Portis and Betts in '07 (1 Viewer)

[Weiner Dog]

There's already a pretty decent topic discussing Portis' value for next year.

link:

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...=288237&hl=

However, I'm curious if Portis owners are worried he could become the '07 version of Julius Jones?? Betts did not exactly sign for "starter" money (5-year, $11mm w/$3.5mm), but he's accumulating "starter" stats (549 yards last four games). Would anybody be surprised to see the following splits next year??

Portis

1019 yards and 4 TD's

Barber:

636 yards and 13 TD's

 

[fruity pebbles]

A. Don't think they're going to pay Portis the kind of money they're paying him to drastically split carries. Maybe an 80-20 type deal but he's being paid to be the workhorse.

B. Betts isn't much of a goalline back. 2 TDs this year in 200 carries.

 

[mlball77]

I'm guessing a 65/35 split of the carries... and Betts will have markedly more recs than Portis. I don't however, see Betts used in a goal line role. So for TDs, I think Portis will probably have a couple more than Betts.

 

[Pip's Invitation]

Portis is the play in TD-heavy leagues and should have more value overall. Betts will have the most value in PPR leagues.

This assumes Portis is healthy, of course.

 

[Kleck.]

A. Don't think they're going to pay Portis the kind of money they're paying him to drastically split carries. Maybe an 80-20 type deal but he's being paid to be the workhorse. B. Betts isn't much of a goalline back. 2 TDs this year in 200 carries.

Portis is top NFL RB talent. Jones is not.

 

[redman]

I submit to you the Priest Holmes - Larry Johnson game-by-game performance from the first half of 2005 (after which point Holmes was out for the season with an injury), for your consideration and discussion:

Larry Johnson

+----------+-------------+--------+----+| WK OPP | RSH YD | RECYD | TD |+----------+-------------+--------+----+| 1 nyj | 9 110 | 11 | 2 || 2 oak | 9 41 | 0 | 1 || 3 den | 8 13 | 0 | 0 || 4 phi | 7 34 | 0 | 0 || 6 was | 13 53 | 2 | 0 || 7 mia | 23 93 | 26 | 1 || 8 sdg | 6 55 | 28 | 0 |+----------+-------------+--------+----+Priest Holmes

+----------+-------------+--------+----+| WK  OPP  |  RSH   YD   |  RECYD | TD |+----------+-------------+--------+----+|  1  nyj  |   22	85  |	 5  |  1 ||  2  oak  |   19	75  |	15  |  1 ||  3  den  |   14	61  |	32  |  0 ||  4  phi  |   18	84  |	24  |  1 ||  6  was  |   14	18  |   100  |  2 ||  7  mia  |   18	90  |	 6  |  2 ||  8  sdg  |   14	38  |	15  |  0 |+----------+-------------+--------+----+

The comparison makes some sense because you have an entrenched, smaller starter who is more explosive, and a larger backup who is more capable of pounding the ball in the offense. Betts, however, is a superior receiver to Portis, something that cannot be said of LJ as compared to Priest. As you can see from Holmes' numbers, he didn't do badly at all with LJ there, and LJ was even putting up ok backup numbers. The good news for Portis owners is that Betts is simply not as good as Portis, even though his skill set and size probably fit the offense a bit better than Portis' does. Betts' outstanding receiving skills may mean that some of those receiving yards that went to Priest Holmes in KC as the primary RB will go to the backup Betts in DC.

 

[Bizkiteer]

I submit to you the Priest Holmes - Larry Johnson game-by-game performance from the first half of 2005 (after which point Holmes was out for the season with an injury), for your consideration and discussion:

Larry Johnson

+----------+-------------+--------+----+| WK OPP | RSH YD | RECYD | TD |+----------+-------------+--------+----+| 1 nyj | 9 110 | 11 | 2 || 2 oak | 9 41 | 0 | 1 || 3 den | 8 13 | 0 | 0 || 4 phi | 7 34 | 0 | 0 || 6 was | 13 53 | 2 | 0 || 7 mia | 23 93 | 26 | 1 || 8 sdg | 6 55 | 28 | 0 |+----------+-------------+--------+----+Priest Holmes

