Rookie RB Landing Spots (1 Viewer)

[salmonstud]

With free agency settling down & most of the bigger names being signed it looks like this coveted deep RB rookie class will have some good landing spots. I have a number of top 5 rookie picks in my dynasty leagues & the obvious need for a number of teams has be salivating. I would be interested in hearing what the Shark Pool thinks would be the top 5-10 ideal landing spots for a rookie RB this year.

MY TOP 10 - Ranked

1. Cowboys - I could get 1,000 yards behind that line. McFadden & Randle shouldn't be too hard to beat out in camp.

2. Chargers - With Matthews joining the Eagles - a huge hole at RB in a historically good offense will be filled via the draft.

3. Falcons - Only competition for starting job in great offense is Freeman.

4. Titans - Sankey flopped last year - Titans will draft a RB early.

5. Jets - Powell & Ivory are not the answer.

6. Jaguars - Jags are building a young nucleus - I don't see D.Robinson as the answer & Gerhart didn't look like a starting RB last year.

7. Panthers - J.Stewart is never healthy! With D.Williams gone - Panthers will draft a RB & he wills start when Stewart goes down as usual.

8. Lions - J.Bell is a decent RB but a day 1 or 2 drafted RB will be given every opportunity in camp to win the job.

9. Patriots - Blount isn't the answer but last time you could rely on a Pats RB for fantasy was Corey Dillon. Hate Billy B for RB fantasy potential.

10.Vikings - All depends on ADP - if he is gone only competition is McKinnon.

ALMOST MADE THE CUT

Ravens - Forsett should start again this year but he is not getting any younger.

Cardinals - RB added would be in RBBC with Ellington - & rumors have ADP going there.

 

[Biabreakable]

prime RB situations

 

[VarsityBlues123]

With free agency settling down & most of the bigger names being signed it looks like this coveted deep RB rookie class will have some good landing spots. I have a number of top 5 rookie picks in my dynasty leagues & the obvious need for a number of teams has be salivating. I would be interested in hearing what the Shark Pool thinks would be the top 5-10 ideal landing spots for a rookie RB this year.

MY TOP 10

Cowboys - I could get 1,000 yards behind that line. McFadden & Randle shouldn't be too hard to beat out in camp.

Chargers - With Matthews joining the Eagles - a huge hole at RB in a historically good offense will be filled via the draft.

Falcons - Only competition for starting job in great offense is Freeman.

Titans - Sankey flopped last year - Titans will draft a RB early.

Jets - Powell & Ivory are not the answer.

Jaguars - Jags are building a young nucleus - I don't see D.Robinson as the answer & Gerhart didn't look like a starting RB last year.

Panthers - J.Stewart is never healthy! With D.Williams gone - Panthers will draft a RB & he wills start when Stewart goes down as usual.

Lions - J.Bell is a decent RB but a day 1 or 2 drafted RB will be given every opportunity in camp to win the job.

Patriots - Blount isn't the answer but last time you could rely on a Pats RB for fantasy was Corey Dillon. Hate Billy B for RB fantasy potential.

Vikings - All depends on ADP - if he is gone only competition is McKinnon.

ALMOST MADE THE CUT

Ravens - Forsett should start again this year but he is not getting any younger.

Cardinals - RB added would be in RBBC with Ellington - & rumors have ADP going there.

looks like the standard stuff everyone is saying its almost as if no one has their own opinion and everyone is just agreeing with popular opinion seems to be.

 

[salmonstud]

prime RB situations

I didn't see this thread.

 

[salmonstud]

looks like the standard stuff everyone is saying its almost as if no one has their own opinion and everyone is just agreeing with popular opinion seems to be.

Being a ##### bag is unoriginal as well.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

With free agency settling down & most of the bigger names being signed it looks like this coveted deep RB rookie class will have some good landing spots. I have a number of top 5 rookie picks in my dynasty leagues & the obvious need for a number of teams has be salivating. I would be interested in hearing what the Shark Pool thinks would be the top 5-10 ideal landing spots for a rookie RB this year.

MY TOP 10

Cowboys - I could get 1,000 yards behind that line. McFadden & Randle shouldn't be too hard to beat out in camp.

Chargers - With Matthews joining the Eagles - a huge hole at RB in a historically good offense will be filled via the draft.

Falcons - Only competition for starting job in great offense is Freeman.

Titans - Sankey flopped last year - Titans will draft a RB early.

Jets - Powell & Ivory are not the answer.

