Shane Vereen (1 Viewer)

[Chaka]

I know you guys don't care about history but I do and it's fun to play with.

So I searched for RBs who had at least 60 receptions for 480 yards with a maximum of 150 carries for at least 300 yards. Judging by the way people seem to view Vereen in here those seem to be very modest thresholds.

There were 29 such seasons in NFL history (1962 was the earliest) and the bottom line is the whole group and each subset (I broke them down by age/YPC etc) averaged about 70 receptions for 1,100 yards and 6 TDs or about 204 PPR fantasy points in a 16 week season. Mid RB#2 apparently.

For the sake of everyone in this thread who bought into Vereen with all their heart & soul I sincerely hope Vereen puts up a season like Lionel James did in 1985: 105 rushes for 516 yards (4.91) and 2 TDs with 86 receptions for 1,027 yards (11.94) and 6 TDs (270 fantasy points!!!). And I hope he doesn't have a year like Tom Rathman did in 1989: 79 rushes for 305 yards (3.86) and 1 TD with 73 receptions for 616 yards (8.44) and 1 TD (160 fantasy points).

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I know you guys don't care about history but I do and it's fun to play with.

So I searched for RBs who had at least 60 receptions for 480 yards with a maximum of 150 carries for at least 300 yards. Judging by the way people seem to view Vereen in here those seem to be very modest thresholds.

There were 29 such seasons in NFL history (1962 was the earliest) and the bottom line is the whole group and each subset (I broke them down by age/YPC etc) averaged about 70 receptions for 1,100 yards and 6 TDs or about 204 PPR fantasy points in a 16 week season. Mid RB#2 apparently.

For the sake of everyone in this thread who bought into Vereen with all their heart & soul I sincerely hope Vereen puts up a season like Lionel James did in 1985: 105 rushes for 516 yards (4.91) and 2 TDs with 86 receptions for 1,027 yards (11.94) and 6 TDs (270 fantasy points!!!). And I hope he doesn't have a year like Tom Rathman did in 1989: 79 rushes for 305 yards (3.86) and 1 TD with 73 receptions for 616 yards (8.44) and 1 TD (160 fantasy points).

the way you're looking at this is certainly very rational, and generally the way I look at players, so I can't directly dispute any of it --- I don't have any crystal ball telling me anything, but I think there are a few fundamental flaws in what you're doing that I'd take issue with.

when you're making up that list of guys you are choosing a data set whether or not you want to make it sound like you're 'choosing'.

what data we choose in these things will directly influence our results, so we have to put some thought into what data to choose.

the uppermost data point is fixed in that sample, there was one historical guy who got the most catches (or whatevers), but you choose the lower boundary, and whatever boundary you choose will push or pull your average --- if I up the lower boundary to 70 catches my average goes up, or if I drop my lower boundary to 50 catches I will pull my average down, so you will tend to create a result that reflects your opinion going into it.

why 60 -- why not 70, why not 50, why not all rb, etc?

secondly, even past the soundness of the methodology, what is the relevance?

I don't remember if it was you, but somebody posted up a big historical list earlier in the thread (or some thread) establishing that it's not actually a random event, and closely tied to specific coaching and scheme --- so, why would I even be interested in all these other guys in different schemes in 1962?

if you take a look at my post on bill o'brien's play counts you may note the patriots play totals over the last few years, as well as the nfl trend in general --- a few years ago you couldn't even find single team running 1100 plays, but last year there was 6 of them, so what relevance does 1962 really have?

if you look at those play counts you will realize the patriots are an outlier, gronkowski is an outlier, welker was an outlier, brady is an outlier, belichick an outlier, and moss an outlier --- there seems to be quite a bit of outlying associated with this team, so why wouldn't I expect more of it, rather than results from joe brown in 1973?

I think a lot of this comes down to the difference between projection and extrapolation, which are often conflated in much the same way as causation and correlation get confused.

arian foster put up 216 ryds and 3td in his final 2 games in 2009.

if, during the 2010 draft, I extrapolate 16 games out of that and expect 1700/24 I'm probably bs'ing myself, and will be simply lucky if I'm anywhere close, as that would certainly be a historical outlier and a ridiculous sample size to begin with.

however, if I project a top 12 rb finish in 2010 off that, it probably falls to more of a question of skill in projections and specific circumstance.

generally speaking, I expect the guys I take in the first half of the draft to be outliers --- it certainly doesn't always work out that way, but that's what I'm hunting for.

 

[Chaka]

I know you guys don't care about history but I do and it's fun to play with.

So I searched for RBs who had at least 60 receptions for 480 yards with a maximum of 150 carries for at least 300 yards. Judging by the way people seem to view Vereen in here those seem to be very modest thresholds.

There were 29 such seasons in NFL history (1962 was the earliest) and the bottom line is the whole group and each subset (I broke them down by age/YPC etc) averaged about 70 receptions for 1,100 yards and 6 TDs or about 204 PPR fantasy points in a 16 week season. Mid RB#2 apparently.

For the sake of everyone in this thread who bought into Vereen with all their heart & soul I sincerely hope Vereen puts up a season like Lionel James did in 1985: 105 rushes for 516 yards (4.91) and 2 TDs with 86 receptions for 1,027 yards (11.94) and 6 TDs (270 fantasy points!!!). And I hope he doesn't have a year like Tom Rathman did in 1989: 79 rushes for 305 yards (3.86) and 1 TD with 73 receptions for 616 yards (8.44) and 1 TD (160 fantasy points).

the way you're looking at this is certainly very rational, and generally the way I look at players, so I can't directly dispute any of it --- I don't have any crystal ball telling me anything, but I think there are a few fundamental flaws in what you're doing that I'd take issue with.

when you're making up that list of guys you are choosing a data set whether or not you want to make it sound like you're 'choosing'.

what data we choose in these things will directly influence our results, so we have to put some thought into what data to choose.

the uppermost data point is fixed in that sample, there was one historical guy who got the most catches (or whatevers), but you choose the lower boundary, and whatever boundary you choose will push or pull your average --- if I up the lower boundary to 70 catches my average goes up, or if I drop my lower boundary to 50 catches I will pull my average down, so you will tend to create a result that reflects your opinion going into it.

why 60 -- why not 70, why not 50, why not all rb, etc?

secondly, even past the soundness of the methodology, what is the relevance?

I don't remember if it was you, but somebody posted up a big historical list earlier in the thread (or some thread) establishing that it's not actually a random event, and closely tied to specific coaching and scheme --- so, why would I even be interested in all these other guys in different schemes in 1962?

if you take a look at my post on bill o'brien's play counts you may note the patriots play totals over the last few years, as well as the nfl trend in general --- a few years ago you couldn't even find single team running 1100 plays, but last year there was 6 of them, so what relevance does 1962 really have?

if you look at those play counts you will realize the patriots are an outlier, gronkowski is an outlier, welker was an outlier, brady is an outlier, belichick an outlier, and moss an outlier --- there seems to be quite a bit of outlying associated with this team, so why wouldn't I expect more of it, rather than results from joe brown in 1973?

I think a lot of this comes down to the difference between projection and extrapolation, which are often conflated in much the same way as causation and correlation get confused.

arian foster put up 216 ryds and 3td in his final 2 games in 2009.

if, during the 2010 draft, I extrapolate 16 games out of that and expect 1700/24 I'm probably bs'ing myself, and will be simply lucky if I'm anywhere close, as that would certainly be a historical outlier and a ridiculous sample size to begin with.

however, if I project a top 12 rb finish in 2010 off that, it probably falls to more of a question of skill in projections and specific circumstance.

generally speaking, I expect the guys I take in the first half of the draft to be outliers --- it certainly doesn't always work out that way, but that's what I'm hunting for.

