Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
RB Phillip Lindsay, IND (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Interseptopus
- Start date
Dismattle
Footballguy
#29 of Baltimore appears to be kind of late to the party You'll notice no flag be reached for until Lindsay follows into the pile Funny part is Lindsay is 20 yds down field when the sack happens LOL I swear it looks like the poor Broncos lineman takes two helmets to the chest I want to say its nice to see no holds barred from Lindsay on plays involving his QB under a pile But from the comments I gather Lindsay may have already been exchanging words w/ #29 On the bright side plenty of time left to see Freeman get some work
https://twitter.com/NFLFootballOps/status/1043930359233015808
https://twitter.com/NFLFootballOps/status/1043930359233015808
Last edited by a moderator:
Hot Sauce Guy
Footballguy
This is because I benched R.Freeman for Murray. Sorry everyone - my bad.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
They may “start” Freeman next as a punishment but Lindsay should get his role back. He’s just better - and for a “small” RB he looks pretty jacked.
Don't Noonan
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
DropKick
Footballguy
How many good quality starting running backs do you know that needlessly jump into a pile after the fact and throw multiple wimpy punches like an idiot?
Deamon
Footballguy
I have a feeling this is going to be a one-off situation and not 'something to seriously worry about moving forward"
sho nuff
Footballguy
Well...Balt guy dove in and Lindsay went in right after him. And didn't just throw punches. Seemed more pushing the guy off of him that was pushing him away from the pile there.
Dumb...yes. Ejection? Not sure that was worthy.
Pwingles
Footballguy
It wasnt smart, but to assume this is going to be a frequent thing is a bit premature, no?
Hes not the first guy to lose his cool and do dumb stuff. You living in constant fear that Mike Evans is going to cheap shot someone every game, even tho its happened one time?
Stompin' Tom Connors
Footballguy
How has Vance approached discipline in the past?
Chance he sits Lindsay because despite the talent and contribution, rooks need to learn?
I’ve seen coaches pull this kind of move even to the detriment of game plan.
Chance he sits Lindsay because despite the talent and contribution, rooks need to learn?
I’ve seen coaches pull this kind of move even to the detriment of game plan.
Nipsey
Footballguy
thecardiackid
Footballguy
Playin him on mnf. Kinda out of need, but I'm feelin a classic afc west shootout if keenum can hang. KC is giving up 30+ pts a game. And at mile high.
90 combined and a score.
Freeman will also do well.
KC 40 - DEN 34
90 combined and a score.
Freeman will also do well.
KC 40 - DEN 34
hamsterdam
Footballguy
I'd love to see some passes thrown to this kid. I wonder why the Broncos haven't been drawing up plays or checking down much.
I'm hoping Lindsay starts getting 5-6 targets a game as the season goes on, considering he was making a splash in camp with his pass catching abilities.
I'm hoping Lindsay starts getting 5-6 targets a game as the season goes on, considering he was making a splash in camp with his pass catching abilities.
Last edited by a moderator:
DropKick
Footballguy
If I were in the NFL. I would be a good quality starting running back and I would throw freakin haymakers if someone were messing with my team
Then I would say. "draft me. I'm gonna rock this league". Then, when I'm in your line-up, I'll throw a haymaker that i warned you about earlier and get ejected. That's you're problem. I'm just sticking up for my homies.
Last edited by a moderator:
DropKick
Footballguy
Skeletore Eh
Footballguy
Gotta think missing almost that entire game was punishment enough
pollardsvision
Footballguy
No idea what he'll do this week, but I kind of find the ejection encouraging. He's a small undrafted RB. Feisty with a chip on his shoulder is probably a good thing. And it's not like he was just running his mouth to somebody when this started, he was trying to recover a fumble (sort of).
Throw in the offense struggling without him, and this seems like an "I like the fire, but don't do dumb stuff, kid. We need you out there" moment.
Throw in the offense struggling without him, and this seems like an "I like the fire, but don't do dumb stuff, kid. We need you out there" moment.
Stuart Ullman
Footballguy
Looks like he's getting better. His acceleration is insane. If there's a hole, even for a split second, he's gone.