+----------+-------------+--------+----+| WK  OPP  |  RSH   YD   |  RECYD | TD |+----------+-------------+--------+----+|  1  nyj  |   22	85  |	 5  |  1 ||  2  oak  |   19	75  |	15  |  1 ||  3  den  |   14	61  |	32  |  0 ||  4  phi  |   18	84  |	24  |  1 ||  6  was  |   14	18  |   100  |  2 ||  7  mia  |   18	90  |	 6  |  2 ||  8  sdg  |   14	38  |	15  |  0 |+----------+-------------+--------+----+

The comparison makes some sense because you have an entrenched, smaller starter who is more explosive, and a larger backup who is more capable of pounding the ball in the offense. Betts, however, is a superior receiver to Portis, something that cannot be said of LJ as compared to Priest. As you can see from Holmes' numbers, he didn't do badly at all with LJ there, and LJ was even putting up ok backup numbers. The good news for Portis owners is that Betts is simply not as good as Portis, even though his skill set and size probably fit the offense a bit better than Portis' does. Betts' outstanding receiving skills may mean that some of those receiving yards that went to Priest Holmes in KC as the primary RB will go to the backup Betts in DC.

DITTO! When I read the first post, I thought about Preist and LJ a year ago. That just seems more like what we can expect to come. Listen to the redman, he knows what he is talking about! KEY

Red = Smart

 

[RustyFA]

I think it will be around 65/35 on rushing in favor of Portis but 20/80 in favor of Betts. Betts is also the bigger back and I think they will split goalline carries. Portis=mid to late 2nd rounder, Betts=7th to 9th rounder. The numbers Betts has put up are just too good for a guy backing up a injury-prone #1.

 

[strong]

I think it will be around 65/35 on rushing in favor of Portis but 20/80 in favor of Betts. Betts is also the bigger back and I think they will split goalline carries. Portis=mid to late 2nd rounder, Betts=7th to 9th rounder. The numbers Betts has put up are just too good for a guy backing up a injury-prone #1.

I'm curious to see a list of 10-15 RBs you'd take ahead of Portis next year... cause I can only think of 5 or 6...

 

[MLBrandow]

"Carbon Copy" is a pretty terrible phrase to compare the two. Betts might get a few more carries, but the situations are entirely different.

 

[gman8343]

I think it will be around 65/35 on rushing in favor of Portis but 20/80 in favor of Betts.

This is crazy.

 

[Blackjacks]

I feel as long as Portis is healthy he will be the focal point in their game plan. Betts is a nice runner but he is no Portis. I think he'll be more of a third down back for Washington next year. The running game is so important in Al Saunders offense they need to make sure they have a good back up plan (reason for paying good $ to Betts). Look at this year they overpaid to get Duckett when they thought there was a chance Portis would miss the year so they had a good backup to Bettts. Portis is one of the top 3 running backs in the league, IMO, and was looking very nice this year in it til his season came to an end. The only comparions with Julius Jones and Clinton Portis is they both play in the NFC EAST, that's where it stops. Portis should still be drafted in the top 5 next year in my opinion and I think he'll outscore that preranking. The redskins should have a descent schedule next year due to their record this year and I think Portis will shine.

 

[Banger]

A. Don't think they're going to pay Portis the kind of money they're paying him to drastically split carries. Maybe an 80-20 type deal but he's being paid to be the workhorse. B. Betts isn't much of a goalline back. 2 TDs this year in 200 carries.

Portis is top NFL RB talent. Jones is not.

This pretty much says it all. Portis >> Betts. Betts is filling in well in his absense but Portis will be the workhorse next year assuming he can buck the injury bug.

 

[weisguy0831]

Portis had one 100-yard rushing game before going on IR. Betts has rushed for 100 plus in 4 straight games. Yes, Portis is being paid a lot of money. But Betts has proven to be a worthy NFL running back. I wouldn't be surprised to see it be 60:40 Portis, with games where Betts gets more carries because Portis isn't getting the job done. The NFL may be about money, but it's about what have you done for me lately and who can help me win this week a lot more. The Redskins just signed Betts to a nice contract extension. It isn't just to get 5 carries a game.

I think this becomes more of a RBBC next year than Portis owners want to believe.

