S Green, B Well, R Mathews (1 Viewer)

[chickenlittle]

Which two would you build your dynasty team around and why? Only consider a 3-5 year window as anything longer than that is a little foolish for NFL Rbs (even that long is probably wishful thinking).

 

[The Real Hipster Doofus]

Which two would you build your dynasty team around and why? Only consider a 5 year window as anything longer than that is a little foolish for NFL Rbs (even that long is probably wishful thinking).

Wells and Mathews.While I expect Green to be productive in the next few years, I don't think he has the same talent level as the other two.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Which two would you build your dynasty team around and why? Only consider a 5 year window as anything longer than that is a little foolish for NFL Rbs (even that long is probably wishful thinking).

Mathews and Wells.Greene is old....I don't believe in Sanchez....he doesn't catch as many passes....and he isn't as talented.I almost didn't include Wells b/c of his "dedication" but people cant ignore his talent at age 21.

 

[footballsavvy]

Id probably say Green and Matthews, primarily because ARI doesn't run enough and Hightower is such a good receiving back that Wells role will be limited. I can't see him getting over 220 carries - to go with very few receptions for the foreseeable future. SG is not a receiving back either, but at least he should get a lot more carries than wells - and behind a much better run-blocking o-line. Either way, it's hard not to include Matthews due to his well-roundedness combined with where he was taken in the draft, combined with his opportunity on that team.

 

[statman]

Greene is old....

the guy's gonna be 25 in August, and has very little mileage on his legs. How is that old?

 

[Kree]

Wells and either/or

 

[Crippler]

Wells and either/or

Best combination of size, speed and strength. Not worried about Hightower or being in Arizona as I truly believe Ken wants to become a running team and Faneca helpsI probably go with Matthews over Greene because of age but this year I like Greene until the Chargers get the OL running woes cured. Jets will outrun SD for fun this year

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Greene is old....the guy's gonna be 25 in August, and has very little mileage on his legs. How is that old?

In 5 years he will be 30.....I believe it is something to take into context....especially with his running style that takes punishment.

 

[TitansFan10]

Greene is old....the guy's gonna be 25 in August, and has very little mileage on his legs. How is that old?

In 5 years he will be 30.....I believe it is something to take into context....especially with his running style that takes punishment.

The poster said for the next 2 or 3 yrs and that even 3 years was a long time for a RB... Dude, 25 is not old when you have only had one half of a NFL season. HTH???

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Greene is old....the guy's gonna be 25 in August, and has very little mileage on his legs. How is that old?

In 5 years he will be 30.....I believe it is something to take into context....especially with his running style that takes punishment.

The poster said for the next 2 or 3 yrs and that even 3 years was a long time for a RB... Dude, 25 is not old when you have only had one half of a NFL season. HTH???

Reread the OP......he said 3-5 years not any longer.

 

[Routilla]

Greene and Mathews.

 

[TitansFan10]

Greene is old....the guy's gonna be 25 in August, and has very little mileage on his legs. How is that old?

In 5 years he will be 30.....I believe it is something to take into context....especially with his running style that takes punishment.

The poster said for the next 2 or 3 yrs and that even 3 years was a long time for a RB... Dude, 25 is not old when you have only had one half of a NFL season. HTH???

Reread the OP......he said 3-5 years not any longer.

Well, still I think your off on it. Like I said, he has had one half of a season. Going out 3,4, or 5 years Greene is going to be with a team that has the better O-line, a commitment to the run, and better talent around him. Most would definitely not be afraid of a guy who in 5 years would be 30... That kind of logic is the complete wrong logic to use in Dynasty. No one can plan 5 years out. In the next couple of years Greene should be very nice.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Well, still I think your off on it. Like I said, he has had one half of a season. Going out 3,4, or 5 years Greene is going to be with a team that has the better O-line, a commitment to the run, and better talent around him. Most would definitely not be afraid of a guy who in 5 years would be 30... That kind of logic is the complete wrong logic to use in Dynasty. No one can plan 5 years out. In the next couple of years Greene should be very nice.

The problem is...all 3 RB's will be nice....this year....next year...and hopefully years from now.But the OP wanted to seperate them...and that is what this thread is to do.Age: Beanie is the youngest...then Mathews....then Greene.Receiving ability: Mathews, Beanie, GreeneSpeed: mathews, beanie, greeneOL: Greene, beanie, MathewsQB: Mathews, greene, beanieRecieving threats: mathews, greene, beanieDedication: Mathews, beanie, greeneSo all of them are in a good situation...but it is the job of a dynasty owner to seperate based on a bunch of criteria....and AGE is one of them. As is wear and tear not only in the NFL but in college too.

 

[Billy Ball Thorton]

Id probably say Green and Matthews, primarily because ARI doesn't run enough and Hightower is such a good receiving back that Wells role will be limited. I can't see him getting over 220 carries - to go with very few receptions for the foreseeable future. SG is not a receiving back either, but at least he should get a lot more carries than wells - and behind a much better run-blocking o-line. Either way, it's hard not to include Matthews due to his well-roundedness combined with where he was taken in the draft, combined with his opportunity on that team.

And how many 3rd downs will Green be in on?? Green is not known as a pass catcher, so I dont see this reasoning at all..

Wells Matthews easily

 

[krsone21]

Well, still I think your off on it. Like I said, he has had one half of a season. Going out 3,4, or 5 years Greene is going to be with a team that has the better O-line, a commitment to the run, and better talent around him. Most would definitely not be afraid of a guy who in 5 years would be 30... That kind of logic is the complete wrong logic to use in Dynasty. No one can plan 5 years out. In the next couple of years Greene should be very nice.

The problem is...all 3 RB's will be nice....this year....next year...and hopefully years from now.

But the OP wanted to seperate them...and that is what this thread is to do.

Age: Beanie is the youngest...then Mathews....then Greene.

Receiving ability: Mathews, Beanie, Greene

Speed: mathews, beanie, greene

OL: Greene, beanie, Mathews

QB: Mathews, greene, beanie

Recieving threats: mathews, greene, beanie

Dedication: Mathews, beanie, greene

So all of them are in a good situation...but it is the job of a dynasty owner to seperate based on a bunch of criteria....and AGE is one of them. As is wear and tear not only in the NFL but in college too.

