RB to Exploit -Avoid...NO vs GB (1 Viewer)

[Ministry of Pain]

Still working on the rest of the games but I wanted to discuss the game tonight.

New Orleans at Green Bay (-4) (48)

The Saints are 24-8 the last 2 years. The Packers are 21-11, this should be an entertaining way to open the season. The Saints have lost 3 games on the road in the last 2 seasons. I love taking the points in this contest but there's so much more going on in this game. Rookie Mark Ingram IMO will be eased into things and I expect a healthy dose of both Pierre Thomas and Darren Sproles in this game. If you own Ingram it might be best to take a wait and see approach. I expect Thomas to see plenty of action in the early part of the season while Ingram masters the position in the NFL. The Packers were 28th against the run in yds per carry but they were 3rd in rushing TDs allowed. I expect New Orleans to run a much more balanced attack this season. I could see you starting Thomas in a flex position. Ingram's time will be sooner over later but not in week 1 if I were a betting man.

The Packers have some questions to answer as well. I know folks want Ryan Grant to be out of the picture but that simply will not be happening. I see a pretty even split most of the way, most of the season, and owners might get frustrated real quick. I can see Grant ending up with 40 yds and TD, then Starks having 60-70 yards but no score. The next week those numbers get flipped around. Hopefully this situation will correct itself but I honestly think we are looking at a split no matter what.

Final Score: New Orleans 23...Green Bay 21

Trying to nail down who will score what in this game is probably an exercise in futility so if you like to gamble roll the dice.

 

[BigTex]

One of my favorite in-season threads.

 

[CompetitiveEdgeFootball]

I still would be surprised if Ingram didn't get a couple shots get in from inside the 5. He might not convert on all of them, but I see like a 12 carry, 40 yard 1 TD stat line for him. I think you're correct and Pierre gets a lot of run as well.

The Grant/Starks stat line seems about right.

In this game I'll be watching 2 things: How does Ingram look with the carries he gets, and how much does Brees look at Graham, and how is he used. I expect the Saints to try and line him up in multiple looks let Brees pick on the mismatches.

 

[pantherclub]

The James Starks logic on this board makes no sense. Why the love for this guy is beyond me. If you think the Packers are not going to run Ryan Grant into the ground you are nuts. Its funny to me that everyone selectively forgets that Starks has a long long history of major injuries.

 

[JoeyJoeJoeJrShabadoo]

The James Starks logic on this board makes no sense. Why the love for this guy is beyond me. If you think the Packers are not going to run Ryan Grant into the ground you are nuts. Its funny to me that everyone selectively forgets that Starks has a long long history of major injuries.

Thanks for this. Up to this point I was just relying on the Packers coaching staff for info on their RB situation, as seen here. Now that I know Grant is getting all the carries, I can safely drop Starks.

 

[Billy1x]

I think Sproles is going to be a lot more active than people think. He was brought in to replace Reggie Bush, not just return kicks. I think Thomas is Ingrams backup in the long run and he a Sproles will be the primary backs. The Saints run the Coryell offense (only offense or defense named after a coach) which historically consisted of one big back and one small one. In St Louis it was Jim Otis and Terry Metcalf. In San Diego it was Chuck Muncie and someone I forget. In Washington (under Gibbs) it was similar (forget the names). And in New Orleans it was Thomas and Bush. Ingram and Sproles would seem to be the air apparent.

For this game I agree with the estimates above. Ingram can't be trusted on passing downs yet unless in 4 weeks he has mastered picking up the blitz. Thomas would be the one I trust since the other two have only been on the team a couple weeks and are still learning the playbook.

 

[pantherclub]

The James Starks logic on this board makes no sense. Why the love for this guy is beyond me. If you think the Packers are not going to run Ryan Grant into the ground you are nuts. Its funny to me that everyone selectively forgets that Starks has a long long history of major injuries.

Thanks for this. Up to this point I was just relying on the Packers coaching staff for info on their RB situation, as seen here. Now that I know Grant is getting all the carries, I can safely drop Starks.

Link doesnt work.I would bet anything that Starks doesnt have more rushing yards than Grant in week one.

