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!

Reuben Droughns going forward (1 Viewer)

butcher boy

Footballguy
What do you think about Reuben going forward?? I need to make a decision whether to keep him or not and it's a tough one. He hasn't been good at all so far this year.

Posting this made me hungry for a Reuben sandwich. :popcorn:

 
some of us are also considering jerome harrison off the wire based on responses to this thread.

is droughns injured? they are still talking about this shoulder, aren't they?

is it the offensive line? is it a perfect storm of bad offensive line/mediocre RB/inexperienced QB which is hurting droughns?

 
/i just aquired him with Delhomme for Grossman and Basket. My RB 3 are him or Leon Washington so i hope he gets something going down the stretch

 
/i just aquired him with Delhomme for Grossman and Basket. My RB 3 are him or Leon Washington so i hope he gets something going down the stretch
be sure to keep us updated on your decisions, we are all curious :rolleyes: regarding droughns... his schedule is brutal, his offensive line is brutal. i think if you play matchups with him that he can give you decent games (80 yards and .5 TD) here and there, but i certainly wouldn't want to rely on him as my RB2. his value isn't any higher in ppr either, since he doesn't catch a lot of passes. regarding harrison, i think he's worse than droughns. same situation, worse back. i find him pretty useless.
 
i read last night that the Browns are going to a 4 man rotation at Guard and Center.

that does not sound like good news to me.

 
Well the additions to the OL were free agents and trades. C Hank Fraley and LT Kevin Shaffer both were known to be weaker at pass blocking. So you would think that the Browns would really focus on establishing the run this season. Instead, they've tried to be a lot more of a wide-open offense. They don't have the personnel to do that and not only that but I think its hurt the development of their strength which should be the run.

 
The shoulder problem will linger all year. As others said, the line and schedule is not conducive to success. He's a solid flex, and maybe even an RB2 in PPR leagues, but his injury, situation and poor GL running (at least since he got to Cleveland) caps his upside.

If you own Droughns, you better be carrying Harrison.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zamboni said:
regarding harrison, i think he's worse than droughns. same situation, worse back. i find him pretty useless.
How do you base that on all of 10 carries? :confused:
all of what? i made one assertion - harrison is worse than droughns. cleveland's coaching staff seems to agree with me. do you disagree? if so, please explain why.
i think you misunderstood - he is asking how you base your (one) assertion on just (or "all of") 10 carries.having watched both of these guys in college (WSU grad) I would have to say that Harrison is by far the more impressive pure runner (speed and instincts) and football player. There are many backs that sit their first year behind inferior starters for many reasons - learning the playbook, learning how to block, etc... I wouldn't be suprised to see Harrison win the job next year but I don't think he is a threat to Droughns this year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
zamboni said:
regarding harrison, i think he's worse than droughns. same situation, worse back. i find him pretty useless.
How do you base that on all of 10 carries? :confused:
all of what? i made one assertion - harrison is worse than droughns. cleveland's coaching staff seems to agree with me. do you disagree? if so, please explain why.
i think you misunderstood - he is asking how you base your (one) assertion on just (or "all of") 10 carries.having watched both of these guys in college (WSU grad) I would have to say that Harrison is by far the more impressive pure runner (speed and instincts) and football player. There are many backs that sit their first year behind inferior starters for many reasons - learning the playbook, learning how to block, etc... I wouldn't be suprised to see Harrison win the job next year but I don't think he is a threat to Droughns this year.
Thanks for the clarification. As noted, I was just wondering how the assessment of Harrison was made on him only having 10 carries. He may in fact be no better than Droughns, but I would say the jury is still out.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i might be totally wrong here-but i don't think ANYONE thinks droughns is better. maybe people agree harrison isn't ready to contribute but i don't think anyone anywhere thinks droughns is a better RB. do they?

 
IMO I loved Harrison in college, but I'm not sure his relative "speed" has translated well into the NFL.

To me, Harrison is elusive and has quickness, but in the NFL I have seen him run down too many times from behind by linebackers (I'm including the preseason looks we got of him). He just doesn't look that fast to me.

Although the running styles are different, I think top side for JH is a player like Duce Staley in alot of ways. Downside is a player just not fast enough for the NFL. Time will tell.

