their YPCs?

People need to stop overthinking this and stop just looking at just a single stat or number. The difference in their play on the field is evident. The actions by the NYG up until this point is evident. The fact that Brown has been on so many different teams, has suffered so many injuries, and has logged so few carries is evident. Whatever threat Brown may pose to Wilson is short-term. And when I say short-term, I'm talking weeks. If Wilson is going to fail and lose carries, it's going to be because of Wilson, not because of Andre Brown.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
FWIW, Not sure how many people who are judging Andre Brown have actually WATCHED him play. He is not the second coming of Jim Brown, but he was better than "just a guy"

Not much lateral ability, but enough to scoot let or right out of a tackle, with enough power to render arm tackles pretty useless. More speed than you'd think, so a nice speed/power combination and he had an ability to see some daylight and get some good runs from it.

To those who say that Wilson's role will be predicated 100% on Wilson and not how good Brown is, I disagree. Regarding 3rd downs, I'd suggest you may be right... if Wilson can handle pass blocking and there is not a need to give him more of a breather, he could get that job. As far as GL and short yardage roles, if someone else CAN do that well, I can see them not subjecting Wilson, especially this early in his career, to the additional damage.

 
FWIW, Not sure how many people who are judging Andre Brown have actually WATCHED him play. He is not the second coming of Jim Brown, but he was better than "just a guy"

Not much lateral ability, but enough to scoot let or right out of a tackle, with enough power to render arm tackles pretty useless. More speed than you'd think, so a nice speed/power combination and he had an ability to see some daylight and get some good runs from it.

To those who say that Wilson's role will be predicated 100% on Wilson and not how good Brown is, I disagree. Regarding 3rd downs, I'd suggest you may be right... if Wilson can handle pass blocking and there is not a need to give him more of a breather, he could get that job. As far as GL and short yardage roles, if someone else CAN do that well, I can see them not subjecting Wilson, especially this early in his career, to the additional damage.
Exactly. He was a 4th rd draft pick by the giants before poppin' his achilles in camp. It looks like it was a 2 year recovery and he's back to looking like he belongs in the NFL. I just think that you can't hold back wilson....cream will rise to the top

 
FWIW, Not sure how many people who are judging Andre Brown have actually WATCHED him play. He is not the second coming of Jim Brown, but he was better than "just a guy"

Not much lateral ability, but enough to scoot let or right out of a tackle, with enough power to render arm tackles pretty useless. More speed than you'd think, so a nice speed/power combination and he had an ability to see some daylight and get some good runs from it.

To those who say that Wilson's role will be predicated 100% on Wilson and not how good Brown is, I disagree. Regarding 3rd downs, I'd suggest you may be right... if Wilson can handle pass blocking and there is not a need to give him more of a breather, he could get that job. As far as GL and short yardage roles, if someone else CAN do that well, I can see them not subjecting Wilson, especially this early in his career, to the additional damage.
I wouldn't say it's predicated 100% on Wilson... but about 85% on Wilson. In the end though, you're just talking semantics. The fact (okay not fact really but hear me out) is that the early down work, 3rd down work and goal line work is really all Wilson's to lose. Brown has shown blown blocks, fumbles and pretty awful performances on short yardage work in this preseason. The more and more Brown shows that he is more or less an average guy, the more and more Wilson will get. Wilson has looked amazing at every turn and point this preseason and Brown's looked 'okay'.

What I've noticed in the 2nd and 3rd preseason games is that when Wilson is out on the field the offense seems more fluid. His presence seems to open better passing lanes and setup better play action. He is a much bigger threat to a defense and forces them to bite a lot more on fakes than Andre Brown does... the coaches see stuff like this, it doesn't just go unnoticed.

 
FWIW, Not sure how many people who are judging Andre Brown have actually WATCHED him play. He is not the second coming of Jim Brown, but he was better than "just a guy"

Not much lateral ability, but enough to scoot let or right out of a tackle, with enough power to render arm tackles pretty useless. More speed than you'd think, so a nice speed/power combination and he had an ability to see some daylight and get some good runs from it.

To those who say that Wilson's role will be predicated 100% on Wilson and not how good Brown is, I disagree. Regarding 3rd downs, I'd suggest you may be right... if Wilson can handle pass blocking and there is not a need to give him more of a breather, he could get that job. As far as GL and short yardage roles, if someone else CAN do that well, I can see them not subjecting Wilson, especially this early in his career, to the additional damage.
I wouldn't say it's predicated 100% on Wilson... but about 85% on Wilson. In the end though, you're just talking semantics. The fact (okay not fact really but hear me out) is that the early down work, 3rd down work and goal line work is really all Wilson's to lose. Brown has shown blown blocks, fumbles and pretty awful performances on short yardage work in this preseason. The more and more Brown shows that he is more or less an average guy, the more and more Wilson will get. Wilson has looked amazing at every turn and point this preseason and Brown's looked 'okay'.

What I've noticed in the 2nd and 3rd preseason games is that when Wilson is out on the field the offense seems more fluid. His presence seems to open better passing lanes and setup better play action. He is a much bigger threat to a defense and forces them to bite a lot more on fakes than Andre Brown does... the coaches see stuff like this, it doesn't just go unnoticed.
Im actually not talking semantics at all, I'm talking roles. And there are two sides to it: talent and health.

Brown has not looked great in pass protection... but I can tell you that won't give Wilson the job unless Wilson is very good to great at it. I could see the Giants using someone else (Torain? He's a good pass protector, correct?) in that role.

As far as goalines, unless Wilson is better than other players there, I could certainly see the Giants look to use someone else to protect their asset. That said, I think Wilson will be in a good number of players within the ten yardline, and he can certainly hit the corner for a number of TDs in those instances.

Now, to your point, I think Wilson could "grab" the 3rd down role moreso than the GL role, because it has less to do with protecting an asset and more to do with production and on field ability.

But, again, a lot is going to come down not to preseason performance, but in season game time performance - Coughlin's a tough grader and won't accept many mistakes there (fumbles, missed blocks, etc - not just for Wilson, but anyone). That said, Coughlin is also willing to work with guys with elite talent to get past any weaknesses, ala Tiki and his huge fumbling issue. But again, that is why I think this year Wilson will be contained due to his role a bit, but next year sky could be the limit.

 
Antrel Rolle was on NFL Radio this morning on XM and they asked him about David Wilson. Two things he said caught my attention, one that they are asking him to split the load with Brown so they want him to do more as a running back than last year and two that he is a force on special teams and want him to build on the success on his return game. I may be reading into it too much since he isn't a coach or even on offense, but this sounds like Andre Brown is definitely in the mix in a bigger way that I would hope and that he will continue his role in special teams which I would hope stops to keep his legs fresh for the offensive role. He did say the team expects Wilson to be one of the leaders though, so that's somewhat promising.
Based on things I have been reading, the coach speak from the Giants RB coach. He talks about Wilson needing to improve in pass protection and running routes. He says that Brown is well versed in these roles but that Wilson needs more work in this area.

That is telling me that going into training camp that Brown is the 3rd down RB, the goal line RB and will split time with Wilson in the rest of the roles. This adds up to Brown getting more touches than Wilson does unless Wilson can take over the 3rd down role imo.

But Brown will likely get hurt again, so then it will not matter.

Will the Giants bring in McGahee? Are there any other free agent RB they might add? I still feel like they need another RB. That guy plays for the Colts now however.
If the Giants felt the need for another RB they would have addressed that long ago.

 
silentcoach said:
gianmarco said:
silentcoach said:
Rick James said:
Wilson is a playmaker. All he needs is a hole or a lane, and his speed will take care of the rest. He also has good moves and enough of a shoulder to get extra yards.

Andre Brown is just a guy. He probably has some nice value this year. But he's just a guy, and if I'm a Wilson owner I'm not worried about him.
A.Brown is "just some guy" with a career avg of 4.7 yards per carry (granted Wilson's is higher).