Jaguars - Jags are building a young nucleus - I don't see D.Robinson as the answer & Gerhart didn't look like a starting RB last year.

Panthers - J.Stewart is never healthy! With D.Williams gone - Panthers will draft a RB & he wills start when Stewart goes down as usual.

Lions - J.Bell is a decent RB but a day 1 or 2 drafted RB will be given every opportunity in camp to win the job.

Patriots - Blount isn't the answer but last time you could rely on a Pats RB for fantasy was Corey Dillon. Hate Billy B for RB fantasy potential.

Vikings - All depends on ADP - if he is gone only competition is McKinnon.

You're making an awful lot of assumptions about how some of the teams feel about the incumbents that are there.

 

[Biabreakable]

I think this is a somewhat difficult exercise because really very few teams would be poor destinations for a RB. Even the Eagles who have 3 quality RB would be of interest if they take a RB.

You can rank the teams in a lot of different ways. Teams that have good run blocking offensive lines might be better fits than ones who do not. You can also rank based on competition of other RB on each teams roster.

Here is a quick attempt at ranking the teams by attractiveness of situation for a RB to compete for playing time right away

Dallas
Chargers
Atlanta

Ravens
Texans
Colts
Jets
Panthers
Bears
Raiders
Lions
Titans
Cardinals
Vikings
Washington
Seahawks

To me there are only 3 teams that look like a RB could step right in without significant competition. Even those teams do have some RB like McFadden, Freeman, Woodhead/Oliver but one of the top RB prospects I think would have a good chance to get over 50% of the carries early on. The use of pass catching RB (particularly in SD) could still limit a top RB prospect such as Melvin Gordon landing there.

The rest of the list has more competition. But some of that competition is old such as Forsett, Foster, Gore, Forte or less proven RB for the rest.

I am not sure if Washington or Seattle should be on the list, as Morris is very well established and a RB added there may only be competing for a COP role. Lynch is even more entrenched, but a bit older than Morris.

To sum up I think there are 16 decent team opportunities for rookie RB to make an impact on. That is half the league. Some rookie RB will get buried behind current starters (the other 16 teams).

Overall I think there is more opportunity for rookie RB across the league than there are for WR.

 

[VarsityBlues123]

With free agency settling down & most of the bigger names being signed it looks like this coveted deep RB rookie class will have some good landing spots. I have a number of top 5 rookie picks in my dynasty leagues & the obvious need for a number of teams has be salivating. I would be interested in hearing what the Shark Pool thinks would be the top 5-10 ideal landing spots for a rookie RB this year.

MY TOP 10

Cowboys - I could get 1,000 yards behind that line. McFadden & Randle shouldn't be too hard to beat out in camp.

Chargers - With Matthews joining the Eagles - a huge hole at RB in a historically good offense will be filled via the draft.

Falcons - Only competition for starting job in great offense is Freeman.

Titans - Sankey flopped last year - Titans will draft a RB early.

Jets - Powell & Ivory are not the answer.

Jaguars - Jags are building a young nucleus - I don't see D.Robinson as the answer & Gerhart didn't look like a starting RB last year.

Panthers - J.Stewart is never healthy! With D.Williams gone - Panthers will draft a RB & he wills start when Stewart goes down as usual.

Lions - J.Bell is a decent RB but a day 1 or 2 drafted RB will be given every opportunity in camp to win the job.

Patriots - Blount isn't the answer but last time you could rely on a Pats RB for fantasy was Corey Dillon. Hate Billy B for RB fantasy potential.

Vikings - All depends on ADP - if he is gone only competition is McKinnon.

You're making an awful lot of assumptions about how some of the teams feel about the incumbents that are there.

i want to add to that saying a guy who is going into his second year as a flop seems premature. do rookies have to be elite their first year to be valuable to their team? acting as if some players will be easily beat out by rookies is not the best way to go either.

 

[JohnnyU]

Some of you go out of your way to discourage anyone from starting a thread. So what if the majority is thinking a certain way? At least it generates good conversation.

 

[VarsityBlues123]

Some of you go out of your way to discourage anyone from starting a thread. So what if the majority is thinking a certain way? At least it generates good conversation.

i think most go out of their way to discourage threads from being created that already were in existence not from discouraging threads in general. but in regards to your post if everyone does agree with the majority it does quite the opposite of creating discussion, just shows that people think what the popular opinion is

 

[Biabreakable]

Some of you go out of your way to discourage anyone from starting a thread. So what if the majority is thinking a certain way? At least it generates good conversation.

