Ryan Grant (1 Viewer)

[sho nuff]

The Dallas game sacks were almost exclusively in the pocket...so again, I question whether you watched the games.

i was actually at the Dallas game in person, so try again.The Dallas D-Line did own the Pack, that is why i said for the most part the o-line has looked decent. Not great, but definitely not horrible as you have implied.I've talked to tons of Packer fans, most will admit Grant has looked bad, whether it's because he isn't very good or due to injury the bottom line is that he's sucked for the most part, that can't be denied...unless your ShoNuff.

So...their Dline...plus Tampa's Dline owned the pack...so, 2 out of 4 games, the line has been beaten down by the D, yet you think they have looked fine for the most part. Sorry...they have not.The line has looked bad in at least half of the games.Ive talked to tons of Packer fans and read what they say on multiple boards...and most reasonable people agree Grant has not looked good several times, but has gotten no help from his line who have looked very bad at times.You cannot say he sucked "for the most part" when he looked good for 2 of the four games, yet say the line looked fine for the most part, when they have sucked for 2 games.I deny that he has sucked all 4 games...or even 3. He looked good against Minny despite the hammy, looked good for what they gave him in the Dallas game. He was bad against Detroit and Tampa.In addition, the line looked alot better against Minny, ok against Detroit, bad against Dallas and Tampa. Something you seem to deny despite nearly every person who has watched GB play this year saying otherwise on this board.

 

[gheemony]

I was hoping that I would read this thread and come away with a good idea about whether or not to accept Grant in a trade (give up Holmes and McGahee for Grant and A. Johnson). Instead, I'm more confused, but do feel like flaming somebody.

Any body got a source for good, objective analysis on the situation (say a beat-writer)?

 

[Kiddnets]

I was hoping that I would read this thread and come away with a good idea about whether or not to accept Grant in a trade (give up Holmes and McGahee for Grant and A. Johnson). Instead, I'm more confused, but do feel like flaming somebody.Any body got a source for good, objective analysis on the situation (say a beat-writer)?

I would do that deal - call me crazy but I think you are getting two good buy lows for a WR in a really bad offense and an injured RB. They just gave Grant a ton of money and will give him a chance to bail out of it. I dealt S JAx for Forte and Grant in a keeper league and am pretty stoked about it!

 

[JSH21]

I'm offering Brandon Jacobs for Grant. I still think Grant will turn it around...Jackson is no threat to his carries. Jacobs on the other hand IMO will be involved in a full 3 headed RBBC soon IMO.

 

[Football Jones]

I play mostly dynasty, but Ryan Grant is one of those guys that can make or break a redraft team. You had to get him early if you liked him, so you have a sizeable investment if you drafted him. Anyway, not sure Grant is a difference-maker, & essentially, that's what a good RB is. I see a size/speed guy with little wiggle. Normally, those type of RBs make it only if they have good vision, & that's what I'm concerned about.

I've never seen a RB have bigger holes to run thru on a more consistent basis than Grant had last year. Whether it was the OL playing above their heads, or the Favre factor, or something else, Grant took advantage of the situation. This year, without good OL play, & Ds maybe playing them a little different, he's struggled. Could be a combination of those two things & his hammy. Or maybe Grant doesn't have the vision to excel over the long-haul. Color me leery, but I wouldn't say he can't do it (at least not yet).

 

[gheemony]

I was hoping that I would read this thread and come away with a good idea about whether or not to accept Grant in a trade (give up Holmes and McGahee for Grant and A. Johnson). Instead, I'm more confused, but do feel like flaming somebody.Any body got a source for good, objective analysis on the situation (say a beat-writer)?

I would do that deal - call me crazy but I think you are getting two good buy lows for a WR in a really bad offense and an injured RB. They just gave Grant a ton of money and will give him a chance to bail out of it. I dealt S JAx for Forte and Grant in a keeper league and am pretty stoked about it!

Unfortunately, the trade offer was reworked to be Turner/Holmes for Grant/AJ. Giving up McGahee worked, but harder for me to give up Turner. May still make the trade.

 

[moderated]

I was hoping that I would read this thread and come away with a good idea about whether or not to accept Grant in a trade (give up Holmes and McGahee for Grant and A. Johnson). Instead, I'm more confused, but do feel like flaming somebody.Any body got a source for good, objective analysis on the situation (say a beat-writer)?

I would do that deal - call me crazy but I think you are getting two good buy lows for a WR in a really bad offense and an injured RB. They just gave Grant a ton of money and will give him a chance to bail out of it. I dealt S JAx for Forte and Grant in a keeper league and am pretty stoked about it!

Unfortunately, the trade offer was reworked to be Turner/Holmes for Grant/AJ. Giving up McGahee worked, but harder for me to give up Turner. May still make the trade.

I'd rather have AJ over Holmes, BUT Turner is far better than Grant, so i don't like the deal now. If you can get it done with McGahee i'd do it though, Mc doesn't get goaline looks and is losing carries to Ronny.

 

[SeniorVBDStudent]

I'm offering Brandon Jacobs for Grant. I still think Grant will turn it around...Jackson is no threat to his carries. Jacobs on the other hand IMO will be involved in a full 3 headed RBBC soon IMO.

When trading risk for risk, always err on the side of better coaching. Advantage: Giants.

 

[sho nuff]

I play mostly dynasty, but Ryan Grant is one of those guys that can make or break a redraft team. You had to get him early if you liked him, so you have a sizeable investment if you drafted him. Anyway, not sure Grant is a difference-maker, & essentially, that's what a good RB is. I see a size/speed guy with little wiggle. Normally, those type of RBs make it only if they have good vision, & that's what I'm concerned about.

I've never seen a RB have bigger holes to run thru on a more consistent basis than Grant had last year. Whether it was the OL playing above their heads, or the Favre factor, or something else, Grant took advantage of the situation. This year, without good OL play, & Ds maybe playing them a little different, he's struggled. Could be a combination of those two things & his hammy. Or maybe Grant doesn't have the vision to excel over the long-haul. Color me leery, but I wouldn't say he can't do it (at least not yet).

I disagree that the holes were that big that often last year.It was highlighted for sure in the Seattle game that there were huge holes...as the Oline did a spectacular job that day. But it was not like that all year.

Right now, its a number of things.

The line has not played well.

Grant looks a bit tentative, in this blocking scheme you really cannot be. Whether he is worried about the Hammy or what, he is not running as decisive or aggressive as he did last year on most runs.

Both need to get better...and the line needs to keep people off him long enough to actually make a cut too.

 

[Football Jones]

I play mostly dynasty, but Ryan Grant is one of those guys that can make or break a redraft team. You had to get him early if you liked him, so you have a sizeable investment if you drafted him. Anyway, not sure Grant is a difference-maker, & essentially, that's what a good RB is. I see a size/speed guy with little wiggle. Normally, those type of RBs make it only if they have good vision, & that's what I'm concerned about.

I've never seen a RB have bigger holes to run thru on a more consistent basis than Grant had last year. Whether it was the OL playing above their heads, or the Favre factor, or something else, Grant took advantage of the situation. This year, without good OL play, & Ds maybe playing them a little different, he's struggled. Could be a combination of those two things & his hammy. Or maybe Grant doesn't have the vision to excel over the long-haul. Color me leery, but I wouldn't say he can't do it (at least not yet).

I disagree that the holes were that big that often last year.It was highlighted for sure in the Seattle game that there were huge holes...as the Oline did a spectacular job that day. But it was not like that all year.

Right now, its a number of things.

The line has not played well.

Grant looks a bit tentative, in this blocking scheme you really cannot be. Whether he is worried about the Hammy or what, he is not running as decisive or aggressive as he did last year on most runs.

Both need to get better...and the line needs to keep people off him long enough to actually make a cut too.

I noticed it in virtualy every game (obviously not on every play). That said, people see different things, so I have no problem with your assessment. However, my basic evaluation of Grant remains (size/speed guy with no wiggle). As I mentioned earlier, those type RBs tend to be effective only if they have good vision. He may not have the vision/instincts to survive on a long-term basis. He's also limited in his ability to create on his own. The hammy could still be a problem, tho. And the OL needs to play better, as well. Not saying he's done, but I'm not real confident either.

 

[qimqam]

Jackson is no threat to his carries.

I keep hearing how Jackson Sux and he is no threat to Grant ... but the GB game that I saw and the numbers just don't support it.Jackson is outperforming Grant in every possible way ... Rushing Avg, Receptions and Reception Average, TDs and FumblesJackson, Brandon Att 18 YDs 93 Avg 5.2 TD 1 Targets 13 Receps 7 YDs 57 Avg 8.1 Fumbles 0Grant, Ryan Att 55 YDs 186 Avg 3.4 TD 0 Targets 3 Receps 2 YDs -4 Avg -2.0 Fumbles 2

 

[sho nuff]

I play mostly dynasty, but Ryan Grant is one of those guys that can make or break a redraft team. You had to get him early if you liked him, so you have a sizeable investment if you drafted him. Anyway, not sure Grant is a difference-maker, & essentially, that's what a good RB is. I see a size/speed guy with little wiggle. Normally, those type of RBs make it only if they have good vision, & that's what I'm concerned about.

I've never seen a RB have bigger holes to run thru on a more consistent basis than Grant had last year. Whether it was the OL playing above their heads, or the Favre factor, or something else, Grant took advantage of the situation. This year, without good OL play, & Ds maybe playing them a little different, he's struggled. Could be a combination of those two things & his hammy. Or maybe Grant doesn't have the vision to excel over the long-haul. Color me leery, but I wouldn't say he can't do it (at least not yet).

I disagree that the holes were that big that often last year.It was highlighted for sure in the Seattle game that there were huge holes...as the Oline did a spectacular job that day. But it was not like that all year.

Right now, its a number of things.

The line has not played well.

Grant looks a bit tentative, in this blocking scheme you really cannot be. Whether he is worried about the Hammy or what, he is not running as decisive or aggressive as he did last year on most runs.

Both need to get better...and the line needs to keep people off him long enough to actually make a cut too.

I noticed it in virtualy every game (obviously not on every play). That said, people see different things, so I have no problem with your assessment. However, my basic evaluation of Grant remains (size/speed guy with no wiggle). As I mentioned earlier, those type RBs tend to be effective only if they have good vision. He may not have the vision/instincts to survive on a long-term basis. He's also limited in his ability to create on his own. The hammy could still be a problem, tho. And the OL needs to play better, as well. Not saying he's done, but I'm not real confident either.

I would say his speed is fine.Don't go quoting 40 times. Im talking speed in pads, with defenders in pads. Or do people forget some of the long runs he had running right past defenders and outrunning people to the endzone?

I think he has plenty of wiggle and showed that last year as well.

Many of his runs last year were cut backs on his own, so not sure where you are getting he is limited in that ability.

 

[sho nuff]

Jackson is no threat to his carries.

I keep hearing how Jackson Sux and he is no threat to Grant ... but the GB game that I saw and the numbers just don't support it.Jackson is outperforming Grant in every possible way ... Rushing Avg, Receptions and Reception Average, TDs and FumblesJackson, Brandon Att 18 YDs 93 Avg 5.2 TD 1 Targets 13 Receps 7 YDs 57 Avg 8.1 Fumbles 0Grant, Ryan Att 55 YDs 186 Avg 3.4 TD 0 Targets 3 Receps 2 YDs -4 Avg -2.0 Fumbles 2

He is the 3rd down back and receiving back for sure.So far, they have had Grant in almost exclusively on running plays...keying in the defense. Jackson has been in a bit more during plays that are more run/pass and has done well from that.But apparently not well enough as he is not getting the carries.And while he did not fumble twice (in fewer touches of course), he was the cause of the 1st INT this past week by Rodgers which led to a TD by Tampa.

 

[Football Jones]

I play mostly dynasty, but Ryan Grant is one of those guys that can make or break a redraft team. You had to get him early if you liked him, so you have a sizeable investment if you drafted him. Anyway, not sure Grant is a difference-maker, & essentially, that's what a good RB is. I see a size/speed guy with little wiggle. Normally, those type of RBs make it only if they have good vision, & that's what I'm concerned about.

I've never seen a RB have bigger holes to run thru on a more consistent basis than Grant had last year. Whether it was the OL playing above their heads, or the Favre factor, or something else, Grant took advantage of the situation. This year, without good OL play, & Ds maybe playing them a little different, he's struggled. Could be a combination of those two things & his hammy. Or maybe Grant doesn't have the vision to excel over the long-haul. Color me leery, but I wouldn't say he can't do it (at least not yet).

I disagree that the holes were that big that often last year.It was highlighted for sure in the Seattle game that there were huge holes...as the Oline did a spectacular job that day. But it was not like that all year.

Right now, its a number of things.

The line has not played well.

Grant looks a bit tentative, in this blocking scheme you really cannot be. Whether he is worried about the Hammy or what, he is not running as decisive or aggressive as he did last year on most runs.

Both need to get better...and the line needs to keep people off him long enough to actually make a cut too.

I noticed it in virtualy every game (obviously not on every play). That said, people see different things, so I have no problem with your assessment. However, my basic evaluation of Grant remains (size/speed guy with no wiggle). As I mentioned earlier, those type RBs tend to be effective only if they have good vision. He may not have the vision/instincts to survive on a long-term basis. He's also limited in his ability to create on his own. The hammy could still be a problem, tho. And the OL needs to play better, as well. Not saying he's done, but I'm not real confident either.

I would say his speed is fine.Don't go quoting 40 times. Im talking speed in pads, with defenders in pads. Or do people forget some of the long runs he had running right past defenders and outrunning people to the endzone?

I think he has plenty of wiggle and showed that last year as well.

Many of his runs last year were cut backs on his own, so not sure where you are getting he is limited in that ability.

You misunderstood me. When I say Grant is a size/speed guy, that means he's got good size & good speed. However, he's got no wiggle (or very little), & does not have the ability to consistently create on his own. That's why I said those type RBs (size/speed, no wiggle) aren't typically successful unless they have good vision/instincts. Therefore, vison/instincts may be Grant's downfall.

 

[sho nuff]

I play mostly dynasty, but Ryan Grant is one of those guys that can make or break a redraft team. You had to get him early if you liked him, so you have a sizeable investment if you drafted him. Anyway, not sure Grant is a difference-maker, & essentially, that's what a good RB is. I see a size/speed guy with little wiggle. Normally, those type of RBs make it only if they have good vision, & that's what I'm concerned about.

I've never seen a RB have bigger holes to run thru on a more consistent basis than Grant had last year. Whether it was the OL playing above their heads, or the Favre factor, or something else, Grant took advantage of the situation. This year, without good OL play, & Ds maybe playing them a little different, he's struggled. Could be a combination of those two things & his hammy. Or maybe Grant doesn't have the vision to excel over the long-haul. Color me leery, but I wouldn't say he can't do it (at least not yet).

I disagree that the holes were that big that often last year.It was highlighted for sure in the Seattle game that there were huge holes...as the Oline did a spectacular job that day. But it was not like that all year.

Right now, its a number of things.

The line has not played well.

Grant looks a bit tentative, in this blocking scheme you really cannot be. Whether he is worried about the Hammy or what, he is not running as decisive or aggressive as he did last year on most runs.

Both need to get better...and the line needs to keep people off him long enough to actually make a cut too.

I noticed it in virtualy every game (obviously not on every play). That said, people see different things, so I have no problem with your assessment. However, my basic evaluation of Grant remains (size/speed guy with no wiggle). As I mentioned earlier, those type RBs tend to be effective only if they have good vision. He may not have the vision/instincts to survive on a long-term basis. He's also limited in his ability to create on his own. The hammy could still be a problem, tho. And the OL needs to play better, as well. Not saying he's done, but I'm not real confident either.

I would say his speed is fine.Don't go quoting 40 times. Im talking speed in pads, with defenders in pads. Or do people forget some of the long runs he had running right past defenders and outrunning people to the endzone?

I think he has plenty of wiggle and showed that last year as well.

Many of his runs last year were cut backs on his own, so not sure where you are getting he is limited in that ability.

You misunderstood me. When I say he's a size/speed guy, that means he's got good size & good speed. However, he's got no wiggle (or very little), & does not have the ability to consistently create on his own. That's why I said those type RBs aren't typically successful unless they have good vision/instincts. Therefore, vison/instincts may be Grant's downfall.

Ahh...I see.Though, one of his strengths last year, and why he was effective...was the vision, he was seeing the cuts and making them, even when it was not in any expected place. Its why he was so much better than Jackson last season.

 

[skillz]

Too many variables going on right now for me to pull the trigger on starting Grant against the lowly Falcons. The offensive line is not very good, Grant has looked hesitant and has fumbilities (whether some of that can be attributed to his hamstring I don't care, bottom line is he has still looked slow/hesitant), and now Rodgers is hurting. Even if Grant starts off having a good game, Rodgers' shoulder could cause him to have to leave the game anytime at which point the Falcons will load the box and dare Flynn to throw the ball. If that happens, Grant isn't going anywhere. Grant is going to have to show me something before I start him again. If he is on my bench when that happens so be it. I would rather have that happen, then have him lay another egg for me after I put him back in my starting line up. 2007-08 was a good year, but that was last year and can't be factored into whether I should be starting him anymore. It is a what have you done for me lately situation in my book.

 

[sho nuff]

Fumblitis? He has 2 fumbles.

Along with Marion Barber, Frank Gore, Darren McFadden.

LJ, Perry, Ricky have more.

Lets not go too crazy with that.

NOTE: Some of you settle down and don't take this as me being "on his jock" or "e-sucking him off". Just pointing out that 2 fumbles is not a big issue just yet. They noticed he was carrying the ball last game and hopefully can correct that.

 

[qimqam]

Fumblitis? He has 2 fumbles.

Along with Marion Barber, Frank Gore, Darren McFadden.

LJ, Perry, Ricky have more.

Lets not go too crazy with that.

NOTE: Some of you settle down and don't take this as me being "on his jock" or "e-sucking him off". Just pointing out that 2 fumbles is not a big issue just yet. They noticed he was carrying the ball last game and hopefully can correct that.

Not letting him carry the ball should significantly reduce the chance of fumbling.

 

[sho nuff]

Fumblitis? He has 2 fumbles.

Along with Marion Barber, Frank Gore, Darren McFadden.

LJ, Perry, Ricky have more.

Lets not go too crazy with that.

NOTE: Some of you settle down and don't take this as me being "on his jock" or "e-sucking him off". Just pointing out that 2 fumbles is not a big issue just yet. They noticed he was carrying the ball last game and hopefully can correct that.

Not letting him carry the ball should significantly reduce the chance of fumbling.

Yes...because Brandon Jackson is sure handed and would never lead to a turnover.

 

[qimqam]

Fumblitis? He has 2 fumbles.

Along with Marion Barber, Frank Gore, Darren McFadden.

LJ, Perry, Ricky have more.

Lets not go too crazy with that.

NOTE: Some of you settle down and don't take this as me being "on his jock" or "e-sucking him off". Just pointing out that 2 fumbles is not a big issue just yet. They noticed he was carrying the ball last game and hopefully can correct that.

Not letting him carry the ball should significantly reduce the chance of fumbling.

Yes...because Brandon Jackson is sure handed and would never lead to a turnover.

Actually it looks like Brandon Jackson hasn't had a turnover in the NFL.

 

[moderated]

Fumblitis? He has 2 fumbles.

Along with Marion Barber, Frank Gore, Darren McFadden.

LJ, Perry, Ricky have more.

Lets not go too crazy with that.

NOTE: Some of you settle down and don't take this as me being "on his jock" or "e-sucking him off". Just pointing out that 2 fumbles is not a big issue just yet. They noticed he was carrying the ball last game and hopefully can correct that.

Not letting him carry the ball should significantly reduce the chance of fumbling.

Yes...because Brandon Jackson is sure handed and would never lead to a turnover.

Actually it looks like Brandon Jackson hasn't had a turnover in the NFL.

ShoNuff =

 

[sho nuff]

Fumblitis? He has 2 fumbles.

Along with Marion Barber, Frank Gore, Darren McFadden.

LJ, Perry, Ricky have more.

Lets not go too crazy with that.

NOTE: Some of you settle down and don't take this as me being "on his jock" or "e-sucking him off". Just pointing out that 2 fumbles is not a big issue just yet. They noticed he was carrying the ball last game and hopefully can correct that.

Not letting him carry the ball should significantly reduce the chance of fumbling.

Yes...because Brandon Jackson is sure handed and would never lead to a turnover.

Actually it looks like Brandon Jackson hasn't had a turnover in the NFL.

Which is why I said lead to a turnover. Or did you not see him giftwrap the 1st int of the game Sunday that led to 7 points for Tampa.

 

[sho nuff]

Fumblitis? He has 2 fumbles.

Along with Marion Barber, Frank Gore, Darren McFadden.

LJ, Perry, Ricky have more.

Lets not go too crazy with that.

NOTE: Some of you settle down and don't take this as me being "on his jock" or "e-sucking him off". Just pointing out that 2 fumbles is not a big issue just yet. They noticed he was carrying the ball last game and hopefully can correct that.

Not letting him carry the ball should significantly reduce the chance of fumbling.

Yes...because Brandon Jackson is sure handed and would never lead to a turnover.

Actually it looks like Brandon Jackson hasn't had a turnover in the NFL.

ShoNuff =

Not really...as has been noted by several people...Jackson was at fault for the first turnover against Tampa.

 

[skillz]

Fumblitis? He has 2 fumbles.

Along with Marion Barber, Frank Gore, Darren McFadden.

LJ, Perry, Ricky have more.

Lets not go too crazy with that.

NOTE: Some of you settle down and don't take this as me being "on his jock" or "e-sucking him off". Just pointing out that 2 fumbles is not a big issue just yet. They noticed he was carrying the ball last game and hopefully can correct that.

Not letting him carry the ball should significantly reduce the chance of fumbling.

Yes...because Brandon Jackson is sure handed and would never lead to a turnover.

Actually it looks like Brandon Jackson hasn't had a turnover in the NFL.

I thought Jackson lost a fumble in the first quarter of the Minn game.

 

[sho nuff]

Fumblitis? He has 2 fumbles.

Along with Marion Barber, Frank Gore, Darren McFadden.

LJ, Perry, Ricky have more.

Lets not go too crazy with that.

NOTE: Some of you settle down and don't take this as me being "on his jock" or "e-sucking him off". Just pointing out that 2 fumbles is not a big issue just yet. They noticed he was carrying the ball last game and hopefully can correct that.

Not letting him carry the ball should significantly reduce the chance of fumbling.

Yes...because Brandon Jackson is sure handed and would never lead to a turnover.

Actually it looks like Brandon Jackson hasn't had a turnover in the NFL.

I thought Jackson lost a fumble in the first quarter of the Minn game.

He did not lose it.Jennings picked it up for a first down 3 yard ahead of the fumble.

 

[skillz]

Fumblitis? He has 2 fumbles.Along with Marion Barber, Frank Gore, Darren McFadden.LJ, Perry, Ricky have more.Lets not go too crazy with that.NOTE: Some of you settle down and don't take this as me being "on his jock" or "e-sucking him off". Just pointing out that 2 fumbles is not a big issue just yet. They noticed he was carrying the ball last game and hopefully can correct that.