Ruebes isn't on a mission to prove he was not just a product of the Denver system this year.............

 
i might be totally wrong here-but i don't think ANYONE thinks droughns is better. maybe people agree harrison isn't ready to contribute but i don't think anyone anywhere thinks droughns is a better RB. do they?
?? i think droughns is better. i have never thought harrison would be an NFL back. currently, cleveland thinks droughns is better. how could you say that nobody does when droughns is currently the starter? coaches don't put "better" players on the bench.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i might be totally wrong here-but i don't think ANYONE thinks droughns is better. maybe people agree harrison isn't ready to contribute but i don't think anyone anywhere thinks droughns is a better RB. do they?
?? i think droughns is better. i have never thought harrison would be an NFL back. currently, cleveland thinks droughns is better. how could you say that nobody does when droughns is currently the starter? coaches don't put "better" players on the bench.
Leinart was on the bench. coaches sit better first year players for a lot of reasons...
 
i might be totally wrong here-but i don't think ANYONE thinks droughns is better. maybe people agree harrison isn't ready to contribute but i don't think anyone anywhere thinks droughns is a better RB. do they?
I think Droughns is a better running back and by quite a bit.Harrison may be a decent back down the road but he doesn't seem ready right now. Cleveland NEEDS Droughns toughness and tackle breaking ability.I've seen harrison go down several times with arm tackles.Harrison is definitely quicker with better route running and pass catching ability,that can't be argued. Reuben is a tough runner with good instincts and vision,he typically hits the hole well and can create a hole when ther isn't one.As far as the rest of the season goes,I agree with the posts above.He'll be decent when he has good matchups.unfortunately there are not many.
 
i might be totally wrong here-but i don't think ANYONE thinks droughns is better. maybe people agree harrison isn't ready to contribute but i don't think anyone anywhere thinks droughns is a better RB. do they?
?? i think droughns is better. i have never thought harrison would be an NFL back. currently, cleveland thinks droughns is better. how could you say that nobody does when droughns is currently the starter? coaches don't put "better" players on the bench.
Leinart was on the bench. coaches sit better first year players for a lot of reasons...
Leinart isn't anymore, is he? Besides, QBs are a little different - it takes much longer to learn that position than any other. Please provide more examples of coaches on 1-4 teams sitting first year running backs that are better than the guy starting. Or give reasons why coaches would do this - you claim that there are lots of them. I see this kind of statement on here every now and then (i.e., "insert backup here" is clearly better), and it just confuses me. Maybe you can explain it to me.
 
i might be totally wrong here-but i don't think ANYONE thinks droughns is better. maybe people agree harrison isn't ready to contribute but i don't think anyone anywhere thinks droughns is a better RB. do they?
?? i think droughns is better. i have never thought harrison would be an NFL back. currently, cleveland thinks droughns is better. how could you say that nobody does when droughns is currently the starter? coaches don't put "better" players on the bench.
Leinart was on the bench. coaches sit better first year players for a lot of reasons...
Leinart isn't anymore, is he? Besides, QBs are a little different - it takes much longer to learn that position than any other. Please provide more examples of coaches on 1-4 teams sitting first year running backs that are better than the guy starting. Or give reasons why coaches would do this - you claim that there are lots of them. I see this kind of statement on here every now and then (i.e., "insert backup here" is clearly better), and it just confuses me. Maybe you can explain it to me.
Harrison is potentially better, but he isn't ready. Droughns may not be a more talented (aka "better") RB, but at this point he's the best overall RB on the team.
 
Flex player at best, but he's more of a bye week fill in at this point. The Browns schedule during weeks 14, 15, and 16 also makes him unstartable during the fantasy playoffs.

 
I'm almost tempted to drop Reuben off my team to free agency. I keep hanging onto him thinking at the very least I'll get some *decent* trade value going, but nobody wants him from me. I'll never start him (2rb's and I have a better 3rd and 4th rb than him).

 
Really, I think there's only one thing to like about Reuben Droughns- he gets touches. I'd rather play someone who's guaranteed to get touches over someone who may or may not get touches, because it's hard to score points if you don't touch the ball.

Droughns should rank pretty low on the list of runningbacks, but at least he's a better option than a Brandon Jacobs, Michael Turner, Jerious Norwood, etc, because we know he's going to touch the ball 10-15 times a game, hopefully more.

That's not a very high compliment, I know, but at least he makes a not-unacceptable bye-week fill-in.

 
Really, I think there's only one thing to like about Reuben Droughns- he gets touches. I'd rather play someone who's guaranteed to get touches over someone who may or may not get touches, because it's hard to score points if you don't touch the ball.Droughns should rank pretty low on the list of runningbacks, but at least he's a better option than a Brandon Jacobs, Michael Turner, Jerious Norwood, etc, because we know he's going to touch the ball 10-15 times a game, hopefully more.That's not a very high compliment, I know, but at least he makes a not-unacceptable bye-week fill-in.
Touches and being the goalline back are the two pluses for him. His schedule looks brutal but he has some decent matchups vs. the Jets, Falcons, Bengals, Chiefs - though he'll be dead to you in the playoffs unless you get to week 16 to play him vs. the Bucs.
 