But, If I were a Wilson owner, I would have hoped "this guy" (Brown) was a little worse than his stats indicate.
Yeah, and 75 CAREER carries since 2010 and being on SIX different teams.
And? The point is if his YPC were <4.0 with 75 carries, Wilson owners would feel better, no? (but to your point, Brown has only CARRIED the ball with TWO teams for his CAREER, with 97% of his carries with the GIANTS).

Anyhow, with the Giants, Brown's: ypc is 5.3 ;) (all last season).

Brown's stats seem to indicate that he is better than most of you think. That is not a knock against Wilson. I am merely suggesting that as a Wilson owner, I would have preferred if Brown's stats were worse than they currently are.
Andre Brown is "just a guy". You quoting a career 4.7 ypc to go against that is silly when they guy has 75 total career carries. I can show you a huge list of guys with an inflated ypc over such a small sample size that aren't very good at all. I don't need his ypc to be <4.0 to know he's "just a guy". His 75 career carries and 6 different teams over the last 3 years tells me a lot more. His ypc over that timeframe could be 10 ypc and it still wouldn't change anything.

So no, his stats don't seem to indicate he is better than most of us think. 4.7 ypc over such a small sample size given the big picture is pretty meaningless, IMO. It's not difficult for RBs to look good over a short stretch of time. That doesn't mean they are any good. As a Wilson owner, what Brown's ypc is over the course of his sparse career is meaningless to me.

Here's a short list of some guys who posted anywhere from 60-100 carries in a season with some very nice ypcs.

J. Forsett 63/375 (6 ypc)

Woodhead 97/547 (5.6 ypc)

T. Choice 92/472 (5.1 ypc)

R. Jennings 84/459 (5.4 ypc)

J. Bell 82/414 (5.1 ypc)

Leon Washington 76/448 (5.9 ypc)

Mewelde Moore 65/379 (5.9 ypc)

Do you think if you owned the guys that started ahead of them that you should be worried just because of their YPCs?

People need to stop overthinking this and stop just looking at just a single stat or number. The difference in their play on the field is evident. The actions by the NYG up until this point is evident. The fact that Brown has been on so many different teams, has suffered so many injuries, and has logged so few carries is evident. Whatever threat Brown may pose to Wilson is short-term. And when I say short-term, I'm talking weeks. If Wilson is going to fail and lose carries, it's going to be because of Wilson, not because of Andre Brown.
The problem was this list is that we have seen what A.Brown can do when he starts and gets the majority of carries.

Most of those backs you listed had few carries per game or a third down back (see woodhead, leon, bell, etc). Here are the games A.Brown started or had 13 carries or more.

TB 13 for 71 1 td, 2 rec for 19 yds

CAR 20 for 113 2 td 3 rec for 17 yds

GB 13 for 64 1 td

Small samplie size of course (but so is Wilson's). Regardless, that is pretty efficient production and there is no denying that A.Brown has a nose for the goaline.

Maybe he CAN get the job done if he is the guy too. Have all the love for Wilson you want, he deserves it, but that does not affect A.Brown's talent in a vacuum.The play on the field is EVIDENT too, don't be blinded from the Wilson love. Again, this does not affect how Wilson plays (vacuum), or his talent, but A.Brown is a lot better than he is being given credit for here.

You already mentioned the others rbs had "short spurts" but how do you KNOW A.Brown's run has been a "spurt" as well? We do not know yet. Time will tell. Wilson is good, and project him as high if you want, but reaching a conclusion that A.Brown is "just a guy" when there is no hard evidence yet, is just trying to satisfy Wilson's projections. Love Wilson, but let's not do it at A.Brown expense.

Wilson is good and will be a beast, that is all that needs to be said. Wilson is good, and A.Brown is "just a guy" is conclusory and I see little evidence of that so far.

Good post though, I can see what you were trying to get at.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
300 carries??? Not going to happen.
Yea, this is dumb. Shocked if he went over 240. You don't run the ball 300 times with one guy when you have Eli Manning, Victor Cruz, and Hakeem Nicks, and a below average run blocking front line.

Dumb.
...and with a RB that weighs 205lbs. What concerns me is that there are some big hitters in this league that will send him flying.
I suppose you are concerned with these guys for being too light?

Chris Johnson: 190 lbs

Jamaal Charles: 199 lbs

Lesean McCoy: 207 lbs

Maurice Jones-Drew: 207 lbs

I've been watching and reading the back and forth about Wilson for awhile and I just can't get over how the guys who are low on Wilson misrepresent facts (or get them downright incorrect, notably regarding fumbles) or get all 'concerned' about things like the above that just seems like grasping at straws.
Don't forget spiller and ray rice spiller 199 and rice 208

 
silentcoach said:
gianmarco said:
silentcoach said:
Rick James said:
Wilson is a playmaker. All he needs is a hole or a lane, and his speed will take care of the rest. He also has good moves and enough of a shoulder to get extra yards.

Andre Brown is just a guy. He probably has some nice value this year. But he's just a guy, and if I'm a Wilson owner I'm not worried about him.
A.Brown is "just some guy" with a career avg of 4.7 yards per carry (granted Wilson's is higher).

But, If I were a Wilson owner, I would have hoped "this guy" (Brown) was a little worse than his stats indicate.
Yeah, and 75 CAREER carries since 2010 and being on SIX different teams.
And? The point is if his YPC were <4.0 with 75 carries, Wilson owners would feel better, no? (but to your point, Brown has only CARRIED the ball with TWO teams for his CAREER, with 97% of his carries with the GIANTS).

Anyhow, with the Giants, Brown's: ypc is 5.3 ;) (all last season).

Brown's stats seem to indicate that he is better than most of you think. That is not a knock against Wilson. I am merely suggesting that as a Wilson owner, I would have preferred if Brown's stats were worse than they currently are.
Andre Brown is "just a guy". You quoting a career 4.7 ypc to go against that is silly when they guy has 75 total career carries. I can show you a huge list of guys with an inflated ypc over such a small sample size that aren't very good at all. I don't need his ypc to be <4.0 to know he's "just a guy". His 75 career carries and 6 different teams over the last 3 years tells me a lot more. His ypc over that timeframe could be 10 ypc and it still wouldn't change anything.

So no, his stats don't seem to indicate he is better than most of us think. 4.7 ypc over such a small sample size given the big picture is pretty meaningless, IMO. It's not difficult for RBs to look good over a short stretch of time. That doesn't mean they are any good. As a Wilson owner, what Brown's ypc is over the course of his sparse career is meaningless to me.

Here's a short list of some guys who posted anywhere from 60-100 carries in a season with some very nice ypcs.

J. Forsett 63/375 (6 ypc)

Woodhead 97/547 (5.6 ypc)

T. Choice 92/472 (5.1 ypc)

R. Jennings 84/459 (5.4 ypc)

J. Bell 82/414 (5.1 ypc)

Leon Washington 76/448 (5.9 ypc)

Mewelde Moore 65/379 (5.9 ypc)

Do you think if you owned the guys that started ahead of them that you should be worried just because of their YPCs?

People need to stop overthinking this and stop just looking at just a single stat or number. The difference in their play on the field is evident. The actions by the NYG up until this point is evident. The fact that Brown has been on so many different teams, has suffered so many injuries, and has logged so few carries is evident. Whatever threat Brown may pose to Wilson is short-term. And when I say short-term, I'm talking weeks. If Wilson is going to fail and lose carries, it's going to be because of Wilson, not because of Andre Brown.
The problem was this list is that we have seen what A.Brown can do when he starts and gets the majority of carries.

Most of those backs you listed had few carries per game or a third down back (see woodhead, leon, bell, etc). Here are the games A.Brown started or had 13 carries or more.

