Ryan Grant (1 Viewer)

[Holy Schneikes]

Seems like I read all the time how Green Bay is looking to replace him, and no one would even CONSIDER him in the first round of a fantasy draft. Folks just seem to be really down on his talent level in general.

But I'm not sure all of that makes much sense.

Grant was one of the most effective runners in the NFL last year, running against one of the toughest running strength of schedules. Can you really do that without any talent?

According to DVOA (which I know isn't perfect, but is fairly revealing IMO), Grant was 13% more effective than the average back in the same circumstances. Johnson, with his record breaking year, was about 15% more effective to give you a feel for where that stands. He carried a 4.44 average, had ZERO fumbles on the year, is relatively cheap, and at 27 years old is just entering his prime. He had 6 TDs in his last 4 regular season games, and then was VERY effective despite limited carries in his one playoff game.

Looking back a little bit, you notice that he's had 1200+ yards for two years in a row, and had 900 yards in his rookie year with only 7 starts. He was hurt in 2008, and his production suffered. But he was still out there and was still reasonably effective. Do you know how many backs had 1200+ rushing in both of the last two years? Three; ADP, Thomas Jones, and Ryan Grant.

Why exactly would Green Bay be going out of their way to replace this guy? Is RB REALLY their biggest need? I just don't get the general perception on Grant.

I'm not saying he's the best RB in the NFL or even top 3 or 4, but I do think he's at LEAST an average starting RB talent in a pretty good situation and I don't think his current fantasy value (particularly in dynasty) reflects that. A lot of folks are waiting for him to get replaced, and I'm not sure that's going to happen any time soon.

 

[sho nuff]

Few things.

When has GB gone out of their way to replace them?

Other than a few rumors on this board.

Mostly looks like they want to replace their backup/complimentary/3rd down guy in Brandon Jackson more than Grant.

I agree he gets overlooked by some here...but that was after disappointing in 2008 (TDs were lacking, as was any consistency in him).

Last year he had a nice year. The TDs helped big time.

But Id say he gets overlooked some because of the flux on their Oline...some because they simply are more of a passing offense than a rushing one and he has not been heavily involved in the pass game.

 

[flranger]

I don't think he has the talent. Just a product of being in a decent offense. Easily replaced, and I mean easily.

 

[Nagle2998]

I don't think he has the talent. Just a product of being in a decent offense. Easily replaced, and I mean easily.

Your right 1200 yard rb's who get 4.0 YPC grow on trees.

 

[sho nuff]

I don't think he has the talent. Just a product of being in a decent offense. Easily replaced, and I mean easily.

Your right 1200 yard rb's who get 4.0 YPC grow on trees.

Don't forget he does not fumble much either.So easily replaced that they can't even find a good enough backup right now.

 

[Tau837]

Lot of discussion on Grant in January in this thread.

From a fantasy perspective, I think he is extremely underrated. From an NFL perspective, I think he is probably underrated a bit. I can buy the notion that his success has been partly due to being in a great situation... but, regardless, he has been successful, and that's all that matters to the Packers. IMO the Packers should have a number of other priorities more important than worrying about Grant, and I suspect that's how they feel about it as well.

 

[flranger]

I don't think he has the talent. Just a product of being in a decent offense. Easily replaced, and I mean easily.

Your right 1200 yard rb's who get 4.0 YPC grow on trees.

Reuben Droughans had back to back 1200 yard seasons while averaging over 4.0 YPC just a 4 years ago (for the record Ryan Grant averaged 3.9 in 2008). If your argument is that he is as talented as Reuben Droughans then I agree. I'd predict a similar career path:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DrouRe00.htm

 

[Holy Schneikes]

I don't think he has the talent. Just a product of being in a decent offense. Easily replaced, and I mean easily.