 

[JoeyJoeJoeJrShabadoo]

The James Starks logic on this board makes no sense. Why the love for this guy is beyond me. If you think the Packers are not going to run Ryan Grant into the ground you are nuts. Its funny to me that everyone selectively forgets that Starks has a long long history of major injuries.

Thanks for this. Up to this point I was just relying on the Packers coaching staff for info on their RB situation, as seen here. Now that I know Grant is getting all the carries, I can safely drop Starks.

Link doesnt work.I would bet anything that Starks doesnt have more rushing yards than Grant in week one.

Even if he does, it won't be because they "run Grant into the ground". Every indication from Packers camp this preseason has been that Grant is sliding and Starks is moving up.

 

[pantherclub]

Define "indication" because from where I am sitting the Packers know exactly what they have in Grant and know what he can and cannot do. Starks is still a bit of a mystery. Grant is the workhorse for the forseeable future. I doubt Stark gets 10 carries tonight.

 

[JoeyJoeJoeJrShabadoo]

Define "indication" because from where I am sitting the Packers know exactly what they have in Grant and know what he can and cannot do. Starks is still a bit of a mystery. Grant is the workhorse for the forseeable future. I doubt Stark gets 10 carries tonight.

I fixed the link for your "indication".From the article:"We know what they can do," first-year running backs coach Jerry Fontenot said. "It's just a matter of getting them comfortable and making sure they've gotten enough reps to do it. The only way I see them doing that is getting them as equal of work as I possibly can."

 

[Sabertooth]

I think Ingram sees 12 carries for 50 yards or so. Maybe a score but the Pack is pretty stout against the run. I think they will play the Saints like the played the Steelers and that is to stop the pass. Which is something the Packers defense excels at. So I think they sacrifice in the run game a little bit.

If this game becomes a shootout, which I doubt with the shortened offseason, Sproles is a nice play here.

 

[sho nuff]

The James Starks logic on this board makes no sense. Why the love for this guy is beyond me. If you think the Packers are not going to run Ryan Grant into the ground you are nuts. Its funny to me that everyone selectively forgets that Starks has a long long history of major injuries.

When has McCarthy ever run any running back into the ground?

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Been waiting a long time to finally try out my new toy in Mark Ingram. If he goes off on my bench, I'm gonna be but I'm going with safer week one options.

 

[Andrew Garda]

Define "indication" because from where I am sitting the Packers know exactly what they have in Grant and know what he can and cannot do. Starks is still a bit of a mystery. Grant is the workhorse for the forseeable future. I doubt Stark gets 10 carries tonight.

I fixed the link for your "indication".From the article:"We know what they can do," first-year running backs coach Jerry Fontenot said. "It's just a matter of getting them comfortable and making sure they've gotten enough reps to do it. The only way I see them doing that is getting them as equal of work as I possibly can."

Packers staff LOVE LOVE LOVE Starks. If he plays half as well as they want/expect him to he'll be their RB next year.That said, I think Sean's right - we'll see a split at least tonight and I'd add for probably the early part of the season.

 

[qimqam]

The James Starks logic on this board makes no sense. Why the love for this guy is beyond me. If you think the Packers are not going to run Ryan Grant into the ground you are nuts. Its funny to me that everyone selectively forgets that Starks has a long long history of major injuries.

said the Grant owner

 

[shadyridr]

I think Ingram has a tough game. Thinking about starting Ward over him but cant get myself to pull the trigger.

 

[qimqam]

I don't own Ingram but I really wish I did. I think he is going to be the featured back almost immediately. I know they will continue to use Thomas and Sproles but I think he will be getting about 50%-60% of the total RB touches as soon as tonight.

If you recall last season not only was Thomas injured but at one point the Saints were hating him because they thought he was milking the injury and were considering benching or releasing him.

In time Ingram is a 25 Touch per game type back

 

[pantherclub]

The James Starks logic on this board makes no sense. Why the love for this guy is beyond me. If you think the Packers are not going to run Ryan Grant into the ground you are nuts. Its funny to me that everyone selectively forgets that Starks has a long long history of major injuries.

When has McCarthy ever run any running back into the ground?

Grant from 2 and 3 years ago.

 

[The Dude]

Define "indication" because from where I am sitting the Packers know exactly what they have in Grant and know what he can and cannot do. Starks is still a bit of a mystery. Grant is the workhorse for the forseeable future. I doubt Stark gets 10 carries tonight.