TB 13 for 71 1 td, 2 rec for 19 yds

CAR 20 for 113 2 td 3 rec for 17 yds

GB 13 for 64 1 td

Small samplie size of course (but so is Wilson's). Regardless, that is pretty efficient production and there is no denying that A.Brown has a nose for the goaline.

Maybe he CAN get the job done if he is the guy too. Have all the love for Wilson you want, he deserves it, but that does not affect A.Brown's talent in a vacuum.The play on the field is EVIDENT too, don't be blinded from the Wilson love. Again, this does not affect how Wilson plays (vacuum), or his talent, but A.Brown is a lot better than he is being given credit for here.

You already mentioned the others rbs had "short spurts" but how do you KNOW A.Brown's run has been a "spurt" as well? We do not know yet. Time will tell. Wilson is good, and project him as high if you want, but reaching a conclusion that A.Brown is "just a guy" when there is no hard evidence yet, is just trying to satisfy Wilson's projections. Love Wilson, but let's not do it at A.Brown expense.

Wilson is good and will be a beast, that is all that needs to be said. Wilson is good, and A.Brown is "just a guy" is conclusory and I see little evidence of that so far.

Good post though, I can see what you were trying to get at.
I get what you're trying to say. And you're more than entitled to your opinion that he's a decent player. Again, at times, he's looked fine. But that's it. To me, he's "just a guy". You tried to point out that when he's been given the shot during a game he's done well with it and that the guys on the list above only had a few carries per game. Well, here you go. Here are just a few names on the list with game logs for any game of 15+ carries for these guys:

T. Choice--

15/53/1 along with 4/31 rec

19/100/1

18/82/1

23/88 along with 5/78 rec

17/90/1 along with 7/25 rec

20/91/0

Forsett--

22/130/2

17/123/1 and 5/26 rec

17/63/0 and 3/31 rec

19/65/0 and 2/10 rec

R. Jennings--

22/108/1 with 4/34

Leon Washington--

20/129/2

15/51/0

23/101/0

15/99 and 3/46 rec

15/60 and 4/24 rec

Mewelde Moore--

17/99/0 with 3/17

20/120/2 with 5/14

19/84/1 with 2/10

24/57/2 with 6/48

15/56/0 with 4/41

23/101 with 1/3

22/122/0 with 2/16

21/67 with 2/9

20/92/0 with 12/90

15/109 with 7/78

20/138 with 5/30

As you can see, marginal RB talents can have success over a short period of time and even have big games. It means nothing for the long term. Based on watching Andre Brown and comparing him to Wilson, he's "just a guy". His draft pedigree says so. His multiple teams says so. His career carries thus far says so. 3 decent games and a 4.7 ypc on 75 carries doesn't say otherwise. If what you see with your eyes says otherwise, that's up to you. I'll disagree there but I won't tell someone they're wrong. But if you're basing it on a handful of games, then I'll respectfully completely disagree and tell you that a few good games is meaningless in terms of trying to say he's more than "just a guy".

 
Andre Brittle Brown is not a threat for significant carries or for goal line touches. The guy is as brittle as they come. Do you really want him fighting for the tough yards? He did pretty well at it last year........ UNTIL..... wait for it..... he got hurt.
I think Andre Brown is a threat for goal line touches, and he will get additional carries too. I think it's likely that Wilson will get the most carries. I don't think it matters how brittle Brown is. They will use him for what he is good at. It can be said that Nicks is brittle. Do you think they will just use Nicks sparingly? I think they will use the players that give them the best chance to score and win.
I would compare Nicks to Brown if Nicks was with something like 8 teams over 4 years, and was never used except for 2 carries and 70 carries with only two of them. And if in very limited play last season Nicks missed time in games for no less than three different injuries.

Otherwise, yeah, I see how this analogy could work :rolleyes:

 
Wilson is a playmaker. All he needs is a hole or a lane, and his speed will take care of the rest. He also has good moves and enough of a shoulder to get extra yards.

Andre Brown is just a guy. He probably has some nice value this year. But he's just a guy, and if I'm a Wilson owner I'm not worried about him.
A.Brown is "just some guy" with a career avg of 4.7 yards per carry (granted Wilson's is higher).

But, If I were a Wilson owner, I would have hoped "this guy" (Brown) was a little worse than his stats indicate.
Yeah, and 75 CAREER carries since 2010 and being on SIX different teams.
And? The point is if his YPC were <4.0 with 75 carries, Wilson owners would feel better, no? (but to your point, Brown has only CARRIED the ball with TWO teams for his CAREER, with 97% of his carries with the GIANTS).

Anyhow, with the Giants, Brown's: ypc is 5.3 ;) (all last season).

Brown's stats seem to indicate that he is better than most of you think. That is not a knock against Wilson. I am merely suggesting that as a Wilson owner, I would have preferred if Brown's stats were worse than they currently are.
Andre Brown is "just a guy". You quoting a career 4.7 ypc to go against that is silly when they guy has 75 total career carries. I can show you a huge list of guys with an inflated ypc over such a small sample size that aren't very good at all. I don't need his ypc to be <4.0 to know he's "just a guy". His 75 career carries and 6 different teams over the last 3 years tells me a lot more. His ypc over that timeframe could be 10 ypc and it still wouldn't change anything.

So no, his stats don't seem to indicate he is better than most of us think. 4.7 ypc over such a small sample size given the big picture is pretty meaningless, IMO. It's not difficult for RBs to look good over a short stretch of time. That doesn't mean they are any good. As a Wilson owner, what Brown's ypc is over the course of his sparse career is meaningless to me.

Here's a short list of some guys who posted anywhere from 60-100 carries in a season with some very nice ypcs.

J. Forsett 63/375 (6 ypc)

Woodhead 97/547 (5.6 ypc)

T. Choice 92/472 (5.1 ypc)

R. Jennings 84/459 (5.4 ypc)

J. Bell 82/414 (5.1 ypc)

Leon Washington 76/448 (5.9 ypc)

Mewelde Moore 65/379 (5.9 ypc)

Do you think if you owned the guys that started ahead of them that you should be worried just because of their YPCs?

People need to stop overthinking this and stop just looking at just a single stat or number. The difference in their play on the field is evident. The actions by the NYG up until this point is evident. The fact that Brown has been on so many different teams, has suffered so many injuries, and has logged so few carries is evident. Whatever threat Brown may pose to Wilson is short-term. And when I say short-term, I'm talking weeks. If Wilson is going to fail and lose carries, it's going to be because of Wilson, not because of Andre Brown.
The problem was this list is that we have seen what A.Brown can do when he starts and gets the majority of carries.

Most of those backs you listed had few carries per game or a third down back (see woodhead, leon, bell, etc). Here are the games A.Brown started or had 13 carries or more.

TB 13 for 71 1 td, 2 rec for 19 yds

CAR 20 for 113 2 td 3 rec for 17 yds

GB 13 for 64 1 td

Small samplie size of course (but so is Wilson's). Regardless, that is pretty efficient production and there is no denying that A.Brown has a nose for the goaline.

Maybe he CAN get the job done if he is the guy too. Have all the love for Wilson you want, he deserves it, but that does not affect A.Brown's talent in a vacuum.The play on the field is EVIDENT too, don't be blinded from the Wilson love. Again, this does not affect how Wilson plays (vacuum), or his talent, but A.Brown is a lot better than he is being given credit for here.

You already mentioned the others rbs had "short spurts" but how do you KNOW A.Brown's run has been a "spurt" as well? We do not know yet. Time will tell. Wilson is good, and project him as high if you want, but reaching a conclusion that A.Brown is "just a guy" when there is no hard evidence yet, is just trying to satisfy Wilson's projections. Love Wilson, but let's not do it at A.Brown expense.

Wilson is good and will be a beast, that is all that needs to be said. Wilson is good, and A.Brown is "just a guy" is conclusory and I see little evidence of that so far.