 

[redman]

Portis had one 100-yard rushing game before going on IR. Betts has rushed for 100 plus in 4 straight games. Yes, Portis is being paid a lot of money. But Betts has proven to be a worthy NFL running back. I wouldn't be surprised to see it be 60:40 Portis, with games where Betts gets more carries because Portis isn't getting the job done. The NFL may be about money, but it's about what have you done for me lately and who can help me win this week a lot more. The Redskins just signed Betts to a nice contract extension. It isn't just to get 5 carries a game.

I think this becomes more of a RBBC next year than Portis owners want to believe.

I won't say what you wrote was ridiculous, but just want to respond to a couple of things. First off, Portis was never 100% healthy this year. Yes, the shoulder got the point where he could play, but he also had a sprained ankle and another problem I'm forgetting that really slowed him down. This was a lost year for him, but he figures to heal up and be ready to go next year.

Second, I'm convinced that this is an offense that can support two successful fantasy RB's. Here's the team rushing stats for the last four games, which I've isolated since that's generally recognized as the time following Gibbs having it out with the team (and Saunders?) about returning to "Redskins football": running and stopping the run.

Week 12: 37/143 (3.9)

Week 13: 35/177 (5.1)

Week 14: 40/210 (5.3)

Week 15: 31/161 (5.2)

Average: 36/173 (4.8)

16-Game Total: 576/2768

Now, I don't think they'll quite average that many rushes over 16 games, however I have said that this is a team that certainly could conceivably rush the ball 550 times next season, which is more than enough for them to give both Portis and Betts ample carries. For example, I'd love for them to limit Portis to no more than 275-300 carries, which would leave an additional 250-275 for the other backs, all but probably 50 of which would go to Betts.

They now have found the formula that works and they will stick with it. Moreover, Campbell will only improve which should only help these RB's find running room, and convert red zone opportunities into TD's (their struggles in that regard are why Betts isn't scoring more TD's right now).

 

[Weiner Dog]

"Carbon Copy" is a pretty terrible phrase to compare the two. Betts might get a few more carries, but the situations are entirely different.

Really?? Thanks for coming back to present day after jetting one year into the future. Welcome back!

 

[dgreen]

Portis had one 100-yard rushing game before going on IR. Betts has rushed for 100 plus in 4 straight games. Yes, Portis is being paid a lot of money. But Betts has proven to be a worthy NFL running back. I wouldn't be surprised to see it be 60:40 Portis, with games where Betts gets more carries because Portis isn't getting the job done. The NFL may be about money, but it's about what have you done for me lately and who can help me win this week a lot more. The Redskins just signed Betts to a nice contract extension. It isn't just to get 5 carries a game. I think this becomes more of a RBBC next year than Portis owners want to believe.

In 2004, the Redskins offense, led by Mark Brunell, got off to a slow start, at best. Later in the season, Brunell was benched and Patrick Ramsey took over. After a couple tough games, Ramsey finished the season well. The entire offense looked better. Just about every fan and observer said the offense improved because of Ramsey replacing Brunell. Gibbs kept insisting that Brunell's career in Washington had not ended and that Ramsey was the beneficiary, not the cause, of the entire offense playing better. The 2005 season was evidence that Gibbs was right, not the average Joe fan. Shocker.Now we find ourselves in 2006 with a similar situation at RB. Betts has stepped in and done a great job these last four weeks. Some Redskins fans are saying the team should trade Portis because Betts is just as good. It' nonsense. Betts, like Ramsey, is the beneficiary of the offense. Betts' first game as a starter also happened to be the Redskins first game "getting back to Redskins football," according to Gibbs. They have done some thing differently than earlier in the season. Betts is running through some HUGE holes these past four weeks.Gibbs has been asked the last couple weeks what next year will be like. He says over and over that Portis is the starter and is their guy. What, exactly, that translates to is anyone's guess. But, nobody should think Betts will take 40% of the carries from a healthy Portis.

 

[Weiner Dog]

Fast forward 2 additional games...

...Betts had 221 yards rushing, 87 yards receiving, and 3 TD's

Betts last 6 games:

156 - 770 - 4.9 - 3

18 - 166 - 1

4 TD's

I'll let somebody else tackle this mess next year.