Agreed. It is a good discussion to have.

A difficult one to really pin down at the same time as there are so many variables to consider.

For the most part I think it may be better to focus on which rookie RB will be able to beat out average competition of the potential landing spots.

One thing that comes to mind for me from last season is how the Titans were considered a ideal landing spot for a RB because of expected high quality offensive line and poor RB competition on the roster. That did not turn out to be the case because of injuries and linemen not playing up to expectations, there were other factors such as poor defense not allowing the Titans to run the ball as much as they could have with better defensive play.

So despite this landing spot seeming like a good destination and Bishop Sankey being the 1st RB taken in the draft. It didn't turn out to be as favorable as expected. I ranked Sankey too high because of this. I also thought Sankey was a more promising RB prospect than he turned out to be. Sankey could still end up panning out as well. Too soon to write him off. Same goes for Freeman and other rookie RB from last season. But what I have tried to learn from this is to try to focus more on the quality of the rookie RB prospect and a bit less on the situation. Although the situation is of course very important.

 

[salmonstud]

Some of you go out of your way to discourage anyone from starting a thread. So what if the majority is thinking a certain way? At least it generates good conversation.

Thanks Johnny

 

[Biabreakable]

FWIW I think salmonstud did a good job of getting the discussion started. He put together a pretty nice list. The reason I posted the link to the other recent conversation about this was to add to the thread. Not to discourage it.

 

[salmonstud]

With free agency settling down & most of the bigger names being signed it looks like this coveted deep RB rookie class will have some good landing spots. I have a number of top 5 rookie picks in my dynasty leagues & the obvious need for a number of teams has be salivating. I would be interested in hearing what the Shark Pool thinks would be the top 5-10 ideal landing spots for a rookie RB this year.

MY TOP 10

Cowboys - I could get 1,000 yards behind that line. McFadden & Randle shouldn't be too hard to beat out in camp.

Chargers - With Matthews joining the Eagles - a huge hole at RB in a historically good offense will be filled via the draft.

Falcons - Only competition for starting job in great offense is Freeman.

Titans - Sankey flopped last year - Titans will draft a RB early.

Jets - Powell & Ivory are not the answer.

Jaguars - Jags are building a young nucleus - I don't see D.Robinson as the answer & Gerhart didn't look like a starting RB last year.

Panthers - J.Stewart is never healthy! With D.Williams gone - Panthers will draft a RB & he wills start when Stewart goes down as usual.

Lions - J.Bell is a decent RB but a day 1 or 2 drafted RB will be given every opportunity in camp to win the job.

Patriots - Blount isn't the answer but last time you could rely on a Pats RB for fantasy was Corey Dillon. Hate Billy B for RB fantasy potential.

Vikings - All depends on ADP - if he is gone only competition is McKinnon.

You're making an awful lot of assumptions about how some of the teams feel about the incumbents that are there.

i want to add to that saying a guy who is going into his second year as a flop seems premature. do rookies have to be elite their first year to be valuable to their team? acting as if some players will be easily beat out by rookies is not the best way to go either.

I agree that a rookie RB doesn't have to be a world beater his 1st year but Sankey looked pretty average.

 

[salmonstud]

FWIW I think salmonstud did a good job of getting the discussion started. He put together a pretty nice list. The reason I posted the link to the other recent conversation about this was to add to the thread. Not to discourage it.

I haven't been on the message board for awhile so I missed it.

I guess a better discussion question would be - if you were able to draft your top rated RB in this class in a rookie dynasty draft - be it Gordon, Gurley, or another....what would be the top 3-5 teams you would like to see them go to?

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I want whoever the Cowboys draft first. One guy they have now is old and the other guy is stupid.

 

[salmonstud]

I think this is a somewhat difficult exercise because really very few teams would be poor destinations for a RB. Even the Eagles who have 3 quality RB would be of interest if they take a RB.

You can rank the teams in a lot of different ways. Teams that have good run blocking offensive lines might be better fits than ones who do not. You can also rank based on competition of other RB on each teams roster.

Here is a quick attempt at ranking the teams by attractiveness of situation for a RB to compete for playing time right away

Dallas
Chargers
Atlanta

Ravens
Texans
Colts
Jets
Panthers
Bears
Raiders
Lions
Titans
Cardinals
Vikings
Washington
Seahawks

To me there are only 3 teams that look like a RB could step right in without significant competition. Even those teams do have some RB like McFadden, Freeman, Woodhead/Oliver but one of the top RB prospects I think would have a good chance to get over 50% of the carries early on. The use of pass catching RB (particularly in SD) could still limit a top RB prospect such as Melvin Gordon landing there.