Leinart isn't anymore, is he? Besides, QBs are a little different - it takes much longer to learn that position than any other. Please provide more examples of coaches on 1-4 teams sitting first year running backs that are better than the guy starting. Or give reasons why coaches would do this - you claim that there are lots of them. I see this kind of statement on here every now and then (i.e., "insert backup here" is clearly better), and it just confuses me. Maybe you can explain it to me.
I'll take a crack at this.First off, "better" is a tricky term to use here. I'd agree that since Droughns is the starter, then by definition he's the "better" RB option for the Browns, at this point anyway. But that doesn't necessarily mean he's the most talented RB the Browns have.You can imagine all sorts of reasons why the most talented guy might not be the "better" option for a team.Maybe the most talented guy...- doesn't fully grasp the playbook, or the formations, or the terminology- doesn't always line up in the right place, or run to the right spot once the ball is snapped.- hasn't mastered the nuances of pass protection and blitz pickup- has issues securing the ball- keeps showing up late for meetings- is dinged upSo I think what folks here are claiming is that Harrison is more talented than Droughns, but is being held back temporarily until one or more of these sorts of issues get ironed out. That leaves Droughns as the "better" RB -- for now.
 
I'm suppose to be working but after reading this thread I thought I would show this comparrison:

Week Browns Schedule Texans schedule

7 Broncos Jags

8 Jets Tenn

9 San diego Giants

10 Falcons Jags

11 Pitt Bills

12 Bengals Jets

13 Chiefs Raiders

14 Pitt Tenn

15 Ravens Pats

16 Bucs Colts

17 Texans Browns

I know it's a mess, the teams highlighted in blue on the left are possible starts for Droughns. The teams highlighted on the right are possible starts for the Houston RB. There 8 possible starts for the Houston RB and only 4 for the Cleveland RB. In addition to that, weeks 8 & 12 are good match-ups for both teams. So, If the backs were the same on both teams, There would be no need to keep Droughns for only 2 starts. I jumped on the Lundy :drive: today and picked him up off waivers just in case. I don't expext much this week against Jacksonville, but after week 8 vs Tennessee maybe we'll know something. One thing for sure, Houston has a tasty schedule most of the way. Oh yea, I have Droughns and will trade him for whatever I can get if Lundy holds the starting gig and performs mediocre. Kubiack say's he's going to give Lundy a shot at it. We'll see?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm very interested in this thread as a Droughns owner. I'm afraid to start him, but I'm afraid to cut him. I guess there is no sense keeping him if I never will start him, but at the same time, I'd hate for him to bounce back in a big way on someone else's team. His schedule looks awful. But if someone like Travis Henry or Dominic Rhodes is out there on the waiver wire (smaller leagues of course), do you drop Droughns for one of them?

 
Leinart isn't anymore, is he? Besides, QBs are a little different - it takes much longer to learn that position than any other. Please provide more examples of coaches on 1-4 teams sitting first year running backs that are better than the guy starting. Or give reasons why coaches would do this - you claim that there are lots of them. I see this kind of statement on here every now and then (i.e., "insert backup here" is clearly better), and it just confuses me. Maybe you can explain it to me.
I'll take a crack at this.First off, "better" is a tricky term to use here. I'd agree that since Droughns is the starter, then by definition he's the "better" RB option for the Browns, at this point anyway. But that doesn't necessarily mean he's the most talented RB the Browns have.You can imagine all sorts of reasons why the most talented guy might not be the "better" option for a team.Maybe the most talented guy...- doesn't fully grasp the playbook, or the formations, or the terminology- doesn't always line up in the right place, or run to the right spot once the ball is snapped.- hasn't mastered the nuances of pass protection and blitz pickup- has issues securing the ball- keeps showing up late for meetings- is dinged upSo I think what folks here are claiming is that Harrison is more talented than Droughns, but is being held back temporarily until one or more of these sorts of issues get ironed out. That leaves Droughns as the "better" RB -- for now.
exactly and I will add:Maroney isn't "clearly" better than Dillon - yet Dillon Starts?How many backs have looked better in Green Bay this year than Ahman Green- yet Green starts?Frank Gore last year in SF - clearly better than Barlow yet only 1 start?Jamal Lewis last year... etc..
 
I got tired of waiting for this guy to do something.

Traded him for Pex Buress and A.Bryant (Dynasty IDP)

I was stoked.

 
Good trade...

I just shipped him and warner for Phillip Rivers. I had no choice. Dead in the water DEAD DEAD at QB. I drafted the worst possible QBs this year and have been starting Harrington and Frye (last 3 weeks).

I don't know if thats lopsided or what... but, with RB depth and an 0-6 record with what was a good team... I'm wanting to win for some pride.

That said... I think it was a good deal. I will be starting Bell, Taylor, McGahee, etc...

