The Gut Check No. 191: Rookie Impact Series - RBs (1 Viewer)

[Matt Waldman]

Rookie Impact Series Part I: RBs

Here's where I stand with the RBs as we head into training camp and we know which teams they will begin their careers.

 

[baconisgood]

Some good stuff- something I disagree with

However, the true reason for a firmer ceiling on the rookie's opportunities will likely have to do with the ineffectiveness of the passing game. It's difficult for me to imagine that Cleveland will have enough consistency with Jake Delhomme, two second-year receivers and the erratic and underachieving Ben Watson to provide Hardesty long enough drives to earn more than 15 carries per game.

Last year the teams with the highest # of running attemptsJetsPanthersDolphinsBengalsTitansBrownsNone of them had a 'good' passing game, and many of them had flat out poor passing games. Some of these attempts are 'other' attempts like Cribbs but even so the Brown's offense averaged > 25 RB rushes +>3.5 RB receptions a game, with a terrible passing offense. Delhomme + Ben Watson + 2nd year receivers instead of rookies probably means a slightly stronger passing game.

 

[Nagle2998]

For where Hardesty is going in most rookie drafts I think he has great value and I did my best to get him in every league I was in but only got him in three our of four. I think outside of Mathews he is going to be the top fantasy rookie this year but I did the same thing with Ron Dayne so take it for what it's worth.

 

[Matt Waldman]

Some good stuff- something I disagree with

However, the true reason for a firmer ceiling on the rookie's opportunities will likely have to do with the ineffectiveness of the passing game. It's difficult for me to imagine that Cleveland will have enough consistency with Jake Delhomme, two second-year receivers and the erratic and underachieving Ben Watson to provide Hardesty long enough drives to earn more than 15 carries per game.

Last year the teams with the highest # of running attemptsJets - have one of the best Panthers - Matt Moore completed nearly 62 percent of his passesDolphins - Henne completed nearly 61 percent of his passesBengals - Carson Palmer completed 60 percent of his passes. TitansBrownsNone of them had a 'good' passing game, and many of them had flat out poor passing games. Some of these attempts are 'other' attempts like Cribbs but even so the Brown's offense averaged > 25 RB rushes +>3.5 RB receptions a game, with a terrible passing offense. Delhomme + Ben Watson + 2nd year receivers instead of rookies probably means a slightly stronger passing game.

I think there is a difference between an effective passing game that helps teams become productive running teams for fantasy football and those that don't. The Browns had three weeks before between weeks 1-13 where they had an RB produce at least 10 fantasy points last year. Jerome Harrison didn't become good fantasy play until week 13. Projecting for the season is different than projecting for the playoffs. The Browns running game was an abject fantasy failure during the regular season; a massive success in the fantasy playoffs. If you drafted the Browns running game for your starting lineup, you probably didn't get a chance to reap the benefits of the playoffs. The Browns also switched QBs too often and couldn't generate enough offense in the passing game to help the ground game. Brady Quinn completed 53 percent of his passes. Carson Palmer, Chad Henne, and Matt Moore completed over 60 percent of theirs. Vince Young and Mark Sanchez play behind two of the better offensive lines in football that actually can convert opportunities at a higher level of efficiency than a team like Cleveland that might have received a lot of attempts and did very little for the entire regular fantasy season. The Jets and Bengals had good enough defenses to keep the running game a viable weapon despite the passing game not being as productive. These teams had what I call effective, but not fantasy productive passing offenses. All the teams you mentioned other than the Browns could actually move the chains with its passing games so they were effective enough to run productively, but not productive enough through the air to win just from the passing game alone. While the Browns have the makings of a good run-blocking line and they certainly dominated some horrible defenses at the end, the Delhomme/Wallace situation isn't stable enough for my belief to raise Hardesty's ceiling.

 

[saintfool]

Regarding Tate:

Outlook: If Tate wins the job outright, he could be an 1100-yard back in this explosive passing offense that will make an opposing defense pay for consistently stacking the box to stop the run. However, Arian Foster has shown too much so far not to earn more opportunities even if I'm wrong about him being a better player than Tate. The Texans will remain too enamored with what Slaton showed a few times per game in 2008 not to hope he'll return to form as an electric change of pace. Put this together, and Tate looks like a back destined to average 10-12 carries at best, but on too inconsistent of a basis to count on him as anything more than a desperation bye week option this year. I think 800-yard upside is generous, probably too generous.

This analysis seems counter-intuitive to me somehow. Foster had two nice games in weeks 16-17 but that's almost his entire body of work. This qualifies as having "shown too much so far" in a udfa that started those games largely because of injuries to Slaton? that's going out of your way to make the case for foster and make a dig at tate. all tate did was get drafted in R2 by kubiak and the texans.