Two things - one they don't know what they have in Grant retruning from a major injury.They knew what they had pre-injury - and it was good but was no where near great.

 

[Reepicheep]

Should be noted that 25% of the Packer's generous rushing yards allowed were given up to non-RB positions. So they are stingy with TDs and the rushing yards aren't as nice as they look. Agree that Ingram will probably get some goal-line looks but a score is probably the only way he justifies a spot on your roster.

Grant vs. Starks is tough too, Packers have given every indication that it will be a full-blown timeshare, not to mention sharing goal-line TDs with Khun and Rodgers.

Overall I'm not feeling very confident about starting any RBs in this matchup, despite the high-powered offenses involved.

 

[Breesisdaman]

Coach Payton scripts the first series but after that he will use the hot hand. If Ingram comes out of the gate destroying then there will be no looking back IMO. PT is not 100% back from his injury so I dont think he will see more carries than Ingram unless he just out shines him on the field during the game. Sproles will get the carries and pass looks that used to go Bush's way especially with Lance Moore not playing this game.

 

[Reepicheep]

The James Starks logic on this board makes no sense. Why the love for this guy is beyond me. If you think the Packers are not going to run Ryan Grant into the ground you are nuts. Its funny to me that everyone selectively forgets that Starks has a long long history of major injuries.

When has McCarthy ever run any running back into the ground?

Grant from 2 and 3 years ago.

And when B-Jax became the starter we all found out exactly why. Grant was his only real option. Now there is another option.(said the Starks owner)

 

[sho nuff]

The James Starks logic on this board makes no sense. Why the love for this guy is beyond me. If you think the Packers are not going to run Ryan Grant into the ground you are nuts. Its funny to me that everyone selectively forgets that Starks has a long long history of major injuries.

When has McCarthy ever run any running back into the ground?

Grant from 2 and 3 years ago.

1 year over 300 carries.The Packers are not going to run either of them into the ground.And Starks' injury history is not all that long...no longer than...say, Ryan Grant's.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

The James Starks logic on this board makes no sense. Why the love for this guy is beyond me. If you think the Packers are not going to run Ryan Grant into the ground you are nuts. Its funny to me that everyone selectively forgets that Starks has a long long history of major injuries.

I have been a Grant supporter. I didn't look at the whole thread yet but I believe the coaches said they were going o split that carries s I have to assume they are not lying.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I think Ingram sees 12 carries for 50 yards or so. Maybe a score but the Pack is pretty stout against the run. I think they will play the Saints like the played the Steelers and that is to stop the pass. Which is something the Packers defense excels at. So I think they sacrifice in the run game a little bit. If this game becomes a shootout, which I doubt with the shortened offseason, Sproles is a nice play here.

I hear you Saber but the trio that New Orleans IMHO is one of the more dynamic backfields. New Orleans can score with the best of them, Super Bowl hangover perhaps too. Don't discount the New Orleans OL. Nicks and Evans are probably the best duo OG in the league.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Been waiting a long time to finally try out my new toy in Mark Ingram. If he goes off on my bench, I'm gonna be but I'm going with safer week one options.

Why don't you share what those other option safe so we have a chance to compare. I'm sure others have the same dilemma.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I think Ingram has a tough game. Thinking about starting Ward over him but cant get myself to pull the trigger.

Can I ask why Ward?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I think you all are going to like this. New Orleans had a ton of injuries to their backfield last year so it is hard to use 2010 as a barometer when the coaching staff has been open about wanting to get back to what helped them win a title in 2009. A lot of the 2009 team is still here with better RBs so in 2009 they avg 130 yds rush per game with the trio of Mike Bell, Pierre Thomas, and Reggie Bush. I believe Ingram is better than Bell and Bush at running the ball. Here is what New Orleans did on the road...@Phi 133, @Buff 222, @Miami 138, @St L 203, @TB 183, @Was 55, @Atl 95, @Car 111...Hang with me for a second on this.

The Packers in 2010 were 28th in ypc like I mentioned up top, but they were 3rd in rush TDs. I think New Orleans will be able to move the football. In 2009 the Saints avg 4.5 ypc...this is why I like taking the points tonight.