This is the exact perception I am talking about. Why do you think that? I've just shown that he has better than average production compared to his peers in the same circumstances (that's what DVOA measures). And if you look at the other backs on his team, he is significantly better than everyone else on the roster, despite all of them likely have more favorable opportunities (3rd downs etc).Then, on one side people are put off by the "passing offense", and on the other folks seem convinced that his numbers are inflated by being on a "decent offense". Being on a good offense helps, but I'm not convinced you could just plug in any old backup RB off the street and have him run for 4.44 and 1200 yards behind that line.What do you think is lacking in his game? We can all agree that he doesn't seem to offer much in the passing game, but that's not his role. As a runner, what is he missing? Vision? Speed? Elusiveness? Tackle-breaking? I contend that opinions of him suffer from a lack of one particular overwhelming skill. When folks think of Chris Johnson they think speed. When folks think of Steven Jackson, they think balance and power. When they think of Deangelo Williams, they think shifty. But with Grant, he doesn't seem to be great at any one thing, but he has enough of ALL of those traits to make a really solid skill package. He's not outrageously fast, but he can break a big play (he ran a surprising mid 4.4 at his combine) . He doesn't break many ankles, but he generally seems to get a few more yards than you might expect. He doesn't dominate defenders with a vicious stiff-arm like Peterson might do, but he doesn't go down particularly easily either.I'm just looking for a little more than "he isn't talented", when most of his results so far in his career suggest otherwise.

 

[gianmarco]

I don't think he has the talent. Just a product of being in a decent offense. Easily replaced, and I mean easily.

Your right 1200 yard rb's who get 4.0 YPC grow on trees.

Reuben Droughans had back to back 1200 yard seasons while averaging over 4.0 YPC just a 4 years ago (for the record Ryan Grant averaged 3.9 in 2008). If your argument is that he is as talented as Reuben Droughans then I agree. I'd predict a similar career path:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DrouRe00.htm

Reuben Droughns played in a system that churned out 1000 yd RBs out of anything with 2 legs. The GB system is far from that and is not a plug n play system where anyone would succeed.

 

[flranger]

It's a compelling argument you make, I just know what I see on the tape. Perceptions differ and clearly we will on this one. Not trying to convince you of otherwise, but I believe that the Packers will continue looking for someone to replace Grant.

Whether we agree or not, my thoughts are RBs are a dime a dozen in the NFL and they have a typical shelf life of about 4 years unless they are really talented. I just don't see that something extra in Ryan Grant that makes me think he will have a longer than average shelf life. He will end up with a nice NFL career and never get the big payday, rushing for about 4800 yards then he will be gone.

Pierre Thomas looks more talented when I see him run than Grant, and yet I'd predict the same for him. There just aren't that many guys who don't have that something extra that pops out on game tape that end up with more than a couple good years as a RB.

ETA: He is 27. Will never get a big contract and will probably end up leaving GB because he was "disrespected" while they replace him with a rookie within the next two years. He will be a goner. He doesn't have the elite talent to compete with 22 year olds within the next couple years.

 

[Mario Kart]

Grant is a modern day Roger Craig. He does what is asked of him, does it well and is not flashy about doing it. He won't be on Sports Center every night but the stats do add up. Some frustration with Grant is that the Packers pass way too much and he is not involved in the passing game that much. Point two is that his stats, appear, to be skewed towards the later parts of the season. Meaning, you don't want him on your team for the first five/six weeks of the year but the playoff run is good to go as the weather and team positioning becomes more apparent.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

I don't think he has the talent. Just a product of being in a decent offense. Easily replaced, and I mean easily.

Your right 1200 yard rb's who get 4.0 YPC grow on trees.

In a zone blocking scheme with a good to great passing game...yes they do.Evidence...see Denver....Terrell Davis, Mike Anderson, Olandis Gary, tatum Bell, Clinton Portis...

 

[mjd2]

aaron rodgers 10 rushing td's last 2 years

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Lot of discussion on Grant in January in this thread.

From a fantasy perspective, I think he is extremely underrated. From an NFL perspective, I think he is probably underrated a bit. I can buy the notion that his success has been partly due to being in a great situation... but, regardless, he has been successful, and that's all that matters to the Packers. IMO the Packers should have a number of other priorities more important than worrying about Grant, and I suspect that's how they feel about it as well.