It is true Greene is older then Wells and no doubt he will start slowing down once he does reach age 30 like most RB's do but if your talking about wear and tear also then even though Greene is older then Wells he has less wear and tear on his body. Between college and the pros he has only touched the ball a total of 550 times including receptions, were as Wells has touched the Ball 807 times up to this point. I agree that Wells will probaby have a longer career do to his age compared to Greene but because Greene has had such little wear and tear up to this point I believe he can be very productive for atleast 5 year, as long as no serious injuries happen along the way.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Well, still I think your off on it. Like I said, he has had one half of a season. Going out 3,4, or 5 years Greene is going to be with a team that has the better O-line, a commitment to the run, and better talent around him. Most would definitely not be afraid of a guy who in 5 years would be 30... That kind of logic is the complete wrong logic to use in Dynasty. No one can plan 5 years out. In the next couple of years Greene should be very nice.

The problem is...all 3 RB's will be nice....this year....next year...and hopefully years from now.

But the OP wanted to seperate them...and that is what this thread is to do.

Age: Beanie is the youngest...then Mathews....then Greene.

Receiving ability: Mathews, Beanie, Greene

Speed: mathews, beanie, greene

OL: Greene, beanie, Mathews

QB: Mathews, greene, beanie

Recieving threats: mathews, greene, beanie

Dedication: Mathews, beanie, greene

So all of them are in a good situation...but it is the job of a dynasty owner to seperate based on a bunch of criteria....and AGE is one of them. As is wear and tear not only in the NFL but in college too.

It is true Greene is older then Wells and no doubt he will start slowing down once he does reach age 30 like most RB's do but if your talking about wear and tear also then even though Greene is older then Wells he has less wear and tear on his body. Between college and the pros he has only touched the ball a total of 550 times including receptions, were as Wells has touched the Ball 807 times up to this point. I agree that Wells will probaby have a longer career do to his age compared to Greene but because Greene has had such little wear and tear up to this point I believe he can be very productive for atleast 5 year, as long as no serious injuries happen along the way.

Did you not count his 2004 prep school(to get eligible for college) year at Milford academy...he had 1,274 yards there too. Either way though I don't see wear and tear as a significant factor on any of these RB's.But if one of them gets run into the ground like Turner did(400 carries) then watch out.

 

[Jackal King]

Id probably say Green and Matthews, primarily because ARI doesn't run enough and Hightower is such a good receiving back that Wells role will be limited. I can't see him getting over 220 carries - to go with very few receptions for the foreseeable future. SG is not a receiving back either, but at least he should get a lot more carries than wells - and behind a much better run-blocking o-line. Either way, it's hard not to include Matthews due to his well-roundedness combined with where he was taken in the draft, combined with his opportunity on that team.

Maurile is currently projecting only 1 RB to have more receptions than Beanie this year.

 

[Aznflyer14]

Not to discount the level of competition in each RB's team's division foes...

I would rank Wells, Mathews, and Greene in this respective order.

Wells vs 49ers, Rams, and Seahawks 6 times per year (49ers DEF is in class of own in this weak division... Rams/Seahawks - still too early to judge their movements in rebuilding their defense)

Mathews vs. Broncos, Raiders, and Chiefs 6 times per year (Broncos's DEF is getting too old, Raiders' boom-bust potential, and Chiefs' DEF should be on the rise with an improved continuity from last year and new additions from the draft/FAs)

Greene vs. Patriots, Dolphins, and Bills 6 times per year. (Pats and Dolphins Defenses should improve in 2-3 years and Bills' DEF still at the bottom of AFC East division)

my two cents...

 

[jurb26]

Wells is easily the top choice of the 3 for me. Mathews would get my nod over Greene.

 

[healthpellets]

wells ..... mathews ..................................greene

/thread

 

[Multiple Scores]

I enjoy this since I have all 3 in my dynasty.

 

[SSOG]

Which two would you build your dynasty team around and why? Only consider a 3-5 year window as anything longer than that is a little foolish for NFL Rbs (even that long is probably wishful thinking).

Personally, I think it's foolish to NOT consider more than 3 years in dynasty. For example: say I expect Frank Gore to outscore Ray Rice by 5 fantasy points over the next 3 years. Should I rank Gore ahead of Rice? I would argue that that's crazy, because 3 years from now Gore will be 30 and Rice will be 28. Those 5 extra points would have been nice, but not as nice as the 2 extra years that Rice would have left. While I wouldn't PROJECT 5 years out, that doesn't mean we can't ACCOUNT FOR 5 years out. Hell, to be perfectly honest, I'm not at all comfortable projecting even two years out. Things change so much from one season to the next.My preferred player ranking method in dynasty is an "exit value" method. To illustrate using Frank Gore again... let's say that I think that Frank Gore will add "X" value to my team over the next 3 years. Now, let's say that I think that Frank Gore's market value 3 years from now will be "Y". Given both of those assumptions, Gore's value today should be "X + Y".

To illustrate this with Ryan Mathews and Shonn Greene... let's say I think they'll score comparable points over the next 3 years. If they score the same amount of points over the next 3 years, then 3 years from now Mathews will be 26 and Greene will be 28. Given that they're coming off of a comparable 3-year stretch, Mathews' trade value will be SUBSTANTIALLY higher than Greene's at that point. As a result, even if I expect them to score the same over the next 3-5 years, I would have to value Mathews over Greene.

With that said, I'd take Wells and Mathews. They're both younger than Greene by several years, which gives them much more of a margin for error (i.e. even if Greene outproduces them by a little bit, they'll still be more valuable N years from now). They're also, in my opinion, better talents (an opinion shared by NFL decision makers who took them in the first while letting Greene fall to the third). Of the three, I think Greene is most dependent on his situation, and he's also in the most volatile situation of the bunch. The Jets line is aging, the and Jets offensive personnel is suggesting an imminent switch to a pass-first offense.

 

[Tanner9919]

Id probably say Green and Matthews, primarily because ARI doesn't run enough and Hightower is such a good receiving back that Wells role will be limited. I can't see him getting over 220 carries - to go with very few receptions for the foreseeable future. SG is not a receiving back either, but at least he should get a lot more carries than wells - and behind a much better run-blocking o-line. Either way, it's hard not to include Matthews due to his well-roundedness combined with where he was taken in the draft, combined with his opportunity on that team.