4.7 ypc allowed vs 4.5 ypc gained...

Pierre Thomas 11-45, 3/20

Mark Ingram 15-65, 2/15, TDrush

Sproles 5/20, 4/35

I expect Ingram to see touches but not more than 45-50% With Lance Moore out you might see more receptions for the RBs.

 

[teet0]

Been waiting a long time to finally try out my new toy in Mark Ingram. If he goes off on my bench, I'm gonna be but I'm going with safer week one options.

Why don't you share what those other option safe so we have a chance to compare. I'm sure others have the same dilemma.

I'm starting Marshawn over Ingram. This quote from Carrol gives me hope there will be 20+ carries this Sun vs. the 9ers. Seahawks RB Marshawn Lynch (ankle) returned to practice Wednesday as Seattle prepares for a Week 1 showdown against the 49ers. "He's got fresh legs, he's ready to go," coach Pete Carroll said. "He'll be getting the ball a lot." - via CBS Sportsline

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Been waiting a long time to finally try out my new toy in Mark Ingram. If he goes off on my bench, I'm gonna be but I'm going with safer week one options.

Why don't you share what those other option safe so we have a chance to compare. I'm sure others have the same dilemma.

Ok, since you ask. I am starting Fred Jackson in one league and Cedric Benson in the other, and pulling Ingram. Also, in one league, I am starting Denarius Moore in hopeless act of indulgence when I could be flexing in Ingram. But I don't recommend this to anyone.

 

[jon_mx]

Not RB, but I would pencil in Meachem and Colston for a score.

 

[zoonation]

The interesting thing from a FF tonight for me is the Grant/Starks situation. While I don't think tongiht will be completely indicative of what to expect for the rest of the season, the ongoing and lengthy pre-season debate will finally get some answers tonight.

The thing is, the answers will have a far bigger impact on the Grant owner than the Starks owner given the respective ADPs of those guys during draft season. My take is that if it is a split situation, like many predict coming out of the gate, it greatly impacts the Grant owner, who likely drafted him to start on a weekly basis. The Starks owner likely drafted him as bench depth and can afford to let the season play out for a bit to see what they ultimately have in terms of a bye week filler.

In any event, I would much rather have Starks than Grant. My own view is that he is the better back, but we will see starting tonight.

 

[FF Ninja]

I love how people offset TDs with other production in their stat predictions. If it is an even split then we'll probably see 50/1 from one guy and 50/0 from the other. And 40/1 and 70/0 are just as likely, actually strike that... those numbers are probably less likely than 40/0 and 70/1. Even splits rarely pan out that the guy with the TD ends up with less yards.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I love how people offset TDs with other production in their stat predictions. If it is an even split then we'll probably see 50/1 from one guy and 50/0 from the other. And 40/1 and 70/0 are just as likely, actually strike that... those numbers are probably less likely than 40/0 and 70/1. Even splits rarely pan out that the guy with the TD ends up with less yards.

Point taken

 

[AmosMoses]

I can see Ingram getting only 20 total yards, but also a TD saving his week 1 score from being awful.

 

[MDPapi]

Been waiting a long time to finally try out my new toy in Mark Ingram. If he goes off on my bench, I'm gonna be but I'm going with safer week one options.

Why don't you share what those other option safe so we have a chance to compare. I'm sure others have the same dilemma.

Ok, since you ask. I am starting Fred Jackson in one league and Cedric Benson in the other, and pulling Ingram. Also, in one league, I am starting Denarius Moore in hopeless act of indulgence when I could be flexing in Ingram. But I don't recommend this to anyone.

I could start Brandon Jacobs or flex in a WR, but I am in the minority who thinks Ingram will actually do pretty well tonight. By that I mean 60-80 yards and a TD. I just think that with no Lance Moore and questions about Colston's health, the Saints may try to run the ball more on the road and slow the game down. Obviously, if they fall behind early that goes out the window. Hell, maybe I'm just starting him because I want a player to root for tonight.

 

[smackdaddies]

I can see Grant ending up with 40 yds and TD, then Starks having 60-70 yards but no score. The next week those numbers get flipped around. Hopefully this situation will correct itself but I honestly think we are looking at a split no matter what.