I think we agree in general, but I'm curious about the "great situation". That's another common theme I hear, but what makes his situation so great? Green Bay is a solid offensive team, which does help, I admit. But they are definitely a "pass-first" team, and their line isn't exactly amazing. He faced some of the toughest run defenses in the league last year. So where are the huge advantages Grant is using to be effective with limited talent?

 

[mozzy84]

I don't think he has the talent. Just a product of being in a decent offense. Easily replaced, and I mean easily.

Your right 1200 yard rb's who get 4.0 YPC grow on trees.

Reuben Droughans had back to back 1200 yard seasons while averaging over 4.0 YPC just a 4 years ago (for the record Ryan Grant averaged 3.9 in 2008). If your argument is that he is as talented as Reuben Droughans then I agree. I'd predict a similar career path:

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DrouRe00.htm

Reuben Droughns played in a system that churned out 1000 yd RBs out of anything with 2 legs. The GB system is far from that and is not a plug n play system where anyone would succeed.

one of those years was in cleveland... just sayingGrant has one more year being the main guy I would think, I am going to be looking to sell him this summer if the right deal comes along.

 

[mozzy84]

Lot of discussion on Grant in January in this thread.

From a fantasy perspective, I think he is extremely underrated. From an NFL perspective, I think he is probably underrated a bit. I can buy the notion that his success has been partly due to being in a great situation... but, regardless, he has been successful, and that's all that matters to the Packers. IMO the Packers should have a number of other priorities more important than worrying about Grant, and I suspect that's how they feel about it as well.

I think we agree in general, but I'm curious about the "great situation". That's another common theme I hear, but what makes his situation so great? Green Bay is a solid offensive team, which does help, I admit. But they are definitely a "pass-first" team, and their line isn't exactly amazing. He faced some of the toughest run defenses in the league last year. So where are the huge advantages Grant is using to be effective with limited talent?

getting pretty much all the carries is part of it, playing for a high scoring team on top of it helps.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Lot of discussion on Grant in January in this thread.

From a fantasy perspective, I think he is extremely underrated. From an NFL perspective, I think he is probably underrated a bit. I can buy the notion that his success has been partly due to being in a great situation... but, regardless, he has been successful, and that's all that matters to the Packers. IMO the Packers should have a number of other priorities more important than worrying about Grant, and I suspect that's how they feel about it as well.

I think we agree in general, but I'm curious about the "great situation". That's another common theme I hear, but what makes his situation so great? Green Bay is a solid offensive team, which does help, I admit. But they are definitely a "pass-first" team, and their line isn't exactly amazing. He faced some of the toughest run defenses in the league last year. So where are the huge advantages Grant is using to be effective with limited talent?

getting pretty much all the carries is part of it, playing for a high scoring team on top of it helps.

One could say that's he's getting pretty much all of the carries because he's significantly better than anyone else on his team, which generally indicates some talent. I guess you might consider not having much behind him part of a "great situation", so I hear you there. I still don't think that adds up to "great" though. I'd say "good" might be a better fit. And what does it take to be successful as a "fantasy rb"? A talented back in a good situation.

 

[flranger]

Lot of discussion on Grant in January in this thread.

From a fantasy perspective, I think he is extremely underrated. From an NFL perspective, I think he is probably underrated a bit. I can buy the notion that his success has been partly due to being in a great situation... but, regardless, he has been successful, and that's all that matters to the Packers. IMO the Packers should have a number of other priorities more important than worrying about Grant, and I suspect that's how they feel about it as well.

I think we agree in general, but I'm curious about the "great situation". That's another common theme I hear, but what makes his situation so great? Green Bay is a solid offensive team, which does help, I admit. But they are definitely a "pass-first" team, and their line isn't exactly amazing. He faced some of the toughest run defenses in the league last year. So where are the huge advantages Grant is using to be effective with limited talent?

getting pretty much all the carries is part of it, playing for a high scoring team on top of it helps.

One could say that's he's getting pretty much all of the carries because he's significantly better than anyone else on his team, which generally indicates some talent. I guess you might consider not having much behind him part of a "great situation", so I hear you there. I still don't think that adds up to "great" though. I'd say "good" might be a better fit. And what does it take to be successful as a "fantasy rb"? A talented back in a good situation.