It's fun, I'm not trying to prove anything.

I chose 60 because it is a modest expectation for Vereen, I set the yardage totals lower for the same reason. I capped it at 150 carries because if you go over that mark you start to get into the full time feature backs. I don't think anyone in here thinks Vereen is the next LT or Tiki and they would create more noise in the data than keeping it lower. And 150 carries seems like a very high upper boundary for Vereen this season.

If people want to start throwing out their projections for Vereen I would be happy to see how many RBs historically have fit their criteria.

BTW in NFL history only 29 times has a RB caught 80 or more passes, the first time was in 1978 (15 of those seasons came from RBs that had over 210 carries as well). Of course that doesn't preclude Vereen from doing it but when it happens on average less than once per season then I have trouble predicting which RB, if any, may do it in any given year. This year, if I had to guess, Pierre Thomas would be at the top of the list and Vereen may be second.

But again it's just a fun exercise, don't read too much into it.

 

[cvnpoka]

well, jamaal charles had 70 catches last yr so he may be a threat. bush or bell are a big time threat if one of them goes down. pierre and woody and vereen too.

id project vereen at 120/500 and 65/520 with 5 total tds. and that leaves him a bit of upside still in terms of catches and tds.

 

[PatsWillWin]

By all means, have fun, but the NFL and specifically the performance of offenses in the NFL is so vastly different than it was in 1962 that I think you're wasting your time.

 

[Boston]

I know you guys don't care about history but I do and it's fun to play with.

So I searched for RBs who had at least 60 receptions for 480 yards with a maximum of 150 carries for at least 300 yards. Judging by the way people seem to view Vereen in here those seem to be very modest thresholds.

There were 29 such seasons in NFL history (1962 was the earliest) and the bottom line is the whole group and each subset (I broke them down by age/YPC etc) averaged about 70 receptions for 1,100 yards and 6 TDs or about 204 PPR fantasy points in a 16 week season. Mid RB#2 apparently.

For the sake of everyone in this thread who bought into Vereen with all their heart & soul I sincerely hope Vereen puts up a season like Lionel James did in 1985: 105 rushes for 516 yards (4.91) and 2 TDs with 86 receptions for 1,027 yards (11.94) and 6 TDs (270 fantasy points!!!). And I hope he doesn't have a year like Tom Rathman did in 1989: 79 rushes for 305 yards (3.86) and 1 TD with 73 receptions for 616 yards (8.44) and 1 TD (160 fantasy points).

I think the Rathman yardage and reception totals are definite possibilities or at least in the ballpark...very realistic and I think they are well thought-out...where I see the difference is in the TD totals...I think Vereen scores 6 more TDs than Rathman did that year...at least...if he does that with at least Rathman's #'s than he's a legit #2...do that with a little more yardage and/or receptions and the #'s get even better...one of the biggest eye-openers this year (for me) is how quickly the RB position turns into a question mark...it's easy to find holes in Vereen's fantasy value but that's pretty much the case after you get by the first 15 or so RBs (talking PPR)...the warts come real quickly this year...if Vereen can stay healthy this year (a big if because he has not stayed anywhere close to healthy since getting drafted) I really think he puts up big numbers this year...the kid can play and there is zero doubt that both BB and Brady are comfortable with him...Vereen is a talented playmaker who's game really fits with how football is being played now...I really believe the only thing keeping him from being the #2 option in the Pats offense (behind Gronk) and being a #2 RB in fantasy is health...he has to prove he can play 16 games...

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

BTW in NFL history only 29 times has a RB caught 80 or more passes, the first time was in 1978

in 1978 the top 3 teams in pass att

min 592

stl 508

nos 479

in 2013 the top 3 teams in pa

cle 681

den 675

atl 659

(pats 628)

29 teams had 480+ attempts in 2013

11 teams had 592+ att in 2013

 

[Chaka]

By all means, have fun, but the NFL and specifically the performance of offenses in the NFL is so vastly different than it was in 1962 that I think you're wasting your time.

Wanna know how many times a RB has hit 80 catches in the last 5 seasons? Once. Darren Sproles 2011. In the last 10 seasons it has happened 4 times; Sproles, Bush in 2006, Steven Jackson in 2006 and Westbrook in 2007.

70 receptions has happened 17 times in the last 10 seasons. Ray Rice (2x), Jamaal Charles, Brian Westbrook (3x), Steven Jackson, Matt Forte, LeSean McCoy & Lamont Jordan account for 10 of those seasons and they were unquestioned lead backs on their teams. I think we can agree that Vereen should not be compared with these guys.

Guys in a similar situation to Vereen are Darren Sproles (3x), Reggie Bush (2x), Pierre Thomas and Danny Woodhead. Any owner would be happy if Vereen put up similar numbers to those guys and he may do it. I certainly won't say he can't do it. But it has happened 7 times in the past 10 seasons with a non-lead/time share back, 5 of those seasons were from Sean Payton coached backs.

Again I am not calling it to not happen but we're not talking high odds here.

 

[Chaka]

And I agree with everyone talking about Belichick being unpredictable and working to the strengths of his players (I pointed it out a couple times myself, which I think was mostly ignored) which makes it more likely that Vereen could be a mold breaker in New England. But that works the other way too, just because the relied on Vereen heavily last season doesn't mean they aren't modifying the game plan for this season.

 

[Chaka]

BTW in NFL history only 29 times has a RB caught 80 or more passes, the first time was in 1978

in 1978 the top 3 teams in pass att

min 592

stl 508

nos 479

in 2013 the top 3 teams in pa

cle 681

den 675

atl 659

(pats 628)

29 teams had 480+ attempts in 2013

11 teams had 592+ att in 2013

Yup a good point and 5 RBs had 70 catch seasons last year too (2 of them were coached by Sean Payton, one was Jamaal Charles and another was Matt Forte, the last was Woodhead).

 

[Chaka]

I know you guys don't care about history but I do and it's fun to play with.

So I searched for RBs who had at least 60 receptions for 480 yards with a maximum of 150 carries for at least 300 yards. Judging by the way people seem to view Vereen in here those seem to be very modest thresholds.

There were 29 such seasons in NFL history (1962 was the earliest) and the bottom line is the whole group and each subset (I broke them down by age/YPC etc) averaged about 70 receptions for 1,100 yards and 6 TDs or about 204 PPR fantasy points in a 16 week season. Mid RB#2 apparently.

For the sake of everyone in this thread who bought into Vereen with all their heart & soul I sincerely hope Vereen puts up a season like Lionel James did in 1985: 105 rushes for 516 yards (4.91) and 2 TDs with 86 receptions for 1,027 yards (11.94) and 6 TDs (270 fantasy points!!!). And I hope he doesn't have a year like Tom Rathman did in 1989: 79 rushes for 305 yards (3.86) and 1 TD with 73 receptions for 616 yards (8.44) and 1 TD (160 fantasy points).

I think the Rathman yardage and reception totals are definite possibilities or at least in the ballpark...very realistic and I think they are well thought-out...where I see the difference is in the TD totals...I think Vereen scores 6 more TDs than Rathman did that year...at least...if he does that with at least Rathman's #'s than he's a legit #2...do that with a little more yardage and/or receptions and the #'s get even better...one of the biggest eye-openers this year (for me) is how quickly the RB position turns into a question mark...it's easy to find holes in Vereen's fantasy value but that's pretty much the case after you get by the first 15 or so RBs (talking PPR)...the warts come real quickly this year...if Vereen can stay healthy this year (a big if because he has not stayed anywhere close to healthy since getting drafted) I really think he puts up big numbers this year...the kid can play and there is zero doubt that both BB and Brady are comfortable with him...Vereen is a talented playmaker who's game really fits with how football is being played now...I really believe the only thing keeping him from being the #2 option in the Pats offense (behind Gronk) and being a #2 RB in fantasy is health...he has to prove he can play 16 games...

8 TDs? I think that belongs in the BOLD Predictions thread.

 

[Sweetness_34]

By all means, have fun, but the NFL and specifically the performance of offenses in the NFL is so vastly different than it was in 1962 that I think you're wasting your time.

Wanna know how many times a RB has hit 80 catches in the last 5 seasons? Once. Darren Sproles 2011. In the last 10 seasons it has happened 4 times; Sproles, Bush in 2006, Steven Jackson in 2006 and Westbrook in 2007.

70 receptions has happened 17 times in the last 10 seasons. Ray Rice (2x), Jamaal Charles, Brian Westbrook (3x), Steven Jackson, Matt Forte, LeSean McCoy & Lamont Jordan account for 10 of those seasons and they were unquestioned lead backs on their teams. I think we can agree that Vereen should not be compared with these guys.

Guys in a similar situation to Vereen are Darren Sproles (3x), Reggie Bush (2x), Pierre Thomas and Danny Woodhead. Any owner would be happy if Vereen put up similar numbers to those guys and he may do it. I certainly won't say he can't do it. But it has happened 7 times in the past 10 seasons with a non-lead/time share back, 5 of those seasons were from Sean Payton coached backs.

Again I am not calling it to not happen but we're not talking high odds here.

Thank you. I see people burn 3-5 round picks on Vereen in every FBGPC draft and just laugh....good luck burning that high a pick on that guy while I spend a 9th round pick on Woodhead.

 

[Ilov80s]

My issue with Vareen is an obvious one and something others have likely expressed already. In 7/10 games last year, he got <6 carries.

 

[Alonzo Mosely]

My issue with Vareen is an obvious one and something others have likely expressed already. In 7/10 games last year, he got <6 carries.

5/8 he only played in 8 games.

In those 8 games he had 9 TDs and 82 targets.

 

[False Start]

My issue with Vareen is an obvious one and something others have likely expressed already. In 7/10 games last year, he got <6 carries.

He also caught 5 or more passes in 5 of those games too.

 

[Boston]

I know you guys don't care about history but I do and it's fun to play with.

So I searched for RBs who had at least 60 receptions for 480 yards with a maximum of 150 carries for at least 300 yards. Judging by the way people seem to view Vereen in here those seem to be very modest thresholds.

There were 29 such seasons in NFL history (1962 was the earliest) and the bottom line is the whole group and each subset (I broke them down by age/YPC etc) averaged about 70 receptions for 1,100 yards and 6 TDs or about 204 PPR fantasy points in a 16 week season. Mid RB#2 apparently.

For the sake of everyone in this thread who bought into Vereen with all their heart & soul I sincerely hope Vereen puts up a season like Lionel James did in 1985: 105 rushes for 516 yards (4.91) and 2 TDs with 86 receptions for 1,027 yards (11.94) and 6 TDs (270 fantasy points!!!). And I hope he doesn't have a year like Tom Rathman did in 1989: 79 rushes for 305 yards (3.86) and 1 TD with 73 receptions for 616 yards (8.44) and 1 TD (160 fantasy points).

I think the Rathman yardage and reception totals are definite possibilities or at least in the ballpark...very realistic and I think they are well thought-out...where I see the difference is in the TD totals...I think Vereen scores 6 more TDs than Rathman did that year...at least...if he does that with at least Rathman's #'s than he's a legit #2...do that with a little more yardage and/or receptions and the #'s get even better...one of the biggest eye-openers this year (for me) is how quickly the RB position turns into a question mark...it's easy to find holes in Vereen's fantasy value but that's pretty much the case after you get by the first 15 or so RBs (talking PPR)...the warts come real quickly this year...if Vereen can stay healthy this year (a big if because he has not stayed anywhere close to healthy since getting drafted) I really think he puts up big numbers this year...the kid can play and there is zero doubt that both BB and Brady are comfortable with him...Vereen is a talented playmaker who's game really fits with how football is being played now...I really believe the only thing keeping him from being the #2 option in the Pats offense (behind Gronk) and being a #2 RB in fantasy is health...he has to prove he can play 16 games...

8 TDs? I think that belongs in the BOLD Predictions thread.

Counting the playoffs he had 9 in 10 games last year so I don't see where projecting 8 over 16 is being bold...my fear is he gets them in bunches and doesn't spread them out evenly...that being said I think most people that are onboard with Vereen understand he maybe a RB that will have some monster games and a few that are a little quiet...

 

[On The Rocks]

By all means, have fun, but the NFL and specifically the performance of offenses in the NFL is so vastly different than it was in 1962 that I think you're wasting your time.

Wanna know how many times a RB has hit 80 catches in the last 5 seasons? Once. Darren Sproles 2011. In the last 10 seasons it has happened 4 times; Sproles, Bush in 2006, Steven Jackson in 2006 and Westbrook in 2007.

70 receptions has happened 17 times in the last 10 seasons. Ray Rice (2x), Jamaal Charles, Brian Westbrook (3x), Steven Jackson, Matt Forte, LeSean McCoy & Lamont Jordan account for 10 of those seasons and they were unquestioned lead backs on their teams. I think we can agree that Vereen should not be compared with these guys.

Guys in a similar situation to Vereen are Darren Sproles (3x), Reggie Bush (2x), Pierre Thomas and Danny Woodhead. Any owner would be happy if Vereen put up similar numbers to those guys and he may do it. I certainly won't say he can't do it. But it has happened 7 times in the past 10 seasons with a non-lead/time share back, 5 of those seasons were from Sean Payton coached backs.

Again I am not calling it to not happen but we're not talking high odds here.

I love Vereen this year and I was looking at him getting 80/800/5 this year - but based on history you show I might need to temper that a bit but not too much. It's not like Vereen is an old man and has been around forever. Last year was a break out year in just 8 games.

I suppose some of his numbers were up (in his limited time) last year due to the lack of a consistant TE threat - but I'm going to give him a mulligan on the injury and don't see any reason why he wouldn't play in at least 14 games this year. I'm not buying into the hype of all these new kids coming in and stealing 3rd down touches from him. I think Brady and Belichick love this guy out of the backfield. He may not be a goal line threat or a guy getting a lot of carries, but in PPR - I think Vereen is $$$.

 

[Chaka]

My issue with Vareen is an obvious one and something others have likely expressed already. In 7/10 games last year, he got <6 carries.

5/8 he only played in 8 games.

In those 8 games he had 9 TDs and 82 targets.

I know you guys don't care about history but I do and it's fun to play with.

So I searched for RBs who had at least 60 receptions for 480 yards with a maximum of 150 carries for at least 300 yards. Judging by the way people seem to view Vereen in here those seem to be very modest thresholds.

There were 29 such seasons in NFL history (1962 was the earliest) and the bottom line is the whole group and each subset (I broke them down by age/YPC etc) averaged about 70 receptions for 1,100 yards and 6 TDs or about 204 PPR fantasy points in a 16 week season. Mid RB#2 apparently.

For the sake of everyone in this thread who bought into Vereen with all their heart & soul I sincerely hope Vereen puts up a season like Lionel James did in 1985: 105 rushes for 516 yards (4.91) and 2 TDs with 86 receptions for 1,027 yards (11.94) and 6 TDs (270 fantasy points!!!). And I hope he doesn't have a year like Tom Rathman did in 1989: 79 rushes for 305 yards (3.86) and 1 TD with 73 receptions for 616 yards (8.44) and 1 TD (160 fantasy points).

I think the Rathman yardage and reception totals are definite possibilities or at least in the ballpark...very realistic and I think they are well thought-out...where I see the difference is in the TD totals...I think Vereen scores 6 more TDs than Rathman did that year...at least...if he does that with at least Rathman's #'s than he's a legit #2...do that with a little more yardage and/or receptions and the #'s get even better...one of the biggest eye-openers this year (for me) is how quickly the RB position turns into a question mark...it's easy to find holes in Vereen's fantasy value but that's pretty much the case after you get by the first 15 or so RBs (talking PPR)...the warts come real quickly this year...if Vereen can stay healthy this year (a big if because he has not stayed anywhere close to healthy since getting drafted) I really think he puts up big numbers this year...the kid can play and there is zero doubt that both BB and Brady are comfortable with him...Vereen is a talented playmaker who's game really fits with how football is being played now...I really believe the only thing keeping him from being the #2 option in the Pats offense (behind Gronk) and being a #2 RB in fantasy is health...he has to prove he can play 16 games...

8 TDs? I think that belongs in the BOLD Predictions thread.

Counting the playoffs he had 9 in 10 games last year so I don't see where projecting 8 over 16 is being bold...my fear is he gets them in bunches and doesn't spread them out evenly...that being said I think most people that are onboard with Vereen understand he maybe a RB that will have some monster games and a few that are a little quiet...

Where are people getting their stats? Either Pro-Football-Reference, ESPN and NFL.com are all wrong or I am just really hung over and reading these posts entirely incorrectly.

Vereen had 4 TDs in 10 games last year.

 

[Ilov80s]

My issue with Vareen is an obvious one and something others have likely expressed already. In 7/10 games last year, he got <6 carries.

5/8 he only played in 8 games.In those 8 games he had 9 TDs and 82 targets.

I counted the playoffs. Where are you getting 9 TDs from?

 

[Ilov80s]

My issue with Vareen is an obvious one and something others have likely expressed already. In 7/10 games last year, he got <6 carries.

5/8 he only played in 8 games.In those 8 games he had 9 TDs and 82 targets.

I know you guys don't care about history but I do and it's fun to play with.

So I searched for RBs who had at least 60 receptions for 480 yards with a maximum of 150 carries for at least 300 yards. Judging by the way people seem to view Vereen in here those seem to be very modest thresholds.

There were 29 such seasons in NFL history (1962 was the earliest) and the bottom line is the whole group and each subset (I broke them down by age/YPC etc) averaged about 70 receptions for 1,100 yards and 6 TDs or about 204 PPR fantasy points in a 16 week season. Mid RB#2 apparently.

For the sake of everyone in this thread who bought into Vereen with all their heart & soul I sincerely hope Vereen puts up a season like Lionel James did in 1985: 105 rushes for 516 yards (4.91) and 2 TDs with 86 receptions for 1,027 yards (11.94) and 6 TDs (270 fantasy points!!!). And I hope he doesn't have a year like Tom Rathman did in 1989: 79 rushes for 305 yards (3.86) and 1 TD with 73 receptions for 616 yards (8.44) and 1 TD (160 fantasy points).

I think the Rathman yardage and reception totals are definite possibilities or at least in the ballpark...very realistic and I think they are well thought-out...where I see the difference is in the TD totals...I think Vereen scores 6 more TDs than Rathman did that year...at least...if he does that with at least Rathman's #'s than he's a legit #2...do that with a little more yardage and/or receptions and the #'s get even better...one of the biggest eye-openers this year (for me) is how quickly the RB position turns into a question mark...it's easy to find holes in Vereen's fantasy value but that's pretty much the case after you get by the first 15 or so RBs (talking PPR)...the warts come real quickly this year...if Vereen can stay healthy this year (a big if because he has not stayed anywhere close to healthy since getting drafted) I really think he puts up big numbers this year...the kid can play and there is zero doubt that both BB and Brady are comfortable with him...Vereen is a talented playmaker who's game really fits with how football is being played now...I really believe the only thing keeping him from being the #2 option in the Pats offense (behind Gronk) and being a #2 RB in fantasy is health...he has to prove he can play 16 games...

8 TDs? I think that belongs in the BOLD Predictions thread.

Counting the playoffs he had 9 in 10 games last year so I don't see where projecting 8 over 16 is being bold...my fear is he gets them in bunches and doesn't spread them out evenly...that being said I think most people that are onboard with Vereen understand he maybe a RB that will have some monster games and a few that are a little quiet...

Where are people getting their stats? Either Pro-Football-Reference, ESPN and NFL.com are all wrong or I am just really hung over and reading these posts entirely incorrectly.

Vereen had 4 TDs in 10 games last year.

It's weird because 2 different posters seem to have magically doubled the number of TDs Vareen scored last year.

 

[Alonzo Mosely]

My issue with Vareen is an obvious one and something others have likely expressed already. In 7/10 games last year, he got <6 carries.

5/8 he only played in 8 games.

In those 8 games he had 9 TDs and 82 targets.

I know you guys don't care about history but I do and it's fun to play with.

So I searched for RBs who had at least 60 receptions for 480 yards with a maximum of 150 carries for at least 300 yards. Judging by the way people seem to view Vereen in here those seem to be very modest thresholds.

There were 29 such seasons in NFL history (1962 was the earliest) and the bottom line is the whole group and each subset (I broke them down by age/YPC etc) averaged about 70 receptions for 1,100 yards and 6 TDs or about 204 PPR fantasy points in a 16 week season. Mid RB#2 apparently.

For the sake of everyone in this thread who bought into Vereen with all their heart & soul I sincerely hope Vereen puts up a season like Lionel James did in 1985: 105 rushes for 516 yards (4.91) and 2 TDs with 86 receptions for 1,027 yards (11.94) and 6 TDs (270 fantasy points!!!). And I hope he doesn't have a year like Tom Rathman did in 1989: 79 rushes for 305 yards (3.86) and 1 TD with 73 receptions for 616 yards (8.44) and 1 TD (160 fantasy points).

I think the Rathman yardage and reception totals are definite possibilities or at least in the ballpark...very realistic and I think they are well thought-out...where I see the difference is in the TD totals...I think Vereen scores 6 more TDs than Rathman did that year...at least...if he does that with at least Rathman's #'s than he's a legit #2...do that with a little more yardage and/or receptions and the #'s get even better...one of the biggest eye-openers this year (for me) is how quickly the RB position turns into a question mark...it's easy to find holes in Vereen's fantasy value but that's pretty much the case after you get by the first 15 or so RBs (talking PPR)...the warts come real quickly this year...if Vereen can stay healthy this year (a big if because he has not stayed anywhere close to healthy since getting drafted) I really think he puts up big numbers this year...the kid can play and there is zero doubt that both BB and Brady are comfortable with him...Vereen is a talented playmaker who's game really fits with how football is being played now...I really believe the only thing keeping him from being the #2 option in the Pats offense (behind Gronk) and being a #2 RB in fantasy is health...he has to prove he can play 16 games...

8 TDs? I think that belongs in the BOLD Predictions thread.

Counting the playoffs he had 9 in 10 games last year so I don't see where projecting 8 over 16 is being bold...my fear is he gets them in bunches and doesn't spread them out evenly...that being said I think most people that are onboard with Vereen understand he maybe a RB that will have some monster games and a few that are a little quiet...

Where are people getting their stats? Either Pro-Football-Reference, ESPN and NFL.com are all wrong or I am just really hung over and reading these posts entirely incorrectly.

Vereen had 4 TDs in 10 games last year.

I don't know what player/season I clicked on, sorry about that. He did only play in 8 games last season though, not 10.

 

[Ilov80s]

My issue with Vareen is an obvious one and something others have likely expressed already. In 7/10 games last year, he got <6 carries.

5/8 he only played in 8 games.In those 8 games he had 9 TDs and 82 targets.

I know you guys don't care about history but I do and it's fun to play with.

So I searched for RBs who had at least 60 receptions for 480 yards with a maximum of 150 carries for at least 300 yards. Judging by the way people seem to view Vereen in here those seem to be very modest thresholds.

There were 29 such seasons in NFL history (1962 was the earliest) and the bottom line is the whole group and each subset (I broke them down by age/YPC etc) averaged about 70 receptions for 1,100 yards and 6 TDs or about 204 PPR fantasy points in a 16 week season. Mid RB#2 apparently.

For the sake of everyone in this thread who bought into Vereen with all their heart & soul I sincerely hope Vereen puts up a season like Lionel James did in 1985: 105 rushes for 516 yards (4.91) and 2 TDs with 86 receptions for 1,027 yards (11.94) and 6 TDs (270 fantasy points!!!). And I hope he doesn't have a year like Tom Rathman did in 1989: 79 rushes for 305 yards (3.86) and 1 TD with 73 receptions for 616 yards (8.44) and 1 TD (160 fantasy points).

I think the Rathman yardage and reception totals are definite possibilities or at least in the ballpark...very realistic and I think they are well thought-out...where I see the difference is in the TD totals...I think Vereen scores 6 more TDs than Rathman did that year...at least...if he does that with at least Rathman's #'s than he's a legit #2...do that with a little more yardage and/or receptions and the #'s get even better...one of the biggest eye-openers this year (for me) is how quickly the RB position turns into a question mark...it's easy to find holes in Vereen's fantasy value but that's pretty much the case after you get by the first 15 or so RBs (talking PPR)...the warts come real quickly this year...if Vereen can stay healthy this year (a big if because he has not stayed anywhere close to healthy since getting drafted) I really think he puts up big numbers this year...the kid can play and there is zero doubt that both BB and Brady are comfortable with him...Vereen is a talented playmaker who's game really fits with how football is being played now...I really believe the only thing keeping him from being the #2 option in the Pats offense (behind Gronk) and being a #2 RB in fantasy is health...he has to prove he can play 16 games...

8 TDs? I think that belongs in the BOLD Predictions thread.

Counting the playoffs he had 9 in 10 games last year so I don't see where projecting 8 over 16 is being bold...my fear is he gets them in bunches and doesn't spread them out evenly...that being said I think most people that are onboard with Vereen understand he maybe a RB that will have some monster games and a few that are a little quiet...

Where are people getting their stats? Either Pro-Football-Reference, ESPN and NFL.com are all wrong or I am just really hung over and reading these posts entirely incorrectly.

Vereen had 4 TDs in 10 games last year.

I don't know what player/season I clicked on, sorry about that. He did only play in 8 games last season though, not 10.

10 is counting the playoffs.

 

[Chaka]

70 receptions has happened 17 times in the last 10 seasons. Ray Rice (2x), Jamaal Charles, Brian Westbrook (3x), Steven Jackson, Matt Forte, LeSean McCoy & Lamont Jordan account for 10 of those seasons and they were unquestioned lead backs on their teams. I think we can agree that Vereen should not be compared with these guys.

Guys in a similar situation to Vereen are Darren Sproles (3x), Reggie Bush (2x), Pierre Thomas and Danny Woodhead. Any owner would be happy if Vereen put up similar numbers to those guys and he may do it. I certainly won't say he can't do it. But it has happened 7 times in the past 10 seasons with a non-lead/time share back, 5 of those seasons were from Sean Payton coached backs.

Again I am not calling it to not happen but we're not talking high odds here.

Sorry I wasn't paying attention last night. I meant to say that SIX of those seven seasons were from Sean Payton coached backs.

 

[Chaka]

I know that I am coming off as the anti-Vereen guy in this thread and I apologize for that. But I really appreciate threads like this because they make me do a deep analysis of a player that I really hadn't given much thought to. Andre Johnson is another one.

I had Vereen as RB#35 on my draft board (non-PPR) and after all the analysis I have done I realize that I have him undervalued in my league. I should probably bump him up to around RB#24-28.

I think 1,100 yards and 5-6 TDs is possible for him but I don't see 80 catches.

 

[Boston]

My bad on the stats...he had four in 10 games last year...the 10 is career in 18 games (which is what I read incorrectly)...to be honest with you I thought that # was high but I assumed that # must be because of the three in a playoff game...but that was the year before against Houston...totally screwed that up...

I still see him in that 8 range...after Gronk I see him being their biggest weapon...while he's not a TE like Hernandez he will have that swiss-army knife role that they envisioned for Hernandez...he'll run the ball, catch short passes and get longer ones (hopefully he can hold onto the ball on that wheel route they run for him...he left a few real big plays on the field last year)...

Overall if you don't think Vereen is getting in the end-zone I see the idea of knocking him down in the rankings as legit...I just really believe in that eightish number and due to that I have him as a solid #2 PPR RB...

 

[JamesTheScot]

BTW in NFL history only 29 times has a RB caught 80 or more passes, the first time was in 1978

in 1978 the top 3 teams in pass att

min 592

stl 508

nos 479

in 2013 the top 3 teams in pa

cle 681

den 675

atl 659

(pats 628)

29 teams had 480+ attempts in 2013

11 teams had 592+ att in 2013

Good posting.

Prior to 1984, how many times had a QB thrown for 5000 yards? 0

Prior to 2008, how many times had a QB thrown for 5000 yards? 1

Prior to 2011, how many times had a QB thrown for 5000 yards? 2

Prior to 2014, how many times has a QB thrown for 5000 yards? 8

To further the point:

In terms of a per game passing yard average for an NFL season (which should eliminate a bias against the old days of shorter seasons)...

Of the top 10 finishes, 6 have occurred since the 2011 season. Brees ranked #8 for his 2008 season. Marino landed at #7 in 1984, Fouts at #6 in 1982 and Moon at #10 in 1990.

Of the top 20, 11 have occurred in the last 3 years. 13 of the 20 have occurred since the 2008 season.

The game changes. When there is an obvious paradigm shift, looking back too far not only doesn't help, it hurts. I suspect that the evidence of the paradigm shift shows up in the QB numbers first, since nearly all passing numbers comes through the QB. But predicting how this paradigm shift is still evolving in terms of how those yards will be distributed through the various pass catchers is not going to be predicted by looking at RB catch numbers from 30 years ago. There simply isn't a relationship between the way the offenses run.

 

[Chaka]

My bad on the stats...he had four in 10 games last year...the 10 is career in 18 games (which is what I read incorrectly)...to be honest with you I thought that # was high but I assumed that # must be because of the three in a playoff game...but that was the year before against Houston...totally screwed that up...

I still see him in that 8 range...after Gronk I see him being their biggest weapon...while he's not a TE like Hernandez he will have that swiss-army knife role that they envisioned for Hernandez...he'll run the ball, catch short passes and get longer ones (hopefully he can hold onto the ball on that wheel route they run for him...he left a few real big plays on the field last year)...

Overall if you don't think Vereen is getting in the end-zone I see the idea of knocking him down in the rankings as legit...I just really believe in that eightish number and due to that I have him as a solid #2 PPR RB...

The problem is that while he may be their best weapon after Gronk (I don't necessarily agree) he is a between the 20s guy and when they are near the goal line Ridley and Bolden will become bigger parts of the offense. Without goal line love it is going to be harder for him to produce 8 TDs.

On the plus side Ridley could fumble away his role and Bolden may not even make the final roster, in that case Vereen becomes much more interesting.

 

[Anarchy99]

This is another example of why I think it is important to consider projecting an entire team's offense and not just isolated players. Based on some projections for guys that have been discussed recently in the Shark Pool . . .

Vereen = 80 receptions

Edelman = 100 receptions

Gronk = 80 receptions

Amendola = 80 receptions

Dobson = 80 receptions

Thompkins = 60 receptions

LaFell = 50 receptions

That's already 530 receptions, not counting any other RB, TE, or WR. Last year, other RB had roughly 40 receptions, other TE about 15, and other WR in the neighborhood of 15 catches. Brady's career high for completions is 401.

So from the names I listed, we would have to eliminate approximately 200 total receptions to make things even remotely close to reality. Feel free to mix and match who loses out.

This would add up to 335 receptions . . .

Vereen = 50 receptions

Edelman = 70 receptions

Gronk = 70 receptions

Amendola = 50 receptions

Dobson = 40 receptions

Thompkins = 30 receptions

LaFell = 25 receptions

The point being, there is only so much production to go around, and they can't all put up monster numbers.

 

[Chaka]

BTW in NFL history only 29 times has a RB caught 80 or more passes, the first time was in 1978

in 1978 the top 3 teams in pass att

min 592

stl 508

nos 479

in 2013 the top 3 teams in pa

cle 681

den 675

atl 659

(pats 628)

29 teams had 480+ attempts in 2013

11 teams had 592+ att in 2013

Good posting.

Prior to 1984, how many times had a QB thrown for 5000 yards? 0

Prior to 2008, how many times had a QB thrown for 5000 yards? 1

Prior to 2011, how many times had a QB thrown for 5000 yards? 2

Prior to 2014, how many times has a QB thrown for 5000 yards? 8

To further the point:

In terms of a per game passing yard average for an NFL season (which should eliminate a bias against the old days of shorter seasons)...

Of the top 10 finishes, 6 have occurred since the 2011 season. Brees ranked #8 for his 2008 season. Marino landed at #7 in 1984, Fouts at #6 in 1982 and Moon at #10 in 1990.

Of the top 20, 11 have occurred in the last 3 years. 13 of the 20 have occurred since the 2008 season.

The game changes. When there is an obvious paradigm shift, looking back too far not only doesn't help, it hurts. I suspect that the evidence of the paradigm shift shows up in the QB numbers first, since nearly all passing numbers comes through the QB. But predicting how this paradigm shift is still evolving in terms of how those yards will be distributed through the various pass catchers is not going to be predicted by looking at RB catch numbers from 30 years ago. There simply isn't a relationship between the way the offenses run.

Already analyzed and posted. Since 2008 10 RBs have 70 receptions: Jamaal Charles, LeSean McCoy, Matt Forte, Ray Rice x2, Darren Sproles x3, Pierre Thomas and Danny Woodhead.

80 receptions by a RB has happened one time since 2008, Sproles in 2011.

Can we agree that Vereen should not be compared to Charles, McCoy, Forte and Rice or is the debate changing to him becoming the unquestioned top dog in New England?

Woodhead is not a lead back (Charles, Forte, Rice) and the other four are Sean Payton coached backs.

There is a reason I think Pierre Thomas is the favorite to lead RBs in receptions this year.

 

[Boston]

This is another example of why I think it is important to consider projecting an entire team's offense and not just isolated players. Based on some projections for guys that have been discussed recently in the Shark Pool . . .

Vereen = 80 receptions

Edelman = 100 receptions

Gronk = 80 receptions

Amendola = 80 receptions

Dobson = 80 receptions

Thompkins = 60 receptions

LaFell = 50 receptions

That's already 530 receptions, not counting any other RB, TE, or WR. Last year, other RB had roughly 40 receptions, other TE about 15, and other WR in the neighborhood of 15 catches. Brady's career high for completions is 401.

So from the names I listed, we would have to eliminate approximately 200 total receptions to make things even remotely close to reality. Feel free to mix and match who loses out.

This would add up to 335 receptions . . .

Vereen = 50 receptions

Edelman = 70 receptions

Gronk = 70 receptions

Amendola = 50 receptions

Dobson = 40 receptions

Thompkins = 30 receptions

LaFell = 25 receptions

The point being, there is only so much production to go around, and they can't all put up monster numbers.

Agreed that the #'s can get out of whack...real tough to guess on this without knowing about Gronk...everything revolves around him...if I had to guess I would do it off of 400 because I do think their passing game will be more like 2011 and 2012 than 2013...so here would be my guess:

Gronk-85

Vereen-75

Edelman-80...love him but it does appear other weapons have the potential to step-up (always dangerous buying into preseason hype) so I have dropped him off late

Amendola-65

Dobson/Thompkins/Lafell-100 combined...

Misc-10

That gets me to 415...feel free to shave off of 15 where you see fit...

Another x-factor here is James White and what his role in the passing game will be...I have zero clue how that will shake out but it definitely bears watching early in the season...

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

By all means, have fun, but the NFL and specifically the performance of offenses in the NFL is so vastly different than it was in 1962 that I think you're wasting your time.

Wanna know how many times a RB has hit 80 catches in the last 5 seasons? Once. Darren Sproles 2011. In the last 10 seasons it has happened 4 times; Sproles, Bush in 2006, Steven Jackson in 2006 and Westbrook in 2007.70 receptions has happened 17 times in the last 10 seasons. Ray Rice (2x), Jamaal Charles, Brian Westbrook (3x), Steven Jackson, Matt Forte, LeSean McCoy & Lamont Jordan account for 10 of those seasons and they were unquestioned lead backs on their teams. I think we can agree that Vereen should not be compared with these guys.

Guys in a similar situation to Vereen are Darren Sproles (3x), Reggie Bush (2x), Pierre Thomas and Danny Woodhead. Any owner would be happy if Vereen put up similar numbers to those guys and he may do it. I certainly won't say he can't do it. But it has happened 7 times in the past 10 seasons with a non-lead/time share back, 5 of those seasons were from Sean Payton coached backs.

Again I am not calling it to not happen but we're not talking high odds here.

So, you're building a case that it's weighed heavily by scheme, rather than being a random distribution, and results are skewed by specific coaches?

What if we were looking at a payton back - would you use this same random number generator?

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Vereen will be this year.

86/757/4 with another 35/165/0 on the ground. That makes a mid-RB2 at super cheap prices. Many 2014 champs will have rolling with Vereen this year.

 

[Chaka]

By all means, have fun, but the NFL and specifically the performance of offenses in the NFL is so vastly different than it was in 1962 that I think you're wasting your time.

Wanna know how many times a RB has hit 80 catches in the last 5 seasons? Once. Darren Sproles 2011. In the last 10 seasons it has happened 4 times; Sproles, Bush in 2006, Steven Jackson in 2006 and Westbrook in 2007.70 receptions has happened 17 times in the last 10 seasons. Ray Rice (2x), Jamaal Charles, Brian Westbrook (3x), Steven Jackson, Matt Forte, LeSean McCoy & Lamont Jordan account for 10 of those seasons and they were unquestioned lead backs on their teams. I think we can agree that Vereen should not be compared with these guys.

Guys in a similar situation to Vereen are Darren Sproles (3x), Reggie Bush (2x), Pierre Thomas and Danny Woodhead. Any owner would be happy if Vereen put up similar numbers to those guys and he may do it. I certainly won't say he can't do it. But it has happened 7 times in the past 10 seasons with a non-lead/time share back, 5 of those seasons were from Sean Payton coached backs.

Again I am not calling it to not happen but we're not talking high odds here.

So, you're building a case that it's weighed heavily by scheme, rather than being a random distribution, and results are skewed by specific coaches?

What if we were looking at a payton back - would you use this same random number generator?