The rest of the list has more competition. But some of that competition is old such as Forsett, Foster, Gore, Forte or less proven RB for the rest.

I am not sure if Washington or Seattle should be on the list, as Morris is very well established and a RB added there may only be competing for a COP role. Lynch is even more entrenched, but a bit older than Morris.

To sum up I think there are 16 decent team opportunities for rookie RB to make an impact on. That is half the league. Some rookie RB will get buried behind current starters (the other 16 teams).

Overall I think there is more opportunity for rookie RB across the league than there are for WR.

Very nice response - I agree with just about everything in your post. The only disagreement is I'm one of the yahoos in the C.Michael love camp...so I don't see Seattle as an ideal landing spot. I believe he will take over someday if he continues to develop.

 

[VarsityBlues123]

taking off the list someone posted above here is my take for the 2015 season. i do not think a team drafting a rb is an automatic demotion and reduction if carries like some some teams actually need the position badly at depth.

Dallas - no brainer will be given a chance to get many carries.
Chargers - no brainer same as above.
Atlanta - freeman will be given the chance to start but i feel they are drafting a rb who will get a chance at good carries.

Ravens - the person they draft will be a role player at first with forsett and zo.
Texans - foster and blue will get the vast majority of carries.
Colts - if they take a rb it will be a role player at best.
Jets - i feel they are taking a rb since they only have ivory an powell but i think it will be a guy more like powell then ivory.
Panthers - no brainer will be given a chance to get many carries.
Bears - forte will rule the roost again.
Raiders - i think murray will be given the majority of carries.
Lions - they only have bell and riddick so they need to draft a rb.
Titans - sankey will be given every chance
Cardinals - i think its a no brainer here
Vikings - no comment until peterson is resolved
Washington - they need a 3rd down guy with potential to be an every down guy.
Seahawks - why?

 

[Biabreakable]

Yep Michael is certainly competition for any rookie RB who might land in Seattle.Similarly McKinnon is good competition for any RB who might land in Minnesota. Peterson will be 30 soon, but he may be in the mix as well.

Some of the situations I listed are far from ideal.

There is a WR thread addressing the opportunity as well. From that evaluation I found there were 8-10 decent landing spots for rookie WR. For the RB I would guess there are 12-16 spots for rookies to contribute in the short term. Some quality prospects (like Michael) will get burried as well. That is when the talent evaluation comes into play.

Overall I think there is a bit more opportunity for rookie RB compared to WR. Which stems back to a conversation about rookie rankings. If the RB should be ranked higher because of greater opportunity compared to the WR or not.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Some of you go out of your way to discourage anyone from starting a thread. So what if the majority is thinking a certain way? At least it generates good conversation.

I'm not trying to discourage discussion at all. I guess I should have elaborated a bit instead of just adding the one line without any substance to why I think the OP was perhaps over-rating some of these situations for immediate production.

Two obvious examples are the Jets and Pats. Chris Ivory has been very productive for the team and the front office made re-signing Bilal Powell a priority during free agency. I do think they may add a speed back like Duke Johnson, but I wouldn't be shocked if they were content to stand pat and just add depth.

Bill Belichick certainly thinks LaGarette Blount is the answer at RB. He seems to really like the guy in fact, and he's been very productive in that offense.

Like some one else said, I doubt Tennessee drafts a RB early after taking Sankey early next season, and we're probably writing him off too quickly. Ray Rice and Leseasn McCoy looked far better in year 2 than as rookies.

Bell and Stewart seem quite entrenched in the lead roles on their teams as well.

Overall though I guess I should say none of those situations would be terrible for a rookie to end up in.

 

[Hu-Tang Clan]

Very nice response - I agree with just about everything in your post. The only disagreement is I'm one of the yahoos in the C.Michael love camp...so I don't see Seattle as an ideal landing spot. I believe he will take over someday if he continues to develop.

Seattle isn't ideal due to Marshawn and then Turbin and then Michael.

 

[salmonstud]

Very nice response - I agree with just about everything in your post. The only disagreement is I'm one of the yahoos in the C.Michael love camp...so I don't see Seattle as an ideal landing spot. I believe he will take over someday if he continues to develop.

Seattle isn't ideal due to Marshawn and then Turbin and then Michael.

I think Michael surpasses Turbin on the depth chart this year.