JG

 
I packaged him in a keeper league with draft picks for Tiki. Hoping the other owner (who is on the tail end of standings) is looking to build for next year and expects Tiki to retire.

I see slightly better numbers for Droughns the rest of the year but nothing exciting. The Browns are a mess and have no immediate hope in sight.

If you can get value for him, trade him away.

 
Leinart isn't anymore, is he? Besides, QBs are a little different - it takes much longer to learn that position than any other. Please provide more examples of coaches on 1-4 teams sitting first year running backs that are better than the guy starting. Or give reasons why coaches would do this - you claim that there are lots of them. I see this kind of statement on here every now and then (i.e., "insert backup here" is clearly better), and it just confuses me. Maybe you can explain it to me.
I'll take a crack at this.First off, "better" is a tricky term to use here. I'd agree that since Droughns is the starter, then by definition he's the "better" RB option for the Browns, at this point anyway. But that doesn't necessarily mean he's the most talented RB the Browns have.You can imagine all sorts of reasons why the most talented guy might not be the "better" option for a team.Maybe the most talented guy...- doesn't fully grasp the playbook, or the formations, or the terminology- doesn't always line up in the right place, or run to the right spot once the ball is snapped.- hasn't mastered the nuances of pass protection and blitz pickup- has issues securing the ball- keeps showing up late for meetings- is dinged upSo I think what folks here are claiming is that Harrison is more talented than Droughns, but is being held back temporarily until one or more of these sorts of issues get ironed out. That leaves Droughns as the "better" RB -- for now.
exactly and I will add:Maroney isn't "clearly" better than Dillon - yet Dillon Starts?How many backs have looked better in Green Bay this year than Ahman Green- yet Green starts?Frank Gore last year in SF - clearly better than Barlow yet only 1 start?Jamal Lewis last year... etc..
Ok I think it's just semantics, then. Tell me that you think Harrison is MORE TALENTED than Droughns, and I understand. I disagree in this specific instance, but I at least can see the validity behind that statement. BETTER includes all of those things listed above, and I think people lose sight of that. How talented a back is and how good that back is are two very different things.
 
Leinart isn't anymore, is he? Besides, QBs are a little different - it takes much longer to learn that position than any other. Please provide more examples of coaches on 1-4 teams sitting first year running backs that are better than the guy starting. Or give reasons why coaches would do this - you claim that there are lots of them. I see this kind of statement on here every now and then (i.e., "insert backup here" is clearly better), and it just confuses me. Maybe you can explain it to me.
I'll take a crack at this.First off, "better" is a tricky term to use here. I'd agree that since Droughns is the starter, then by definition he's the "better" RB option for the Browns, at this point anyway. But that doesn't necessarily mean he's the most talented RB the Browns have.You can imagine all sorts of reasons why the most talented guy might not be the "better" option for a team.Maybe the most talented guy...- doesn't fully grasp the playbook, or the formations, or the terminology- doesn't always line up in the right place, or run to the right spot once the ball is snapped.- hasn't mastered the nuances of pass protection and blitz pickup- has issues securing the ball- keeps showing up late for meetings- is dinged upSo I think what folks here are claiming is that Harrison is more talented than Droughns, but is being held back temporarily until one or more of these sorts of issues get ironed out. That leaves Droughns as the "better" RB -- for now.
exactly and I will add:Maroney isn't "clearly" better than Dillon - yet Dillon Starts?How many backs have looked better in Green Bay this year than Ahman Green- yet Green starts?Frank Gore last year in SF - clearly better than Barlow yet only 1 start?Jamal Lewis last year... etc..
Ok I think it's just semantics, then. Tell me that you think Harrison is MORE TALENTED than Droughns, and I understand. I disagree in this specific instance, but I at least can see the validity behind that statement. BETTER includes all of those things listed above, and I think people lose sight of that. How talented a back is and how good that back is are two very different things.
agreed. I think he is more talented - not necessarily "better".
 
Of course in most cases, more talented = better.

When it doesn't, it's likely a temporary condition, and before long the more talented player can reasonably be expected to emerge as the better player too.

This explains why folks tend to talk about Harrison becoming the starter in "when" terms, rather than "if" terms.

 
i got him for Heap two weeks ago, to be my number three back.

Seems like i coulda got more for heap if i waited a little

 
davearm said:
Of course in most cases, more talented = better.When it doesn't, it's likely a temporary condition, and before long the more talented player can reasonably be expected to emerge as the better player too.This explains why folks tend to talk about Harrison becoming the starter in "when" terms, rather than "if" terms.
Charles Rogers is one of the most talented WRs I've ever seen. He's not BETTER than anyone. And I still don't think Harrison is more talented than Droughns.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top