 

[baconisgood]

The Browns had three weeks before between weeks 1-13 where they had an RB produce at least 10 fantasy points last year

Jerome Harrison didn't become good fantasy play until week 13

Jamal Lewis averaged 15.9 rushes and 0.9 receptions/game the first 11 weeks of the season (9 games played). His, and the Browns offenses, problem was 3.5 y/c average. Harrison became relevant week 12 with 17 touches for 97 yards and 2 TDs. IIRC he was banged up week 13 and Chris Jennings got 20 carries and a TD after Harrison left the game (Harrison had 9 touches before leaving). Lewis also missed weeks 3+4- week 4 against a good Cinci Defense Harrison put up 152 yards on 34 touches.The lead back for Cleveland was fantasy relevant in every game that Jamal Lewis didn't play in with the exception being on the road in Bal where Harrison got 85 yards on 21 touches. If Hardesty wins the starting job his is almost certainly in line for 17+ touches a game which would still leave 11+ touches a game for Harrison/Hillis at last years pace, which is based on a crappy Jamal Lewis last year.

Panthers - Matt Moore completed nearly 62 percent of his passes

Delhomme completed 55% and threw 18 picks in the first 11 games and Carolina was still able to run the ball, Anderson/Quinn had worse passing statistics than Delhomme as well.

 

[Todem]

CJ Spiller will be a major upgrade for the Bills. He will be getting the ball in all 3 phases of the game (running, passing, special teams). The guy has such a high ceiling....in fact the highest among the rookie backs. His talent has elite written all over him. I think Spiller has the biggest impact to his team. Fantasy wise he may be top 2 among this years crop of rookies. I think Matthews has the best situation with really no competition but his OL better improve big time...or he may have a YPC like Forte's rookie season. The difference will be Forte was the offense in 2008...Mathews will not be the focal point.

Best also has a great opportunity in front of him. I just question his size. He is a small back. talent is mad but his size can become an issue come the later half of the season. And yeah I know small backs have made it in the league....but he is not a 20 plus carry a week back....I just don't see it.

If I had to rank fantasy numbers this season

1) Matthews (his TD numbers should be stout)

2) Spiller

3) Best

4) Hardesty

5) Tate

 

[Matt Waldman]

Regarding Tate:

Outlook: If Tate wins the job outright, he could be an 1100-yard back in this explosive passing offense that will make an opposing defense pay for consistently stacking the box to stop the run. However, Arian Foster has shown too much so far not to earn more opportunities even if I'm wrong about him being a better player than Tate. The Texans will remain too enamored with what Slaton showed a few times per game in 2008 not to hope he'll return to form as an electric change of pace. Put this together, and Tate looks like a back destined to average 10-12 carries at best, but on too inconsistent of a basis to count on him as anything more than a desperation bye week option this year. I think 800-yard upside is generous, probably too generous.

This analysis seems counter-intuitive to me somehow. Foster had two nice games in weeks 16-17 but that's almost his entire body of work. This qualifies as having "shown too much so far" in a udfa that started those games largely because of injuries to Slaton? that's going out of your way to make the case for foster and make a dig at tate. all tate did was get drafted in R2 by kubiak and the texans.

I think your language "make a dig at Tate" sounds as if you believe I have something personal against Ben Tate rather than that I look at the way Tate played at Auburn and simply don't think he's that good of a player. I don't think Foster will blight out Tate's chances to even see the field (although there is a chance). I'm stating Foster has shown too much not to get a chance to earn time in combination with Slaton for Tate's carries to be limited 10-12. If you believe that the Texans have been successful acquiring RBs during the Kubiak era then I can understand why you believe a round two RB like Tate would be a better player than a UDFA like Foster. However, I would argue you're presuming that Tate is better based on his draft position by a team that I believe hasn't been good at selecting RBs in the draft. Tate wasn't considered this strong of an RB prospect to earn that high of a round of selection in many circles. Foster was considered a potential first-day talent but there were questions about character and he lacked enough body of work for teams to feel comfortable taking him. The argument on Foster was if he had one more year of good play, he could have been a first day pick. Counter-intuitive argument? Maybe. But wrong? We'll find out

 

[Shutout]

Regarding Tate:

Outlook: If Tate wins the job outright, he could be an 1100-yard back in this explosive passing offense that will make an opposing defense pay for consistently stacking the box to stop the run. However, Arian Foster has shown too much so far not to earn more opportunities even if I'm wrong about him being a better player than Tate. The Texans will remain too enamored with what Slaton showed a few times per game in 2008 not to hope he'll return to form as an electric change of pace. Put this together, and Tate looks like a back destined to average 10-12 carries at best, but on too inconsistent of a basis to count on him as anything more than a desperation bye week option this year. I think 800-yard upside is generous, probably too generous.

This analysis seems counter-intuitive to me somehow. Foster had two nice games in weeks 16-17 but that's almost his entire body of work. This qualifies as having "shown too much so far" in a udfa that started those games largely because of injuries to Slaton? that's going out of your way to make the case for foster and make a dig at tate. all tate did was get drafted in R2 by kubiak and the texans.

I agree with the overall theme of the original post. To me, its basically pointing out that Foster has indeed played well in his opportunities. Yes, its a small sample, but its still two more games than Tate. I think its expected that you give an incumbent a chance and Foster seems to be doing that, especially with some time missed by Tate. But overall, the reason I tend to agree with the gist of the quote is because its Kubiak and his philosophy re: RBs tends to suggest that, if healthy, it will be a mixture of players and not one guy dominating the touches week in and week out. From what I know (have heard), they made a distinct effort to get Tate because Kubiak has been obsessed with getting that "big" back that can run inside and Chris Brown has not been reliable enough to do that. They actually preferred Toby but screwed themselves with the trade with the Vikes but knew that either Toby or Tate would be there. That whole line of thinking seems to indicate to me that they want multiple guys to fill roles. Overall, I have to think that if they truly wanted a bellcow back, they would have used their 1st rounder to move in position to do so.