2 fumbles in the past 2 games is a cause for concern in my eyes. When he is barely getting any yardage (and no TD's) and is then losing 2 points by fumbling that is a problem. Whether you want to call it fumbilitis or not, its clearly another factor that results in him providing poor fantasy production so far. At least many of the guys on the list you provided have had some good games this year and are startable players (except for Ricky and Perry)-- Grant only has 1 good game if you want to count the Minn. game. I am just saying that the guy is not startable for me right now. If you want to play him on your team so be it. Good for you. I am going to keep him on my bench for now and, like you, am hopeful he turns things around soon. I have to since he has absolutely no value right now and I am certainly not going to cut him, or trade him for nothing.

 

[sho nuff]

Fumblitis? He has 2 fumbles.Along with Marion Barber, Frank Gore, Darren McFadden.LJ, Perry, Ricky have more.Lets not go too crazy with that.NOTE: Some of you settle down and don't take this as me being "on his jock" or "e-sucking him off". Just pointing out that 2 fumbles is not a big issue just yet. They noticed he was carrying the ball last game and hopefully can correct that.

2 fumbles in the past 2 games is a cause for concern in my eyes. When he is barely getting any yardage (and no TD's) and is then losing 2 points by fumbling that is a problem. Whether you want to call it fumbilitis or not, its clearly another factor that results in him providing poor fantasy production so far. At least many of the guys on the list you provided have had some good games this year and are startable players (except for Ricky and Perry)-- Grant only has 1 good game if you want to count the Minn. game. I am just saying that the guy is not startable for me right now. If you want to play him on your team so be it. Good for you. I am going to keep him on my bench for now and, like you, am hopeful he turns things around soon. I have to since he has absolutely no value right now and I am certainly not going to cut him, or trade him for nothing.

I agree its cause to keep an eye on it. Which is why I noted that they noticed him carrying the ball low last week and will work to correct that.I don't own him on any team...so the criticism of my posts that I must just be that hopeful of the guy have shown to really have no merit.

 

[AcerFC]

Was finally just able to unload him. My team is 1-3, partner 2-2

I gave Grant, B Jackson, LJ Smith and Warner for Brees and F Jones.

I am very happy with it.

Not soliciting advice, just sharing what I was able to get

 

[rock753]

Grant has looked very bad all year. He's a huge weakness for the Packers right now. Give Jackson or Lumpkin a shot, Grant is useless and not even serviceable.

More nonsense.Looked bad all year?He looked fine against Minny, and in the carries he actually got against Dallas he looked fine too.You simply don't deal in facts when it comes to Grant.

GRANT HAS LOOKED BAD ALL YEAR!HE HAS SOMETHING LIKE 40 CARRIES FOR 80 YARDS IN HIS LAST 3 GAMES. I HAVE GRANT AND HAD HIM AS MY #1 IN MY 14-TEAM KEEPER LEAGUE - WHAT A WASTE SO FAR!!!LUCKILY I HAD A HUNCH ON SLATON AND DRAFTED HIM AND MADE A TRADE FOR LJ.GRANT IS THE BEST RB ON THE TEAM BUT HE HAS LOOKED BAD, HOWEVER SO HAS THE GB OL.

Wowser...simmer

 

[RobMexico]

This thread is like crack to me. I keep checking in hopes of some new insight/news, yet more of the same.

I'll throw my own 2¢ in while I'm here...

Grant is not performing. His o-line isn't helping though. He looks fully healed and is the featured back. I don't expect Jackson to get any more then 5-7 carries a game from here out.

Grant will turn it around IMO and be a solid #2 back and rank around 15 from here in-out.

That being said, if you own Grant, you are best to stick with him and play someone else if you can until he turns it around. If you don't own him and intend on buying low, only do so if you can take the risk of sticking him on your bench.

piece owt.