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!
Thanks Bloom. Didn't really see that myself in the GTech games of his I saw and in that Jacksonville game, but as has been pointed out, if the DLine is in the backfield on every play, it's hard to look real instinctive hitting the holes.
I'll have to watch this situation closer. I had written Hollings off to some degree.
Played in 14 games, had 47 catches on 69 targets. that equals 3.35 receptions per game on almost 5 taregts per game. In 16 games that equals 54 receptions. That's the number we talk about.Last half of the year he had rotating QBs. But, whatever - he was still averaging an excellent 7.24 in the second half of the year catch. 3 catches/game and 7 yards/catch gives ya an extra 5 pt/game from DD in pt/reception leagues.
Maybe I'm nuts, but this description fits a change of pace back more than a feature back.And inexperience at the position would seem to support keeping him at change of pace for a while, only use him extensively if DD gets injured, and using him next year in anticipation of DD becoming an RFA after 2005.
I'd say that's accurate, but there is a strong argument that DDavis brings more to the table than the other backs you mentioned - especially in regards to receiving numbers. Colin's attempt to manipulate the facts notwithstanding, if Carr is really going to throw more, Davis and his 68%+ reception rate and 7.5 YPR will be a part of that as the feature back - you should pencil in 48+ catches, and 350+ receiving yards on the year from him - as a conservative estimate - unlerss you truly believe that Hollings will create a RBBC.The other guys are not likely to give you good dual threat numbers.
Starting him behind McAllister I am pretty stoked to start this season. I am obviously behind the notion that this was mostly coach hype speak. I've seen links comparing DD to Thurman Thomas in his hay day, that being said, why wouldn't you want this guy as your RB2? T2 was no slouch in his day, throw in Johnson(A. Reed), and your on your way to the next triplets!! 
This has been essentially ignored throughout the thread.2002: 447 passing attempts, #32 in the NFL.2003: 438 passing attempts, #31 in the NFL.Now the OC is suggesting 560? Last season, I believe that would have ranked #6 in the NFL.2002: 424 rushing attempts (359 by RBs), #21 in the NFL.2003: 421 rushing attempts (374 by RBs), #22 in the NFL.Now the OC is suggesting 480? Last season, I believe that would have ranked #10 in the NFL.What exactly is it that will make the difference? They let Mack go (addition by subtraction), Hollings should at least be an improvement over him. What else? This is quite a reach IMO.Break down the RB carries. Assume a modest increase to 400 on the season. First off, that is 25 per game, not 30 (obviously). Throw out 1 carry per game for RBs other than Davis and Hollings. That leaves 24 to split. Even if Hollings remains a clear backup, I could easily see him getting 6 per game, leaving 18 per game for Davis. That would yield "only" 288 carries. I say only because many here are projecting 320+, which I think is significantly unlikely.Now, unlike Mack, Hollings should prove to be a decent receiver, so I think he will also steal a couple of targets per game from Davis. I think expecting about 3 catches per game for Davis is reasonable.288 carries and 48 catches is 336 touches. That would probably yield 1500-1600 yards and 7-10 TDs. At the high end, that would have been good enough for RB11 last season. I see that as Davis's likely upside, which he would reach only if he plays 16 games... which I doubt.All that said, I think people are focusing too much on Hollings as the reason Davis might falter. As I showed above, Davis could get 75% of the RB touches and still be limited. As I posted earlier, there have been many backs who looked great in a part time breakout season only to disappoint the following season with very modest gains or by failing to reproduce the breakout numbers, even with more games.
Marc, I agree with your point. I did not want to get into all of the pluses and deltas that could be assigned to D. Davis, Dillon, Henry, Barber, S. Davis, Rudi, Bennett and Martin in my earlier response. What you have written is exactly why D. Davis should be at the top of that tier. D. Davis does offer the best dual threat of that group and, opinion, faces the least amount of competition to reach his maximum potential. His "if, then" statements stop and start with Hollings. If Hollings can prove his worth, then he will being to see playing time. Given all that has been written regarding Hollings, I must opt for saying Hollings' playing time will be minimal. Minimal defined as less than 30% of all rushing attempts.I apologize to the pro Hollings camp but I cannot get over the fact his inflated college numbers included dustings of UCONN, Vandy and BYU. Plus, he did not look very sharp in his limited playing time last year...knee injury or not. The rest of the backs in the grouping above have multiple qualifiers, whereas, D. Davis only has the one. For me Davis is the most logical pick; has the back-up with the best drafting price and, as of today, has the greatest opportunity to see the majority of offensive snaps for his team.
