What's new
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!

Reggie Bush (1 Viewer)

I would guess a great deal of his carries for loss were in the first half of the season. The kid grew exponentially as the season went on. As a Saints fan Im very excited to see what he can do with a full season under his belt and a full offseason with brees to prepare

 
SSOG said:
Bri said:
Success Rate measures how often an RB gets 40% of the necessary yardage on 1st down, 60% on 2nd down, or 100% on 3rd down- basically, a measure of how good an RB is at moving the chains.
40+60+100? :thumbup:
It makes perfect sense if you think about it. The goal of the offense is to move the chains, and the way to do that is to progress towards a first down. Any play on 3rd down that doesn't get all of the necessary yardage is an unsuccessful play on the assumption that you're going to punt it away (you can get 20 yards, and if it's 3rd and 47, it doesn't matter). Obviously you need a larger chunk of the yards on 2nd down to be successful than you did on 1st, because you have fewer plays after that- for instance, 8 yards on 1st and 20 would be very helpful, but on 2nd-and-20 would be essentially meaningless (leaving you with a still difficult 3rd-and-12).
IMO, Not at all, but if it works for you...whatever works man.
 
As for Freebagel's argument that Fred Taylor set career highs in ypc in Jax, so their OLine must have been a great run-blocking unit... here are Taylor's year-by-year ypcs for every year where he played 10 or more games: 4.6, 4.6, 4.8, 4.6, 4.6, 4.7, 4.1, 5.0. Yeah, that 5.0 value was clearly way out of line with his career averages, Jax's offensive line must have been a dramatic improvement over where it was in the past. :thumbup:Taylor did set a career high in ypc, but he was essentially just as effective as he always was. And besides, even if we do think that Jax's offensive line was worth .4 more yards per carry last year than they have been in the past, Jones-Drew averaged FIVE POINT SEVEN yards per carry. That is more than two full yards more per carry than Reggie Bush. Bush could have played on the Cardinals and Jones-Drew on the mid-90s Cowboys and the difference in lines still wouldn't explain away more than two full yards per carry.
1. Perhaps you missed the part about the guy being basically THIRTY ONE YEARS OLD. People don't set career high's in ypc just before they turn thirty one unless there was a HUGE improvement in the people around them. At that age, guys generally see their ypc drop off by HUGE amounts, not IMPROVE by large amounts. But that's exactly what happened with Taylor.2. I don't know why you brought up the difference in ypc between MJD and Bush, because it was never my intent to draw that comparison directly. My only point was that these bizarre comments that N.O. is obviously a vastly superior rushing situation over Jacksonville (who quite frankly was right up there with teams like Denver last year) are nothing short of ignorant (not meaning to use the word in a degrading way, that's just the best-fit term here - people are blindly assuming that because New Orleans was more productive offense that it was a better situation for rushing as well). It like Joe-six-pack sitting here saying "durrrr, New Orleans is explosive so it must be easier to run the ball there". KC didn't have an explosive passing game during Priest's incredible seasons yet that offense was known as FF RB heaven. Denver's passing game has always been merely above average or worse during their run of FF RB superiority as well. Yet, when it fits their cause, "oh hay guys this guy couldn't be in a good system that's not a great passing system har har!". It's like people didn't actually watch the games which, given many of the comments made in this thread, actually makes sense.I live in Gainesville so we get basically every Jacksonville game on TV here. New Orleans was nationally televised a ton of times this year so I saw a bunch of them as well. Seeing both at least 7 or 8 times this year (Jacksonville more like 13 or so) even though N.O. was hella-fun to watch, I can EASILY say that the running lanes in Jacksonville were MUCH, MUCH wider way more consistently than they were in New Orleans.And quite frankly, anyone that's watched both and tries to say differently is flat out lying, because no one could be blind enough to genuinely think otherwise after watching both.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Blackjacks said:
There is another thread for comparing MJD and RB. I was just making a statement that MJD went to a better situation which I'll still stand by. I believe that RB opened up things for Brees and Colston and allowed Payton to call the plays he called. Don't just look at #'s SSOG, look at when Reggie is on the field their are always 2 players on him which opens up alot for others. I've never on this board said MJD wasn't any good. All I've been saying is I think he went over his ceiling and was in a good spot to do what he did. The difference, in my opininon. Reggie still has alot to learn don't get me wrong. However I think in 2 years he will be the best offensive weapon in the league. Just my 2 cents and you your right to yours.Wouldn't you agree last years Saints team was very different all around than the Saints teams from the past?
Don't just look at the numbers?2005 NO 17 rushing TDs2005 JAX 18 rushing TDsAnd NO lost their RB1 with a torn ACL! *lol* Stecker? Really? Leftwich/Garrad vs BreesCarl Smith vs PaytonColston vs Reggie WilliamsSeriously? Carl Smith got FIRED. I thought JAX was far better off? Such a better offense? They fired the OC. The offense was a MESS. MJD went over his ceiling. *lol* You need to look up the word ceiling. In his rookie year, MJD maxed himself out, had a career year, now it's all down hill. Bush struggled, on a potent offense, but he's learning the NFL game.
I'll say this one time and make it slow enough for you to understand. PRIOR to last year, when both rookies were drafted, MJD in my opinion went to the better offense and better team. Reggie went to a team that was coming off a horrible season, yes they had a huge disaster occur, but they had a new qb, new coach, and wr's. They were thought of as well, PRIOR to last year to have one of the worst offensive lines in the league as well as a horrible defense. In my opinion, for what it's worth, Reggie was the nucleaus to allow Payton to work his magic. His presense was alot like Marshall Faulk's presense with the Greatest Show on Turf. Not since Marshall's days have we seen an offense like that. And once Marshall's talents went so did the team. I think Reggie gives his team the same oppurtunity. Although Warner was great during those years and Martz was a genius it all came back to Marshall. He was the centerpoint to that offense and without him it didn't work. I think your seeing the same with Reggie.
 