Why does that situation need to correct itself? If Packer RB (combined, including Kuhn) get 110 yards rushing and a TD, that would be ideal for the Packers. They would run with that all year

Trying to nail down who will score what in this game is probably an exercise in futility so if you like to gamble roll the dice.

Not so hard - Start Rodgers, Crosby, JFin and Jennings every game all year. The rest - meh.

 

[uwftbl]

Don't be surprised to see Alex Green take a few carries away from Grant and Starks.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I can see Grant ending up with 40 yds and TD, then Starks having 60-70 yards but no score. The next week those numbers get flipped around. Hopefully this situation will correct itself but I honestly think we are looking at a split no matter what.

Why does that situation need to correct itself? If Packer RB (combined, including Kuhn) get 110 yards rushing and a TD, that would be ideal for the Packers. They would run with that all year

Trying to nail down who will score what in this game is probably an exercise in futility so if you like to gamble roll the dice.

Not so hard - Start Rodgers, Crosby, JFin and Jennings every game all year. The rest - meh.

We're talking RBs Smack.

 

[gandalas]

Been waiting a long time to finally try out my new toy in Mark Ingram. If he goes off on my bench, I'm gonna be but I'm going with safer week one options.

Why don't you share what those other option safe so we have a chance to compare. I'm sure others have the same dilemma.

Personally, it was between Ingram and Beanie Wells as my RB3 (McFadden and Rice starting). I went with Beanie this week and his good matchup against the Carolina Defense. I have a feeling this will be a constant struggle all season long for who to start of those 2.

 

[greggorymac]

The interesting thing from a FF tonight for me is the Grant/Starks situation. While I don't think tongiht will be completely indicative of what to expect for the rest of the season, the ongoing and lengthy pre-season debate will finally get some answers tonight.The thing is, the answers will have a far bigger impact on the Grant owner than the Starks owner given the respective ADPs of those guys during draft season. My take is that if it is a split situation, like many predict coming out of the gate, it greatly impacts the Grant owner, who likely drafted him to start on a weekly basis. The Starks owner likely drafted him as bench depth and can afford to let the season play out for a bit to see what they ultimately have in terms of a bye week filler.In any event, I would much rather have Starks than Grant. My own view is that he is the better back, but we will see starting tonight.

Starks went a full round ahead of Grant in our 12 team non-ppr draft two nights ago. I think more people are higher on Starks than you think and drafted him much higher killing the "value".

 

[pantherclub]

The interesting thing from a FF tonight for me is the Grant/Starks situation. While I don't think tongiht will be completely indicative of what to expect for the rest of the season, the ongoing and lengthy pre-season debate will finally get some answers tonight.

The thing is, the answers will have a far bigger impact on the Grant owner than the Starks owner given the respective ADPs of those guys during draft season. My take is that if it is a split situation, like many predict coming out of the gate, it greatly impacts the Grant owner, who likely drafted him to start on a weekly basis. The Starks owner likely drafted him as bench depth and can afford to let the season play out for a bit to see what they ultimately have in terms of a bye week filler.

In any event, I would much rather have Starks than Grant. My own view is that he is the better back, but we will see starting tonight.

Starks went a full round ahead of Grant in our 12 team non-ppr draft two nights ago.

I think more people are higher on Starks than you think and drafted him much higher killing the "value".

thats just crazy

 

[greggorymac]

The interesting thing from a FF tonight for me is the Grant/Starks situation. While I don't think tongiht will be completely indicative of what to expect for the rest of the season, the ongoing and lengthy pre-season debate will finally get some answers tonight.

The thing is, the answers will have a far bigger impact on the Grant owner than the Starks owner given the respective ADPs of those guys during draft season. My take is that if it is a split situation, like many predict coming out of the gate, it greatly impacts the Grant owner, who likely drafted him to start on a weekly basis. The Starks owner likely drafted him as bench depth and can afford to let the season play out for a bit to see what they ultimately have in terms of a bye week filler.

In any event, I would much rather have Starks than Grant. My own view is that he is the better back, but we will see starting tonight.

Starks went a full round ahead of Grant in our 12 team non-ppr draft two nights ago.