I don't think anyone is arguing that he may not be a successful fantasy back next year. Your original post was asking why no one respects him and why he is always looking to be replaced. I'm pretty sure most of the posts were focused on your original question, not whether or not he might be successful next year.He will be replaced by father time. 28 next year and that will be it. One good year left unless they find his replacement this year.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Lot of discussion on Grant in January in this thread.

From a fantasy perspective, I think he is extremely underrated. From an NFL perspective, I think he is probably underrated a bit. I can buy the notion that his success has been partly due to being in a great situation... but, regardless, he has been successful, and that's all that matters to the Packers. IMO the Packers should have a number of other priorities more important than worrying about Grant, and I suspect that's how they feel about it as well.

I think we agree in general, but I'm curious about the "great situation". That's another common theme I hear, but what makes his situation so great? Green Bay is a solid offensive team, which does help, I admit. But they are definitely a "pass-first" team, and their line isn't exactly amazing. He faced some of the toughest run defenses in the league last year. So where are the huge advantages Grant is using to be effective with limited talent?

getting pretty much all the carries is part of it, playing for a high scoring team on top of it helps.

One could say that's he's getting pretty much all of the carries because he's significantly better than anyone else on his team, which generally indicates some talent. I guess you might consider not having much behind him part of a "great situation", so I hear you there. I still don't think that adds up to "great" though. I'd say "good" might be a better fit. And what does it take to be successful as a "fantasy rb"? A talented back in a good situation.

I don't think anyone is arguing that he may not be a successful fantasy back next year. Your original post was asking why no one respects him and why he is always looking to be replaced. I'm pretty sure most of the posts were focused on your original question, not whether or not he might be successful next year.He will be replaced by father time. 28 next year and that will be it. One good year left unless they find his replacement this year.

What I'm debating is the "great situation". Seems to me part of perception of his talent level is based on him being in a "great situation" and I don't think I agree with that. Olandis Gary was in a "great situation". I don't think Grant is.Every back will be replaced by father time. No argument there. But one year is pushing it if time is really your main issue. I know backs fall off a cliff quickly, but he will be 27 years old through most of 2010, which gives him 4 solid years based strictly on time with the assumption that he is done at 30. Plus, he doesn't really have all much mileage on him considering his "advanced age"

I'm really trying to figure out WHY he is generally considered to be under-talented. I'm guessing mostly pedigree - he just wasn't that great in college and a lot of folks just can't seem to get past that. He's the anti-Reggie Bush.

 

[Tau837]

Point two is that his stats, appear, to be skewed towards the later parts of the season. Meaning, you don't want him on your team for the first five/six weeks of the year but the playoff run is good to go as the weather and team positioning becomes more apparent.

I disagree that there is any predictive value to this. In 2007, he didn't get an opportunity until several games into the season. In 2008, he held out and missed a good deal of camp/preseason, and then got a hamstring injury that carried into the season while he played through it. I don't think any of that holds predictive value. So you're left just with one season in which he had the same role and was healthy from the start of the season.

 

[Tau837]

Lot of discussion on Grant in January in this thread.

From a fantasy perspective, I think he is extremely underrated. From an NFL perspective, I think he is probably underrated a bit. I can buy the notion that his success has been partly due to being in a great situation... but, regardless, he has been successful, and that's all that matters to the Packers. IMO the Packers should have a number of other priorities more important than worrying about Grant, and I suspect that's how they feel about it as well.

I think we agree in general, but I'm curious about the "great situation". That's another common theme I hear, but what makes his situation so great? Green Bay is a solid offensive team, which does help, I admit. But they are definitely a "pass-first" team, and their line isn't exactly amazing. He faced some of the toughest run defenses in the league last year. So where are the huge advantages Grant is using to be effective with limited talent?

Yes, I think we agree. The positives in his situation include the following:1. No competition for carries.

2. A passing offense that will tend to be the focus of the opposing defenses.

3. An excellent defense (#7 in points allowed and #2 in yards allowed in 2009) that in theory helps him to get more carries.

4. Despite playing in Minnesota's division (#2 rushing defense in 2009), he also plays Detroit (#25 rushing defense in 2009) and Chicago (#23 rushing defense in 2009) twice each per season.

Maybe there are things that could be better, like a better run blocking OL, but that is still a strong situation IMO.

 

[sho nuff]

Right now...the blocking will possibly be a concern as they are not sure who will be playing OT for them.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Every week during the season I wrote that Grant was an average guy, middle of the road, somewhere between 12-18 consistently week to week.

But there is no upside with Grant, and you have to think GB is looking to bring in some speed at their RB position to go along with Grant who is not what I would call fast.

He is the definition of average

 

[Tau837]

Lot of discussion on Grant in January in this thread.

From a fantasy perspective, I think he is extremely underrated. From an NFL perspective, I think he is probably underrated a bit. I can buy the notion that his success has been partly due to being in a great situation... but, regardless, he has been successful, and that's all that matters to the Packers. IMO the Packers should have a number of other priorities more important than worrying about Grant, and I suspect that's how they feel about it as well.

Not sure if people are going to read the other thread, so I decided to pull over a couple of posts, because I think some people would be surprised at some of Grant's accomplishments in 2009.

1. 8 of Grant's 282 rushing attempts were for 20+ yards (2.8%) and 2 of Grant's 25 receptions were for 20+ yards (8%).

2. Grant was tied for 6th in rushing TDs with 11.

3. Grant was great at the goal line, with 8 TDs on 14 carries from the opponent's 5 and closer. Only 4 RBs (Turner, Hightower, McGahee, Mendenhall) with at least 10 such carries had a better scoring rate.

4. Grant was tied for 5th in rushing first downs with 61.

5. Grant was tied for 5th in yards gained after contact with 774.

6. Grant was 8th in missed tackles (tackles either broken or avoided) with 29.

Ran across stats at NFL.com that show Grant was tied for 11th in 20+ yard runs and tied for 10th in 40+ yard runs, just to complete the rank statistics I posted above.

 

[CravenM]

Maybe the stats won't bear it out but I don't think the Packers have an offense that properly takes advantage of his skills inside the 5 yard line and definitely inside the 10. I've had his in a dynasty league for the last 3 years and I constantly watch them throwing 75% of the time (seemingly) inside the 10. And of the rushes, he seems to only get about half of them.

He's definitely got the talent to be a long term starter in the NFL. He's not as fast as ADP (who is) but then again doesn't fumble as much either. He's big enough to run between the tackles. He can read the blitz and block, catch passes out of the backfield, and everything else that's required. He appears to be a team player who gives 100% on every plan.

What's not to like?

 

[gianmarco]

Every week during the season I wrote that Grant was an average guy, middle of the road, somewhere between 12-18 consistently week to week. But there is no upside with Grant, and you have to think GB is looking to bring in some speed at their RB position to go along with Grant who is not what I would call fast. He is the definition of average

Actually, he's the definition of above average.

 

[Holy Schneikes]

Every week during the season I wrote that Grant was an average guy, middle of the road, somewhere between 12-18 consistently week to week. But there is no upside with Grant, and you have to think GB is looking to bring in some speed at their RB position to go along with Grant who is not what I would call fast. He is the definition of average

So he times well (see his combine 40), and breaks as many or more long runs than most of his competition. If you are comparing him to Chris Johnson, then yeah, I guess he's slow. But if you compare him to an average (or even good) starting NFL running back, he actually holds up pretty well in terms of speed.If you look at the top 10 rushers in the league last year, I'd say there are two guys who are clearly faster than he is. Chris Johnson and ADP. The rest of them are in the same ballpark as far as I can tell.I think this is another perfect example of "Oh, hey, it's Ryan Grant. He can't be fast, so the team must be looking for more speed."

 

[ookook]

I believe a lot of owners fail to dscount the 2008 season when he was injured. You look at 07 and 09 and he seems like he is just fine for the next 2 years....

 

[Ron_Mexico]

I don't think he has the talent. Just a product of being in a decent offense. Easily replaced, and I mean easily.

<_<