 

[VarsityBlues123]

Very nice response - I agree with just about everything in your post. The only disagreement is I'm one of the yahoos in the C.Michael love camp...so I don't see Seattle as an ideal landing spot. I believe he will take over someday if he continues to develop.

Seattle isn't ideal due to Marshawn and then Turbin and then Michael.

I think Michael surpasses Turbin on the depth chart this year.

based on what reasoning?

 

[ol blues]

There are 5 immediate fantasy relevant landing spots for redraft leagues if a rounded skills back is added. In order:

1. Dallas lacks a starter and has all other necessary offensive support.

2. San Diego also lacks a starter, but has less reliable support.

3. Atlanta lacks OLine talent, but has everything else, including an OC who figures to scheme heavy touches to his RB and Freeman has skills and size far more compatible with a Helu role than being lead back.

4. Detroit is a certain landing spot for another back, but the issue is how high is that priority given other team needs. Neither Riddick nor Bell offer strong lead back skills, but the Lions certainly can get by with them and may only draft a developmental guy.

5. Baltimore fills the same niche as Detroit: another back is certain, but Forsett and Taliaferro can get it done, so, absent adding a high end rounded skills talent, the fantasy impact won't be great.

Other redraft league fantasy relevant landing spots like the Jets, Panthers, Titans, and Pats lack the upside or certainty to put them in the same class.

 

[salmonstud]

Very nice response - I agree with just about everything in your post. The only disagreement is I'm one of the yahoos in the C.Michael love camp...so I don't see Seattle as an ideal landing spot. I believe he will take over someday if he continues to develop.

Seattle isn't ideal due to Marshawn and then Turbin and then Michael.

I think Michael surpasses Turbin on the depth chart this year.

based on what reasoning?

I think he has looked better in limited action. His pass protection has held him back. I'm banking once that improves he will move up the depth chart. I believe he is a much better pure runner than Turbin.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I would put Indy much higher, as high as 2nd.

Yes, they're limited in year 1 by Gore, but beyond that it's an ideal situation long-term alongside Luck.

Seems like it would be the perfect spot for Gurley. Let Gore carry the load early while the knee continues to get back to 100% and then make the transition.

 

[Bri]

Titans...can't say that they're so elated with Sankey that they'll turn down someone that falls into their lap and most articles that accompany mocks do mention RBs falling this year.

It's unlikely, but wouldn't be all that surprising.

 

[ratbast]

People are overrating the Ravens. Forsett and Taliaferro? Sign me up as a buyer of both.

 

[ratbast]

If Freeman gets a "thunder" running mate in Atlanta I'm buying.

 

[Zdravko]

While attractiveness of the landing spot is certainly important, we should also try to assess the likelihood a team invests a (semi-)high pick in a (semi-)decent rookie.

Below is my view (assumes AP stays in MIN and ignores Ridley and PT). I use that approach to also estimate risk for current RBs to get hit in the dynasty RB carnage that this draft has the potential to become. Thoughts?

ARI almost certain

DAL almost certain

IND almost certain

NYJ almost certain

SDC almost certain

WAS almost certain

BAL likely

CAR likely

CHI likely

DET likely

HOU likely

MIA likely

NEP likely

PIT likely

TEN likely

ATL unlikely

BUF unlikely

CLE unlikely

GBP unlikely

JAC unlikely

KCC unlikely

MIN unlikely

NYG unlikely

SFO unlikely

STL unlikely

TBB unlikely

CIN very unlikely

DEN very unlikely

NOS very unlikely

OAK very unlikely

PHI very unlikely

SEA very unlikely

 

[Dr. Octopus]

While attractiveness of the landing spot is certainly important, we should also try to assess the likelihood a team invests a (semi-)high pick in a (semi-)decent rookie.

Below is my view (assumes AP stays in MIN and ignores Ridley and PT). I use that approach to also estimate risk for current RBs to get hit in the dynasty RB carnage that this draft has the potential to become. Thoughts?

ARI almost certain

DAL almost certain

IND almost certain

NYJ almost certain

SDC almost certain

WAS almost certain

BAL likely

CAR likely

CHI likely

DET likely

HOU likely

MIA likely

NEP likely

PIT likely

TEN likely

ATL unlikely

BUF unlikely

CLE unlikely

GBP unlikely

JAC unlikely

KCC unlikely

MIN unlikely

NYG unlikely

SFO unlikely

STL unlikely

TBB unlikely

CIN very unlikely

DEN very unlikely

NOS very unlikely

OAK very unlikely

PHI very unlikely

SEA very unlikely

You must be a Devonte Freeman owner . I think Atlanta could be more likely than a lot of teams yo have above them on that list.