Still afraid he's going to get hurt. But ride him until the wheels fall off, he's got the goods.
Still afraid he's going to get hurt. But ride him until the wheels fall off, he's got the goods.
hamsterdam
Footballguy
Good to see they gave him the GL carry. He was in there for 1st and goal and got the carry on 2nd and goal.
electric Ape
Footballguy
He may be small but I'm not sure that his injury risk is greater than average for a RB. He touched the ball a lot in college and never missed a game
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
This is what I've found the oddest about his usage - not much work in the passing game. He showed what a weapon he could be catching passes in the flats and running in open space in Week 1 and since then he gets 5 targets in 3 weeks.
hamsterdam
Footballguy
It's blowing my mind honestly. It's not like any other back on the Broncos is racking up the catches, Booker leads them with 8. After all that camp talk about how he's going to excel catching passes, even making it seem like that will be his specialty... turns out they like running him up the gut even more.
ffldrew
Footballguy
#2 the TE option stinks as well - you would think they would work the shorter option pass plays to Lindsey instead of some TE they brought out of a T-Mobile store.
Stompin' Tom Connors
Footballguy
I've speculated this elsewhere, but in the MNF game, we saw Lindsay struggle in pass pro, so I wonder if the lack of targets/usage simply steps from wanting a stouter back in pass situations in terms of the ability to pick up coverage. I noticed Booker being in on passing downs late when the Broncos were trying to move the chains late instead of
Hoping this is an area Lindsay can learn, but given size (5'8/165) vs Freeman (5'11/238) and Booker (5'11/218) I am not sure it's in the Broncos best interest.
That said, the fact that they aren't using Lindsay on any given down as a receiver is strange. Wonder if we'll see a little more usage against funnel/stout run Ds like the Rams WK6 or the Texans in WK9.
Hope so, I think Lindsay can be just as electric. How much was he used as a receiver in college? Thought one knock against him in draft profiles was securing the ball in stride.
Hoping this is an area Lindsay can learn, but given size (5'8/165) vs Freeman (5'11/238) and Booker (5'11/218) I am not sure it's in the Broncos best interest.
That said, the fact that they aren't using Lindsay on any given down as a receiver is strange. Wonder if we'll see a little more usage against funnel/stout run Ds like the Rams WK6 or the Texans in WK9.
Hope so, I think Lindsay can be just as electric. How much was he used as a receiver in college? Thought one knock against him in draft profiles was securing the ball in stride.
Elevencents
Footballguy
I wish there were some way to quantify the small back = can’t handle a full workload correlation. This is thrown around alllll the time - we just saw it with Breida as well. Has there been a history of RBs <185lbs getting hurt shortly after garnering full time touches? Or is this simply all assumption?
ffldrew
Footballguy
Buffs used him in all sorts of ways - he did catch a lot of screens. Buffs also did the shovel pass stuff a lot - it is really a hand off but Montez would toss the ball forward as the runner was going in front of him on end around - they were counted as passes. So beware of extrapolating much from his college stat line.
ETA- Offense at CU was really spastic so it was hard to judge his ability. He reminds me of a faster Gerald Wilhite - who could be electtric but stumble and bumble all over the place and drop the ball on some easy passes(although Elway sucked at easy short passes - he had one speed)
Last edited by a moderator:
Probably hard to measure because it's self-selecting. Those types of RBs are less likely to get the full workload that would expose them to injury.
There is some stat (that I think may have been quoted upthread) about RBs below a certain size never hitting certain volume milestones in terms of carries or yards. But even that can only tell you so much, depending on where you set the parameters (5-9 vs 5-10, 185 vs 195, etc.)
So yeah, I think we're mostly relying on intuition here.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Here is some brief discussion on that from a few pages back that shows a bunch of backs that came into the league under 200 pounds and were able to handle multiple seasons of heavy workloads. As you'll see even after presenting the list some still had the perception that these smaller backs were injury prone (not faulting anyone for that perception because it's the intuitive way to think). As you can see that perception wasn't the reality. I don't think a smaller back is any more likely to get injured handling a heavy workload than a bigger back is. There are obvious advantages for a bigger back though which is why a smaller back must present some elite traits if they are to earn a heavy workload.
zoonation
Footballguy
I have a slightly different take. I thought Lindsay misread a lot of blocks and could have got a lot more out of his runs than he did. He's still dynamic, but I question whether he is truly elite.
spodog
Footballguy
Spot on. He did this on a punt return as well, but it is a learning process. He probably left 60 yards or more on the field, including the return yards, by zigging when he should have zagged. It's not really a negative unless he doesn't continue to improve. Still very impressive for an URFA
Stompin' Tom Connors
Footballguy
The first part is true about missing some blocks, but disagree on not getting more out of his runs.