Re: Hardesty...I think a lot of people are going to disappointed in this one. I don't think Hardesty is talented enough to just take total control of that job. I think Harrison, Cribbs, and perhaps even Davis will have roles. Add to it that even Hillis may have some vulture work and that the Brown simply aren't at a point to control games and run ad naseum, it all adds up to mediocre to me. If you are looking at the numbers only, the Browns are quite skewed as they REALLY padded their run stats down the stretch last year. I don't see that as a sign of what they will do this year against the Ravens, Steelers, Bengals, etc. I see it more of a sign as what they did against weaker and uninterested teams down the stretch.

I think clearly the top rookie RBs this year will be Matthews and Best and I really don't expect any surprises from anyone else this year.

 

[Matt Waldman]

The Browns had three weeks before between weeks 1-13 where they had an RB produce at least 10 fantasy points last year

Jerome Harrison didn't become good fantasy play until week 13

Jamal Lewis averaged 15.9 rushes and 0.9 receptions/game the first 11 weeks of the season (9 games played). His, and the Browns offenses, problem was 3.5 y/c average. Harrison became relevant week 12 with 17 touches for 97 yards and 2 TDs. IIRC he was banged up week 13 and Chris Jennings got 20 carries and a TD after Harrison left the game (Harrison had 9 touches before leaving). Lewis also missed weeks 3+4- week 4 against a good Cinci Defense Harrison put up 152 yards on 34 touches.The lead back for Cleveland was fantasy relevant in every game that Jamal Lewis didn't play in with the exception being on the road in Bal where Harrison got 85 yards on 21 touches. If Hardesty wins the starting job his is almost certainly in line for 17+ touches a game which would still leave 11+ touches a game for Harrison/Hillis at last years pace, which is based on a crappy Jamal Lewis last year.

Panthers - Matt Moore completed nearly 62 percent of his passes

Delhomme completed 55% and threw 18 picks in the first 11 games and Carolina was still able to run the ball, Anderson/Quinn had worse passing statistics than Delhomme as well.

Again, name a Browns running back that was a consistently productive fantasy starter during the fantasy season?The Panthers have a strong offensive line that has been a proven unit. The Browns did not. While I agree that the Browns could get better basing it off number of attempts last year when those numerous attempts didn't equate to consistent fantasy production. I don't think a player with less than 10 fantasy points per game can really be considered productive. 6-8 points in a game might be relevant, but it won't make you competitive.

 

[Matt Waldman]

Regarding Tate:

Outlook: If Tate wins the job outright, he could be an 1100-yard back in this explosive passing offense that will make an opposing defense pay for consistently stacking the box to stop the run. However, Arian Foster has shown too much so far not to earn more opportunities even if I'm wrong about him being a better player than Tate. The Texans will remain too enamored with what Slaton showed a few times per game in 2008 not to hope he'll return to form as an electric change of pace. Put this together, and Tate looks like a back destined to average 10-12 carries at best, but on too inconsistent of a basis to count on him as anything more than a desperation bye week option this year. I think 800-yard upside is generous, probably too generous.

This analysis seems counter-intuitive to me somehow. Foster had two nice games in weeks 16-17 but that's almost his entire body of work. This qualifies as having "shown too much so far" in a udfa that started those games largely because of injuries to Slaton? that's going out of your way to make the case for foster and make a dig at tate. all tate did was get drafted in R2 by kubiak and the texans.

I agree with the overall theme of the original post. To me, its basically pointing out that Foster has indeed played well in his opportunities. Yes, its a small sample, but its still two more games than Tate. I think its expected that you give an incumbent a chance and Foster seems to be doing that, especially with some time missed by Tate. But overall, the reason I tend to agree with the gist of the quote is because its Kubiak and his philosophy re: RBs tends to suggest that, if healthy, it will be a mixture of players and not one guy dominating the touches week in and week out. From what I know (have heard), they made a distinct effort to get Tate because Kubiak has been obsessed with getting that "big" back that can run inside and Chris Brown has not been reliable enough to do that. They actually preferred Toby but screwed themselves with the trade with the Vikes but knew that either Toby or Tate would be there. That whole line of thinking seems to indicate to me that they want multiple guys to fill roles. Overall, I have to think that if they truly wanted a bellcow back, they would have used their 1st rounder to move in position to do so.

Re: Hardesty...I think a lot of people are going to disappointed in this one. I don't think Hardesty is talented enough to just take total control of that job. I think Harrison, Cribbs, and perhaps even Davis will have roles. Add to it that even Hillis may have some vulture work and that the Brown simply aren't at a point to control games and run ad naseum, it all adds up to mediocre to me. If you are looking at the numbers only, the Browns are quite skewed as they REALLY padded their run stats down the stretch last year. I don't see that as a sign of what they will do this year against the Ravens, Steelers, Bengals, etc. I see it more of a sign as what they did against weaker and uninterested teams down the stretch.