I'd say Mathews and GreeneGreene has the best situation out of all 3 of them, best O-line, best defense which improves the Jets' offensive time of possession since they get the ball back in their hands more quickly.Mathews has a terrific coaching staff that knows a lot about running the ball, has a superior supporting cast.Wells has Hightower to compete with, the loss of Boldin will hurt,and the Cards will throw out Leinart at QB, which has me more than just a little bit worried about the AZ offense going forward.

 

[Todem]

Wells and Matthews

Greene maybe the most over valued RB right now.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

wells ..... mathews ..................................greene/thread

This guy knows stuff.

 

[KellysHeroes]

I'd take Greene #1, hes undervalued IMO... you may not believe in Sanchez but Defense's are going to have to be honest to Holmes / Cotch / Edwards / Keller so he won't be facing to many 8 in the box sets. He has a great workhorse build, LT is going to take some of the workload off and I would usually be worried but the Jets are a running team and there will be such a large pie that it doesn't bother me that much... Rex loves Shonn and Rex wants him to get 300 carries this yr. Yeah Greene is 25 but with little mileage so I expect a good 4 to 5 yrs out of him; thats all you can ask for when selecting an RB.

Next I would take Matthews based on his value of being rookie 1.01.... even if he disappoints he will still have great value next yr.

Wells isn't a bad choice but if theres one QB I have no faith in its Lienart... whats he going to do when Fitz is tripled? I think Beanie will disappoint and it won't be totally his fault.

 

[Young 8]

lol @Greene haters

 

[KellysHeroes]

lol @Greene haters

this guy knows his stuff, Greene is most sure thing out of the three

 

[ookook]

Depends on whether it is PPR or not.

I think one should not underestimate the commitment the NYJs have to rushing the football and the quality of their line.

Everyone says that dynasty is about talent and not situation: I fundamentally disagree. Sure situations change. But so do our assessments of "talent".

I am VERY skeptical of any RB in AZ putting up decent rushing stats in terms of being a Top 10. But, PPR changes that for fantasy purposes. (BTW, I also thought Hightower has improved).

So no PPR, Greene and Mathews. PPR, Wells and Mathews.

Edited to add: BTW, I still hate PPR.

 

[Billy Ball Thorton]

Green is a 2 down back his ceiling is top 15 and I doubt he gets there.

Wells /Matthews seem to me to have a higher ceiling..

Hightower is garbage and I would be more worried about McNight than I would Hightower.

 

[Multiple Scores]

Green is a 2 down back his ceiling is top 15 and I doubt he gets there.

Thomas Jones was #5 RB in 2008 and in 2009. Explain to me how Greene has a ceiling of top 15? Was it Jones superior skills at this point or was it Jones superior pass catching?

 

[TitansFan10]

Greene could run for 1300 and they would be saying he is a subpar talent waiting to have his job taken away first opportunity. Once peoples minds are made up it is hard to change them.

 

[Billy Ball Thorton]

Green is a 2 down back his ceiling is top 15 and I doubt he gets there.

Thomas Jones was #5 RB in 2008 and in 2009. Explain to me how Greene has a ceiling of top 15? Was it Jones superior skills at this point or was it Jones superior pass catching?

Your correct it was "Jones superior skill" when compared to Green... Please remind me what Green has done outside a couple of nice runs in the playoffs. Im sure the Green huggers here think often about those runs when drafting him.. He was a 3rd round talent last year and I see little reason to compare him to Thomas Jones based off what we have seen.

Jets brought in LT and drafted Mcknight in the 4th rd (1 round later than Green) but yet everyone expects Green to be this workhorse that Jones a first round talent was... Make's me lol.....

 

[Multiple Scores]

Green is a 2 down back his ceiling is top 15 and I doubt he gets there.

Thomas Jones was #5 RB in 2008 and in 2009. Explain to me how Greene has a ceiling of top 15? Was it Jones superior skills at this point or was it Jones superior pass catching?

Your correct it was "Jones superior skill" when compared to Green... Please remind me what Green has done outside a couple of nice runs in the playoffs. Im sure the Green huggers here think often about those runs when drafting him.. He was a 3rd round talent last year and I see little reason to compare him to Thomas Jones based off what we have seen.

Jets brought in LT and drafted Mcknight in the 4th rd (1 round later than Green) but yet everyone expects Green to be this workhorse that Jones a first round talent was... Make's me lol.....

Can I join your league?

 

[KellysHeroes]

Green is a 2 down back his ceiling is top 15 and I doubt he gets there.

Thomas Jones was #5 RB in 2008 and in 2009. Explain to me how Greene has a ceiling of top 15? Was it Jones superior skills at this point or was it Jones superior pass catching?

Your correct it was "Jones superior skill" when compared to Green... Please remind me what Green has done outside a couple of nice runs in the playoffs. Im sure the Green huggers here think often about those runs when drafting him.. He was a 3rd round talent last year and I see little reason to compare him to Thomas Jones based off what we have seen.

Jets brought in LT and drafted Mcknight in the 4th rd (1 round later than Green) but yet everyone expects Green to be this workhorse that Jones a first round talent was... Make's me lol.....

Can I join your league?

Joe McKnight was so out of shape that he puked in the 1st 15 minutes of his 1st workout...

 

[thriftyrocker]

Green is a 2 down back his ceiling is top 15 and I doubt he gets there.

Thomas Jones was #5 RB in 2008 and in 2009. Explain to me how Greene has a ceiling of top 15? Was it Jones superior skills at this point or was it Jones superior pass catching?

Doesn't matter if Greene only plays on running downs cause the Jets would like to run on every down.That said I'd rather have Wells and Mathews.

 

[TS Garp]

I guess this probably deserves its own thread, but I'm surprised at how ready most posters are to discount Tim Hightower and not worry about him eating into Wells' numbers. He's carved out a valuable role in the offense as a great pass-catching back, and, most importantly, as a goal-line vulture. I do like Wells but I just don't think Hightower's going anywhere and he's going to put a ceiling on what we'll see from Wells.