Good post though, I can see what you were trying to get at.
I get what you're trying to say. And you're more than entitled to your opinion that he's a decent player. Again, at times, he's looked fine. But that's it. To me, he's "just a guy". You tried to point out that when he's been given the shot during a game he's done well with it and that the guys on the list above only had a few carries per game. Well, here you go. Here are just a few names on the list with game logs for any game of 15+ carries for these guys:

T. Choice--

15/53/1 along with 4/31 rec

19/100/1

18/82/1

23/88 along with 5/78 rec

17/90/1 along with 7/25 rec

20/91/0

Forsett--

22/130/2

17/123/1 and 5/26 rec

17/63/0 and 3/31 rec

19/65/0 and 2/10 rec

R. Jennings--

22/108/1 with 4/34

Leon Washington--

20/129/2

15/51/0

23/101/0

15/99 and 3/46 rec

15/60 and 4/24 rec

Mewelde Moore--

17/99/0 with 3/17

20/120/2 with 5/14

19/84/1 with 2/10

24/57/2 with 6/48

15/56/0 with 4/41

23/101 with 1/3

22/122/0 with 2/16

21/67 with 2/9

20/92/0 with 12/90

15/109 with 7/78

20/138 with 5/30

As you can see, marginal RB talents can have success over a short period of time and even have big games. It means nothing for the long term. Based on watching Andre Brown and comparing him to Wilson, he's "just a guy". His draft pedigree says so. His multiple teams says so. His career carries thus far says so. 3 decent games and a 4.7 ypc on 75 carries doesn't say otherwise. If what you see with your eyes says otherwise, that's up to you. I'll disagree there but I won't tell someone they're wrong. But if you're basing it on a handful of games, then I'll respectfully completely disagree and tell you that a few good games is meaningless in terms of trying to say he's more than "just a guy".
I like this. In the end, we differ on the "eye ball" test.

As for the rbs mentioned above, we saw that they could not sustain those spurts. However, it does not necessarily follow that because those rbs could not sustain it long term that A.Brown will also not sustain longterm success. Will A.Brown? Time will tell. I bet more on yes, at least more on "yes" than most of this board is willing to get on board with.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
actually bud Wilson has olympic track star speed and has been clocked in the sub 4.3. Even if it is hand timed who cares the guy is Super fast. that's the point guy.

 
Andre Brittle Brown is not a threat for significant carries or for goal line touches. The guy is as brittle as they come. Do you really want him fighting for the tough yards? He did pretty well at it last year........ UNTIL..... wait for it..... he got hurt.
I think Andre Brown is a threat for goal line touches, and he will get additional carries too. I think it's likely that Wilson will get the most carries. I don't think it matters how brittle Brown is. They will use him for what he is good at. It can be said that Nicks is brittle. Do you think they will just use Nicks sparingly? I think they will use the players that give them the best chance to score and win.
I would compare Nicks to Brown if Nicks was with something like 8 teams over 4 years, and was never used except for 2 carries and 70 carries with only two of them. And if in very limited play last season Nicks missed time in games for no less than three different injuries.

Otherwise, yeah, I see how this analogy could work :rolleyes:
I gave my opinion. It certainly didn't warrant an eye-roll. This site is infested with rudeness.

 
Conclusion of this thread: Wilson owners WANT A.Brown to stink so they do not have to worry about him cutting into Wilson's production. Just be content that Wilson is a beast and that he will start. Whether A.Brown cuts into Wilson's production will play out on the field.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Personally, I don't want them to run Wilson into the ground. a 70/30 split would be perfect. Hopefully, Wilson will have some TD opportunites besides the long runs. I hope Brown isn't the Micheal Bush of the Giants as a Wilson owner. We'll see soon enough.

 
actually bud Wilson has olympic track star speed and has been clocked in the sub 4.3. Even if it is hand timed who cares the guy is Super fast. that's the point guy.
couldn't find a post in this thread this might have been in response to...

i did in the other wilson thread (band wagon?) post 1651, concept coop did post 1678...

i'm one of wilson's biggest advocates (check recent post in other thread), but earlier it was said he was olympic sprinter, now olympic sprinter speed...

he has enough positives to stand on their own merit, but olympic speed or olympic-like isn't one of them*... i wouldn't put him in spiller's class**, which was another point in the other thread...

why should we care if it was hand timed?

the whole point of measuring speed to the tenth or even hundredth of a second presupposes accuracy...

scouts don't say RB X ran pretty much faster than 5 seconds for 40...

a 4.3 hand timed is likely a 4.4, which, not surprisingly, is i think what he ran electronically timed at combine...

if we are going to be fast and loose with a tenth of a second, would it make as much sense to make a probable 4.4 a 4.5 instead of a 4.3? no, because he ran a 4.4, not a 4.5 (or 4.3)...

super fast... sure, i'm down with that... he is also very quick... fast AND quick is what makes tavon austin so dangerous (austin did run better 40 at combine)...

* below is VTech track bio... states he was top triple jumper in nation as prep, personal best 11.01 100 m... that is a lot faster than most people, but not really close to olympic speed...

http://www.hokiesports.com/track/players/wilson_david.html

** spiller's clemson track bio - personal best 10.29 100 m, which is SMOKIN! but even that not really olympic speed, he was one of faster collegiate sprinters in the nation... he didn't do that well in nationals, but his qualifying 6.58 60 m. was second fastest in nation... florida state champ in 100 m. with 10.42 as prep...

http://www.clemsontigers.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=28500&ATCLID=205530189

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Antrel Rolle was on NFL Radio this morning on XM and they asked him about David Wilson. Two things he said caught my attention, one that they are asking him to split the load with Brown so they want him to do more as a running back than last year and two that he is a force on special teams and want him to build on the success on his return game. I may be reading into it too much since he isn't a coach or even on offense, but this sounds like Andre Brown is definitely in the mix in a bigger way that I would hope and that he will continue his role in special teams which I would hope stops to keep his legs fresh for the offensive role. He did say the team expects Wilson to be one of the leaders though, so that's somewhat promising.
Based on things I have been reading, the coach speak from the Giants RB coach. He talks about Wilson needing to improve in pass protection and running routes. He says that Brown is well versed in these roles but that Wilson needs more work in this area.

That is telling me that going into training camp that Brown is the 3rd down RB, the goal line RB and will split time with Wilson in the rest of the roles. This adds up to Brown getting more touches than Wilson does unless Wilson can take over the 3rd down role imo.

But Brown will likely get hurt again, so then it will not matter.

Will the Giants bring in McGahee? Are there any other free agent RB they might add? I still feel like they need another RB. That guy plays for the Colts now however.
If the Giants felt the need for another RB they would have addressed that long ago.
And the post that you quoted is from very long ago as well.

ETA - I am not sure why you are dredging that back up now as not really relevant to current situation here except for the fact that the coaches have been talking about thier concerns about Wilson in pass protection for a long time.

Don't make me blast you with the squelch gun.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Put this into the out of control bandwagon thread, might as well add it here as I think it is relevant. Channeling my inner Faust, Rotoworld's Evan Silva tweeted the following

Myth 1: Andre Brown is #Giants GL back. Brown & David Wilson combined for 10 1st-team red-zone touches in preseason. Wilson 5, Brown 5.
 
Put this into the out of control bandwagon thread, might as well add it here as I think it is relevant. Channeling my inner Faust, Rotoworld's Evan Silva tweeted the following

Myth 1: Andre Brown is #Giants GL back. Brown & David Wilson combined for 10 1st-team red-zone touches in preseason. Wilson 5, Brown 5.
i read this earlier but not as closely as i thought...

is silva making a GL/RZ conflation?

if wilson's 5 carries were from 20, and brown's from 1 (sure this isn't the case), this point may not be myth buster he thinks it is, at least based on how he has phrased it...

a carry could be red zone variety without being goal line...

that said, i wouldn't be surprised if wilson is as good or better, and used as much or more around goal line...