I think clearly the top rookie RBs this year will be Matthews and Best and I really don't expect any surprises from anyone else this year.

See, I believe Hardesty is talented enough. I just don't believe the Browns will be good enough this year to maximize his talent. I see Hardesty as a fantasy RB3 with enough games to excite folks for next year. My debate partner thinks I'm not giving him enough upside with the Brownies.

 

[baconisgood]

But overall, the reason I tend to agree with the gist of the quote is because its Kubiak and his philosophy re: RBs tends to suggest that, if healthy, it will be a mixture of players and not one guy dominating the touches week in and week out.

This isn't my impression of Kubiak from how the past three seasons have played out. In 2008 Slaton averaged 19.9 touches a game, in 2007 Ron Dayne had 210 touches in 12 games (and 1 touch in a 13th game). In 2009 a lot of different RBs touched the ball but Arian Foster had 17, 3, 19 and 23 touches in the games he got looks. Ryan Moats had 15, 25, 19, 15, 11, 13, 12 and 4. Slaton averaged 16 touches a game but that was clearly dragged down by his injured 2nd half of the season. In his first 7 games he got 19.5 touches a game. Because their team was so banged up it was hard to know who would get the most carries but It appears as if Kubiak wants a lead back to give 18-20 carries a game to.

 

[kremenull]

Some good stuff- something I disagree with

However, the true reason for a firmer ceiling on the rookie's opportunities will likely have to do with the ineffectiveness of the passing game. It's difficult for me to imagine that Cleveland will have enough consistency with Jake Delhomme, two second-year receivers and the erratic and underachieving Ben Watson to provide Hardesty long enough drives to earn more than 15 carries per game.

Last year the teams with the highest # of running attemptsJetsPanthersDolphinsBengalsTitansBrownsNone of them had a 'good' passing game, and many of them had flat out poor passing games. Some of these attempts are 'other' attempts like Cribbs but even so the Brown's offense averaged > 25 RB rushes +>3.5 RB receptions a game, with a terrible passing offense. Delhomme + Ben Watson + 2nd year receivers instead of rookies probably means a slightly stronger passing game.

I highly respect your player evaluation and analysis. I enjoy the thorough breakdown in explaining the key traits for projecting. player success, I believe you've added quite a bit of value to this site.That said, I don't see the need for the "if Chris Johnson were a 4.5 forty guy" to enter into this latest piece. I get the point that you were making about speed not being overly critical in relation to several other key traits for runners, but a truly undersized 4.5ish RB in the NFL is almost useless. Teams have to literallly account for the entire width of the field vs CJ4.24. Without the blazing burst and speed, the defense can constrict the field due to the limitations of a slower back in stretching the field (horizontally), which translates into running lanes. And without the added creases (running lanes), a much slower back will need to rely heavily on power to excel. In this case, Johnson obviously doesn't have that requisite power and I don't believe hed generate much YAC (yards-after-contact) if he continually had to run more square-on into defenders without the benefit of the angles he creates primarily due to his phenemenal speed/burst. Not trying to nitpick here as I think you have the most valuable content on staff, but I think this article didn't need such a speculative (and questionable) interjection. Keep up the good work!Peace!

 

[Matt Waldman]

Some good stuff- something I disagree with

However, the true reason for a firmer ceiling on the rookie's opportunities will likely have to do with the ineffectiveness of the passing game. It's difficult for me to imagine that Cleveland will have enough consistency with Jake Delhomme, two second-year receivers and the erratic and underachieving Ben Watson to provide Hardesty long enough drives to earn more than 15 carries per game.

Last year the teams with the highest # of running attemptsJetsPanthersDolphinsBengalsTitansBrownsNone of them had a 'good' passing game, and many of them had flat out poor passing games. Some of these attempts are 'other' attempts like Cribbs but even so the Brown's offense averaged > 25 RB rushes +>3.5 RB receptions a game, with a terrible passing offense. Delhomme + Ben Watson + 2nd year receivers instead of rookies probably means a slightly stronger passing game.

I highly respect your player evaluation and analysis. I enjoy the thorough breakdown in explaining the key traits for projecting. player success, I believe you've added quite a bit of value to this site.That said, I don't see the need for the "if Chris Johnson were a 4.5 forty guy" to enter into this latest piece. I get the point that you were making about speed not being overly critical in relation to several other key traits for runners, but a truly undersized 4.5ish RB in the NFL is almost useless. Teams have to literallly account for the entire width of the field vs CJ4.24. Without the blazing burst and speed, the defense can constrict the field due to the limitations of a slower back in stretching the field (horizontally), which translates into running lanes. And without the added creases (running lanes), a much slower back will need to rely heavily on power to excel. In this case, Johnson obviously doesn't have that requisite power and I don't believe hed generate much YAC (yards-after-contact) if he continually had to run more square-on into defenders without the benefit of the angles he creates primarily due to his phenemenal speed/burst. Not trying to nitpick here as I think you have the most valuable content on staff, but I think this article didn't need such a speculative (and questionable) interjection. Keep up the good work!Peace!

