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!
thats scary!
It'd be interesting to see how many per 1/2 of the season to see if he did improve as much as he appeared to.
Good points, but I just keep looking at what Tiki Barber did later in his career and feel it's way to early to pass judgement on Reggie Bush. He's a smart, speedy runner with great hands. All he needs is to learn some patience and maybe bulk up a bit.
The two players Bush most compares to are Westbrook and Tiki. Neither did much during his rookie year. And while Reggie obviously received more opportunities than them out of the gate, he was also the most heralded RB to enter the league in years. As a result, he received tons of attention from defenses from day one on. He's the most talented back to enter the league in years. He might not ever be a big-time TD scorer, but he's the real deal.
Couldn't disagree more.
Other than DE, name one other position where players have historically come in and contributed at a higher level immediately than they have at RB. I could name you probably 30 RBs who had a tremendous impact as a rookie. Try that with any other position.
I don't think there is necessarily a big learning curve related to the RB position, but there is definitely a learning curve when it comes to the speed of the players and the game, and especially how fast the running lanes and holes close.
he won the NFC rushing Title, and in the last week of the year, sat in a blow out, lost the overall title to Okoye by 10 yards. Only had like 25 catches
I agree as much as possible.
I think what a lot of people don't factor in is the type of runner that the guy is. Reggie is not your traditional running back and combine that with he is a guy that at the college level beat you with pure athleticism there is going to be a learning curve for a player of his style. Slowing down when hitting the hole, getting used to not being the fastest on the field. You cannot judge him buy normal standards...he is far to diverse. Factor in too that he has to learn as both a receiver and a runner, the trick plays, punt returns, and just being seen and treated as a savior in New Orleans you gotta cut the guy some slack. This is not your ordinary stud he had a lot on his plate for a rookie year. And again ROOKIE YEAR...people critique him like its year 5.
You'd be wrong if we're talking about other offensive skill positions which is basically ff players.
I got the exact same feeling, you could see him grow game by game...once he figures it out he'll be the next great RB...definitely Canton bound if he can stay healthy.
With me, or with Ronny M?
Not according to FBG play by play data, which shows he had 27 carries for loss in his 155 regular season carries. I may have missed one, but I counted 51 carries for 0 yards or a loss in his 171 regular and post season carries.I'm not saying my "recount" data is great, but I believe what was posted here is inaccurate.Furthermore, I will simply say that I hope there are a lot of people in my drafts who are as down on Bush as many here in this forum... I think he is undervalued at this point.
In non PPR leagues he ranked #17 last year (FBG scoring), despite everything you have posted. And he was #8 in fantasy points among RBs from weeks 10 to 17, despite the fact that he played only one quarter in week 17. Do you not think he learned anything that helped him in the second half?
Um, he's going in the middle of the first round in most expert ppr leagues. He won't see the end of the second in most non-ppr leagues (or shouldn't).
wiff u
I agree. What I saw was Reggie pressing too hard and defenses that were completely committed to not getting beat by the heralded rookie. Then as it became apparent that the Saints offense was pretty good and defenses had to take other factors into account, things started opening up for Bush. Combine that with him learning and growing every game, and a great second-half performance was the result.Hopefully he'll continue to build on that success.
Then you'd be wrong.
G, DE, DT, CB, K, P all have an easier learning curve IMO. In college Bush was able to get away with the running style you saw in the early portion of last year. If there was "Very Little" learning curve at the running back position then why do RB's not have their carreer years imediatly and then decline from there? How old were LT, LJ, Shaun Alexander, Tiki, Marshall Faulk, Priest (just of the top of my head) when they had their carreer years?
All you have to do is look at his numbers. I own him in a Non-PPR league and he was the RB15. He scored 54 points the first eight games and 127 the last eight games. This cannot be overlooked.The guy had 1307 combined yards as a rookie and was improving as the year went on. Looking at his "Success Rate" for the year tells us nothing about how he'll do in the future. Nor does comparing his "Success Rate" to McAllister's because Deuce has much more experience than Reggie. I'd like to see what his "Success Rate" was as the year progressed-maybe broken down every four games. I'd also like to see what his "Success Rate" was if you combine his rushing and receiving stats. I have a feeling that these two statistics will tell a different story.
I think he was asking that in regards to negative rushes.
Same story for Walter Payton as well.And to be frank, I don't think either of those guys showed the visible improvements Bush did over the course of the season during their 3.6ypc rookie years.
Not sure what to make of this stuff. Depends on the situation in which the touches occured doesn't it? A guy with 15 touches on 3rd and short is going to have a much higher "Success Rate" percentage than a guy with 15 touches on 3rd an long. I would imagine that McAllister had more touches on 3rd and short than did Bush.
I'm with Vision here.This is commonly called " The Paralysis of Analysis".
Very
:taptaptap: Hello, is this thing on?
:(
He is used that way more because he is not a guy that is going to run off tackle play after play because he RARELY breaks tackles . . .
#17 as a part time RB isn't bad. As the year went on, you saw fewer and fewer carries for loses.Undervalue Bush at your own peril.
What good did it do you the 2nd half of the season if 33% of his scoring came in 1 out of those 8 games? I'm not one to usually pitch the arguments like "take out his 1 huge run" or "subtract the 1 big game" but in this case, it seems spurious to me to see people constantly quoting a relatively meaningless end of year fantasy finish. In PPG he finished the 23rd RB, not even a half point PPG above #27 - Thomas Jones. That means he was barely a RB2 last year in non-PPR. The fact that he played all season long is why he finished where he did and ahead of some other players.I keep seeing references in the Bush threads about how the "lightbulb" turned on for him the 2nd half of the season and he did indeed average a much better ypc in the 2nd half. However, there's not a lot of data to look at either. How can we really tell if he got that much better in the 2nd half, when in 6 of those 8 games he got 10 carries or less? It's hard to tell much when he's only getting carry totals like:5 for 24 vs Atl6 for 37 vs Dal7 for 14 vs Was3 for 20 vs CarEven in his monster fantasy game against SF he had 10 carries for 37 yards.You'll get no argument from me that he's an excellent pass catcher and dangerous in space, but running the ball seems unsettled. Now that being said, NO just doesn't seem to be using him in a way where we can really tell if he's running the ball all that well (off-tackles, sweeps, etc.) I think that contributed greatly to those many negative carries the OP was talking about.All you have to do is look at his numbers. I own him in a Non-PPR league and he was the RB15. He scored 54 points the first eight games and 127 the last eight games. This cannot be overlooked.The guy had 1307 combined yards as a rookie and was improving as the year went on. Looking at his "Success Rate" for the year tells us nothing about how he'll do in the future. Nor does comparing his "Success Rate" to McAllister's because Deuce has much more experience than Reggie. I'd like to see what his "Success Rate" was as the year progressed-maybe broken down every four games. I'd also like to see what his "Success Rate" was if you combine his rushing and receiving stats. I have a feeling that these two statistics will tell a different story.
At the end of last year the games that I watched he was breaking tackles and running hard.duaneok66 said:
This was exactly what Baldinger was showing about Bush, and also about Deuce.Deuce made good and decisive cuts after reading the DL and the LBs. Deuce didn't try to make too much out of a run but rather take what the defense was giving.Andy Dufresne said:
Maybe Baldy meant runs for negative or zero - I didn't check his math. Glad you did.Just Win Baby said:
