Shane Vereen (1 Viewer)

[Bayhawks]

20 carries vs. 43 carries isn't "historical data"; it's a collection of anecdotes. Ridley hasn't been a goal-line monster, but neither has Vereen, and Vereen really isn't likely to become one. I personally like the guy, I think he's a better runner than Forsett, but he never struck me as having star quality. As for "the end of last year", Vereen didn't have any rushing TDs after week 12. Barring a Ridley injury the best case for Vereen this year is serious RBBC, probably as #2.

A collection of anecdotes? It may be a small sample size, but it's not a collection of anecdotes. If you still think 20 rushes for 2 yards isn't bad, maybe it is worth noting that since 2002, it is by far the lowest rushing total for any RB with 20 rushes or more. The next lowest was Steve Slaton with 10 yards on 20 carries in 2008.

It's not 20 rushes for 2 yards. It's 20 rushes for 8 TDs. Once you're in the end zone you can't get credited for any more yards, so the number of yards gained is really not relevant.

>Given that NE has a good o-line and is a high threat to throw at the goal line, and that BJGE was more effective, I don't see how you keep defending his performance. I don't think he's a bad runner - I drafted him in several redrafts last year and was quite happy with the results, but I don't think his goal line job is safe i</p>n 2013.

I'm defending the fact that he scored TDs at a higher rate than any other back you listed as comparables, so by your own stats, he's done well, and there's no reason to believe his goal-line job is in jeapordy. Also, I don't think Vereen is a great goal-line back. He was maybe better than Forsett, not as good as Best, definitely not anywhere near Lynch, and probably not as good as Adimchinobe Echemandu. He can probably do OK if he gets the ball at the goal line but I wouldn't see more than 8 TDs on 20 attempts coming from him.

Dude, we get it that you went to Cal but no one gives a s*** about these comparisons to Forsett and Best. This is the NFL. We don't need to stick to guys who went to Cal as frames of reference. And no, he didn't score TDs at a higher rate than the other backs I listed. The most important one I listed was BJGE, who outperformed him in every respect despite being in the same situation. As for the other RBs, I'm sure Foster would perform better at the goal line if he were in a less predictable situation than Houston. That's why it is better to compare Ridley's conversion rate with other RBs on the same team.

But while Vereen is on the same team, he was NEVER in the same situation. As you yourself pointed out, NE could just as easily pass as run when inside the 5, so teams couldn't just "stack the line." When a DC sees Ridley leave the game, and Vereen enter, don't you think they would be more likely to suspect a pass play & set their defense along those lines, thereby leaving Vereen with an easier situation to rush in (than Ridley might have faced)? That being said, I don't think Ridley owners need to worry about him being replaced as the GL back (unless he continues to fumble, especially at the stripe), but I do think his TD totals have a cap, for these reasons: 1-BB seems to like to "out-smart" other coaches, which could be why Vereen started to get some GL carries last year. IIRC, he would occasionaly used Woodhead similarly. 2-Brady will throw a quick slant/out for a TD just as easily as hand the ball off. 3-Brady seems to like the QB sneak, and the O-line seems to be pretty good at it. 4-Brady is (IMO) one of the best QBs at recognizing defenses and audibling (sp?) to a play that gives the offense the advantage. All these factors could prevent Ridley from scoring 15+ TDs, but I would be surprised if he gets less than 8.

I guess the confusion comes as I pointed out Ridley's short comings on the goal line last year in a Vereen thread. My statement wasn't so much about Vereen as his 5 carries are just not enough to get a good feel for his ability. I just feel like Ridley underperformed in goal line situations relative to his predecessor, so BB may outsource that job next year. That is all. I just thought the stats were worth pointing out and people have flipped out. I don't even care. I don't own any NE players. Just thought the stat was interesting and could be an omen for change (all I said was that I'd be wary of Ridley losing GL carries, FFS). However, I've wasted a handful of posts debating with people who are set in their thinking and refuse to consider another perspective. It's quite annoying - the lengths people will go to in order to see what they want to see and ignore stats.

I believe YOU posted in a previous thread that you love stats, but you have to know how to use them. In this case, you might be the one who is not using them right. Success at the goal line is looked at as scoring TDs, both FF-wise, and in the NFL. I don't think you'd find many NFL GMs/coaches who would prefer a RB with a high GL YPC over a RB with a high GL TD conversion rate. Ridley had the 3rd most goal line TDs among RBs in 2012, and (as has been noted) did so at a rate that was equivalent (in some cases, better) to the other top RBs in the NFL. You posted "Vereen got some goal line work late last season," but that is a mis-leading statement. It implies that Vereen got more GL work later in the year than he did earlier. The reality is Vereen got 5 goal line carries in 2012, and 3 took place in the last 1/2 of the season (last 8 games). When you consider that he didn't play in the 1st 3 games of the season, getting 2 GL carries in the 1st 1/2 of the season, and 3 in the last 1/2 actually indicates a decrease in the amount he was used at the GL, not an increase. You also compare Ridley's success rate of 40% to BJGE's success rate of 50%, and suggest that those numbers are significant because they both played in NE. But the fact of the matter is that they weren't the same team. The O-line in NE didn't seem to play as well in 2012 as they have in previous years. The OC was different; perhaps McDaniels isn't as good a play-caller as O'Brien was. With the changes that occur year-to-year in the NFL, it isn't necessarily prudent to look at 1 organization from year to year and assume that the situations are identical. The stats show that Vereen had a higher conversion rate, but it was on a statistically insignificant sample size. The stats also show that Ridley had a GL conversion rate that compares favorably with other top RBs. You choose to discount this stat (in part because Ridley's situation is different than those other RBs). The stats show that BJGE had a higher conversion rate when he was with the Patriots, and you emphasize this stat (despite that fact that BJGE's situation then was different than Ridley's situation last year). You appear to be set in your thinking that Vereen is a threat to Ridley at the GL; that is your opinion, & you're entitled to it. But you are "annoyed" by people who are "set in their opinion" and "ignore stats." That is precisely what you are doing. In fact, that is exactly what most FFers do. Look at players, situations, numbers, etc & make their projections/opinions/ideas accordingly. Some value certain stats over others. Why does everyone have to agree with you? If they did, these message boards would be a lot less interesting.

 

[FF Ninja]

*sigh* Ok, let me state one more time that I'm well aware that Vereen's sample size is too small to draw conclusions. I've never said it wasn't. I've also said that I'm not sure it would be Vereen who would take over. Just that Ridley hasn't been impressive at the goal line. And I do agree that the most important thing about being a goal line back is scoring - never argued that point. So... thus far you have acted like you've been countering me when you've said absolutely nothing contrary. Good work.

Your blather about BJGE being in a different situation while still citing conversion rate of RBs on completely different teams is just stupid. Sure, the play calling might be a bit different in NE and perhaps there is a different member of the o-line, but BJGE is as close a comparison as we're going to find. And BJGE had 3 years to compile those stats.

The Patriots averaged 4.2 ypc this year as compared to 4.0 ypc last year, so I'm not sure what you are talking about with the o-line not playing as well.

So back to his 2 yards on 20 carries - again, I agree that TDs are most important - but this stat stood out. Nobody with 20 carries has had such a poor ypc for as far back as I can check with data dominator. While it is not the most important metric for goal line work, it shows that he's going backwards quite a bit which IS a bad thing. You people just want to ignore that. It may not be the most important, but it still has relevance whether you want to admit it or not.

And FFS, read my initial post. I simply said that I'd be WARY of Ridley losing GL carries. I suspect that Vereen could be in line. Maybe it'll be Bolden. I don't know. And I never claimed to think it was written in stone, so no, I'm not set in my thinking that Vereen is a threat to Ridley. I'm just WARY that Ridley might lose carries to someone given that he's the worst goal line back they've had in a few years (and their previous GL back was not a very impressive talent) and he's got a high tendency to lose yards.

 

[Bayhawks]

*sigh* Ok, let me state one more time that I'm well aware that Vereen's sample size is too small to draw conclusions. I've never said it wasn't. I've also said that I'm not sure it would be Vereen who would take over. Just that Ridley hasn't been impressive at the goal line. And I do agree that the most important thing about being a goal line back is scoring - never argued that point. So... thus far you have acted like you've been countering me when you've said absolutely nothing contrary. Good work.

Your blather about BJGE being in a different situation while still citing conversion rate of RBs on completely different teams is just stupid. Sure, the play calling might be a bit different in NE and perhaps there is a different member of the o-line, but BJGE is as close a comparison as we're going to find. And BJGE had 3 years to compile those stats.

The Patriots averaged 4.2 ypc this year as compared to 4.0 ypc last year, so I'm not sure what you are talking about with the o-line not playing as well.

So back to his 2 yards on 20 carries - again, I agree that TDs are most important - but this stat stood out. Nobody with 20 carries has had such a poor ypc for as far back as I can check with data dominator. While it is not the most important metric for goal line work, it shows that he's going backwards quite a bit which IS a bad thing. You people just want to ignore that. It may not be the most important, but it still has relevance whether you want to admit it or not.

And FFS, read my initial post. I simply said that I'd be WARY of Ridley losing GL carries. I suspect that Vereen could be in line. Maybe it'll be Bolden. I don't know. And I never claimed to think it was written in stone, so no, I'm not set in my thinking that Vereen is a threat to Ridley. I'm just WARY that Ridley might lose carries to someone given that he's the worst goal line back they've had in a few years (and their previous GL back was not a very impressive talent) and he's got a high tendency to lose yards.

YOUR quote in your OP, "Vereen got some goal line work late last year and did pretty well. Ridley was awful at the goal line." gives the impression that Vereen's GL work "late" last year came at the expense of Ridley's GL work. I don't know if you intended to give that impression or not, but the way you worded your post did just that.

The fact is that Vereen got 2 GL carries in the 1st 8 games, but he only played on 5 of those games, so he got 2 GL carries in 5 games. Ridley got 7 GL carries in the first 8 games. Vereen then got 3 GL carries in the last 8 games, while Ridley got 13. So, in reality, Ridley got more GL work late in the season, while Vereen effectively got less, which is the exact opposite of what your post implied. That is the only point of yours that I attempted to "counter," as the other points you made were your conclusions.

You argued that the people who don't agree with your conclusion that people should be wary about Ridley and his GL ability "are set in their thinking," but you admit that TD conversion is the most important part of GL carries, but just discount the fact that Ridley was one of the best in the league at scoring TDs at the goal-line. You're suggesting that a RB who is one of the best at what is most important at the GL (scoring TDs, as you've admitted) would lose GL carries. That doesn't logically make sense. As I previously stated, however, I would be concerned with Ridley's ball security. If he continues to fumble, especially at the GL, I would expect his GL opps to decline.

 

[FF Ninja]

This is one of the dumbest arguments I've ever been in. Even more so because I neither have a player involved nor do I care about how this situation actually unfolds.

I've clearly explained my point over and over, so you are either being intentionally dense or you just aren't very smart. Either way, I've got no use in continuing this discussion with you.

 

[Benchwarmers]

I have Ridley already and just picked up Vereen for a 6th round 2014.

 

[ghostguy123]

I have Ridley already and just picked up Vereen for a 6th round 2014.

Who is the dummy that gave you Vereen for a 6th?? Unless is was a roster cutdown move, that is real bad. In any case it is bad

 

[Bayhawks]

This is one of the dumbest arguments I've ever been in. Even more so because I neither have a player involved nor do I care about how this situation actually unfolds.

I've clearly explained my point over and over, so you are either being intentionally dense or you just aren't very smart. Either way, I've got no use in continuing this discussion with you.

I don't understand why you do this. You feel obligated to resort to insults and name calling (I've seen it in several threads). This is a FF message board. The entire point of this board is for people to discuss fantasy football, not for everyone to say "FF Ninja, you're so smart." There are going to be differences of opinions, that's the point.

As for clearly explaining your point "over and over," no, you haven't. You've stated your conclusion, but when inconsistencies have been demonstrated in your rationale, you've resorted to insults, like above.

Here are the inconsistencies that I've pointed out, and you've failed to address:

1-Your OP implied that Vereen got more GL carry work late in the season, when in fact he got less (on a per-game basis). If your conclusion that Ridley's GL role would be threatened by Vereen was based on this (at least, in part), then how can your conclusion be valid?

2-Your OP said that Ridley wasn't impressive at the GL, but the stats show that he was one of the most successful RBs at scoring goal-line TDs. You, yourself admitted that scoring TDs is the most important part of GL running. So, if Ridley is one of the most effective @ scoring GL TDs, why would his role be threatened?

If you would care to address those flaws in your rationale, I'd like to continue this discussion. If you choose (AGAIN) to ignore them & only want to call names & make insults, well, that's usually the last resort of losing debaters.

 

[bigstacks33]

I picked Vereen up last year because I knew there was another owner in my dyansty that loved him but he didnt want to sit on Vereen while he was injured/not producing. I ended up in the championship game last year and started Vereen because he had been getting more and more touches towards the end of the season. Vereen laid an egg week 16. I lost the Championship by less than 2 points, and if I had started Bilal Powell would have been champion. So, with that sour taste in my mouth I had every intention to shop Vereen in the off season. Not because of the goose egg per say, but more because there has always been, and always will be, uncertainty in the New England Patriots backfield. Ridley isnt going anywhere. He has proven himself as a 1000 yard back. He doesnt fumble often and has earned the trust of BB. I do everything I can to avoid anyone in the Patriots offense because, in the end, its never the most talented player that produces, its who Bill decides has done all the right things in practice and in games.

So before I had the opportunity to shop Vereen, I was offered a trade by the same owner from whom I knew was enamoured with Vereen. He offered 2013 pick 1.11 and Ryan Williams for Vereen. I think this is exceptional value in a relatively deep rookie draft. I am not in love with Ryan Williams. But what I do love is his situation. Beanie Wells is gone. LRSH is gone. Rashard Mendenhall was signed but with both he and Williams battling back from knee injuries, Ryan Williams is the far superior talent. What I like even more is the certainty I will have in the Cardinals backfield. I will know, going into each week, whether Ryan Williams will get the bulk of the carries. Arians doesnt play games. You are either the bell cow or not. If I know, going into the week, that Williams isnt starting, thats ok, I can plan accordingly. But no one here can tell me that they are certain on any given week that Vereen is going to get any carries, let alone enough to warrant a start.

 

[Quibbler]

This is one of the dumbest arguments I've ever been in. Even more so because I neither have a player involved nor do I care about how this situation actually unfolds.

I've clearly explained my point over and over, so you are either being intentionally dense or you just aren't very smart. Either way, I've got no use in continuing this discussion with you.

I don't understand why you do this. You feel obligated to resort to insults and name calling (I've seen it in several threads). This is a FF message board. The entire point of this board is for people to discuss fantasy football, not for everyone to say "FF Ninja, you're so smart." There are going to be differences of opinions, that's the point.

As for clearly explaining your point "over and over," no, you haven't. You've stated your conclusion, but when inconsistencies have been demonstrated in your rationale, you've resorted to insults, like above.

Here are the inconsistencies that I've pointed out, and you've failed to address:

1-Your OP implied that Vereen got more GL carry work late in the season, when in fact he got less (on a per-game basis). If your conclusion that Ridley's GL role would be threatened by Vereen was based on this (at least, in part), then how can your conclusion be valid?

2-Your OP said that Ridley wasn't impressive at the GL, but the stats show that he was one of the most successful RBs at scoring goal-line TDs. You, yourself admitted that scoring TDs is the most important part of GL running. So, if Ridley is one of the most effective @ scoring GL TDs, why would his role be threatened?

If you would care to address those flaws in your rationale, I'd like to continue this discussion. If you choose (AGAIN) to ignore them & only want to call names & make insults, well, that's usually the last resort of losing debaters.

His argument on point 2 is that you shouldn't compare Patriots RBs vs. RBs on other teams, because the Pats are such a threat to pass at the goalline. I.e. Foster vs. Ridley isn't a very helpful comp, since Foster is always going to be the #1 priority for the D, whereas defenses are more likely to worry about Gronk and/or whoever's lined up wide than they are about Ridley. In the Pat's offense, an average RB is going to look very good at the goalline compared to the rest of the league.

That's why FF Ninja wants to compare Ridley vs. BJGE when he was a Pat. It's a more illustrative comparison, he thinks, since both were in the same situation. I think there's something to that, although I'm not as convinced that the comparison supports the conclusions FF Ninja is drawing from it.

A couple points on this issue:

1) Yes, the Pats are always a threat to pass on the goalline, but they also run a lot in the red zone (118 rushes vs. 88 passes, last year I believe). Defenses doubtless know this, so I'm not so sure it really is true that Pats RBs have a unique situation. In other words, I think it is still helpful to compare Ridley vs. RBs on other teams.

2) The fact that Ridley has been worse than BJGE when he was a Pat at the goalline could mean either a) that Ridley isn't very good as a goalline back, or b) that BJGE is good in those situations. We know the Lawfirm isn't a particularly impressive talent overall, but perhaps he's actually pretty good at the goalline.

There are a couple reasons to think that (b) might be the case, IMO. First, a lot of BJGE's struggles as an RB have to do with the fact that he's slow as molasses and can't break away from anyone in the open field. When he was with the Pats, he almost never broke a long run, but he was great at picking up a couple yards. The guy had a knack for finding a little crease in the line, putting his head down, and always falling forward (which doesn't sound all that great, but was like night and day compared to Maroney). Second, the Pats kept him around for years before they started using him--as the Audibles guys say, that tells you that the team sees something good in him. In his case, it was probably largely his ridiculous ball-security, but it might also have been because he had done very well at the goalline as a rookie, when he had to replace Maroney. Third, how did Maroney do in these situations? I don't have the data on hand, but I suspect he did significantly worse than both BJGE and Ridley. That suggests to me, that BJGE shouldn't be viewed as simply an "average" Pats RB.

 

[FF Ninja]

This is one of the dumbest arguments I've ever been in. Even more so because I neither have a player involved nor do I care about how this situation actually unfolds.

I've clearly explained my point over and over, so you are either being intentionally dense or you just aren't very smart. Either way, I've got no use in continuing this discussion with you.

I don't understand why you do this. You feel obligated to resort to insults and name calling (I've seen it in several threads). This is a FF message board. The entire point of this board is for people to discuss fantasy football, not for everyone to say "FF Ninja, you're so smart." There are going to be differences of opinions, that's the point.

As for clearly explaining your point "over and over," no, you haven't. You've stated your conclusion, but when inconsistencies have been demonstrated in your rationale, you've resorted to insults, like above.

Here are the inconsistencies that I've pointed out, and you've failed to address:

1-Your OP implied that Vereen got more GL carry work late in the season, when in fact he got less (on a per-game basis). If your conclusion that Ridley's GL role would be threatened by Vereen was based on this (at least, in part), then how can your conclusion be valid?

2-Your OP said that Ridley wasn't impressive at the GL, but the stats show that he was one of the most successful RBs at scoring goal-line TDs. You, yourself admitted that scoring TDs is the most important part of GL running. So, if Ridley is one of the most effective @ scoring GL TDs, why would his role be threatened?

If you would care to address those flaws in your rationale, I'd like to continue this discussion. If you choose (AGAIN) to ignore them & only want to call names & make insults, well, that's usually the last resort of losing debaters.

Why would I want to continue this? If for no other reason, I really don't care about the conclusion. It all started because I just wanted to share some stats I stumbled upon as food for thought. Then you and others attempt to refute it as ridiculous with very weak arguments while ignoring pertinent data. That's stupid and that's why I'm not interested in discussing things with you. I'm always surprised at the lengths people will go through to bury their heads in the sand.

I have ignored your point about Vereen's carries early and late because that isn't an important fact. The only thing with statistical significance is Ridley's carries. Vereen doesn't have many so I don't know if he's good or not. Also, as far as I'm concerned, Ridley is the starter and the goal line back so losing carries to Vereen or Bolden at the goal line is a bad thing no matter when it occurs. This is much more of a Ridley discussion than Vereen - in hindsight it should have been posted in a Ridley-centric thread rather than a Vereen thread.

You keep yammering about how I agree TD conversion rate at the goal line is the most important aspect, but that doesn't mean that gaining positive yards ISN'T important. I don't know how many times I can smack you over the head with that. Going backwards is bad, mkay?

And I've stated my point over and over because you keep asking the same question despite the fact I've already answered it over and over. Why would Ridley's carries be threatened? For the last F-ing time: he is scoring at a lesser rate than his very average predecessor AND he's going backwards at rate we have not witnessed in as long as data dominator will go back. You act like I haven't explained this several times which is why I said you are either being intentionally dense (i.e. trolling me) or you aren't very smart. This isn't a resort to insults. It is simply a truth.

Maybe his numbers last year were a fluke and his stats normalize next year. I don't know. I thought it was worth throwing out there. I wasn't trying to draw any hard conclusions from that but you and others want to act like it is totally meaningless. Why would I want to attempt intelligent discussions with people who blow off stats that don't reflect well on their players?

 

[Bayhawks]

This is one of the dumbest arguments I've ever been in. Even more so because I neither have a player involved nor do I care about how this situation actually unfolds.

I've clearly explained my point over and over, so you are either being intentionally dense or you just aren't very smart. Either way, I've got no use in continuing this discussion with you.

I don't understand why you do this. You feel obligated to resort to insults and name calling (I've seen it in several threads). This is a FF message board. The entire point of this board is for people to discuss fantasy football, not for everyone to say "FF Ninja, you're so smart." There are going to be differences of opinions, that's the point.

As for clearly explaining your point "over and over," no, you haven't. You've stated your conclusion, but when inconsistencies have been demonstrated in your rationale, you've resorted to insults, like above.

Here are the inconsistencies that I've pointed out, and you've failed to address:

1-Your OP implied that Vereen got more GL carry work late in the season, when in fact he got less (on a per-game basis). If your conclusion that Ridley's GL role would be threatened by Vereen was based on this (at least, in part), then how can your conclusion be valid?

2-Your OP said that Ridley wasn't impressive at the GL, but the stats show that he was one of the most successful RBs at scoring goal-line TDs. You, yourself admitted that scoring TDs is the most important part of GL running. So, if Ridley is one of the most effective @ scoring GL TDs, why would his role be threatened?

If you would care to address those flaws in your rationale, I'd like to continue this discussion. If you choose (AGAIN) to ignore them & only want to call names & make insults, well, that's usually the last resort of losing debaters.

Why would I want to continue this? If for no other reason, I really don't care about the conclusion. It all started because I just wanted to share some stats I stumbled upon as food for thought. Then you and others attempt to refute it as ridiculous with very weak arguments while ignoring pertinent data. That's stupid and that's why I'm not interested in discussing things with you. I'm always surprised at the lengths people will go through to bury their heads in the sand.

I have ignored your point about Vereen's carries early and late because that isn't an important fact. The only thing with statistical significance is Ridley's carries. Vereen doesn't have many so I don't know if he's good or not. Also, as far as I'm concerned, Ridley is the starter and the goal line back so losing carries to Vereen or Bolden at the goal line is a bad thing no matter when it occurs. This is much more of a Ridley discussion than Vereen - in hindsight it should have been posted in a Ridley-centric thread rather than a Vereen thread.

You keep yammering about how I agree TD conversion rate at the goal line is the most important aspect, but that doesn't mean that gaining positive yards ISN'T important. I don't know how many times I can smack you over the head with that. Going backwards is bad, mkay?

And I've stated my point over and over because you keep asking the same question despite the fact I've already answered it over and over. Why would Ridley's carries be threatened? For the last F-ing time: he is scoring at a lesser rate than his very average predecessor AND he's going backwards at rate we have not witnessed in as long as data dominator will go back. You act like I haven't explained this several times which is why I said you are either being intentionally dense (i.e. trolling me) or you aren't very smart. This isn't a resort to insults. It is simply a truth.

Maybe his numbers last year were a fluke and his stats normalize next year. I don't know. I thought it was worth throwing out there. I wasn't trying to draw any hard conclusions from that but you and others want to act like it is totally meaningless. Why would I want to attempt intelligent discussions with people who blow off stats that don't reflect well on their players?

If you don't want to continue the discussion, then just don't participate anymore. There's no need to insult people who don't agree with you, or share your interpretation of the data.

You feel that Ridley's GL YPC is more important than his TD conversion rate, I disagree.

You feel that comparing Ridley to BJGE (from previous years) is more relevant than comparing him to other RBs in the NFL, I disagree (to an extent).

You feel that Vereen was "eating into" Ridley's GL work. I disagree, since he was getting fewer GL carries towards the end of the year.

Those are our basic differences during this discussion. Your interpretation of the data & stats doesn't make you stupid, nor does mine. It just means we are viewing the situation differently. I'll say, AGAIN, that's the point of this board; to get different perspectives on players, situation, etc. Not to have everyone agree with each other. You suggest I'm blowing off stats that don't reflect well on players I own ( don't own either player, BTW), but one could argue that you are blowing off stats that don't suit your position (Ridley's TD conversion rate, Vereen's DECLINING GL usage as the season progressed, etc). What we are both doing is choosing which stats we believe are most relevant. Maybe I'm wrong about which stats I feel are important. Maybe you're wrong. Maybe we're both wrong. That doesn't mean you have to resort to juvenile tactics like name-calling.

 

[Sake-Bombers]

Will at least one of you please just take the high road, agree to disagree and move along?

 

[FF Ninja]

I agree TD conversion rate at the goal line is the most important aspect, but that doesn't mean that gaining positive yards ISN'T important.

You feel that Ridley's GL YPC is more important than his TD conversion rate, I disagree.

SMH

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

ESPN Boston says Shane Vereen is "worth closely monitoring" as the Patriots scramble to replace Aaron Hernandez.
The Patriots are extremely creative with their players, using versatility to create mismatches. The explosive Vereen has that versatility, while the likes of Jake Ballard, Daniel Fells and Michael Hoomanawanui don't. Former Patriots scouting intern Field Yates expects Vereen to move all over the formation, splitting out wide against linebackers as a pre-snap motion player. He'll also fill Danny Woodhead's old pass-catching that produced 40 receptions on 55 targets a year ago. Vereen will be an asset for both the Patriots and fantasy owners this season.


Source: ESPN.com

 

[Faust]

Two more from Rotoworld:

ESPN Boston considers Shane Vereen the clear-cut favorite to inherit ex-Patriots RB Danny Woodhead's third-down/passing-game role.

It's an easy connection to make after Vereen filled in for a banged up Woodhead in the Divisional Round and ripped off 124 yards and three touchdowns on just 12 touches. "I'd say that I'm approaching this season a little bit differently than I did last season," Vereen said. "Just with a mindset of my role on the team." The 2011 second-rounder has developed slowly, but will be an outside threat for RB2 value if he can run with Woodhead's old job in camp.

May 14 - 3:22 PM

Source: ESPN Boston

ESPN Boston's Field Yates expects Shane Vereen's playing time to "spike" in 2013.

The writing is on the wall for a potential breakout year. Danny Woodhead's free-agent departure opens up all passing-down work behind Stevan Ridley, and Vereen earned a significant bump in snaps after averaging 6.4 yards per touch and scoring seven touchdowns last season, including the playoffs. Woodhead quietly finished as top-25 fantasy back in 2012. Vereen will be on the RB2 radar.

Mar 16 - 6:51 PM

Source: ESPN Boston

 

[towney]

And now this... Sleeper???

ESPN Boston says Shane Vereen is "worth closely monitoring" as the Patriots scramble to replace Aaron Hernandez.
The Patriots are extremely creative with their players, using versatility to create mismatches. The explosive Vereen has that versatility, while the likes of Jake Ballard, Daniel Fells and Michael Hoomanawanui don't. Former Patriots scouting intern Field Yates expects Vereen to move all over the formation, splitting out wide against linebackers as a pre-snap motion player. He'll also fill Danny Woodhead's old pass-catching that produced 40 receptions on 55 targets a year ago. Vereen will be an asset for both the Patriots and fantasy owners this season.
Source: ESPN.com

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

During Patriots spring practices, "there were times" Shane Vereen lined up as an outside receiver and got matched up with a linebacker.
Patriots Football Weekly's Paul Perillo compares the formation to the one out of which Vereen caught a 33-yard TD pass against Houston in the Divisional Round of the playoffs, beating coverage with a double move. Calling him a "versatile running back with wide receiver skills," Perillo believes Vereen will essentially be New England's No. 2 receiver behind Danny Amendola this year.

Source: patriots.com

 

[Beerguzzler]

If there were ever a time to sell high on this guy, it's now. I would try to package him + some other 5/6th round talent and try to get a stud. There may be someone willing to bite on the hype that he's getting right now.

 

[RushHour]

I love this guy in 2013 but the way this is going, there's no way you will be able to get him at a value in any August drafts.

 

[cdubz]

I love this guy in 2013 but the way this is going, there's no way you will be able to get him at a value in any August drafts.

Was doing a FFPC mock a couple weeks ago, and he was already coming off the board at 6.11. I would have taken him at 6.12 if he hadn't gone there. Though I don't think I would take him much higher. Solid low-end RB2/ high-end RB3 in a 12-team league, but upside is most likely capped in that situation.

 

[GeeYouknit]

I got 1.06 and he is actually available for our rookie/FA draft so I'm semi-amazed that I'm considering him here

 

[kutta]

I got 1.06 and he is actually available for our rookie/FA draft so I'm semi-amazed that I'm considering him here

We had the first two rounds of our rookie/FA draft before the fiasco with Hernandez, and Vareen was available but not drafted. We have the next two rounds in about a month, and I have the first pick and will most likely be taking him.

 

[Sabertooth]

He was cut in one of my leagues for Austin Collie. I dumped Zach Ertz for him immediately.

 

[cdubz]

He was cut in one of my leagues for Austin Collie. I dumped Zach Ertz for him immediately.

When was this? What kind of leagues are you playing in?

 

[Sabertooth]

He was cut in one of my leagues for Austin Collie. I dumped Zach Ertz for him immediately.

When was this? What kind of leagues are you playing in?

Admittedly it is a 10 team league with about 4 ham an eggers. We do have smallish rosters at 24 players though and it is start 2QB. This owner is actually pretty good though and I was a bit shocked that he pulled this move. Maybe he was drunk.

 

[Air Stich]

I love this guy in 2013 but the way this is going, there's no way you will be able to get him at a value in any August drafts.

Was doing a FFPC mock a couple weeks ago, and he was already coming off the board at 6.11. I would have taken him at 6.12 if he hadn't gone there. Though I don't think I would take him much higher. Solid low-end RB2/ high-end RB3 in a 12-team league, but upside is most likely capped in that situation.

His non-PPR adp at FFC.com is 6.07 and rising. I like the guy, but I'm not burning a 6th round pick on him in a non-PPR.

 

[cdubz]

I love this guy in 2013 but the way this is going, there's no way you will be able to get him at a value in any August drafts.

Was doing a FFPC mock a couple weeks ago, and he was already coming off the board at 6.11. I would have taken him at 6.12 if he hadn't gone there. Though I don't think I would take him much higher. Solid low-end RB2/ high-end RB3 in a 12-team league, but upside is most likely capped in that situation.

His non-PPR adp at FFC.com is 6.07 and rising. I like the guy, but I'm not burning a 6th round pick on him in a non-PPR.

Wow, did not realize that - I don't know if I would burn an 8th on him in non-ppr.

 

[Air Stich]

I love this guy in 2013 but the way this is going, there's no way you will be able to get him at a value in any August drafts.

Was doing a FFPC mock a couple weeks ago, and he was already coming off the board at 6.11. I would have taken him at 6.12 if he hadn't gone there. Though I don't think I would take him much higher. Solid low-end RB2/ high-end RB3 in a 12-team league, but upside is most likely capped in that situation.

His non-PPR adp at FFC.com is 6.07 and rising. I like the guy, but I'm not burning a 6th round pick on him in a non-PPR.

Wow, did not realize that - I don't know if I would burn an 8th on him in non-ppr.

I won't be surprised if he still outperforms his elevated adp, but now you're passing on guys like Vernon Davis, Russell Wilson, RG3, or Antonio Brown to get him. He's not a lottery ticket anymore. He's gonna need some TDs to justify his draft position.

 

[humpback]

I got 1.06 and he is actually available for our rookie/FA draft so I'm semi-amazed that I'm considering him here

We had the first two rounds of our rookie/FA draft before the fiasco with Hernandez, and Vareen was available but not drafted. We have the next two rounds in about a month, and I have the first pick and will most likely be taking him.

It depends on the league settings I guess, but this seems silly to me.

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

SI's Greg Bedard stated in an interview with 98.5 The Sports Hub that the Patriots internally contemplated increasing Shane Vereen's usage last year, and suggested Vereen may help replace Aaron Hernandez in 2013.
"I think he can be a very effective player," former Patriots beat writer Bedard said of Vereen. "He's the guy who ... when Gronk went out (last year) and they were really looking at some options, I kept hearing from people inside the organization to keep an eye on Vereen. They think he can fill some of the role that Hernandez did. So I don't see why that can't happen this year. How they're gonna do it, I'm not sure." Vereen is a recommended flex/RB2 pick in fantasy drafts.


Source: 98.5 The Sports Hub

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

The Boston Herald suggests the Patriots' "offensive overhaul" could set up Shane Vereen for a "breakout season" in 2013.
Per beat reporter Jeff Howe, Vereen's "speed, elusiveness in space, and receiving ability" could translate to more touches. Just as importantly, Vereen's role is growing as he inherits passing-back duties from Danny Woodhead. We'll monitor the way in which Vereen is utilized closely this preseason.

Source: Boston Herald

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

Shane Vereen has taken training camp reps both at slot receiver and outside receiver, in addition to operating as the Patriots' passing-back replacement for Danny Woodhead.
The Boston Herald considers Vereen the Patriots' one player behind Danny Amendola with the "best potential" to be a "breakout performer." Vereen "appears to be one of (Tom) Brady's safety valves" in practice, and has frequently been sent in motion, which the Herald notes Aaron Hernandez used to do. "Vereen could very well be one of the guys (playcaller Josh McDaniels) employs to help make up for losing Hernandez," writes beat reporter Karen Guregian. Vereen's baseline role is Woodhead's old duties, which offered flex value in fantasy leagues. Vereen's ceiling is to be utilized a la Darren Sproles, as a mismatch creator in the passing game and explosive change-of-pace ball carrier.


Source: Boston Herald

 

[Faust]

Tom Brady, Patriots' offense clicking despite turnover

Excerpt:

As a potential "joker," Vereen has lined up in the backfield, out wide and in the slot. Local writers as well as TheMMQB.com's Peter King and ESPN's Chris Mortensen have reported that Vereen will be a major cog in this year's offense. It will be interesting to see if coordinator Josh McDaniels uses Vereen like a knight on a chess board to create mismatches and dictate defensive coverages, as the Patriots did previously with Aaron Hernandez.

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

According to SI's Peter King, Shane Vereen "is going to get a lot of touches from the look of things" at Patriots camp.
King recently attended Pat camp, and echoes what Boston beat writers have been pushing about Vereen. His role is expanding, and he's a mismatch creator on a team whose offensive philosophy is to create mismatches. Vereen has been lining up at slot receiver, tailback, and outside receiver since May OTAs.


Source: SI.com

 

[Otis]

This is starting to sound really promising.

 

[Nucker101]

This is starting to sound really promising.

So it's probably going to end badly. #FelixJones :(

 

[Tackling Dummies]

This is starting to sound really promising.

So it's probably going to end badly. #FelixJones :(

Nope, blue skies and a nice wind behind.

 

[cstu]

I'm really coming around on Vereen although I still have some concerns from a fantasy perspective. I'm expecting mid-high RB2 numbers in PPR but I'm not sure I would trust him as my RB2. I have a feeling he's going to have some huge games but knowing BB he could be heavily involved one week and not the next (i.e. last year's playoffs). IMO he's a guy you have to start every week otherwise you risk missing out on his big games.

 

[MAC_32]

I'm really coming around on Vereen although I still have some concerns from a fantasy perspective. I'm expecting mid-high RB2 numbers in PPR but I'm not sure I would trust him as my RB2. I have a feeling he's going to have some huge games but knowing BB he could be heavily involved one week and not the next (i.e. last year's playoffs). IMO he's a guy you have to start every week otherwise you risk missing out on his big games.

I agree with your take on Vereen, but not how I'd use him in fantasy. He's high risk/reward bye week/injury filler. I know when I put him in there I could get 150/2 or 20/0 and not have any idea before the game.

 

[Air Stich]

So how high does he go in full point PPR leagues? Is he a top 40 pick yet?

 

[MAC_32]

So how high does he go in full point PPR leagues? Is he a top 40 pick yet?

Crazy talk.

I like him after I have 2 RB, 2 WR, and at least QB, probably TE too.

 

[Boston]

Here's the ultimate question I have with Vereen...will real football success translate to fantasy football success and if so how much...right now it would be a real shocker if Vereen is not a big part of the Patriots offense...that being said there is another RB on the roster who is legit in Ridley and he will probably be their primary ball-carrier...so does that mean Vereen becomes Kevin Faulk part two or does he become a RB who plays a role that the Pats really haven't had before...in the past the Pats have not been a stranger to carving out a role for a skill player that was pretty different than what they had done in the past...right now I am very high on Vereen but I would be lying if I made a stat prediction and said I was comfortable with it...at some point pre-draft that will have to be done but right bow I'd like to see him play in a few pre-season games and be even more comfortable that he can be an impact player regardless of how many touches he gets...

 

[FF Ninja]

I'm really coming around on Vereen although I still have some concerns from a fantasy perspective. I'm expecting mid-high RB2 numbers in PPR but I'm not sure I would trust him as my RB2. I have a feeling he's going to have some huge games but knowing BB he could be heavily involved one week and not the next (i.e. last year's playoffs). IMO he's a guy you have to start every week otherwise you risk missing out on his big games.

It is possible but there's no way I expect that. Is he going to be the next Sproles? This is a crowded backfield. He'll have to make a living off of receptions. I think he needs at least 60 receptions to crack mid-RB2 territory considering he won't be getting goal line carries. Blount and Bolden will get some carries, too.

 

[oNe MaN wOlF pAcK]

Vereen is Darren Sproles. That's what you expect this year period. Non PPR leagues will dissapoint. Flex play in PPR leagues unless its a small league. Woodhead's role plus spelling Ridley. Darren Sproles role in NO. Blount threatens Ridley more than Vereen. like Ingram vs Pierre in NO.

 

[Air Stich]

Vereen is Darren Sproles. That's what you expect this year period. Non PPR leagues will dissapoint. Flex play in PPR leagues unless its a small league. Woodhead's role plus spelling Ridley. Darren Sproles role in NO. Blount threatens Ridley more than Vereen. like Ingram vs Pierre in NO.

FYI- Sproles has been an RB1 in ppr leagues for the last two years. If Vareen = Sproles from last year, he's the steal of the draft.

 

[KCitons]

As an owner of Vereen, I'm starting to think sell high. Especially if he has a good 1st preseason game.

 

[Sabertooth]

I agree. I have him and may need to count on him. I'd be much more comfortable with a guy like BJGE or a different low level starter.

 

[cstu]

I'm really coming around on Vereen although I still have some concerns from a fantasy perspective. I'm expecting mid-high RB2 numbers in PPR but I'm not sure I would trust him as my RB2. I have a feeling he's going to have some huge games but knowing BB he could be heavily involved one week and not the next (i.e. last year's playoffs). IMO he's a guy you have to start every week otherwise you risk missing out on his big games.

It is possible but there's no way I expect that. Is he going to be the next Sproles? This is a crowded backfield. He'll have to make a living off of receptions. I think he needs at least 60 receptions to crack mid-RB2 territory considering he won't be getting goal line carries. Blount and Bolden will get some carries, too.

I don't expect him to get used as much as Sproles but they should try to get the ball to him a lot considering the inexperience of their receivers. What I'm picturing is a better Joique Bell, who had 900 total yards, 52 catches and 3 TD's last year.

 

[Boston]

I'm really coming around on Vereen although I still have some concerns from a fantasy perspective. I'm expecting mid-high RB2 numbers in PPR but I'm not sure I would trust him as my RB2. I have a feeling he's going to have some huge games but knowing BB he could be heavily involved one week and not the next (i.e. last year's playoffs). IMO he's a guy you have to start every week otherwise you risk missing out on his big games.

It is possible but there's no way I expect that. Is he going to be the next Sproles? This is a crowded backfield. He'll have to make a living off of receptions. I think he needs at least 60 receptions to crack mid-RB2 territory considering he won't be getting goal line carries. Blount and Bolden will get some carries, too.

While it is a crowded backfield Vereen is the only RB that does what he does...the other guys are more grinders...as I stated before the question becomes whether he turns into a Faulk type of RB or if the Pats carve out something different with him where he is more involved...with the loss of Hernandez, Gronk potentially missing a few games and a raw WR corps Vereen could be used in a manner that BB has not used a RB before...

 

[humpback]

I'm really coming around on Vereen although I still have some concerns from a fantasy perspective. I'm expecting mid-high RB2 numbers in PPR but I'm not sure I would trust him as my RB2. I have a feeling he's going to have some huge games but knowing BB he could be heavily involved one week and not the next (i.e. last year's playoffs). IMO he's a guy you have to start every week otherwise you risk missing out on his big games.

It is possible but there's no way I expect that. Is he going to be the next Sproles? This is a crowded backfield. He'll have to make a living off of receptions. I think he needs at least 60 receptions to crack mid-RB2 territory considering he won't be getting goal line carries. Blount and Bolden will get some carries, too.

Including the post season, Vereen had 4 rushing TDs last season- 3 from 1 yd and 1 from 4 yds. He obviously isn't going to be the goal line RB, but he'll get some goal line carries with the way NE does things.

Vereen is Darren Sproles. That's what you expect this year period. Non PPR leagues will dissapoint. Flex play in PPR leagues unless its a small league. Woodhead's role plus spelling Ridley. Darren Sproles role in NO. Blount threatens Ridley more than Vereen. like Ingram vs Pierre in NO.

Sproles is way more than a flex play in PPR leagues- most people would be ecstatic if he puts up those numbers.