Are you implying that the results were skewed by intent? The only criteria for the search was RBs who had 70 catches in the past 10 seasons and I am not sure why you call that random. The search merely revealed that Sean Payton likes to throw to his backs more than any other coach. It also revealed that if you want to predict a RB to have 70 catches your best bet is to choose an unquestioned lead back or a Sean Payton back.

Did you already post your projections for Vereen's total receptions this season (I think we can agree that his value is based upon his receiving production)? What are you basing them on?

 

[Chaka]

Vereen will be this year.

86/757/4 with another 35/165/0 on the ground. That makes a mid-RB2 at super cheap prices. Many 2014 champs will have rolling with Vereen this year.

I think the receptions are high (by about 15-20) and the total yardage is too low (by about 150-200).

 

[Anarchy99]

This is another example of why I think it is important to consider projecting an entire team's offense and not just isolated players. Based on some projections for guys that have been discussed recently in the Shark Pool . . .

Vereen = 80 receptions

Edelman = 100 receptions

Gronk = 80 receptions

Amendola = 80 receptions

Dobson = 80 receptions

Thompkins = 60 receptions

LaFell = 50 receptions

That's already 530 receptions, not counting any other RB, TE, or WR. Last year, other RB had roughly 40 receptions, other TE about 15, and other WR in the neighborhood of 15 catches. Brady's career high for completions is 401.

So from the names I listed, we would have to eliminate approximately 200 total receptions to make things even remotely close to reality. Feel free to mix and match who loses out.

This would add up to 335 receptions . . .

Vereen = 50 receptions

Edelman = 70 receptions

Gronk = 70 receptions

Amendola = 50 receptions

Dobson = 40 receptions

Thompkins = 30 receptions

LaFell = 25 receptions

The point being, there is only so much production to go around, and they can't all put up monster numbers.

Agreed that the #'s can get out of whack...real tough to guess on this without knowing about Gronk...everything revolves around him...if I had to guess I would do it off of 400 because I do think their passing game will be more like 2011 and 2012 than 2013...so here would be my guess:

Gronk-85

Vereen-75

Edelman-80...love him but it does appear other weapons have the potential to step-up (always dangerous buying into preseason hype) so I have dropped him off late

Amendola-65

Dobson/Thompkins/Lafell-100 combined...

Misc-10

That gets me to 415...feel free to shave off of 15 where you see fit...

Another x-factor here is James White and what his role in the passing game will be...I have zero clue how that will shake out but it definitely bears watching early in the season...

I know everyone likes to throw MISCELLANEOUS overboard, but there are ALWAYS leftovers . . . and they never go away. But it's not sexy to allocate bottom feeder production, even though every team has some.

Since Brady came to town, here were the reception totals each season for all the flotsam and jetsam AFTER the Top 6 players in terms of receptions. So most years it would have been either 4WR-1TE-1RB or 3WR-2TE-1RB as the top guys . . . and then everyone else. Well, here are the totals each season in the "everybody else" category added together:

2013 - 66

2012 - 43

2011 - 27

2010 - 52

2009 - 61

2008 - 24

2007 - 28

2006 - 83

2005 - 96

2004 - 74

2003 - 75

2002 - 78

2001 - 66

Now you did list 7 guys by name and 10 catches by miscellaneous to come up with your 415 receptions. I doubt Thompkins/Dobson/LaFell each get 33/33/33 for receptions, so it might have to be something like 45/30/25. If so, that would mean your NOT TOP 6 would have 35 receptions combined. Certainly that starts to get into the realm of being more reasonable. However, that still means any TE not named Gronk (whether he is on or not on the roster currently) and all other RB not named Vereen would be limited to a total of 10 receptions. One would think that Ridley and White and whomever else they roll out there would get more than 10 catches on the season.

Clearly if guys get hurt that changes the entire equation, and given the propensity for some of these players to be out of the line up, one has to expect that some folks will miss some time. As you said, that's where it gets really hard to predict and how they will reset and reshuffle the pass distribution will get interesting.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

By all means, have fun, but the NFL and specifically the performance of offenses in the NFL is so vastly different than it was in 1962 that I think you're wasting your time.

Wanna know how many times a RB has hit 80 catches in the last 5 seasons? Once. Darren Sproles 2011. In the last 10 seasons it has happened 4 times; Sproles, Bush in 2006, Steven Jackson in 2006 and Westbrook in 2007.

how many times in the last year has a rb been on pace for 80 catches, and who were they?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

My bad on the stats...he had four in 10 games last year...the 10 is career in 18 games (which is what I read incorrectly)...to be honest with you I thought that # was high but I assumed that # must be because of the three in a playoff game...but that was the year before against Houston...totally screwed that up...

I still see him in that 8 range...after Gronk I see him being their biggest weapon...while he's not a TE like Hernandez he will have that swiss-army knife role that they envisioned for Hernandez...he'll run the ball, catch short passes and get longer ones (hopefully he can hold onto the ball on that wheel route they run for him...he left a few real big plays on the field last year)...

Overall if you don't think Vereen is getting in the end-zone I see the idea of knocking him down in the rankings as legit...I just really believe in that eightish number and due to that I have him as a solid #2 PPR RB...

The problem is that while he may be their best weapon after Gronk (I don't necessarily agree) he is a between the 20s guy and when they are near the goal line Ridley and Bolden will become bigger parts of the offense.

could I get a source on this?

 

[Chaka]

By all means, have fun, but the NFL and specifically the performance of offenses in the NFL is so vastly different than it was in 1962 that I think you're wasting your time.

Wanna know how many times a RB has hit 80 catches in the last 5 seasons? Once. Darren Sproles 2011. In the last 10 seasons it has happened 4 times; Sproles, Bush in 2006, Steven Jackson in 2006 and Westbrook in 2007.

how many times in the last year has a rb been on pace for 80 catches, and who were they?

Don't know, don't care, doesn't matter.

 

[Chaka]

My bad on the stats...he had four in 10 games last year...the 10 is career in 18 games (which is what I read incorrectly)...to be honest with you I thought that # was high but I assumed that # must be because of the three in a playoff game...but that was the year before against Houston...totally screwed that up...

I still see him in that 8 range...after Gronk I see him being their biggest weapon...while he's not a TE like Hernandez he will have that swiss-army knife role that they envisioned for Hernandez...he'll run the ball, catch short passes and get longer ones (hopefully he can hold onto the ball on that wheel route they run for him...he left a few real big plays on the field last year)...

Overall if you don't think Vereen is getting in the end-zone I see the idea of knocking him down in the rankings as legit...I just really believe in that eightish number and due to that I have him as a solid #2 PPR RB...

The problem is that while he may be their best weapon after Gronk (I don't necessarily agree) he is a between the 20s guy and when they are near the goal line Ridley and Bolden will become bigger parts of the offense.

could I get a source on this?

No. Can I get a source that he is a goal line guy?

If you choose to play the semantics card let me clear it up in advance; my definition of a "between the 20s guy" is one who is not a regular or primary option near the goal line, let's call it inside the five. I am guessing you understood that. Would you like me to edit the post to say "between the 5s" or will you provide evidence to the contrary? I am always happy to reevaluate my position in light of solid arguments or evidence.

 

[Boston]

This is another example of why I think it is important to consider projecting an entire team's offense and not just isolated players. Based on some projections for guys that have been discussed recently in the Shark Pool . . .

Vereen = 80 receptions

Edelman = 100 receptions

Gronk = 80 receptions

Amendola = 80 receptions

Dobson = 80 receptions

Thompkins = 60 receptions

LaFell = 50 receptions

That's already 530 receptions, not counting any other RB, TE, or WR. Last year, other RB had roughly 40 receptions, other TE about 15, and other WR in the neighborhood of 15 catches. Brady's career high for completions is 401.