Here's a vid that's selective as it doesn't show every run, and especially those he didn't fare as well in, but illustrates some good counter points:
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap3000000969246/Best-runs-from-Phillip-Lindsay-and-Royce-Freeman-Week-4
Watch the first run of his in the video -- he makes these insanely fast quick jump cuts (maybe 3 of them?) that gets defenders just off center, allowing him to burst by -- it looks fluid, but his success here is solely because he is making more out of the run with his feet/moves.
His red zone TD run showed me how he could make more of nothing -- and in short yardage too, which was impressive for a smaller back -- he ran right into the teeth of up the gut pressure and had Allan Bailey -- a 6'3, 285 end -- have him in the grasp, but kept his legs churning and pulled Bailey and the pile forward and squirted through.
And I don't think anyone is calling him elite -- he was a waiver pickup for everyone. His future is really bright, IMHO, as he's shown consistently how his skills translate at the NFL level despite his size. The proof will come in future games as teams have more tape on him and adjust.
electric Ape
Footballguy
Dr Octopus posted a really interesting and detailed response to this. Here's my two cents:
I haven’t done a study or anything but offhand I can think of plenty of examples of small backs coming out of the gates fast but then getting their careers derailed due to injuries. Guys like Andre Ellington, Chris Thompson, and Steve Slaton fit that bill. I remember back in the Tiki Barber era reading one fantasy magazine’s opinion that small RBs were at no greater injury risk than the bigger guys. Based on my unscientific observation I’m not sure that’s true, I’ve seen plenty of little guys wear down and break under a heavy load. But this is a case-by-case thing. Tiki Barber was on the small side and durable as hell. Warrick Dunn was tiny yet extremely durable. And so far Lindsay has been durable too. My best guess would be that small RBs in general are at a somewhat higher risk of injury but that being small isn’t any kind of injury death sentence. If a guy racks up almost 5,000 yards in college on 900+ touches without missing games I think it’s kind of silly to classify him as high risk.
Also I know it's a different sport, but consider the case of Isaiah Thomas in the NBA. Small players require crazy elite athleticism to have any kind of edge against bigger competition. When a small player is banged up or worn down and his performance is diminished even 10 or 15% he may be rendered completely ineffective. A larger player has a bigger margin for error. So not only do you need to consider the risk of incurring an injury, we also need to think about a small player's ability to play through one or after one.
Fantasy Index did a study, that basically concluded that bigger RB's were more injury prone. They thought this was likely the case because they typically encountered more contact on their carries(some of which they themselves caused) and would often have defenders going lower to tackle them, leading to an increased chance of leg injuries. Bigger RB's tended to also be used more in high contact areas(short yardage) whereas smaller RB's would often be schemed into space. Bigger RB's also tended to have shorter careers.electric Ape said:
electric Ape
Footballguy
You're 100% right, that's the study I read. Just couldn't remember the source.
That study is a bit old, now we have more data. I guess the question is do we still believe its findings? While I think there's validity to the situational comparisons, I'm not sure that I'm fully onboard with its main conclusion.
hamsterdam
Footballguy
Now he's getting the targets but not the rushing attempts. I guess it had to do with game script since they were down big most of the game, I'm guessing he'll have a better day vs AZ next week.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Just picking random anecdotal examples that fit your “theory” doesn’t really say anything because I can then just say something like I haven’t done a study or anything but offhand I can think of plenty of examples of big backs coming out of the gates fast but then getting their careers derailed due to injuries. Guys like Darren McFadden, Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams fit that bill.