1. I resent the implication that I was trying to manipulate facts.2. I don't think you are painting an accurate picture of DD's receptions. I happen to remember many of them very clearly as the Texans are the AFC team carried locally. Many of his receptions reminded me of playing Super Tecmo Bowl, when I the Running Back would come out of the backfield and run a hook 3 yards up the field and always be open. These are DUMP OFF PASSES. They are outlets. After it became apparent that this was all that was happening, an ILB started clogging up the middle and his targets aand receptions fell back down to earth. Look at his target stats after week 8 compared to week 6, 7, and 8. Defenses keyed in on him coming out of the backfield.Holmes, Faulk, LT2, Ahman, etc. line up in the slot, they run fly routes, they run outs, they do MUCH more than shift through the line and turn around for a 3 yard completion. If you feel comfortable projecting Davis as a receiving threat, so be it. But I know what I saw with my own eyes - he was an outlet with a QB that was almost never comfortable going down field. TO say his role is like that of Priest or LT2 ("extensively used") is just plain wrong. Didn't matter whether it was Banks or Carr, they both would take the snap, and it was like they said..."Andre's Covered, I'll dump it to Davis." It was mind-boggling to watch them try and win games that way. Will Davis catch some balls this season? Of course. But if he's still catching 6 or 7 dump-offs a game, then that means David Carr still sucks and the offense is going no where.3. If you don't think Tiki Barber (average of 70 receptions a year in the last 4) or Curtis Martin (average of 53 receptions a year in the last 4, 2.9 per game with Pennington under center) "aren't likely to post good dual threat numbers", than I'd like to see your definition of "dual threat."
ColinYou were serious about that list?
I thought you were being tongue-in-cheek...there may indeed be a long history of backs who looked great in a part-time role during their first season & then dropped off when named the starter, but the guys you listed ain't them.Point taken about Davis' upside potential, but seeing as how his current (July on) ADP has him as the 12th RB taken, and Marshall Faulk will likely move back ahead of him as his injury rumors continue to go unsubstantiated, that only helps to make the case that Davis' value is not being inflated. I think that based on current worries vs. perceived upside, the only back being drafted after Davis who you could make a case for picking over Domanick would be Corey Dillon, who is averaging as the 14th RB selected, one slot behind Davis & Faulk. But Antsports does not offer a dynasty/keeper draft option in their mocks, and I believe that a lot of people participating are in fact "warming up" for one of these leagues, where Davis' age makes him a more attractive pick than Dillon. And, of course, in point/reception leagues, you have to figure that Davis will do better as a receiver, while Dillon gives way on passing downs to Kevin Faulk.From week 9 on, Davis had 30 targets over 8 games, or just under 4 per game. That with 3 different quarterbacks lining up under center.I think it does matter whether it was Banks or Carr (or Ragone) under center:Carr: 2 targets week 10 (25 attempts), 1 target in week 11 (Carr only played the first quarter & attempted 4 passes), 2 targets in week 13 (Carr played 2nd half & attempted only 5 passes), 5 targets in week 16 (34 attempts), 7 targets in week 17 (23 attempts). So Davis got 17 targets in 3 & 3/4 games with Carr, or about 18.7% of the passes that Carr threw.Banks: 2 targets in week 9 (19 attempts), 3 targets in week 11 (Banks played the last 3 quarters & threw 16 passes), 2 targets in week 12 (25 attempts), 3 targets in week 13 (Banks played the 1st half & attempted 15 passes). Davis got 10 targets in 3 1/4 games with Banks, or about 13.3% of the passes that Banks threw.Ragone: 3 targets in week 15 (Ragone attempted 17 passes). 17.6% of his passes were thrown to Davis.Overall, Davis was the intended recipient of 16.4% of the passes thrown by Texans' QBs over that span. If they really do manage to get in 35 passing plays per game, and subtracting 3.5 per game for QB runs & sacks, that equates to a little over 5 targets per game in 2004, or about 83 targets for the season. If Davis again catches 66.2% of them (which he did in 2003), that's 55 receptions for the season.Again, I'm throwing out his "early success" of weeks 6-8, when Davis had 29 targets. And I should remind you that Davis still averaged 7.5 yards per reception on those DUMP OFF PASSES.
EDIT because I should learn not to do math in my head. Corrected percentage of targets with Banks in at QB.
Yes, I was serious.I previously posted this stuff in Davis's Player Spotlight thread (in multiple posts).You were serious about that list?
Let's look at the numbers he had last season in the games he started (I did not include pts for recepts. 860 rushing yards
Most of the players you listed there actually improved in their second season, as your post shows, so I figured you were being sarcastic. BTW, Holmes dropped the year after his first breakout primarily because of injury & the Ravens bringing in Errict Rhett (who was once quite the prospect), if memory serves. He still averaged 5.7 ypc in his limited duty, and put up over 500 yards in only 8 games (and 89 carries). Regardless, pro-football-reference.com shows him as being the RB15 in 1998, which wouldn't meet your criteria--he improved drastically from 2001-2002, when he first hit the top 14.At any rate, I'll just chalk that up to going off the top of your head (which I do & embarass myself on a near-constant basis).
You're not getting my point. The other great backs I mentioned improved by 4% on their breakout season numbers with no adjustments. You are making adjustments.You likely would have been doing the same thing for Dillon, Green, Alexander, etc. after their breakouts... and your predictions would have turned out to be overly optimistic in each case.
Sorry to offend - I thought it was unusual you were picking and choosing his last 8 games as your reference - I disagree that the main reason his receptions declined was someone covering him - I would argue his outlet passing was used a lot earlier because of the three-deep rotating QB problems the team had thorugh mid-season and the fact that he was being used almost exclusively early as a COP/third down back for Mack. Also, if you feel comfortable pointing to Martin only under Pennie, I would think you need to restrict DD's receiving stats to only games when Carr was back there. All you really have to do is compare the games with Carr behind center with th eones without him and you'll see significant drops in targets in the games Carr was unavailable. My guess is that defenses were able to load up 8 in the box and commit an extra man to DD out of the backfield b/c the threat of a downfield pass from Carr's backups was not there and there was not as great a need to pressure the QB. Finally, While his targets certainly declined over the last 8 games, his carries went up dramatically, his YPR did not siginficantly decline, and (IMO, most importantly) his reception percentage remained very high over the second half (61+% reception rate).
Good points re: other backs used on fly and slot formations. As discussed above, I don't think the ILB on Davis was the sole reason for his reduced targets, but the QB play may have been.
DD is used like Martin, IMO - Martin makes catches out of the backfield and there is a different back on the team that should be the main pass ctahcing threat over him (Jordon) in 2004. Re: Tiki - he is certainly a dual threat. If it weren't for his receiving numbers, he'd be a bottom rung starting FF RB.3. If you don't think Tiki Barber (average of 70 receptions a year in the last 4) or Curtis Martin (average of 53 receptions a year in the last 4, 2.9 per game with Pennington under center) "aren't likely to post good dual threat numbers", than I'd like to see your definition of "dual threat."
Looking more closely at Holmes's particular situation, his total numbers were impacted by injury, not Rhett (compare the carries when healthy to the prior season). I did shortchange him, though... I just used the totals at pro-football-reference.com, so I failed to see that he had a one carry game that significantly impacted his per game average. His real dropoff was -1.4% or so.However, one of the points I was making is that it isn't necessarily required that we evaluate each player's unique situation... we can instead simply look at the body of evidence. Some guys got hurt, some guys were in different situations, some guys were in the coach's doghouse, some guys just didn't perform as well. Each and every one of these things could apply to Davis, now or later.
Nice find - and not just because it is a training camp report that totally supports my position.