So from the names I listed, we would have to eliminate approximately 200 total receptions to make things even remotely close to reality. Feel free to mix and match who loses out.

This would add up to 335 receptions . . .

Vereen = 50 receptions

Edelman = 70 receptions

Gronk = 70 receptions

Amendola = 50 receptions

Dobson = 40 receptions

Thompkins = 30 receptions

LaFell = 25 receptions

The point being, there is only so much production to go around, and they can't all put up monster numbers.

Agreed that the #'s can get out of whack...real tough to guess on this without knowing about Gronk...everything revolves around him...if I had to guess I would do it off of 400 because I do think their passing game will be more like 2011 and 2012 than 2013...so here would be my guess:

Gronk-85

Vereen-75

Edelman-80...love him but it does appear other weapons have the potential to step-up (always dangerous buying into preseason hype) so I have dropped him off late

Amendola-65

Dobson/Thompkins/Lafell-100 combined...

Misc-10

That gets me to 415...feel free to shave off of 15 where you see fit...

Another x-factor here is James White and what his role in the passing game will be...I have zero clue how that will shake out but it definitely bears watching early in the season...

I know everyone likes to throw MISCELLANEOUS overboard, but there are ALWAYS leftovers . . . and they never go away. But it's not sexy to allocate bottom feeder production, even though every team has some.

Since Brady came to town, here were the reception totals each season for all the flotsam and jetsam AFTER the Top 6 players in terms of receptions. So most years it would have been either 4WR-1TE-1RB or 3WR-2TE-1RB as the top guys . . . and then everyone else. Well, here are the totals each season in the "everybody else" category added together:

2013 - 66

2012 - 43

2011 - 27

2010 - 52

2009 - 61

2008 - 24

2007 - 28

2006 - 83

2005 - 96

2004 - 74

2003 - 75

2002 - 78

2001 - 66

Now you did list 7 guys by name and 10 catches by miscellaneous to come up with your 415 receptions. I doubt Thompkins/Dobson/LaFell each get 33/33/33 for receptions, so it might have to be something like 45/30/25. If so, that would mean your NOT TOP 6 would have 35 receptions combined. Certainly that starts to get into the realm of being more reasonable. However, that still means any TE not named Gronk (whether he is on or not on the roster currently) and all other RB not named Vereen would be limited to a total of 10 receptions. One would think that Ridley and White and whomever else they roll out there would get more than 10 catches on the season.

Clearly if guys get hurt that changes the entire equation, and given the propensity for some of these players to be out of the line up, one has to expect that some folks will miss some time. As you said, that's where it gets really hard to predict and how they will reset and reshuffle the pass distribution will get interesting.

I think there is zero doubt that injuries will have a big effect on this...out of Gronk, Vereen, Edelman, Amendola and Dobson you have five guys that have all missed significant time early in their careers...as a Pats fan I would love to see all of these guys on the field for 16 games but that's probably not going to happen...an injury to either Gronk, Vereen or Edelman could change numbers dramatically while an injury to Amendola would open the door for someone like Thompkins or LaFell to make a little more noise...Dobson is a total wildcard...until I see him on the field and healthy I don't really know what to make of him...he showed some nice flashes last year but it seems like his injury has a chance to nag him...I don't say that based on anything concrete, just a gut-feeling from what you hear about him...

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

My bad on the stats...he had four in 10 games last year...the 10 is career in 18 games (which is what I read incorrectly)...to be honest with you I thought that # was high but I assumed that # must be because of the three in a playoff game...but that was the year before against Houston...totally screwed that up...

I still see him in that 8 range...after Gronk I see him being their biggest weapon...while he's not a TE like Hernandez he will have that swiss-army knife role that they envisioned for Hernandez...he'll run the ball, catch short passes and get longer ones (hopefully he can hold onto the ball on that wheel route they run for him...he left a few real big plays on the field last year)...

Overall if you don't think Vereen is getting in the end-zone I see the idea of knocking him down in the rankings as legit...I just really believe in that eightish number and due to that I have him as a solid #2 PPR RB...

The problem is that while he may be their best weapon after Gronk (I don't necessarily agree) he is a between the 20s guy and when they are near the goal line Ridley and Bolden will become bigger parts of the offense.

could I get a source on this?

No. Can I get a source that he is a goal line guy?

If you choose to play the semantics card let me clear it up in advance; my definition of a "between the 20s guy" is one who is not a regular or primary option near the goal line, let's call it inside the five. I am guessing you understood that. Would you like me to edit the post to say "between the 5s" or will you provide evidence to the contrary? I am always happy to reevaluate my position in light of solid arguments or evidence.

Did i make that claim?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Vereen's TDs last year were from 9, 6, 4 and 5 yards.

See, Chaka, it's possible to not being just a between the 20s guy and not a goal line guy either.

 

[Chaka]

My bad on the stats...he had four in 10 games last year...the 10 is career in 18 games (which is what I read incorrectly)...to be honest with you I thought that # was high but I assumed that # must be because of the three in a playoff game...but that was the year before against Houston...totally screwed that up...

I still see him in that 8 range...after Gronk I see him being their biggest weapon...while he's not a TE like Hernandez he will have that swiss-army knife role that they envisioned for Hernandez...he'll run the ball, catch short passes and get longer ones (hopefully he can hold onto the ball on that wheel route they run for him...he left a few real big plays on the field last year)...

Overall if you don't think Vereen is getting in the end-zone I see the idea of knocking him down in the rankings as legit...I just really believe in that eightish number and due to that I have him as a solid #2 PPR RB...

The problem is that while he may be their best weapon after Gronk (I don't necessarily agree) he is a between the 20s guy and when they are near the goal line Ridley and Bolden will become bigger parts of the offense.

could I get a source on this?

No. Can I get a source that he is a goal line guy?

If you choose to play the semantics card let me clear it up in advance; my definition of a "between the 20s guy" is one who is not a regular or primary option near the goal line, let's call it inside the five. I am guessing you understood that. Would you like me to edit the post to say "between the 5s" or will you provide evidence to the contrary? I am always happy to reevaluate my position in light of solid arguments or evidence.

Did i make that claim?

Seriously, guy? Seriously?

At times you can be downright intransigent. It seems that you disagree with the notion that Vereen is a yardage guy and will be limited in scoring opportunities. Is that the case? If so is it too much to ask you to defend that position? If not would you clarify why you needed a source to defend my stance?

It takes a lot of effort to get you to provide any information and you end up wasting a lot of time and space in these threads.

 

[Chaka]

Fine, I give up. Vereen is not a time share guy who will have to rely on yardage and catches to inflate his fantasy value because he will get limited work around the goal line.

So what is his role then? Lead back in line for 250+ touches including plenty of opportunities at the stripe?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I have to defend my request for a source on some info you posted?

 

[MoveToSkypager]

I enjoyed Larry and Chaka's posts here. Larry of course was right, but that's no matter.

 

[Chaka]

I have to defend my request for a source on some info you posted?

You don't have to do anything.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

I have to defend my request for a source on some info you posted?

You don't have to do anything.

Sure he does. He has to convert oxygen to carbon dioxide for starters.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Fine, I give up. Vereen is not a time share guy who will have to rely on yardage and catches to inflate his fantasy value because he will get limited work around the goal line.

So what is his role then? Lead back in line for 250+ touches including plenty of opportunities at the stripe?

Why so defensive? I was just pointing out that all four of Vereen's touchdowns were from inside the 10 last year, when you suggested that was merely a between the 20s guy. No, he likely won't be a goal line back, and, no, he likely won't get 250 touches, but he won't have to to be as good as some of us think he will be.

 

[Ilov80s]

What I like about Vareen this year is that if you take his stats from last year, prorate them over 16 games and triple them, they are just ridiculously great numbers.