RBs get injured, period.
electric Ape
Footballguy
Your post is a little unfair. I stated twice in the quoted message that I’m offering an unscientific opinion. Agree or disagree but sheesh don’t call me out for not being scientific enough.Dr. Octopus said:
Also the “science” we’ve been discussing in this thread is mostly a Fantasy Index study from 2004 plus a data filter where 215 lbs. is considered small? We’re not exactly looking at Newton’s Law of Motion. Let’s look at the situation with an open mind since the science on this topic is hardly settled.
I liked your earlier post in this thread and I’m onboard with the premise that smaller players are used in space more and tend to take less collisions. I do, however, wonder if the collisions they end up taking are more problematic.
Above I brought up the case of Isaiah Thomas in the NBA and I think it’s relevant in the NFL too. You posted yourself that smaller backs need elite traits and athleticism to compensate for their size disadvantages. Playing banged up or worn down (not technically injured) is more of a threat to these players’ effectiveness and edges. This is an additional risk to smaller backs that isn’t often discussed and I think it’s more significant than risk of a catastrophic injury. Even a 5% reduction in athleticism can kill a player’s career if he’s relying on thin edges. In a post above Chris Johnson was listed as a small player who was durable. And he was. But after a few seasons of heavy use he was still on the field but no longer as athletically special and only marginally effective as a football player. Again this is a single cherry picked example but you get my point.
Also I know coaches do irrational things often but do we really think all of the theoretically best coaches in the world have no feel for this situation? Why are larger backs much more widely used in bellcow positions than smaller backs? My gut feeling is that coaches know from experience that smaller RBs are at a higher risk of wearing down and becoming less effective than bigger RBs.
Anyway that’s my 2 cents. I’m not married to any of it. As more data comes in if it’s proven more definitively that a 185 or 190 lbs RB carries no additional injury risk I’m happy to adopt that position.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
Well, I wasn't trying to call you out and I apologize if it came off that way - I'm just calling out the danger of using random examples because that works both ways.
And the "study" that was done earlier in this thread started off with 215 as the cut-off but when that was called out it was lowered to 205 - and @Biabreakable looked at backs that came into the league at 200 pounds or less but eliminated guys that quickly because "bigger" like Clinton Portis.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
The main thing is that there are so few examples of a "smaller" RB getting the opportunity to be a featured RB.
The logic, or science is that there are very few instances of a player being that light having a large enough workload to be consistently relevant for the purposes of fantasy football.
So one can draw two conclusions from this.
With a glass half empty perspective the odds are against them becoming a feature RB who is relevant for fantasy, because so few of them have done that. Along with some moving of the chains as far as where the arbitrary cut off will be. The more you lower the weight, the smaller the sample of players becomes. So with the logic of what players have been successful they are not the lighter players. Well except for a few hall of fame types.
Or you can look at it from a glass half full perspective and realize that there have been some great players from this smaller sample group and the frequency of successful players is actually higher than the other sample sizes success rate.
With a dynasty perspective in mind, it has also been found that heavier players at RB have shorter careers than RB who do not rely on size and power as much as some of these players do. Which leads to more violent contact than a player who isn't running that way as their bread and butter will. All of those hits add up over time and there is a higher injury risk, which leads to shorter careers.
Good RB come in all shapes and sizes.
The logic, or science is that there are very few instances of a player being that light having a large enough workload to be consistently relevant for the purposes of fantasy football.
So one can draw two conclusions from this.
With a glass half empty perspective the odds are against them becoming a feature RB who is relevant for fantasy, because so few of them have done that. Along with some moving of the chains as far as where the arbitrary cut off will be. The more you lower the weight, the smaller the sample of players becomes. So with the logic of what players have been successful they are not the lighter players. Well except for a few hall of fame types.
Or you can look at it from a glass half full perspective and realize that there have been some great players from this smaller sample group and the frequency of successful players is actually higher than the other sample sizes success rate.
With a dynasty perspective in mind, it has also been found that heavier players at RB have shorter careers than RB who do not rely on size and power as much as some of these players do. Which leads to more violent contact than a player who isn't running that way as their bread and butter will. All of those hits add up over time and there is a higher injury risk, which leads to shorter careers.
Good RB come in all shapes and sizes.