* was about to crosspost in bandwagon thread, but yenrub beat me to it...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Put this into the out of control bandwagon thread, might as well add it here as I think it is relevant. Channeling my inner Faust, Rotoworld's Evan Silva tweeted the following

Myth 1: Andre Brown is #Giants GL back. Brown & David Wilson combined for 10 1st-team red-zone touches in preseason. Wilson 5, Brown 5.
i read this earlier but not as closely as i thought...

is silva making a GL/RZ conflation?

if wilson's 5 carries were from 20, and brown's from 1 (sure this isn't the case), this point may not be myth buster he thinks it is, at least based on how he has phrased it...

a carry could be red zone variety without being goal line...

that said, i wouldn't be surprised if wilson is as good or better, and used as much or more around goal line...

* was about to crosspost in bandwagon thread, but yenrub beat me to it...
Lets see...In the first preseason game Wilson saw a run from the PIT 5 for no gain. So count is 1-0 Wilson. In the 2nd preseason game Wilson saw one carry from the 5 that was completely blown up and he lost 4 yardage by Warner getting into the backfield before he even got the ball in his hands. So the count is 2-0 Wilson. In the 3rd preseason game Wilson was only on the field for the first quarter. During the first quarter they didn't get close enough to be in a goal line situation. In the second quarter Brown saw 2 goal line carries one from the 4 and one from the 2 and didn't manage to get in the end zone and they hit a FG instead. So the count is 2-2.

So still an even split on actual "goal line" which I tend to define by runs from within the 5 yard line. It sounds like Silva is talking about plays from within the 20. Either way though, it's an even split and Wilson has been seeing ALL of the early carries. In two of the games Brown didn't see a single touch of the ball until Wilson was already on the bench for the rest of the game. To me that's extremely telling that this is a starter and backup situation more so then the 1a and 1b situation people keep thinking it'll be.

 
Is there a formal or widely accepted definition of "goal line"

5 yards or 15 feet is not goaline. If you are 3rd and 5 that's not short yardage - it's a passing down. Id think anything 4-5 yards or further is usually the regular package, not a goalline type / short yardage.

3 yards is still a stretch, call it a no man lands - but honestly, its NOT short yardage (i.e. 3rd and 3 is going to be passing more often than not, or use the pass as a guise to slip in a run)

Goal Line is 1-2 yards. Now, how many of those occur during a year? That would be an interesting study that should be done. Because if it really is say 1-2 yards max, but a team gets say 15 of those in a season, and 12 of them go to one back resulting in 30-40% success rate, thats 4 TDs. If its higher than 15 and/or a higher success rate, we are talking 6+ TDs - that's where the TD vulture comes into play.

For argument's sake, if there are 5-6 "goal line" TDs for a team, we will give 1-2 to a QB. Those additional 4 if given to a Wilson or a Forte are a sizeable difference than if they get vultured. And again, if the numbers are even a little higher, the significance is even greater.

Now, in the case of a guy like Wilson, who for this year at least may not be given the full 3rd down job, if you take say 4 or so TDs away, and also the receptions and opportunities on third, you have gone from elite top 5 potential to low end #1 potential but more likely a #2 with more inconsistency week to week.

Which, imo, is what most of this thread has been about, albeit with a lot of posturing and huffing and puffing in between.

That said, it would be interesting to see what the "Goal line" role means. How many times is a team within the 2 yard line, how many TDs average result from there and how does it effect teams where you might have a goal line back - be it Wilson/Brown (and again, we aren't sure here but its assumed by most, at least for now, that Brown has that role) or Forte/Bush etc.

 
Is there a formal or widely accepted definition of "goal line"

5 yards or 15 feet is not goaline. If you are 3rd and 5 that's not short yardage - it's a passing down. Id think anything 4-5 yards or further is usually the regular package, not a goalline type / short yardage.

3 yards is still a stretch, call it a no man lands - but honestly, its NOT short yardage (i.e. 3rd and 3 is going to be passing more often than not, or use the pass as a guise to slip in a run)

Goal Line is 1-2 yards. Now, how many of those occur during a year? That would be an interesting study that should be done. Because if it really is say 1-2 yards max, but a team gets say 15 of those in a season, and 12 of them go to one back resulting in 30-40% success rate, thats 4 TDs. If its higher than 15 and/or a higher success rate, we are talking 6+ TDs - that's where the TD vulture comes into play.

For argument's sake, if there are 5-6 "goal line" TDs for a team, we will give 1-2 to a QB. Those additional 4 if given to a Wilson or a Forte are a sizeable difference than if they get vultured. And again, if the numbers are even a little higher, the significance is even greater.

Now, in the case of a guy like Wilson, who for this year at least may not be given the full 3rd down job, if you take say 4 or so TDs away, and also the receptions and opportunities on third, you have gone from elite top 5 potential to low end #1 potential but more likely a #2 with more inconsistency week to week.

Which, imo, is what most of this thread has been about, albeit with a lot of posturing and huffing and puffing in between.

That said, it would be interesting to see what the "Goal line" role means. How many times is a team within the 2 yard line, how many TDs average result from there and how does it effect teams where you might have a goal line back - be it Wilson/Brown (and again, we aren't sure here but its assumed by most, at least for now, that Brown has that role) or Forte/Bush etc.
I mean I honestly don't know that you can truely define the "goal line role". Sure, "technically" Goal & 1 to go would be the true definition of goal line. However, is that how a coach determines it? If Coughlin and Gilbride are saying "Andre Brown is our goal-line back" what does that mean?

Here's an interesting bit from the mouth of Brown himself

Andre Brown told the NY Daily News it "killed me" when he got stuffed at the Jets' four-yard line on his final first-team carry of the Giants' third preseason game.

"I was like ‘Oh, how the hell did we not get it in?’" he said. "Especially me, I pride myself on being a goal-line back."
So here, Brown is considering the 4 yard line a 'goal-line' situation. So I think my conjecture of >5 yard line is a good assumption of the coaching staffs vision of goal-line.

 
Is there a formal or widely accepted definition of "goal line"

5 yards or 15 feet is not goaline. If you are 3rd and 5 that's not short yardage - it's a passing down. Id think anything 4-5 yards or further is usually the regular package, not a goalline type / short yardage.

3 yards is still a stretch, call it a no man lands - but honestly, its NOT short yardage (i.e. 3rd and 3 is going to be passing more often than not, or use the pass as a guise to slip in a run)

Goal Line is 1-2 yards. Now, how many of those occur during a year? That would be an interesting study that should be done. Because if it really is say 1-2 yards max, but a team gets say 15 of those in a season, and 12 of them go to one back resulting in 30-40% success rate, thats 4 TDs. If its higher than 15 and/or a higher success rate, we are talking 6+ TDs - that's where the TD vulture comes into play.

For argument's sake, if there are 5-6 "goal line" TDs for a team, we will give 1-2 to a QB. Those additional 4 if given to a Wilson or a Forte are a sizeable difference than if they get vultured. And again, if the numbers are even a little higher, the significance is even greater.

Now, in the case of a guy like Wilson, who for this year at least may not be given the full 3rd down job, if you take say 4 or so TDs away, and also the receptions and opportunities on third, you have gone from elite top 5 potential to low end #1 potential but more likely a #2 with more inconsistency week to week.

Which, imo, is what most of this thread has been about, albeit with a lot of posturing and huffing and puffing in between.

That said, it would be interesting to see what the "Goal line" role means. How many times is a team within the 2 yard line, how many TDs average result from there and how does it effect teams where you might have a goal line back - be it Wilson/Brown (and again, we aren't sure here but its assumed by most, at least for now, that Brown has that role) or Forte/Bush etc.
I mean I honestly don't know that you can truely define the "goal line role". Sure, "technically" Goal & 1 to go would be the true definition of goal line. However, is that how a coach determines it? If Coughlin and Gilbride are saying "Andre Brown is our goal-line back" what does that mean?