 

[loose circuits]

Feels like the thread I started has been stolen

 

[VarsityBlues123]

to put into perspective that people over hype where a player is taken or assume a team drafting of a RB always means anything more than depth some times.

where was christine michael taken again?

back to the conversation.

 

[Zdravko]

You must be a Devonte Freeman owner . I think Atlanta could be more likely than a lot of teams yo have above them on that list.

Hehe, yes, I have him in one league...which translates to probably average ownership for me. But yeah, I struggle where to put ATL. Maybe I need an in-between, fifth category. From the noise coming out of there, I get the feeling they actually believe in Freeman, so I would say they are less likely to invest in a decent player compared to, say, HOU or TEN.

In terms of landing spot, don't think Atlanta is a great one. If they do invest in a high-profile rookie, that would signal to me a commitment to a multi-headed RBBC. Bad news for all.

 

[VarsityBlues123]

Very nice response - I agree with just about everything in your post. The only disagreement is I'm one of the yahoos in the C.Michael love camp...so I don't see Seattle as an ideal landing spot. I believe he will take over someday if he continues to develop.

Seattle isn't ideal due to Marshawn and then Turbin and then Michael.

I think Michael surpasses Turbin on the depth chart this year.

based on what reasoning?

I think he has looked better in limited action. His pass protection has held him back. I'm banking once that improves he will move up the depth chart. I believe he is a much better pure runner than Turbin.

he has had 53 touches over two years how can you determine how a player can look on about 25 touches per year? i have to defer to the coaches who have been to the last two super bowls and won one of the, who for two years have not seen something to put michael above turbin. i dont think you banking on it i think you are hoping at this point. at the end of the day though seattle is very unlikely to draft a runner but i have seen crazier things.

 

[ol blues]

While attractiveness of the landing spot is certainly important, we should also try to assess the likelihood a team invests a (semi-)high pick in a (semi-)decent rookie.

Below is my view (assumes AP stays in MIN and ignores Ridley and PT). I use that approach to also estimate risk for current RBs to get hit in the dynasty RB carnage that this draft has the potential to become. Thoughts?

ARI almost certainDAL almost certainIND almost certainNYJ almost certainSDC almost certainWAS almost certain BAL likelyCAR likelyCHI likelyDET likelyHOU likelyMIA likelyNEP likelyPIT likelyTEN likely ATL unlikelyBUF unlikelyCLE unlikelyGBP unlikelyJAC unlikelyKCC unlikelyMIN unlikelyNYG unlikelySFO unlikelySTL unlikelyTBB unlikely CIN very unlikelyDEN very unlikelyNOS very unlikelyOAK very unlikelyPHI very unlikelySEA very unlikely

You must be a Devonte Freeman owner . I think Atlanta could be more likely than a lot of teams yo have above them on that list.

Agreed. As are the Jags which, at least for now given Gerhart's move to H Back, lack a starting caliber back.

 

[Bri]

While attractiveness of the landing spot is certainly important, we should also try to assess the likelihood a team invests a (semi-)high pick in a (semi-)decent rookie.

Below is my view (assumes AP stays in MIN and ignores Ridley and PT). I use that approach to also estimate risk for current RBs to get hit in the dynasty RB carnage that this draft has the potential to become. Thoughts?

ARI almost certainDAL almost certainIND almost certainNYJ almost certainSDC almost certainWAS almost certain BAL likelyCAR likelyCHI likelyDET likelyHOU likelyMIA likelyNEP likelyPIT likelyTEN likely ATL unlikelyBUF unlikelyCLE unlikelyGBP unlikelyJAC unlikelyKCC unlikelyMIN unlikelyNYG unlikelySFO unlikelySTL unlikelyTBB unlikely CIN very unlikelyDEN very unlikelyNOS very unlikelyOAK very unlikelyPHI very unlikelySEA very unlikely

You must be a Devonte Freeman owner . I think Atlanta could be more likely than a lot of teams yo have above them on that list.

Agreed. As are the Jags which, at least for now given Gerhart's move to H Back, lack a starting caliber back.

what's wrong with Robinson?

 

[*****]

Robinson made big progress between year one and year two. He works his tail off and is a team first guy. The Jags like him. Yes, I think the Jags draft a RB; but probably in the 3rd round or later. But Denard will still get a shot to contribute or even be the starter if he progresses between year and two and three, like he progressed last offseason.