I think more people are higher on Starks than you think and drafted him much higher killing the "value".

thats just crazy

Why? because the ADP dictates otherwise? The coaching comments regarding the even split were already made public by the time of our draft which dropped Grant's value and increased Starks to around the same level. That league mate just views Starks as the greater talent and the one to separate themselves this year.

 

[saintfool]

I don't own Ingram but I really wish I did. I think he is going to be the featured back almost immediately. I know they will continue to use Thomas and Sproles but I think he will be getting about 50%-60% of the total RB touches as soon as tonight.

If you recall last season not only was Thomas injured but at one point the Saints were hating him because they thought he was milking the injury and were considering benching or releasing him.

In time Ingram is a 25 Touch per game type back

this would be the first i have heard about the possibility of the saints benching, much less releasing, pierre last year. Payton was frustrated with the diagnosis, recovery and rehab for pierre but those two things - especially last season - seem remote. payton liked ivory, sure, and went so far as to call him "special". there was talk about trading pierre, too, but that's a different story altogether.

if the saints have a lead then i expect them to lean on the ground game quite a bit. they know GB can move the ball quickly. they want to tire the GB defense too. a steady diet of thomas/ingram/sproles will put a lot of pressure on GB. if the saints are behind in the game then you'll see sproles and thomas a lot.

 

[LawFitz]

if the saints are behind in the game then you'll see sproles and thomas a lot.

To me, this is the thing that scares me most about starting Ingram tonight. GB offense is no joke. Saints better bring their A game rushing early to keep Rodgers off the field, b/c otherwise it will become the Brees and Sproles show with only a sprinkle of Thomas and Ingram.But even in a shootout, at least Ingram is likely to see some goal line duty. That is his trump card this year.

 

[DexterDew]

Thanks for thread again this year MOP! One of my favorites.

I'm buying into the story line that Ingram will be brought along slowly. There is something about PT being familar with the offense and a versatile back that indicates he will get the most touches. I would think the other key to the PT/Ingram debate is pass protection, for which I will admit I have no idea which one is better.

 

[elbowrm]

I'm fighting not to start Ingram tonight solely to have more action in the game. Can't wait for 830!

 

[meeka]

I'm fighting not to start Ingram tonight solely to have more action in the game. Can't wait for 830!

Me too. I am talking myself into benching Felix Jones against the Jets. It is not easy to bench Ingram, but for this week I think I will sit him.

 

[PahtyTom]

I wouldn't sit Ingram

 

[CompetitiveEdgeFootball]

The interesting thing from a FF tonight for me is the Grant/Starks situation. While I don't think tongiht will be completely indicative of what to expect for the rest of the season, the ongoing and lengthy pre-season debate will finally get some answers tonight.

The thing is, the answers will have a far bigger impact on the Grant owner than the Starks owner given the respective ADPs of those guys during draft season. My take is that if it is a split situation, like many predict coming out of the gate, it greatly impacts the Grant owner, who likely drafted him to start on a weekly basis. The Starks owner likely drafted him as bench depth and can afford to let the season play out for a bit to see what they ultimately have in terms of a bye week filler.

In any event, I would much rather have Starks than Grant. My own view is that he is the better back, but we will see starting tonight.

Starks went a full round ahead of Grant in our 12 team non-ppr draft two nights ago.

I think more people are higher on Starks than you think and drafted him much higher killing the "value".

thats just crazy

Why? because the ADP dictates otherwise? The coaching comments regarding the even split were already made public by the time of our draft which dropped Grant's value and increased Starks to around the same level. That league mate just views Starks as the greater talent and the one to separate themselves this year.

Anyone paying close attention to the GB preseason knows that Starks has been a camp darling, and was a coaching staff favorite since the end of last season. They say things like "poor mans Adrian Peterson" and other nonsense. All reports from camp have dictated that Starks looked better as a runner, and it's a fact that Grant took a pay cut to stay on the team. I'm not going to bother to dig out links, they're all there for anyone to find on rotoworld, look at the archives going back as far as february and macrh. This is the time of year we get a lot of people posting that have no clue what's happened in the last 4 months. They just fall in love with past seasons production and projections. It was a really boring time during the lockout, but things did happen, and one of them was Starks really making a big push for the lions share of carries in Green Bay.