Reggie Bush is on the Cover of Madden 08 isn't he? :blackdot: Here comes the high ankle sprain, out for 3-4 weeks with a slow recovery to 100%

- just sayin :popcorn:

 
Let me put it this way...I think he's the total package, the ultimate weapon like LT is right now, and yes, like Marshall used to be. I remember when LT worked out with him during the summer before his last year at USC, and LT spoke about how hard he trained. How he pushed himself until he puked and just kept going. If LT was impressed, that says a lot. :blackdot:

 
Let me put it this way...I think he's the total package, the ultimate weapon like LT is right now, and yes, like Marshall used to be. I remember when LT worked out with him during the summer before his last year at USC, and LT spoke about how hard he trained. How he pushed himself until he puked and just kept going. If LT was impressed, that says a lot. :bag:
no he isn't . . . he doesn't break tackles NEARLY as well as LT . . .
 
Let me put it this way...I think he's the total package, the ultimate weapon like LT is right now, and yes, like Marshall used to be. I remember when LT worked out with him during the summer before his last year at USC, and LT spoke about how hard he trained. How he pushed himself until he puked and just kept going. If LT was impressed, that says a lot. :thumbup:
no he isn't . . . he doesn't break tackles NEARLY as well as LT . . .
Yeah, but he was just a rookie this year.
 
Let me put it this way...I think he's the total package, the ultimate weapon like LT is right now, and yes, like Marshall used to be. I remember when LT worked out with him during the summer before his last year at USC, and LT spoke about how hard he trained. How he pushed himself until he puked and just kept going. If LT was impressed, that says a lot. :D
no he isn't . . . he doesn't break tackles NEARLY as well as LT . . .
Yeah, but he was just a rookie this year.
good . . . let's wait to see if/when he brakes tackles like LT before we anoint him LT3 . . .
 
Let me put it this way...I think he's the total package, the ultimate weapon like LT is right now, and yes, like Marshall used to be. I remember when LT worked out with him during the summer before his last year at USC, and LT spoke about how hard he trained. How he pushed himself until he puked and just kept going. If LT was impressed, that says a lot. :D
no he isn't . . . he doesn't break tackles NEARLY as well as LT . . .
Yeah, but he was just a rookie this year.
good . . . let's wait to see if/when he brakes tackles like LT before we anoint him LT3 . . .
I don't think that's going to happen since his initials aren't LT. As said before, he looks to be the same type of weapon LT is. He can do it all. LT didn't become as good as he is overnight.
 
All this man-love for a part-time RB makes me ill.

Deuce is the primary RB at New Orleans, and he equaled or out-performed Bush in every significant rushing criteria last season. Furthermore, Deuce is not going to go anywhere as he is signed through 2012.

From a performance perspective, Deuce and Bush each have an 8% chance of pulling off a rush of 10 or more yards, and Bush is nearly twice as likely to end up with a rush of 1 yard or less. So you tell me, is Payton going to bench Deuce in favor of Bush? I don't think so!

Bush is a serious offense weapon which Payton will continue to utilize for sure, but Bush will continue to share touches for years to come, and therefore will not come anywhere near LT2-like performance anytime soon.

 
FWIW, many Saints fans have speculated Deuce's last year with the team will be 2009.

Unless he renegotiates and takes a significant pay cut, which isn't totally out of the question.

 
I'm happy to concede that Deuce only plays with the Saints through 2009. That's 3 more full seasons that he and Bush are sharing touches and it completely nullifies any chance that Bush has of producing LT2-like Fantasy stats until the 2010 season!

 
SproutDaddy said:
Let me put it this way...I think he's the total package, the ultimate weapon like LT is right now, and yes, like Marshall used to be. I remember when LT worked out with him during the summer before his last year at USC, and LT spoke about how hard he trained. How he pushed himself until he puked and just kept going. If LT was impressed, that says a lot. :scared:
no he isn't . . . he doesn't break tackles NEARLY as well as LT . . .
Yeah, but he was just a rookie this year.
good . . . let's wait to see if/when he brakes tackles like LT before we anoint him LT3 . . .
I don't think that's going to happen since his initials aren't LT. As said before, he looks to be the same type of weapon LT is. He can do it all. LT didn't become as good as he is overnight.
it won't happen because they are different in terms of skill set . . .
 
Afro Samurai,

I'm not happy it will take Bush 4 years to show us what he can do as a full-time RB.

My "happy" was in reference to conceding 2009 instead of 2012 for Deuce's realistic departure from New Orleans.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Afro Samurai,I'm not happy it will take Bush 4 years to show us what he can do as a full-time RB.My "happy" was in reference to conceding 2009 instead of 2012 for Deuce's realistic departure from New Orleans.
I don't think he'll ever be a "full-time RB" in the NFL. At least not in the manner people are discussing in this thread. He didn't even do that in college. But that doesn't mean he doesn't have the ability to be an RB1 for many years given his unique talents.I :loco: at the people who seem angry that he's not a traditional RB in the mold of an LT2.
 
Afro Samurai,I'm not happy it will take Bush 4 years to show us what he can do as a full-time RB.My "happy" was in reference to conceding 2009 instead of 2012 for Deuce's realistic departure from New Orleans.
I don't think he'll ever be a "full-time RB" in the NFL. At least not in the manner people are discussing in this thread. He didn't even do that in college. But that doesn't mean he doesn't have the ability to be an RB1 for many years given his unique talents.I :angry: at the people who seem angry that he's not a traditional RB in the mold of an LT2.
The whole "he didn't do it in college" thing carries no weight. Do you think he would've split carries if he had played for Memphis in college? Do you think he would've split carries if he had been picked by the Texans instead of the Saints? I'm gonna lean towards no.The fact that Bush has been lucky enough to have LenDale White and Deuce McAllister as his teammates in no way proves that he couldn't carry the full load if he were put in a situation that offered him that opportunity. He's about the same size as Marshall Faulk, Tiki Barber, and Brian Westbrook. Those are three of the most productive FF backs to play in the past decade. If they can do it, I see no reason why Reggie can't. He has the same type of ability (arguably better).
 
Afro Samurai,I'm not happy it will take Bush 4 years to show us what he can do as a full-time RB.My "happy" was in reference to conceding 2009 instead of 2012 for Deuce's realistic departure from New Orleans.
I don't think he'll ever be a "full-time RB" in the NFL. At least not in the manner people are discussing in this thread. He didn't even do that in college. But that doesn't mean he doesn't have the ability to be an RB1 for many years given his unique talents.I :boxing: at the people who seem angry that he's not a traditional RB in the mold of an LT2.
The reason he wasn't a full-time RB in college has less to do with Bush and more to do with the fact that they had/have some tremendous talent at RB at SC. They had two 1st Round talents at RB (with a couple more talented players hanging out at JC's), and it would have been ridiculous to not use both of them.God, I hate SC.
 
155 carries, 52 for a loss.That's over 1/3 of his carries.(Stat from Brian Baldinger, appearing at NFL Films in Mt. Laurel, NJ on NFL Network / Total Access)
It be interesting to see how Bush would do if he didn't have Duce to share time with. I don't think he have a great improvement in overall numbers. However, Bush is a very good RB, I not sure he is a 1st round pick in non performance FF leagues. I think the value pick is Duce at RB, based at where you can get him in most FF drafts.
 
FWIW, many Saints fans have speculated Deuce's last year with the team will be 2009.

Unless he renegotiates and takes a significant pay cut, which isn't totally out of the question.
I'm happy to concede that Deuce only plays with the Saints through 2009. That's 3 more full seasons that he and Bush are sharing touches and it completely nullifies any chance that Bush has of producing LT2-like Fantasy stats until the 2010 season!
Also, FWIW, Kenny Wilkerson, the Saints radio sideline reporter and WWL evening sports talk host, has speculated (numerous times) that this will be Deuce's last season in New Orleans. Who knows... :thumbup:
 
do you guys actually think that Bush is getting 300+carries even if Deuce goes down??

they didn't draft Pittman for nothing . . .

 
do you guys actually think that Bush is getting 300+carries even if Deuce goes down??they didn't draft Pittman for nothing . . .
I guess we should all downgrade Stephen Jackson big time then. After all, they didn't draft Brian Leonard in the 2nd Round (two rounds ahead of Pittman) for nothing...Teams select players at positions with star players every year, particularly at RB. You need quality depth in the NFL. This is especially true at RB.So, yes, they didn't select Pittman for nothing. They took him because he was probably the best player left on their board at a position where quality depth is a must. They took him to help provide that depth.
 
do you guys actually think that Bush is getting 300+carries even if Deuce goes down??they didn't draft Pittman for nothing . . .
I guess we should all downgrade Stephen Jackson big time then. After all, they didn't draft Brian Leonard in the 2nd Round (two rounds ahead of Pittman) for nothing...Teams select players at positions with star players every year, particularly at RB. You need quality depth in the NFL. This is especially true at RB.So, yes, they didn't select Pittman for nothing. They took him because he was probably the best player left on their board at a position where quality depth is a must. They took him to help provide that depth.
you're comapring Jackson to Bush?? you're comapring STL to NOLOL1) NO has TWO quality runners, STL had 85 year old Davis backing up SJ . . .2) Bush has NEVER carried the load fulltime, unlike Jackson . . .
 
do you guys actually think that Bush is getting 300+carries even if Deuce goes down??they didn't draft Pittman for nothing . . .
I guess we should all downgrade Stephen Jackson big time then. After all, they didn't draft Brian Leonard in the 2nd Round (two rounds ahead of Pittman) for nothing...Teams select players at positions with star players every year, particularly at RB. You need quality depth in the NFL. This is especially true at RB.So, yes, they didn't select Pittman for nothing. They took him because he was probably the best player left on their board at a position where quality depth is a must. They took him to help provide that depth.
you're comapring Jackson to Bush?? you're comapring STL to NOLOL1) NO has TWO quality runners, STL had 85 year old Davis backing up SJ . . .2) Bush has NEVER carried the load fulltime, unlike Jackson . . .
Bush avg. 15 touches agame last year which is just fine for him to be in the top 10.Also, Davis is no longer on the Rams roster.........do some homework before posting please.And in closing I feel comfortable in saying I'll take the Rams offense over the Saints this year.SJax is much better of a rb than Reggie Bush but I think Reggie is a better football player. :)
 
do you guys actually think that Bush is getting 300+carries even if Deuce goes down??

they didn't draft Pittman for nothing . . .
I guess we should all downgrade Stephen Jackson big time then. After all, they didn't draft Brian Leonard in the 2nd Round (two rounds ahead of Pittman) for nothing...Teams select players at positions with star players every year, particularly at RB. You need quality depth in the NFL. This is especially true at RB.

So, yes, they didn't select Pittman for nothing. They took him because he was probably the best player left on their board at a position where quality depth is a must. They took him to help provide that depth.
you're comapring Jackson to Bush?? you're comapring STL to NOLOL

1) NO has TWO quality runners, STL had 85 year old Davis backing up SJ . . .

2) Bush has NEVER carried the load fulltime, unlike Jackson . . .
2) Bush avg. 15 touches agame last year which is just fine for him to be in the top 10. 1) Also, Davis is no longer on the Rams roster.........do some homework before posting please.

And in closing I feel comfortable in saying I'll take the Rams offense over the Saints this year.

SJax is much better of a rb than Reggie Bush but I think Reggie is a better football player. :)
1) no kidding . . . hence the Leonard selection . . . ------------

2) 15 touches doesnt explain WHY they drafted Pittman . . . they could care less if he's in your FF top 10; they drafted Pittman to take some of the load if Deuce goes down . . .

try again . . .

 
Last edited by a moderator:
do you guys actually think that Bush is getting 300+carries even if Deuce goes down??

they didn't draft Pittman for nothing . . .
I guess we should all downgrade Stephen Jackson big time then. After all, they didn't draft Brian Leonard in the 2nd Round (two rounds ahead of Pittman) for nothing...Teams select players at positions with star players every year, particularly at RB. You need quality depth in the NFL. This is especially true at RB.

So, yes, they didn't select Pittman for nothing. They took him because he was probably the best player left on their board at a position where quality depth is a must. They took him to help provide that depth.
you're comapring Jackson to Bush?? you're comapring STL to NOLOL

1) NO has TWO quality runners, STL had 85 year old Davis backing up SJ . . .

2) Bush has NEVER carried the load fulltime, unlike Jackson . . .
I am? Point out any comparisons in my post if you don't mind.Anyway, at the time of the draft, the Saints had essentially three (3) running backs - Deuce (injury risk), Bush, and Stecker. You don't see RB as a need for the Saints? And, yet, they still waited until 9 other RB's were off the board to grab Pittman. This was a draft pick to provide depth.

 
do you guys actually think that Bush is getting 300+carries even if Deuce goes down??

they didn't draft Pittman for nothing . . .
I guess we should all downgrade Stephen Jackson big time then. After all, they didn't draft Brian Leonard in the 2nd Round (two rounds ahead of Pittman) for nothing...Teams select players at positions with star players every year, particularly at RB. You need quality depth in the NFL. This is especially true at RB.

So, yes, they didn't select Pittman for nothing. They took him because he was probably the best player left on their board at a position where quality depth is a must. They took him to help provide that depth.
in case of injury . . . you're comapring Jackson to Bush?? you're comapring STL to NO

LOL

1) NO has TWO quality runners, STL had 85 year old Davis backing up SJ . . .

2) Bush has NEVER carried the load fulltime, unlike Jackson . . .
I am? Point out any comparisons in my post if you don't mind.Anyway, at the time of the draft, the Saints had essentially three (3) running backs - Deuce (injury risk), Bush, and Stecker. You don't see RB as a need for the Saints? And, yet, they still waited until 9 other RB's were off the board to grab Pittman. This was a draft pick to provide depth.
 
do you guys actually think that Bush is getting 300+carries even if Deuce goes down??

they didn't draft Pittman for nothing . . .
I guess we should all downgrade Stephen Jackson big time then. After all, they didn't draft Brian Leonard in the 2nd Round (two rounds ahead of Pittman) for nothing...Teams select players at positions with star players every year, particularly at RB. You need quality depth in the NFL. This is especially true at RB.

So, yes, they didn't select Pittman for nothing. They took him because he was probably the best player left on their board at a position where quality depth is a must. They took him to help provide that depth.
you're comapring Jackson to Bush?? you're comapring STL to NOLOL

1) NO has TWO quality runners, STL had 85 year old Davis backing up SJ . . .

2) Bush has NEVER carried the load fulltime, unlike Jackson . . .
2) Bush avg. 15 touches agame last year which is just fine for him to be in the top 10. 1) Also, Davis is no longer on the Rams roster.........do some homework before posting please.

And in closing I feel comfortable in saying I'll take the Rams offense over the Saints this year.

SJax is much better of a rb than Reggie Bush but I think Reggie is a better football player. :thumbup:
1) no kidding . . . hence the Leonard selection . . . ------------

2) 15 touches doesnt explain WHY they drafted Pittman . . . they could care less if he's in your FF top 10; they drafted Pittman to take some of the load if Deuce goes down . . .

try again . . .
I read your post wrong. I thought you said Davis was backing him up, sorry.Some of the load yes but Reggie would definetly be the main guy if Deuce went down.

Sorry again. I take all the egg on my face for that one. :rolleyes:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyway, at the time of the draft, the Saints had essentially three (3) running backs - Deuce (injury risk), Bush, and Stecker. You don't see RB as a need for the Saints? And, yet, they still waited until 9 other RB's were off the board to grab Pittman. This was a draft pick to provide depth.
Pretty sure Pittman was a BPA pick. This was not really a 'need' area as the Saints have an intriguing prospect, Jamaal Branch, who likely would've replaced Stecker anyway.
 
Anyway, at the time of the draft, the Saints had essentially three (3) running backs - Deuce (injury risk), Bush, and Stecker. You don't see RB as a need for the Saints? And, yet, they still waited until 9 other RB's were off the board to grab Pittman. This was a draft pick to provide depth.
Pretty sure Pittman was a BPA pick. This was not really a 'need' area as the Saints have an intriguing prospect, Jamaal Branch, who likely would've replaced Stecker anyway.
There's plenty of intriguing prospects out there. I don't believe teams plan on them as much as they hope...if that makes some sense.Deuce's knee(or knees) could be a concern for the franchise. Sit on Pittman and trade him next year if you're still confident in Deuce/Bush combo. As a pair, I think it would take a special player to be able to sub for both of them for an extended period and they may feel Pittman can do that. Pittman offers some nice options for them.
 
do you guys actually think that Bush is getting 300+carries even if Deuce goes down??they didn't draft Pittman for nothing . . .
Pittman is a fraction of the player that Deuce McAllister is. He might eventually have some sort of role with the Saints, but he probably won't get a significant piece of the pie ala Deuce. Bush is better than Pittman in every facet of the game. Pittman poses zero long-term threat.
 
All this man-love for a part-time RB makes me ill.Deuce is the primary RB at New Orleans, and he equaled or out-performed Bush in every significant rushing criteria last season. Furthermore, Deuce is not going to go anywhere as he is signed through 2012.From a performance perspective, Deuce and Bush each have an 8% chance of pulling off a rush of 10 or more yards, and Bush is nearly twice as likely to end up with a rush of 1 yard or less. So you tell me, is Payton going to bench Deuce in favor of Bush? I don't think so!Bush is a serious offense weapon which Payton will continue to utilize for sure, but Bush will continue to share touches for years to come, and therefore will not come anywhere near LT2-like performance anytime soon.
First off, if you literally believe that going forward Deuce and Bush have an equal chance to break long runs, I disagree with that. Last season, Bush was hampered by ankle injuries, plus he had to learn how to adapt to the pro game. I seriously doubt McAllister will continue to break long runs as often as Bush this year and beyond.Secondly, as others have said, I disagree with your assessment of McAllister's contract situation. I posted this in the McAllister Spotlight thread:
Here is McAllister's base salary info from nflpa.org:2006 1450000.00 2007 2600000.00 2008 3600000.00 2009 5200000.00 2010 6200000.00 2011 7100000.00 2012 8100000.00 I doubt McAllister's contract will stick after 2008, when he will be 30, and it's possible they could ask him to rework it after this season. I would expect him to be traded or cut, depending on how well he performs over the next two seasons (and how well Bush performs). Knowing that is coming, I'd expect the touches at RB to slowly shift more to Bush over the next two years.As to McAllister's fantasy potential, consider this:Games 1-8 (8 games): 111/487/5 rushing (4.4 ypc) and 17/109/0 (6.4 ypr) receiving on 21 targets = 89.6 fantasy pointsGames 9-16 (7 games): 143/570/6 rushing (4.0 ypc) and 13/89/0 (6.8 ypr) receiving on 15 targets = 101.9 fantasy pointsAnd then he followed that up with 208 total yards and 2 TDs in 2 playoff games against Philly and Chicago.He definitely got stronger as the season went on, though I'm not sure there is more improvement to come in year 2 post injury as was suggested above. I think his improvement will be offset by a shift of touches towards Bush.Last year, Deuce had 274 touches in 15 games, while Bush had only 243 in 16 (more like 15.25) games. I see that gap narrowing. I projected Bush for 265 touches in the Bush spotlight thread, and I'll go with 260 for Deuce.240/1032/9 (4.3 ypc) rushing20/136/0 (6.8 ypr) receivingThat is 171 fantasy points (FBG scoring), which would have ranked him as RB #22 last season.
For completeness, I posted this in Bush's Spotlight thread:
I think he has excellent potential to be a top 10 RB in most fantasy scoring systems.Here is McAllister's base salary info from nflpa.org:2006 1450000.00 2007 2600000.00 2008 3600000.00 2009 5200000.00 2010 6200000.00 2011 7100000.00 2012 8100000.00 I doubt McAllister's contract will stick after 2008, when he will be 30, and it's possible they could ask him to rework it after this season. I would expect him to be traded or cut, depending on how well he performs over the next two seasons (and how well Bush performs). Knowing that is coming, I'd expect the touches at RB to slowly shift more to Bush over the next two years.As to Bush's fantasy potential, consider this:Games 1-8: 80/200/0 rushing (2.5 ypc) and 47/318/0 (6.8 ypr) receiving on 60 targets = 51.8 fantasy pointsGames 9-16: 74/358/6 rushing (4.8 ypc) and 42/430/2 (10.2 ypr) receiving on 61 targets = 126.8 fantasy pointsAnd note that the second half split includes week 17 against Carolina when Bush played only one quarter.And then he followed that up with 225 total yards and 2 TDs in 2 playoff games against Philly and Chicago.Project his second half to 16 games and you get 148/716/12 rushing and 82/860/4... and his playoff performance makes that seem like a pretty valid projection, especially considering the competition.Do I think Bush will produce like the second half for all of next season? Well, the TDs and the yards per carry and reception may tough to duplicate, but then again I'd expect more than 148 carries and very possibly more than 82 catches.I'll go with:180/828/9 (4.6 ypc) rushing85/765/4 (9.0 ypr) receivingThat is 237 fantasy points (FBG scoring), which would have ranked him as RB #8 last season.
 
do you guys actually think that Bush is getting 300+carries even if Deuce goes down??they didn't draft Pittman for nothing . . .
Pittman is a fraction of the player that Deuce McAllister is. He might eventually have some sort of role with the Saints, but he probably won't get a significant piece of the pie ala Deuce. Bush is better than Pittman in every facet of the game. Pittman poses zero long-term threat.
who is comparing Pittman to McCallister ??? If you think that Bush gets 300+ carries if Deuce goes down, then you're kidding yourself . . .
 
do you guys actually think that Bush is getting 300+carries even if Deuce goes down??they didn't draft Pittman for nothing . . .
Pittman is a fraction of the player that Deuce McAllister is. He might eventually have some sort of role with the Saints, but he probably won't get a significant piece of the pie ala Deuce. Bush is better than Pittman in every facet of the game. Pittman poses zero long-term threat.
who is comparing Pittman to McCallister ??? If you think that Bush gets 300+ carries if Deuce goes down, then you're kidding yourself . . .
Bush will absolutely get the overwhelming majority of carries whenever Deuce leaves town or gets injured. Will it be 300 carries? It's definitely possible. Pittman is nothing special. He was a 4th round pick in a weak RB crop. He poses no threat to anyone.
 
Think what you want haters

Reggie is great
Another insightful Blackjacks post lost in a sea of great statistical discussion....But stats to the BJ's are like :lmao:
Insightful on your part too :popcorn: . Give the guy a break, he is discussing a view point that is not popular, its more benificial to hear both sides of an argument then to hear from only one. I tend to agree with Blackjacks on this.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top