Thanks for the kind words.My take on CJ is that if he were a 4.5 guy that his acceleration would still be good enough to be very dangerous as a runner because the rest of his skills are what make him good, not just his speed. I think his vision, cutting ability, and balance would make him good enough to be a 1300-yard back. I just don't think that we would have to presume that Johnson would have to run square into a defender because he ran a 4.5-40 rather than a 4.24. If anything, he might get hit with glancing blow that brings him down for a 15-yard gain rather than not get hit and score from 50 yards away. That was the point I was making because Terrell Davis was considered a 4.5-4.6 guy and started in this league at 190-195 lbs., which I think would have qualified as him being undersized and useless. But to be as honest as possible about this segment, I thought of adding it (in addition to the reasons we both stated) because I believe that if I have an opportunity to drive readers to the Shark Pool by quoting something that was posted in here, then that helps the site and the quality of posts here. Some people in the SP never look at articles. Some people look at articles but never come to the SP. So I thought this might be a draw at the risk of being too tangential, which you felt it was...Anyhow, no worries about "nitpicking," I post the stuff here to spark debate and I hardly expect people to agree with an entire 10-12 pages of content - or even half of it

 

[jsharlan]

If you believe that the Texans have been successful acquiring RBs during the Kubiak era then I can understand why you believe a round two RB like Tate would be a better player than a UDFA like Foster. However, I would argue you're presuming that Tate is better based on his draft position by a team that I believe hasn't been good at selecting RBs in the draft.

Before Tate the only RBs Kubiak has drafted was 6th rounder Wali Lundy and 3rd rounder Steve Slaton. I dunno if there is enough there to trend and say that Kubiak hasn't been good at selecting RBs when he's only selected two. Slaton's rookie year was very good for a 3rd rounder and Lundy was a 6th round pick with no real expectations. I'm not sold on Tate yet myself and I see this as more of a committee because Slaton is just too talented in space not to be on the field. There will be no real workhouse here imo. Kubiak has a knack for finding players that fit his system so I think Tate can find success in this offense, but if he can't block he wont get the playing time. Kubiak is big on needing RBs to be able to block. Hell its the only reason that waste of life Chris Brown stayed around as long as he did. Slaton had his issues in his sophomore year, but everyone forgets the offensive line was down two starters and the center played hurt. That had a major impact on the running game.

 

[saintfool]

I think your language "make a dig at Tate" sounds as if you believe I have something personal against Ben Tate rather than that I look at the way Tate played at Auburn and simply don't think he's that good of a player. I don't think Foster will blight out Tate's chances to even see the field (although there is a chance). I'm stating Foster has shown too much not to get a chance to earn time in combination with Slaton for Tate's carries to be limited 10-12.

i still don't understand foster has shown to warrant that faith. while he had a great junior year, he had a really lackluster senior year (injuries and a bad UT team will do that). he didn't push to start over slaton and only got significant playing time once slaton went down to injury. it's great that he took advantage of the opportunity in those two games but let's not overstate things.at the end of the season, everyone knew that the texans would be looking for a bigger RB to shoulder the load with slaton. rather than reward foster for his performance in those two important games, they spent a R2 pick to grab tate. not exactly a ringing endorsement of foster, imo.i don't want to make a case for tate vs foster on talent because it's so subjective at this point. foster has the edge going into the season because he's got familiarity with the kubiak system. in the end , i think kubiak will make an effort to see his R2 pick succeed because he made a statement with that selection.

 

[Matt Waldman]

I think your language "make a dig at Tate" sounds as if you believe I have something personal against Ben Tate rather than that I look at the way Tate played at Auburn and simply don't think he's that good of a player. I don't think Foster will blight out Tate's chances to even see the field (although there is a chance). I'm stating Foster has shown too much not to get a chance to earn time in combination with Slaton for Tate's carries to be limited 10-12.

i still don't understand foster has shown to warrant that faith. while he had a great junior year, he had a really lackluster senior year (injuries and a bad UT team will do that). he didn't push to start over slaton and only got significant playing time once slaton went down to injury. it's great that he took advantage of the opportunity in those two games but let's not overstate things.at the end of the season, everyone knew that the texans would be looking for a bigger RB to shoulder the load with slaton. rather than reward foster for his performance in those two important games, they spent a R2 pick to grab tate. not exactly a ringing endorsement of foster, imo.i don't want to make a case for tate vs foster on talent because it's so subjective at this point. foster has the edge going into the season because he's got familiarity with the kubiak system. in the end , i think kubiak will make an effort to see his R2 pick succeed because he made a statement with that selection.

Excellent point about getting a round two back not being a ringing endorsement of Foster. Very possible that Kubiak will make an effort to see his R2 pick succeed and likely true. I just don't think it will 1000-1100 yards true as a rookie. I think it will be 500-800 yards true in a committee.

 

[jacobo_moses]

ONe thing I don't get Matt Waldman is this. If Jonathan Dwyer is so horrible at pass protection, (and apparently that can't be taught) why was he rated has a top 5 RB going into this draft before the NFL COmbine, and the drug testing, scared owners off.

If he was rated that high woudn't he have to be semi decent at pass protection?