Here's an interesting bit from the mouth of Brown himself

Andre Brown told the NY Daily News it "killed me" when he got stuffed at the Jets' four-yard line on his final first-team carry of the Giants' third preseason game.

"I was like ‘Oh, how the hell did we not get it in?’" he said. "Especially me, I pride myself on being a goal-line back."
So here, Brown is considering the 4 yard line a 'goal-line' situation. So I think my conjecture of >5 yard line is a good assumption of the coaching staffs vision of goal-line.
That's a fair perspective, but I'd love to see an actual study. I suppose to be really accurate, and if it's even really possible, you'd want to know the formation and the package that the coaches put in as well. Obviously it gets more complex by down. So, first down and goal at the four, you have a lot of coaches that will put in a full run package, extra blocker, telegraph the run and try to conservatively bowl it in. If they don't get the TD, maybe the get to the 1 or 2 yardline, and try that again before passing on third (or, trying the run AGAIN).

Even so, there has to be some ability to study this without as much depth that can come to some conclusion of how many Goal line touches (whatever the definition may be) teams get, what the average conversion is and how that relates to a players value when he is the starting RB but not the Goal Line back. Because, again, the hypothetical 4-6 TD swing, which seems from the gut to be about right, propels a RB up a couple tiers in the rankings. That's important when determining a low RB#1 vs mid RB#2, or a RB#2 with upside vs. a guy that might get you 800-1000 yards but few if any TDs.

 
Is there a formal or widely accepted definition of "goal line"

5 yards or 15 feet is not goaline. If you are 3rd and 5 that's not short yardage - it's a passing down. Id think anything 4-5 yards or further is usually the regular package, not a goalline type / short yardage.

3 yards is still a stretch, call it a no man lands - but honestly, its NOT short yardage (i.e. 3rd and 3 is going to be passing more often than not, or use the pass as a guise to slip in a run)

Goal Line is 1-2 yards. Now, how many of those occur during a year? That would be an interesting study that should be done. Because if it really is say 1-2 yards max, but a team gets say 15 of those in a season, and 12 of them go to one back resulting in 30-40% success rate, thats 4 TDs. If its higher than 15 and/or a higher success rate, we are talking 6+ TDs - that's where the TD vulture comes into play.

For argument's sake, if there are 5-6 "goal line" TDs for a team, we will give 1-2 to a QB. Those additional 4 if given to a Wilson or a Forte are a sizeable difference than if they get vultured. And again, if the numbers are even a little higher, the significance is even greater.

Now, in the case of a guy like Wilson, who for this year at least may not be given the full 3rd down job, if you take say 4 or so TDs away, and also the receptions and opportunities on third, you have gone from elite top 5 potential to low end #1 potential but more likely a #2 with more inconsistency week to week.

Which, imo, is what most of this thread has been about, albeit with a lot of posturing and huffing and puffing in between.

That said, it would be interesting to see what the "Goal line" role means. How many times is a team within the 2 yard line, how many TDs average result from there and how does it effect teams where you might have a goal line back - be it Wilson/Brown (and again, we aren't sure here but its assumed by most, at least for now, that Brown has that role) or Forte/Bush etc.
I mean I honestly don't know that you can truely define the "goal line role". Sure, "technically" Goal & 1 to go would be the true definition of goal line. However, is that how a coach determines it? If Coughlin and Gilbride are saying "Andre Brown is our goal-line back" what does that mean?

Here's an interesting bit from the mouth of Brown himself

Andre Brown told the NY Daily News it "killed me" when he got stuffed at the Jets' four-yard line on his final first-team carry of the Giants' third preseason game.

"I was like ‘Oh, how the hell did we not get it in?’" he said. "Especially me, I pride myself on being a goal-line back."
So here, Brown is considering the 4 yard line a 'goal-line' situation. So I think my conjecture of >5 yard line is a good assumption of the coaching staffs vision of goal-line.
That's a fair perspective, but I'd love to see an actual study. I suppose to be really accurate, and if it's even really possible, you'd want to know the formation and the package that the coaches put in as well. Obviously it gets more complex by down. So, first down and goal at the four, you have a lot of coaches that will put in a full run package, extra blocker, telegraph the run and try to conservatively bowl it in. If they don't get the TD, maybe the get to the 1 or 2 yardline, and try that again before passing on third (or, trying the run AGAIN).

Even so, there has to be some ability to study this without as much depth that can come to some conclusion of how many Goal line touches (whatever the definition may be) teams get, what the average conversion is and how that relates to a players value when he is the starting RB but not the Goal Line back. Because, again, the hypothetical 4-6 TD swing, which seems from the gut to be about right, propels a RB up a couple tiers in the rankings. That's important when determining a low RB#1 vs mid RB#2, or a RB#2 with upside vs. a guy that might get you 800-1000 yards but few if any TDs.
Sure, I would definitely love to have a more definite ruling on "goal-line"s definition. What I can say is this... Andre Brown scored 8 TDs last season... 7 from the 1 yard line and 3 from the 2 yard line. 4 of his 8 TDs came in games where he was the primary back during the game. So half of his TDs (or your 4-6 swing) game when he was in as strictly a goal line back. By the same token Bradshaw had 6 TDs last season, 3 of which game in from the 1 yard line. Bradshaw also saw 10 or less carries in 4 games last season, you'd assume adding those 4 games into a starting role (Wilson for example?) he would have probably seen 2 more TDs and likely one of them would have been from the 1 yard line.

The whole purpose of those stats is to evaluate Wilson IF Brown falls into a goal-line role. Wilson's talent is far superior to that of Bradshaw. You'd have to assume he probably breaks a few more big runs in a season as a starter than Bradshaw. So say we take Bradshaw's 6 TDs in 14 games (really about 12 cause he went out early in two of them) and make that a safe 8 TDs for a whole 16 game season. Add in the addition of Wilson's superior talent and I think it's crazy not to imagine he gets 10 rushing TDs this season. Whether from the goal-line or from the 50.

The simple fact is when I look at this here is what I see. Does Brown's presence have a negative impact on Wilson if he's thrust into the 3rd down and goal line back role? Yes... BUT. I think Brown's presence is the difference between Wilson posting a 1500 total yards and 13 TD season and Wilson posting a 1800 total yarsd and 18 TD season. One is Top 10 elite and one is Top 3 elite. Either way, Wilson is still being horribly undervalued right now as a late 3rd early 4th round pick in most leagues.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The simple fact is when I look at this here is what I see. Does Brown's presence have a negative impact on Wilson if he's thrust into the 3rd down and goal line back role? Yes... BUT. I think Brown's presence is the difference between Wilson posting a 1500 total yards and 13 TD season and Wilson posting a 1800 total yarsd and 18 TD season. One is Top 10 elite and one is Top 3 elite. Either way, Wilson is still being horribly undervalued right now as a late 3rd early 4th round pick in most leagues.
All fair points. I'd love to see a study not for the Wilson Brown, but for the TD vulture issue in general

To get back on point (apologize for the digression), I see 1500 and 13 as much closer to the ceiling. 1800 total yards and 18 TDs just seems way out of whack, which is part of what I see as too much hype for a young, very talented but not fully proven player who has some question regarding key roles. There are enough folks that are in my camp (and some that see him as even less valuable than that, but I recognize the tremendous talent and upside) whereby you and some others see him as undervalued.

Which is why we play this game.

 
cross posted from other thread...

thanx, khy...

great (aggregation of) posts...

the reminder about the greater number of GL looks bradshaw had as starter last year, compared to brown, and wilson having a shot at taking over most or all of them (important detail and specifics about the 2012 distribution casting a beacon on potential 2013 usage and ratio) cut through some of the thread clutter like the crazy 88s getting dispatched in kill bill. :)

* some contention about what consitutes a "GL" carry (RZ inside 20 yd)... some use inside 5 yd, i sort of agree with upthread as 1-2 yd intuitively seems more like it... as long as the convention is understood, than we know what we are talking about...

i'd make the point that even if brown had a few more carries from inside 2, but wilson has more or something closer to even split from inside 5, wilson's greater explosivenes (and though they ran similar 40 times in respective combines, wilson looks noticeably quicker to me) could be an equalizer - in the sense of, if he is as good or better scoring from 3 yd than brown from 2 yd?

also, maybe there is a perception that a close to 200 lb. (207?) home run hitter may have trouble in close, where running lanes are more congested and size/power seem to be better suited to the task (for instance, montee ball fits this profile better than even a bulked up hillman)...

without trying to cherry pick data to frame a desired outcome, i'll ask something i don't know the answer to (though have suspicions - see below)... are RBs he has been compared to above... chris johnson, jamaal charles and CJ spiller (maybe league's fastest starters, in same neighborhood size-wise, all homerun hitters with the proverbial ability to take it to the house on any play), poor or below average in converting GL rushing opportunities (maybe check with inside 5 and inside 2 data?), when they had the chance (we could ask how many chances they had, but that could involve several confounding variables, like how other teams/HCs/OCs handle RBBC usage, talent of depth behind them, variable competence of overall offenses to get them in scoring position)...

anecdotally, when looking into charles season right before tearing ACL, don't recall exact number, but a lot of his TDs were in close, more than i recalled... i thought i recalled greater percentage from 10 yd and out, but the result was not what i expected, lot more in close opps than i had realized.
 
The simple fact is when I look at this here is what I see. Does Brown's presence have a negative impact on Wilson if he's thrust into the 3rd down and goal line back role? Yes... BUT. I think Brown's presence is the difference between Wilson posting a 1500 total yards and 13 TD season and Wilson posting a 1800 total yarsd and 18 TD season. One is Top 10 elite and one is Top 3 elite. Either way, Wilson is still being horribly undervalued right now as a late 3rd early 4th round pick in most leagues.
All fair points. I'd love to see a study not for the Wilson Brown, but for the TD vulture issue in general

To get back on point (apologize for the digression), I see 1500 and 13 as much closer to the ceiling. 1800 total yards and 18 TDs just seems way out of whack, which is part of what I see as too much hype for a young, very talented but not fully proven player who has some question regarding key roles. There are enough folks that are in my camp (and some that see him as even less valuable than that, but I recognize the tremendous talent and upside) whereby you and some others see him as undervalued.

Which is why we play this game.
Sure, I mean that's fair. Obviously what I'm projecting is high for an unproven player. That's rational. I look at it this way in a sense though, and I'm pulling some of this from an analysis I did in another thread that showed a trend in the past 3 seasons. It showed that from the concensus preseason Top 10 redraft rankings on average: 4-5 of them stayed in the Top 10, 3 of the players ranked 11-20 moved into the top 10 and 2-3 others came in from 21+ to the top ten. Last season we saw LeSean McCoy, Darren McFadden, DeMarco Murray, MJD, CJ2k, and Matt Forte all be Top 10 picks who didn't finish in the top 10. We saw Doug Martin (RB15), Trent Richardson (RB16) come into the Top 10 from the 11-20 bracket. And Alfred Morris (RB48), CJ Spiller (RB40) and Stevan Ridley (RB24) come into the Top 10 from the RB21+ bracket.

So assuming that trend continues (which history will show it's fairly like to continue) which 2-3 of the current 11-20 ADP RBs do you assume move into the Top 10?

11. Matt Forte

12. Chris Johnson

13. Steven Jackson

14. Stevan Ridley

15. MJD

16. Reggie Bush

17. Frank Gore

18. David Wilson

19. DeMarco Murray

20. Eddie Lacy

My personal opinion here is probably Wilson, Ridley and CJ2K come into the Top 10 fray. Assuming that Wilson is the very bottom of the top 10 he would have to post around 1300yards 12 TDs. Last years #10 Stevan Ridley posted 1314 yards along with 12 TDs. Now if we differ on the opinion that Wilson is one of the 2-3 to crack the top 10 thats a different story. I'm just saying we're actually debating a difference of 200 yards and 1 TD if we both believe that he cracks the Top 10 this season. Ridley cracked Top 10 without any real receptions as did Alfred Morris and Marshawn Lynch. Wilson should see 20-30 receptions as a floor in my opinion this season which adds a lot to his potential value.

 
Andre Brittle Brown is not a threat for significant carries or for goal line touches. The guy is as brittle as they come. Do you really want him fighting for the tough yards? He did pretty well at it last year........ UNTIL..... wait for it..... he got hurt.
I think Andre Brown is a threat for goal line touches, and he will get additional carries too. I think it's likely that Wilson will get the most carries. I don't think it matters how brittle Brown is. They will use him for what he is good at. It can be said that Nicks is brittle. Do you think they will just use Nicks sparingly? I think they will use the players that give them the best chance to score and win.
I would compare Nicks to Brown if Nicks was with something like 8 teams over 4 years, and was never used except for 2 carries and 70 carries with only two of them. And if in very limited play last season Nicks missed time in games for no less than three different injuries.

Otherwise, yeah, I see how this analogy could work :rolleyes:
I gave my opinion. It certainly didn't warrant an eye-roll. This site is infested with rudeness.
You compared Nicks with Brown, particularly in terms of injuries. Not to mention that their playing careers are quite different as well.

And yet you are upset that you were called out for that ridiculous comparison? Make better comparisons and have a thicker skin. It's an anonymous message board... Lighten up, Francis.

 
without trying to cherry pick data to frame a desired outcome, i'll ask something i don't know the answer to (though have suspicions - see below)... are RBs he has been compared to above... chris johnson, jamaal charles and CJ spiller (maybe league's fastest starters, in same neighborhood size-wise, all homerun hitters with the proverbial ability to take it to the house on any play), poor or below average in converting GL rushing opportunities (maybe check with inside 5 and inside 2 data?), when they had the chance (we could ask how many chances they had, but that could involve several confounding variables, like how other teams/HCs/OCs handle RBBC usage, talent of depth behind them, variable competence of overall offenses to get them in scoring position)...
See I've had a rather large issue with this comparison for awhile. Is that Wilson is similar to these guys... lets look at just pure size metrics for a minute? Note, BMI is a little bit more telling than overall weight in terms of a guys "playing size" as it shows the average of their height and weight.

Chris Johnson: 5' 11" 191lbs BMI: 26.6

Jamaal Charles: 5' 11" 199lbs BMI: 27.8

CJ Spiller: 5' 11" 200lbs BMI: 27.9

These guys are MUCH smaller than Wilson... lets look at guys who are actually in his wheelhouse on BMI:

David Wilson: 5' 9" 205lbs BMI: 30.3

Tiki Barber: 5' 10" 205lbs BMI: 29.4

Barry Sanders: 5' 8" 200lbs BMI: 30.4

LaDainian Tomlinson: 5'10" 215lbs BMI: 30.8

Marshall Faulk: 5' 10" 211lbs BMI: 30.3

I really wish people would stop comparing him to CJ1K, Charles and Spiller... while he has that level of explosiveness he is not a tiny guy. A few people have said he's like a hybrid of Ray Rice and Jamaal Charles which is far more accurate. Whether you want to say I'm hyping him up or not? He does posses elite speed, change of direction, stopping, strength all in one package. His actual size matches up with many of the greatest of all time for that level of elite physical embodiment. Watch some actual tape on him from last season, he has amazing deceiving power in his legs. Which are huge by the way if you haven't actually looked at any photos of the kid.