I tend to think Wells is overvalued at this point whereas Greene is quite undervalued, which I never would have expected after his playoff showing. He rushed for 300+ yards in the playoffs and his team subsequently cut a 1,400 yard rusher to clearly make him the guy. Add to that the fact that they're solidly a run-first team...I get that he's not a pass catcher, but, beyond that, what's there not to like?

 

[gehazi]

Which two would you build your dynasty team around and why? Only consider a 5 year window as anything longer than that is a little foolish for NFL Rbs (even that long is probably wishful thinking).

Wells and Mathews.While I expect Green to be productive in the next few years, I don't think he has the same talent level as the other two.

Exactly this.

 

[Banger]

Wow, I'm shocked how dismissive people are of Greene. I hope that continues all through the offseason. Behind that line Greene will be a stud for the next couple years.

 

[Multiple Scores]

Jets brought in LT and drafted Mcknight in the 4th rd (1 round later than Green) but yet everyone expects Green to be this workhorse that Jones a first round talent was... Make's me lol.....

What's your take on the Jets grabbing McKnight and kicking Leon to the curb, so this is bad for Greene? Why is having junk behind you better than having a star? I'm just mystified at this.

 

[footballsavvy]

Id probably say Green and Matthews, primarily because ARI doesn't run enough and Hightower is such a good receiving back that Wells role will be limited. I can't see him getting over 220 carries - to go with very few receptions for the foreseeable future. SG is not a receiving back either, but at least he should get a lot more carries than wells - and behind a much better run-blocking o-line. Either way, it's hard not to include Matthews due to his well-roundedness combined with where he was taken in the draft, combined with his opportunity on that team.

Maurile is currently projecting only 1 RB to have more receptions than Beanie this year.

I have to stay that is the worst projection I have ever heard. And no offense to Maurile - I read the "experts" opinions as much as anyone - but I also think for myself. Hightower had 63 receptions last year, proving to be one of the best receiving backs in the league. Give me one reason why they would not continue to use Hightower as a receiving back while spelling Wells? I feel sorry for people who base picks on horrible information like this. It is a perfect example of why you should make your own projections/ranking lists and pick from it without looking back.Anyway, I think Wells is a better pure runner than Greene. And maybe he has a few more catches than Greene - but Greene is no slouch either and his situation should give him around 50 more touches than Wells.... all behind a superior offensive line.

 

[footballsavvy]

Edited to add: BTW, I still hate PPR.

I still have absolutely no idea why this is so overwhelmingly popular. Some people even assume it is the standard.From the "sell me on Matthews" thread:

Why he won't be top 10 PPR:

Nobody cares about ppr. The OP did not say ppr. Why do people assume this ridiculous scoring system is everyone else's default?And where did you get 20 receptions from anyway? Norv said 40.

Actually, its pretty hard to find a non-ppr league these days. Personally, I just assume any ranking or analysis is geared towards PPR unless specifically stated otherwise.

It's very simple. People got tired of having every fantasy season tied to the success of their running backs. PPR makes it possible to have a good team even if you are stronger at receiver than running back. There are many more possibilities for configuring a championship team in a PPR league. I realize some people don't like change and prefer to stick to the age old re-draft, non-ppr, round-robin draft strategy of taking RBs in the first 4 rounds and being shoe-in for the playoffs every year. But other people like more of a challenge and more options.

 

[footballsavvy]

I guess this probably deserves its own thread, but I'm surprised at how ready most posters are to discount Tim Hightower and not worry about him eating into Wells' numbers. He's carved out a valuable role in the offense as a great pass-catching back, and, most importantly, as a goal-line vulture. I do like Wells but I just don't think Hightower's going anywhere and he's going to put a ceiling on what we'll see from Wells. I tend to think Wells is overvalued at this point whereas Greene is quite undervalued, which I never would have expected after his playoff showing. He rushed for 300+ yards in the playoffs and his team subsequently cut a 1,400 yard rusher to clearly make him the guy. Add to that the fact that they're solidly a run-first team...I get that he's not a pass catcher, but, beyond that, what's there not to like?

I agree 100%. Wells is extremely over valued. Hightower is one of the best receiving backs in the league and is extremely valuable to that football team. For some reason fantasy owners think that the coach cares more about Wells fantasy stats than about winning football games. Hightower had 63 receptions last year and he will be in there on most passing downs again this year. If he's not, then Whisenhunt is the biggest moron in the league.The only chance Wells has of beating Greene is if the Cardinals change their game plan in dramatic fashion and pound the hell out of the ball. Of course this won't work either because their defense will suck and they won't be able to sustain a run game. Don't forget they lost Dansby and Rolle. I'll be surprised if Wells have 220 carries.

 

[Multiple Scores]

I guess this probably deserves its own thread, but I'm surprised at how ready most posters are to discount Tim Hightower and not worry about him eating into Wells' numbers. He's carved out a valuable role in the offense as a great pass-catching back, and, most importantly, as a goal-line vulture. I do like Wells but I just don't think Hightower's going anywhere and he's going to put a ceiling on what we'll see from Wells.

I tend to think Wells is overvalued at this point whereas Greene is quite undervalued, which I never would have expected after his playoff showing. He rushed for 300+ yards in the playoffs and his team subsequently cut a 1,400 yard rusher to clearly make him the guy. Add to that the fact that they're solidly a run-first team...I get that he's not a pass catcher, but, beyond that, what's there not to like?

I agree 100%. Wells is extremely over valued. Hightower is one of the best receiving backs in the league and is extremely valuable to that football team. For some reason fantasy owners think that the coach cares more about Wells fantasy stats than about winning football games. Hightower had 63 receptions last year and he will be in there on most passing downs again this year. If he's not, then Whisenhunt is the biggest moron in the league.The only chance Wells has of beating Greene is if the Cardinals change their game plan in dramatic fashion and pound the hell out of the ball. Of course this won't work either because their defense will suck and they won't be able to sustain a run game. Don't forget they lost Dansby and Rolle. I'll be surprised if Wells have 220 carries.

Horrible take footballsavvy, with your name you should know better than this. I can only speak for myself so take it fwiw. For reason based on my eyeballs and football acumen and not regarding my lust for fantasy points I think Wells is an elite talent, I don't think Hightower is a good back. Pretty simple. I believe Hightower will get his touches, roughly 30%, there are not many backs out there that don't have COP/dual role, whatever you want to call it. I will go so far as to say that Hightower is a better pass catcher. Wells will not sit on all 3rd downs or all 3rd and long, he will get some runs on 3rd down, he will be in there for the sake of the gameplan and how the box is stacked. Wells is flat out a bigger threat than Hightower, does this make me someone who only thinks about fantasy stats and not winning games? Chester Taylor is a better pass catcher than Peterson and Peterson was not pulled every time 3rd down came up, Wells is just superior as a football player than Hightower and having him on the field more increases the Cardinals chances of winning football games, the fantasy stats piling up is the icing.

 

[SSOG]

I can't speak for the OP but I think I get what he's saying and, for the most part, I agree. I get what you are saying, but you are WAY overvaluing age, presuming that you will be able to successfully trade the player at your perceived value, and you've got an overblown sense of longevity. The fact is that running backs rarely produce at a high level for more than 5 years. I know we both can find a Curtis Martin and LT here and there, but the OP is trying to be realistic. Not one of these guys has run for 1000 yards yet. Expecting 3 relatively productive seasons from all of them is just crazy and predicting their trade value (or any RB's) in 3 years is impossible, but I'm glad you think you can.

Shaun Alexander seemed to have a good, solid run of success. He had exactly 5 consecutive years of 1000+ yards. Deuce McAllister was a highly coveted guy. He only had 4 good years with a dud thrown in the middle, which would hurt that trade value. Rudi Johnson only had 3 good years. Stephen Davis had 4 with a dud in the middle. Tiki's 4th year he ran for 1006 then 865 then 5 more 1000+ years. Some of them at an advanced age. Edge put up 7 years but with some bumps. Anthony Thomas looked promising but only put up two 1000+ yd seasons. William Green... we won't even go there, but I bet he was talked about in conversations like this one and picked by many. Thomas Jones 5 years sub 1000, last 5 over 1000.

I threw those out because longevity is totally unpredictable. So I think the OP just doesn't want anyone getting carried away trying to predict all (or any) of these guys to have rare 5+ seasons of high productivity. Chances are not that great that one of them runs for 1000 yards in 5 years given that not a single one of them has proven the ability to perform at that high of a level for a full season. ...and if they had, we should probably worry about their chances of keeping it up for more than 4 more seasons (kind of kidding, but kind of the harsh reality).

Yes, it's pretty much impossible to predict trade value 3 years from now. It's also impossible to predict production 3 years from now, but the OP had no problem with trying that. Hell, if you really wanted to minimize the difficulty of predictions, you'd use an exit value formula with a 1-year window- in other words, you'd project how someone would do this year, you'd project what their trade value would be a year from now, and you'd derive a value that was a composite of those two projections. It's a much safer exercise than trying to predict 3 years out, at any rate.Anyway, while longevity is unpredictable, there are certain rules of dynasty that are not unpredictable. Players suffer very predictable and easily anticipated drops in value at certain age milestones (a small one at 26, a medium sized one at 27, and bigger ones at 28, 29, and 30). Also, my projection doesn't necessarily need to be accurate 3 years out in order to produce accurate rankings today, because every ranking today carries the same risk of inaccuracy.

Let's say that I predict that Wells, Mathews, and Greene will all score exactly 250 fantasy points in each of the next 3 years. Based on exit value, I should then rank them Mathews > Wells > Greene. Now, you're right that things might change, and maybe Mathews breaks his ankle and his value suffers... so let's discount Mathews' projection to account for that risk. Now, I'd have to discount Greene and Wells by the same amount, because they carry the same risk. Since all 3 backs are receiving the same discount, I can effectively just ignore that risk entirely because it doesn't have any net impact on the rankings. All 3 backs are also a bust risk, but I'd say it's a pretty comparable bust risk, so again I can completely ignore that risk when comparing the players. When you eliminate all of the variables that affect all three players equally, you're left with your original projection (whatever it is), and age (a variable that DOES NOT affect all three backs equally). So, again, I think it'd be silly to project out to 3 years and *NOT* account for value beyond that, because all you have to do is include the most predictable variable in all of fantasy football- player age.

Even if Greene scores exactly the same as Wells and Mathews, he will be less valuable 3 years from now. That's a simple fact. In order for Greene to be more valuable than Wells and Mathews, then, he'll need to score enough more points than either to overcome his age disadvantage. It's certainly possible, but you can't just ignore his age as if it's not a negative against him.

So for me this is a tough one. I feel like Beanie has loads of talent but he was injured quite a bit in college and I just don't like the Arizona offense right now (or in the near future). Shonn Greene proved his worth in the playoffs. The guy could tear it up behind that line for a few years (SSOG- is that line really aging? Mangold and Ferguson are really young and they are going to put a rookie in place of the declining Faneca) but he, too, showed injury concerns. Matthews is an NFL unknown but if a broken LT could score 12 TD last season then I'll take my chances with the guy AJ Smith traded the farm for. So without a lot of confidence I'm going to roll the dice on the rookie on a super potent offense, then I'll take my chances on the guy who torched teams in the playoffs for 2.5 games, and I'll take a pass on the guy whose team took steps back on both offense and defense. I know everyone says draft talent over situation, but he's got 4 more years on that rookie contract and NFL RB's just don't last that long. It's a shame because he looks pretty awesome at times. Switch situations and I'd take him over the other two.

Off topic: just looking at those old stats, Eddie George must have been the only guy in history to get 315 carries in a season while averaging 3.0 ypc. That is just crazy.

Edit: accidentally put "dude" instead of "dud" and it looked really bad.

Any good rookie RB will get a second contract in the NFL, so what do you mean when you say that "NFL RBs just don't last [four years]"? And even if you don't think any of the RBs will last more than 4 years, 4 years is AGES in the NFL. Situations can change radically during that stretch. I mean, consider: In the 2005 season, the Pittsburgh Steelers were coached by Bill Cowher, a famous choker who was destined to retire without ever winning the big one. They were coming off a season where 61% of the plays they called were runs, and they were in the middle of a season where 57% of the plays they called were runs. Their offensive line was considered one of the best in the league and was anchored by All Pro Alan Faneca. Fast forward 4 years now. Pittsburgh now has 2 SB championships. Alan Faneca just signed with his 3rd team. Pittsburgh's line is considered mediocre, and in 2009 the team ran on just 42% of its offensive plays.It's not a Pittsburgh specific thing, either. Go look at any NFL team midway through the 2005 season, and compare them to where they were midway through 2009. For instance, midway through 2005 the Denver Broncos were led by Pro Bowl QB Jake Plummer on their way to a 13-3 season and an AFCCG appearance. They ran 53% of the time and were threatening to become the first team in 20 years to produce a pair of 1,000 yard rushers. Their head coach is an institution who will coach them for another decade, at least. 4 years later, they've drafted a QB in the first round, turned him into a pro bowler, and traded him away already. They run on 43% of their offensive snaps, and they can't even produce ONE 1,000 yard rusher, let alone two. Their head coach just signed a contract with the Washington Redskins. In 2005, the Kansas City Chiefs were the best rushing team in the entire NFL, and their backup RB rushed for 1750 yards despite only starting 7 games. Last year, they cut that backup halfway through the season because he couldn't average 3 yards per carry, and their offense was terrible.

I know that some people look at this uncertainty and say that that's all the more reason not to project beyond 2-3 years. Like I said, if you're using exit value, then the uncertainty isn't a big deal when looking towards the future because it affects all RBs equally. What it *IS* a good argument for, though, is rating players based on talent instead of situation. The Jets look like a ground-based ball-control juggernaut right now. 4 years ago, so did Pitt, Denver, and Kansas City. If you're drafting Greene high because you love his situation, but not necessarily his talent... then you're going to be left high and dry in a season or two when his situation is no longer recognizable.

I have to stay that is the worst projection I have ever heard. And no offense to Maurile - I read the "experts" opinions as much as anyone - but I also think for myself. Hightower had 63 receptions last year, proving to be one of the best receiving backs in the league. Give me one reason why they would not continue to use Hightower as a receiving back while spelling Wells? I feel sorry for people who base picks on horrible information like this. It is a perfect example of why you should make your own projections/ranking lists and pick from it without looking back.

Anyway, I think Wells is a better pure runner than Greene. And maybe he has a few more catches than Greene - but Greene is no slouch either and his situation should give him around 50 more touches than Wells.... all behind a superior offensive line.

19% of Hightower's receptions and a whopping 28% of his receiving yardage came in a single game (6% of his season) last year. He only averaged 5.35 yards per target on the season (comparisons: Sproles = 8.7 YPT, Slaton = 7.6 ypt, Fred Jackson = 6.2, K. Smith = 7.1, Rice = 6.8, Peterson = 7.6, and Wells = 8.9). The fact that Tim Hightower had 63 receptions last year didn't prove he was one of the best receiving backs in the league, it proved he was one of the most target (second in targets to Ray Rice). Hightower was a mediocre receiver with limited talent who happened to receive heavy usage. Those are exactly the kind of players who wind up falling off the face of the planet with "no warning".

 

[wiscstlatlmia]

I can't speak for the OP but I think I get what he's saying and, for the most part, I agree. I get what you are saying, but you are WAY overvaluing age, presuming that you will be able to successfully trade the player at your perceived value, and you've got an overblown sense of longevity. The fact is that running backs rarely produce at a high level for more than 5 years. I know we both can find a Curtis Martin and LT here and there, but the OP is trying to be realistic. Not one of these guys has run for 1000 yards yet. Expecting 3 relatively productive seasons from all of them is just crazy and predicting their trade value (or any RB's) in 3 years is impossible, but I'm glad you think you can.

Shaun Alexander seemed to have a good, solid run of success. He had exactly 5 consecutive years of 1000+ yards. Deuce McAllister was a highly coveted guy. He only had 4 good years with a dud thrown in the middle, which would hurt that trade value. Rudi Johnson only had 3 good years. Stephen Davis had 4 with a dud in the middle. Tiki's 4th year he ran for 1006 then 865 then 5 more 1000+ years. Some of them at an advanced age. Edge put up 7 years but with some bumps. Anthony Thomas looked promising but only put up two 1000+ yd seasons. William Green... we won't even go there, but I bet he was talked about in conversations like this one and picked by many. Thomas Jones 5 years sub 1000, last 5 over 1000.

I threw those out because longevity is totally unpredictable. So I think the OP just doesn't want anyone getting carried away trying to predict all (or any) of these guys to have rare 5+ seasons of high productivity. Chances are not that great that one of them runs for 1000 yards in 5 years given that not a single one of them has proven the ability to perform at that high of a level for a full season. ...and if they had, we should probably worry about their chances of keeping it up for more than 4 more seasons (kind of kidding, but kind of the harsh reality).

Yes, it's pretty much impossible to predict trade value 3 years from now. It's also impossible to predict production 3 years from now, but the OP had no problem with trying that. Hell, if you really wanted to minimize the difficulty of predictions, you'd use an exit value formula with a 1-year window- in other words, you'd project how someone would do this year, you'd project what their trade value would be a year from now, and you'd derive a value that was a composite of those two projections. It's a much safer exercise than trying to predict 3 years out, at any rate.Anyway, while longevity is unpredictable, there are certain rules of dynasty that are not unpredictable. Players suffer very predictable and easily anticipated drops in value at certain age milestones (a small one at 26, a medium sized one at 27, and bigger ones at 28, 29, and 30). Also, my projection doesn't necessarily need to be accurate 3 years out in order to produce accurate rankings today, because every ranking today carries the same risk of inaccuracy.

Let's say that I predict that Wells, Mathews, and Greene will all score exactly 250 fantasy points in each of the next 3 years. Based on exit value, I should then rank them Mathews > Wells > Greene. Now, you're right that things might change, and maybe Mathews breaks his ankle and his value suffers... so let's discount Mathews' projection to account for that risk. Now, I'd have to discount Greene and Wells by the same amount, because they carry the same risk. Since all 3 backs are receiving the same discount, I can effectively just ignore that risk entirely because it doesn't have any net impact on the rankings. All 3 backs are also a bust risk, but I'd say it's a pretty comparable bust risk, so again I can completely ignore that risk when comparing the players. When you eliminate all of the variables that affect all three players equally, you're left with your original projection (whatever it is), and age (a variable that DOES NOT affect all three backs equally). So, again, I think it'd be silly to project out to 3 years and *NOT* account for value beyond that, because all you have to do is include the most predictable variable in all of fantasy football- player age.

Even if Greene scores exactly the same as Wells and Mathews, he will be less valuable 3 years from now. That's a simple fact. In order for Greene to be more valuable than Wells and Mathews, then, he'll need to score enough more points than either to overcome his age disadvantage. It's certainly possible, but you can't just ignore his age as if it's not a negative against him.

So for me this is a tough one. I feel like Beanie has loads of talent but he was injured quite a bit in college and I just don't like the Arizona offense right now (or in the near future). Shonn Greene proved his worth in the playoffs. The guy could tear it up behind that line for a few years (SSOG- is that line really aging? Mangold and Ferguson are really young and they are going to put a rookie in place of the declining Faneca) but he, too, showed injury concerns. Matthews is an NFL unknown but if a broken LT could score 12 TD last season then I'll take my chances with the guy AJ Smith traded the farm for. So without a lot of confidence I'm going to roll the dice on the rookie on a super potent offense, then I'll take my chances on the guy who torched teams in the playoffs for 2.5 games, and I'll take a pass on the guy whose team took steps back on both offense and defense. I know everyone says draft talent over situation, but he's got 4 more years on that rookie contract and NFL RB's just don't last that long. It's a shame because he looks pretty awesome at times. Switch situations and I'd take him over the other two.

Off topic: just looking at those old stats, Eddie George must have been the only guy in history to get 315 carries in a season while averaging 3.0 ypc. That is just crazy.

Edit: accidentally put "dude" instead of "dud" and it looked really bad.

Any good rookie RB will get a second contract in the NFL, so what do you mean when you say that "NFL RBs just don't last [four years]"? And even if you don't think any of the RBs will last more than 4 years, 4 years is AGES in the NFL. Situations can change radically during that stretch. I mean, consider: In the 2005 season, the Pittsburgh Steelers were coached by Bill Cowher, a famous choker who was destined to retire without ever winning the big one. They were coming off a season where 61% of the plays they called were runs, and they were in the middle of a season where 57% of the plays they called were runs. Their offensive line was considered one of the best in the league and was anchored by All Pro Alan Faneca. Fast forward 4 years now. Pittsburgh now has 2 SB championships. Alan Faneca just signed with his 3rd team. Pittsburgh's line is considered mediocre, and in 2009 the team ran on just 42% of its offensive plays.It's not a Pittsburgh specific thing, either. Go look at any NFL team midway through the 2005 season, and compare them to where they were midway through 2009. For instance, midway through 2005 the Denver Broncos were led by Pro Bowl QB Jake Plummer on their way to a 13-3 season and an AFCCG appearance. They ran 53% of the time and were threatening to become the first team in 20 years to produce a pair of 1,000 yard rushers. Their head coach is an institution who will coach them for another decade, at least. 4 years later, they've drafted a QB in the first round, turned him into a pro bowler, and traded him away already. They run on 43% of their offensive snaps, and they can't even produce ONE 1,000 yard rusher, let alone two. Their head coach just signed a contract with the Washington Redskins. In 2005, the Kansas City Chiefs were the best rushing team in the entire NFL, and their backup RB rushed for 1750 yards despite only starting 7 games. Last year, they cut that backup halfway through the season because he couldn't average 3 yards per carry, and their offense was terrible.

I know that some people look at this uncertainty and say that that's all the more reason not to project beyond 2-3 years. Like I said, if you're using exit value, then the uncertainty isn't a big deal when looking towards the future because it affects all RBs equally. What it *IS* a good argument for, though, is rating players based on talent instead of situation. The Jets look like a ground-based ball-control juggernaut right now. 4 years ago, so did Pitt, Denver, and Kansas City. If you're drafting Greene high because you love his situation, but not necessarily his talent... then you're going to be left high and dry in a season or two when his situation is no longer recognizable.

I have to stay that is the worst projection I have ever heard. And no offense to Maurile - I read the "experts" opinions as much as anyone - but I also think for myself. Hightower had 63 receptions last year, proving to be one of the best receiving backs in the league. Give me one reason why they would not continue to use Hightower as a receiving back while spelling Wells? I feel sorry for people who base picks on horrible information like this. It is a perfect example of why you should make your own projections/ranking lists and pick from it without looking back.

Anyway, I think Wells is a better pure runner than Greene. And maybe he has a few more catches than Greene - but Greene is no slouch either and his situation should give him around 50 more touches than Wells.... all behind a superior offensive line.

19% of Hightower's receptions and a whopping 28% of his receiving yardage came in a single game (6% of his season) last year. He only averaged 5.35 yards per target on the season (comparisons: Sproles = 8.7 YPT, Slaton = 7.6 ypt, Fred Jackson = 6.2, K. Smith = 7.1, Rice = 6.8, Peterson = 7.6, and Wells = 8.9). The fact that Tim Hightower had 63 receptions last year didn't prove he was one of the best receiving backs in the league, it proved he was one of the most target (second in targets to Ray Rice). Hightower was a mediocre receiver with limited talent who happened to receive heavy usage. Those are exactly the kind of players who wind up falling off the face of the planet with "no warning".

...can someone explain to me how shonn greene is all of a sudden such a good nfl rb prospect...when he couldnt even beat out albert young at iowa.... thats a telling fact to me that he didnt even split carries with young while he was there...you guys must have loved matt forte and kevin smith too huh?...yes his situation is fantastic...but usually the cream rises to the top and greene just clearly isnt an elite player...sorry beanie and mathews the whole way here,not even close

 

[wiscstlatlmia]

and btw...beanie is the youngest by almost 16 months...hes only 21 and mathews is 23

 

[SSOG]

A reasonable assumption is that these drops in value are likely related to injuries and situational changes, such as new, more talented competition for carries... thus these age milestones are less important than years in the league. The longer you are in the league, the more you are subject to career damaging injuries or new guys stealing your job while you nurse a high ankle sprain.

I'm talking about drops in perceived value, which have nothing to do with injury or lack of performance. I mean, look at Frank Gore. He was a top 5 fantasy back last year (despite essentially missing 3 games), yet his value is far lower than it should be because he's 27 years old. Guys like Wells and Greene and Mendenhall are fetching as much in trade as Steven Jackson and DeAngelo Williams- proven uberstuds- because those guys are 27, too. Drops in perceived value as a player ages are so reliable you could set your watch to them.

Yes, in a vacuum age could be a determining factor. I never said it was absolutely irrelevant, I just said you overvalued it. I stand by that. When only given a 3-5 year window, age is of little importance for these young guys. In the hopeful prediction of 5 productive years, he'll only be 30. I wouldn't be surprised if the guys that fall off before 30 are the ones who got started earlier. Also, a lot of this talk about value is in reference to trade value. You can't assume you'll actually get this perceived fair market value. I think the value the OP was talking about was fantasy production value in the next 3-5 years. But I could very easily be wrong on that.

The OP asked who it's better to build your team around, not who will score the most points in the next 3 years. Exit Value therefore plays a part. For instance, if you ask me who will score more points in the next 3 years between Gore and Rice, I think there's a great chance that it'll actually be Gore. On the other hand, if you ask me who I'd rather build around, it's Rice and it's not even close. Why? Because 3 years from now, after Gore is done scoring all those points, he'll be a spent asset with little further value to my team, while Rice will still be going strong.It's true that I use trade value as part of my exit value calculations, but I'm using it as a proxy for future performance. I'm operating under the assumption that the players with high trade value are the players with high projected future production levels. Therefore, if an RB has very high trade value 3 years from now, the fantasy public is saying that they expect him to continue to produce. If he has low trade value, the fantasy public is saying that they don't expect him to continue to produce.

NFL running backs are doing good to get 5 productive years. Luckily, most of them don't waste them in the first year or two in the league. But Matthews (and his 250+ carries this year) could easily be done by the time his rookie (5 or 6 years?) contract is up. Beanie was a late first, so he's got 4 more years. Greene had a 4 year deal, so he'll be up for a new one the quickest. Although they usually get new deals/extensions if they produce. You make the situations seem totally random. They aren't fully predictable but they aren't as loose as you make them seem. I'd be willing to bet that Rex Ryan is around for at least several more years and I think that is the most solid situation of the 3. If Leinert sucks Arizona could be in a pinch. All sorts of things could be shuffled. Norv isn't a great HC. He could be kicked to the curb but that division is pretty awful so I think this is the middle spot. Norv could be around a few more years. As for the line, I think Greene's is the safest. Both LT and C are first round talent and very young.

That's an interesting theory- the theory that RBs are granted a certain number of "good seasons", and that sucking this year means an RB is more likely to not suck 5 years from now. I sincerely doubt there's any merit to it whatsoever, but I'd be curious to see if you could provide some data to support the position.

I forgot to add to my last post about how silly it is to just ignore situation. I think Corey Dillon is a good example. The guy was a good RB on Cincy. He actually looked like he might be done his last year there. Then he went to NE and absolutely tore it up. If he played there his whole career he'd be a HoF lock. One could say it is just an example of how situations change, but gambling on the better talent to end up in a better situation is risky. How did Edge do when he went to Arizona? It seems it would be best to stick with what you know now rather than sitting on a player you think is more talented and waiting for him to get a new contract while praying he doesn't get hurt in his current mediocre situation.

Tore it up? Dillon had one good year in New England- a season that was barely better than his previous best year (1740/13 vs. 1540/13). Edgerrin James averaged 1400 yards in his first two seasons in Arizona before he turned 30 and hit the wall. While they performed better in the good situations than the bad, their performance in the bad situation was very comparable to their performance in the bad. Looking at it, they both got maybe 1300-1400 yards on the strength of their talent, and then maybe got an extra 300 yards on the strength of their situation.I don't think anyone is saying that situation isn't important. If it wasn't, then people wouldn't consider it in redraft leagues. The reason why situation matters in redraft far more than in dynasty, though, is because situation changes fast. Even when you think it's not going to. Yeah, right now you think that the Jets is a fantastic situation and will remain that way for the forseeable future. Four years ago, no one would have ever believed that the Broncos would fire Mike Shanahan or that their run% would drop to 43%. In fact, Pittsburgh and Denver have long been hailed as the two greatest models of stability in the entire NFL. Bowlen and Rooney have both said that their primary philosophy is that there is little that benefits a team more than stability. If radical change can strike in Denver and Pittsburgh, it can strike anywhere.

 

[TitansFan10]

These well thought arguments are why I love this place.

I just think that Greene may be a bit more valuable than you see him SSOG. You are smarter than me.

So could you actually play devil's advocate and compare him to a few players who came in and did much better than expected?

In my mind, I see him as a faster/better version of Rudi Johnson. Am I the only one who saw him running for 10 yards a pop literally dragging guys behind him? It looked kind of like LT's prime when he was dragging those guys....

Edit to add - I mean players YOU thought and maybe argued would be less valuable then were surprised with. I ask this only because I think many are seeing Greene as a 300 carry 1200 yard RB with at least 10 TD's a year. A very solid guy for some years to come. A guy I love to have as my weekly starter to go behind MJD or AP etc.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

These well thought arguments are why I love this place.

I just think that Greene may be a bit more valuable than you see him SSOG. You are smarter than me.

So could you actually play devil's advocate and compare him to a few players who came in and did much better than expected?

In my mind, I see him as a faster/better version of Rudi Johnson. Am I the only one who saw him running for 10 yards a pop literally dragging guys behind him? It looked kind of like LT's prime when he was dragging those guys....

Edit to add - I mean players YOU thought and maybe argued would be less valuable then were surprised with. I ask this only because I think many are seeing Greene as a 300 carry 1200 yard RB with at least 10 TD's a year. A very solid guy for some years to come. A guy I love to have as my weekly starter to go behind MJD or AP etc.

LT isn't a power back never was. Bad comparison...I see a Michael Turner/Jamal Lewis(in their primes) with less speed.I just don't see him on the same talent level as Wells and Mathews(and I am a Greene owner).