Doesn't make sense. Seems like you are way down on Dwyer by the way. I'll admit I'm semi high on him, and I realize he has a few areas he really needs to improve. But it seems like you are lower on him then a lot of the FBG staff.

 

[Creed Bratton]

Expect the rookie to catch at least 30-40 passes in addition to earning 220-240 carries.

That just seems like a lot of carries to predict for Best. I know it only averages out to 14-15/gm but I'll be very surprised if he's at 200+ at the end of the year. He's got some things going for him in the talent dept. but he's got some knocks in the chances for 200+ carries dept. He's slightly built (looks like WR legs), he's a rookie, he's on a team that plays from behind early and often.

You may believe that Jahvid Best is a slightly undersized rookie running back and those factors will keep him from getting 220-240 carries, but his coach doesn't seem to share that view. Schwartz came out and said that he doesn't have any preconceived notions about how he should be used and implied that Best will get the carries this season. It's certainly valid to think that maybe he is too small and can't handle the pounding or is an injury risk(views that i'm not inclined to agree with myself), but his coach seems like he might give his rookie a chance to prove otherwise.

 

[kremenull]

Expect the rookie to catch at least 30-40 passes in addition to earning 220-240 carries.

That just seems like a lot of carries to predict for Best. I know it only averages out to 14-15/gm but I'll be very surprised if he's at 200+ at the end of the year. He's got some things going for him in the talent dept. but he's got some knocks in the chances for 200+ carries dept. He's slightly built (looks like WR legs), he's a rookie, he's on a team that plays from behind early and often.Also, as I was reading I was so pleased to actually remember Wali Lundy's name after a few moments of thought, but I was beaten to my point by jsharlan. As he noted, one 3rd and one 6th round selection do not make a large enough sample size to say Rick Smith has been a poor drafter of RBs. We've been very poor at selecting veteran help (although I think Moats is a quality Slaton backup), no one will argue that, but we've yet to take a guy as early as Tate. I've been very impressed with our drafts so I'm not jumping to a conclusion on this one, but it's hard to bet against Rick Smith. We've got two small backs on our roster. Tate seems to be the north south guy Kubiak wanted yet Foster has apparently shined (as much as you can w/o pads) while Tate's been hurt. But more importantly, watching all the games, I firmly believe Kubiak prefers a split when two solid options are available. If Slaton, Foster, and Tate all prove to be viable options this year, I don't expect any of them to really stand out (RB2 value or better). Given the preference for a power running game, I'd think it'd just be Tate/Foster pounding the ball but Slaton has proven so effective as a receiver I find it hard to believe he'd be phased out.

Every time I see guys state how a player's build, esp young RBs, is going to impede his outlook, I simply shake my head as to how my next point isn't understood.These are developing young men,they WILL get stronger, and in most cases, bigger. Best, and others like Spiller, Charles, Felix, CJ4.24, are no longer in school, they are full-time professional athletes. If you work at a computer all day as your job and no longer have to sit through lenghty classes and do homework, worry about money, the next meal, and be bogged down by all the daily activities and stresses associated with a college student, you'd think you'd be able to advance in your chosen field, correct? With the needed dedication, of course.These guys work out extensively when they are no longer in school, as their livelihood is to become better athletes. And teams have the infrastructure in place to guide these guys on what they need to do to improve. Weight gain and adding muscle mass for full-time, dedicated pro athletes is not hard to accomplish. For top-fligh guys, it's pretty much a given that their bodies will transform to some degree in order to perform their job. I think it would be foolish to believe that Best is not working on his lower body strength and development in preparation for his pro career.Just take a look this year at guys like Charles, CJ4.24, and Felix (well, he was already confirmed to be at 218-220 lbs last season) and how they've transformed their physiques. Guys like Best and Spiler appear to be dedicated and have the desire, IMO, to follow this same path as have other smaller backs of the past (Faulk, Westy, Tiki, Portis, Barry) in building up their bodies to at least not let this be the reason impeding their performance at this level. And not everyone has to be 220 or so to excel, some guys may only need to add a few lbs and strengthen the right areas (legs and core) like Barry Sanders and Marshall Faulk, for example. Best & Spiller fit their profile, IMO, in this regard. They will probably not play above 210, but anything between 204-210 for these guys should be fine if the added strength is attained......

 

[Creed Bratton]

Expect the rookie to catch at least 30-40 passes in addition to earning 220-240 carries.

That just seems like a lot of carries to predict for Best. I know it only averages out to 14-15/gm but I'll be very surprised if he's at 200+ at the end of the year. He's got some things going for him in the talent dept. but he's got some knocks in the chances for 200+ carries dept. He's slightly built (looks like WR legs), he's a rookie, he's on a team that plays from behind early and often.

You may believe that Jahvid Best is a slightly undersized rookie running back and those factors will keep him from getting 220-240 carries, but his coach doesn't seem to share that view. Schwartz came out and said that he doesn't have any preconceived notions about how he should be used and implied that Best will get the carries this season. It's certainly valid to think that maybe he is too small and can't handle the pounding or is an injury risk(views that i'm not inclined to agree with myself), but his coach seems like he might give his rookie a chance to prove otherwise.

I don't feel like being too small or being an injury risk or any other single factor stands out as what will keep him from 220-240 carries. There are so many factors that I feel that it is very likely that 200+ just doesn't happen. After the season is over I'm sure we'll be able to pinpoint the reason, but right now I just see too many potential obstacles to 220-240 carries. I mean, how many losing teams can afford to feed the ball to their RB? Steven Jackson is all I can think of. I just looked and Fred Jackson had 237/46. So, I guess it can happen but it sure doesn't look probable. And being on a bad team is just one obstacle. He's got a few. Every team would like to see their RB1 get at least 15 carries, but it just doesn't always work out like that. I like Best. I just feel like the optimism for his opportunities (and productivity from them) is out of control here in the shark pool. There is a chance these dreams could come true, but I think it is small enough that it makes it a really hard gamble to take.

Most teams in the NFL actually give their lead back at least 15 carries a game. Very few teams feed their running back like Steven Jackson, and he ends up with well over 320 carries in a 16 game season. Kevin Smith the last two seasons had to deal with many of the same team factors you mentioned, and he didn't have any problem getting the number of carries we're talking about.

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Expect the rookie to catch at least 30-40 passes in addition to earning 220-240 carries.

That just seems like a lot of carries to predict for Best. I know it only averages out to 14-15/gm but I'll be very surprised if he's at 200+ at the end of the year. He's got some things going for him in the talent dept. but he's got some knocks in the chances for 200+ carries dept. He's slightly built (looks like WR legs), he's a rookie, he's on a team that plays from behind early and often.Also, as I was reading I was so pleased to actually remember Wali Lundy's name after a few moments of thought, but I was beaten to my point by jsharlan. As he noted, one 3rd and one 6th round selection do not make a large enough sample size to say Rick Smith has been a poor drafter of RBs. We've been very poor at selecting veteran help (although I think Moats is a quality Slaton backup), no one will argue that, but we've yet to take a guy as early as Tate. I've been very impressed with our drafts so I'm not jumping to a conclusion on this one, but it's hard to bet against Rick Smith. We've got two small backs on our roster. Tate seems to be the north south guy Kubiak wanted yet Foster has apparently shined (as much as you can w/o pads) while Tate's been hurt. But more importantly, watching all the games, I firmly believe Kubiak prefers a split when two solid options are available. If Slaton, Foster, and Tate all prove to be viable options this year, I don't expect any of them to really stand out (RB2 value or better). Given the preference for a power running game, I'd think it'd just be Tate/Foster pounding the ball but Slaton has proven so effective as a receiver I find it hard to believe he'd be phased out.

Every time I see guys state how a player's build, esp young RBs, is going to impede his outlook, I simply shake my head as to how my next point isn't understood.These are developing young men,they WILL get stronger, and in most cases, bigger. Best, and others like Spiller, Charles, Felix, CJ4.24, are no longer in school, they are full-time professional athletes. If you work at a computer all day as your job and no longer have to sit through lenghty classes and do homework, worry about money, the next meal, and be bogged down by all the daily activities and stresses associated with a college student, you'd think you'd be able to advance in your chosen field, correct? With the needed dedication, of course.These guys work out extensively when they are no longer in school, as their livelihood is to become better athletes. And teams have the infrastructure in place to guide these guys on what they need to do to improve. Weight gain and adding muscle mass for full-time, dedicated pro athletes is not hard to accomplish. For top-fligh guys, it's pretty much a given that their bodies will transform to some degree in order to perform their job. I think it would be foolish to believe that Best is not working on his lower body strength and development in preparation for his pro career.Just take a look this year at guys like Charles, CJ4.24, and Felix (well, he was already confirmed to be at 218-220 lbs last season) and how they've transformed their physiques. Guys like Best and Spiler appear to be dedicated and have the desire, IMO, to follow this same path as have other smaller backs of the past (Faulk, Westy, Tiki, Portis, Barry) in building up their bodies to at least not let this be the reason impeding their performance at this level. And not everyone has to be 220 or so to excel, some guys may only need to add a few lbs and strengthen the right areas (legs and core) like Barry Sanders and Marshall Faulk, for example. Best & Spiller fit their profile, IMO, in this regard. They will probably not play above 210, but anything between 204-210 for these guys should be fine if the added strength is attained......

Did the weight gain work for Felix? He was still hurt last season.Jerious Norwood...he was skinny and talented and it didn't work.Slaton gained weight last year and was worse.Reggie Bush has never stayed healthy and is small.Story of Westy's career.I agree with your point....but it's a case by case basis. Best has already had concussion, neck, elbow, knee problems....in college. Could he gain weight in the NFL and stay completely healthy....it's possible. Is it likely...not so much.

 

[kremenull]

Expect the rookie to catch at least 30-40 passes in addition to earning 220-240 carries.