 
definitely seen tape and cited it throughout the thread (maybe other thread, hard to keep track)... but hadn't necessarliy analyzed his lower body infrastructure...

i do remember appreciating rice more when realizing how massive his thighs are... lacy has tree trunks for thighs... old school references, though more in power back vein, include earl campbell, robert newhouse and theotis brown (more than 30" THIGHS, had to buy slacks for obese person and take waist in)...

noted upthread, but wilson was said at VTech to have lineman-like leg strength, and broke positional records in that category at school...

photos of wilson... pretty well put together...

http://www.google.com/search?q=david+wilson&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=Kq4fUtzZOqKrjAKZl4CwBQ&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1088&bih=465

 
Last edited by a moderator:
without trying to cherry pick data to frame a desired outcome, i'll ask something i don't know the answer to (though have suspicions - see below)... are RBs he has been compared to above... chris johnson, jamaal charles and CJ spiller (maybe league's fastest starters, in same neighborhood size-wise, all homerun hitters with the proverbial ability to take it to the house on any play), poor or below average in converting GL rushing opportunities (maybe check with inside 5 and inside 2 data?), when they had the chance (we could ask how many chances they had, but that could involve several confounding variables, like how other teams/HCs/OCs handle RBBC usage, talent of depth behind them, variable competence of overall offenses to get them in scoring position)...
See I've had a rather large issue with this comparison for awhile. Is that Wilson is similar to these guys... lets look at just pure size metrics for a minute? Note, BMI is a little bit more telling than overall weight in terms of a guys "playing size" as it shows the average of their height and weight.

Chris Johnson: 5' 11" 191lbs BMI: 26.6

Jamaal Charles: 5' 11" 199lbs BMI: 27.8

CJ Spiller: 5' 11" 200lbs BMI: 27.9

These guys are MUCH smaller than Wilson... lets look at guys who are actually in his wheelhouse on BMI:

David Wilson: 5' 9" 205lbs BMI: 30.3

Tiki Barber: 5' 10" 205lbs BMI: 29.4

Barry Sanders: 5' 8" 200lbs BMI: 30.4

LaDainian Tomlinson: 5'10" 215lbs BMI: 30.8

Marshall Faulk: 5' 10" 211lbs BMI: 30.3

I really wish people would stop comparing him to CJ1K, Charles and Spiller... while he has that level of explosiveness he is not a tiny guy. A few people have said he's like a hybrid of Ray Rice and Jamaal Charles which is far more accurate. Whether you want to say I'm hyping him up or not? He does posses elite speed, change of direction, stopping, strength all in one package. His actual size matches up with many of the greatest of all time for that level of elite physical embodiment. Watch some actual tape on him from last season, he has amazing deceiving power in his legs. Which are huge by the way if you haven't actually looked at any photos of the kid.
With Barry's small size, poor pass blocking and not being a prolific receiving back, he must have squeeked into the HoF.

 
without trying to cherry pick data to frame a desired outcome, i'll ask something i don't know the answer to (though have suspicions - see below)... are RBs he has been compared to above... chris johnson, jamaal charles and CJ spiller (maybe league's fastest starters, in same neighborhood size-wise, all homerun hitters with the proverbial ability to take it to the house on any play), poor or below average in converting GL rushing opportunities (maybe check with inside 5 and inside 2 data?), when they had the chance (we could ask how many chances they had, but that could involve several confounding variables, like how other teams/HCs/OCs handle RBBC usage, talent of depth behind them, variable competence of overall offenses to get them in scoring position)...
See I've had a rather large issue with this comparison for awhile. Is that Wilson is similar to these guys... lets look at just pure size metrics for a minute? Note, BMI is a little bit more telling than overall weight in terms of a guys "playing size" as it shows the average of their height and weight.

Chris Johnson: 5' 11" 191lbs BMI: 26.6

Jamaal Charles: 5' 11" 199lbs BMI: 27.8

CJ Spiller: 5' 11" 200lbs BMI: 27.9

These guys are MUCH smaller than Wilson... lets look at guys who are actually in his wheelhouse on BMI:

David Wilson: 5' 9" 205lbs BMI: 30.3

Tiki Barber: 5' 10" 205lbs BMI: 29.4

Barry Sanders: 5' 8" 200lbs BMI: 30.4

LaDainian Tomlinson: 5'10" 215lbs BMI: 30.8

Marshall Faulk: 5' 10" 211lbs BMI: 30.3

I really wish people would stop comparing him to CJ1K, Charles and Spiller... while he has that level of explosiveness he is not a tiny guy. A few people have said he's like a hybrid of Ray Rice and Jamaal Charles which is far more accurate. Whether you want to say I'm hyping him up or not? He does posses elite speed, change of direction, stopping, strength all in one package. His actual size matches up with many of the greatest of all time for that level of elite physical embodiment. Watch some actual tape on him from last season, he has amazing deceiving power in his legs. Which are huge by the way if you haven't actually looked at any photos of the kid.
With Barry's small size, poor pass blocking and not being a prolific receiving back, he must have squeeked into the HoF.
... I'm sorry. Did I say "Lets look at a pure size metric for a minute" or "Lets stop comparing Wilson to schlubs like Chris Johnson and Spiller and compare him to guys in his own class like Tomlinson, Sanders and Faulk"? Oh right, I said compare size. Sanders of course being almost the exact same physical build as Wilson is incredibly relevant to a lot of arguments people keep trying to make:

  • He's too small to be a goal-line back
  • He's too small he's probably going to get hurt
  • He's too small and doesn't possess good tackle breaking ability
All complete fabrications of people who are just looking for reasons to dislike the prospects of David Wilson.

 
I agree. My comment was a tongue-in-cheek remark about how even a small RB, that didn't pass block well, nor was a prolific receiver could make it to the HoF.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hard to say, it's a gamble but I wouldn't put him over Forte. CJ is a tough back to own because he just lays total eggs once in a while like he did vs. Green Bay last season in Week 16 (championship week but I ain't bitter .... lol) and MJD is coming off a very serious injury.

 
I'm in love with David Wilson, but I wouldn't take him over Forte.

I would take him over MJD and CJ2K.

1) JAX will be awful. Wilson should have a greater opportunity for TDs

2) TEN may be improved. I like what I hear about their OL. But I just like Wilson a little more than CJ2k.

 
No way I take him over Forte. I don't like MJD's situation, but I still might take MJD over Wilson, ppr. And as previously mentioned, CJ is anyone's guess. I've steered clear of him but would struggle choosing between those two.

I think Wilson will light up some weeks but I'm not expecting him to win owners a lot of their weeks.

 
In a PPR redraft starting to think Wilson should move ahead of CJ, MJD, Forte.... Is that nuts?
No way I take him over Forte. I don't like MJD's situation, but I still might take MJD over Wilson, ppr. And as previously mentioned, CJ is anyone's guess. I've steered clear of him but would struggle choosing between those two.

I think Wilson will light up some weeks but I'm not expecting him to win owners a lot of their weeks.
I don't agree with the "no way am I taking him over <x> guy" at least with the ones mentioned here. Wilson has the talent and now the opportunity to finish Top 5 this year. Why would there be no way you're taking him over Forte? The guy hasn't scored more than 6 TDs the past two seasons. It appears like Wilson should be a rather large part of the running and passing game. In the preseason he had 24 rushes to 7 receptions running as the starter in all 4 of the games. That's almost a 1/3 carry to reception ratio. Obviously that won't keep up throughout the season but it's possible he gets a LOT more receptions than people are currently projecting for him. Bradshaw averaged around 45 receptions or so year-to-year on the team. By comparison Forte had 44 receptions in 15 games last year.

This comes to personal preference, me personally? I think Wilson's floor is about the same as Forte and higher than MJD and CJ's. I think Wilson's ceiling is higher than Forte and MJD and even with CJ. So yeah, I'd 100% draft him over MJD, CJ and Forte.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top