That just seems like a lot of carries to predict for Best. I know it only averages out to 14-15/gm but I'll be very surprised if he's at 200+ at the end of the year. He's got some things going for him in the talent dept. but he's got some knocks in the chances for 200+ carries dept. He's slightly built (looks like WR legs), he's a rookie, he's on a team that plays from behind early and often.Also, as I was reading I was so pleased to actually remember Wali Lundy's name after a few moments of thought, but I was beaten to my point by jsharlan. As he noted, one 3rd and one 6th round selection do not make a large enough sample size to say Rick Smith has been a poor drafter of RBs. We've been very poor at selecting veteran help (although I think Moats is a quality Slaton backup), no one will argue that, but we've yet to take a guy as early as Tate. I've been very impressed with our drafts so I'm not jumping to a conclusion on this one, but it's hard to bet against Rick Smith. We've got two small backs on our roster. Tate seems to be the north south guy Kubiak wanted yet Foster has apparently shined (as much as you can w/o pads) while Tate's been hurt. But more importantly, watching all the games, I firmly believe Kubiak prefers a split when two solid options are available. If Slaton, Foster, and Tate all prove to be viable options this year, I don't expect any of them to really stand out (RB2 value or better). Given the preference for a power running game, I'd think it'd just be Tate/Foster pounding the ball but Slaton has proven so effective as a receiver I find it hard to believe he'd be phased out.

Every time I see guys state how a player's build, esp young RBs, is going to impede his outlook, I simply shake my head as to how my next point isn't understood.These are developing young men,they WILL get stronger, and in most cases, bigger. Best, and others like Spiller, Charles, Felix, CJ4.24, are no longer in school, they are full-time professional athletes. If you work at a computer all day as your job and no longer have to sit through lenghty classes and do homework, worry about money, the next meal, and be bogged down by all the daily activities and stresses associated with a college student, you'd think you'd be able to advance in your chosen field, correct? With the needed dedication, of course.These guys work out extensively when they are no longer in school, as their livelihood is to become better athletes. And teams have the infrastructure in place to guide these guys on what they need to do to improve. Weight gain and adding muscle mass for full-time, dedicated pro athletes is not hard to accomplish. For top-fligh guys, it's pretty much a given that their bodies will transform to some degree in order to perform their job. I think it would be foolish to believe that Best is not working on his lower body strength and development in preparation for his pro career.Just take a look this year at guys like Charles, CJ4.24, and Felix (well, he was already confirmed to be at 218-220 lbs last season) and how they've transformed their physiques. Guys like Best and Spiler appear to be dedicated and have the desire, IMO, to follow this same path as have other smaller backs of the past (Faulk, Westy, Tiki, Portis, Barry) in building up their bodies to at least not let this be the reason impeding their performance at this level. And not everyone has to be 220 or so to excel, some guys may only need to add a few lbs and strengthen the right areas (legs and core) like Barry Sanders and Marshall Faulk, for example. Best & Spiller fit their profile, IMO, in this regard. They will probably not play above 210, but anything between 204-210 for these guys should be fine if the added strength is attained......

Did the weight gain work for Felix? He was still hurt last season.Jerious Norwood...he was skinny and talented and it didn't work.Slaton gained weight last year and was worse.Reggie Bush has never stayed healthy and is small.Story of Westy's career.I agree with your point....but it's a case by case basis. Best has already had concussion, neck, elbow, knee problems....in college. Could he gain weight in the NFL and stay completely healthy....it's possible. Is it likely...not so much.

I think we're talking about two different things here in relation to a player's size: 1) workload, and 2) health.I was inferring that a player's size is not necessarily an impediment to the workload that he can attain. Size has yet to stop CJ4.24 and MJD. And Tiki, Westbrook, Faulk, and Barry were all able to handle a pretty nice workload during their heydays. Injury isn't determined by your size, although smaller RBs can wear down a bit moreso than bigger guys as a season progresses. The type of injuries that Best has experienced have nothing to do with his size, IMO, as these same types of injuries have occurred to other, bigger RBs without the mention of their size being a factor. I think the weight gain has benefitted Felix as to how much more powerful he runs. In watching him last year, this guy is a lot better in-between the tackles than most people perceive him to be. Watch Out in '10!

 

[Matt Waldman]

Expect the rookie to catch at least 30-40 passes in addition to earning 220-240 carries.

That just seems like a lot of carries to predict for Best. I know it only averages out to 14-15/gm but I'll be very surprised if he's at 200+ at the end of the year. He's got some things going for him in the talent dept. but he's got some knocks in the chances for 200+ carries dept. He's slightly built (looks like WR legs), he's a rookie, he's on a team that plays from behind early and often.Also, as I was reading I was so pleased to actually remember Wali Lundy's name after a few moments of thought, but I was beaten to my point by jsharlan. As he noted, one 3rd and one 6th round selection do not make a large enough sample size to say Rick Smith has been a poor drafter of RBs. We've been very poor at selecting veteran help (although I think Moats is a quality Slaton backup), no one will argue that, but we've yet to take a guy as early as Tate. I've been very impressed with our drafts so I'm not jumping to a conclusion on this one, but it's hard to bet against Rick Smith. We've got two small backs on our roster. Tate seems to be the north south guy Kubiak wanted yet Foster has apparently shined (as much as you can w/o pads) while Tate's been hurt. But more importantly, watching all the games, I firmly believe Kubiak prefers a split when two solid options are available. If Slaton, Foster, and Tate all prove to be viable options this year, I don't expect any of them to really stand out (RB2 value or better). Given the preference for a power running game, I'd think it'd just be Tate/Foster pounding the ball but Slaton has proven so effective as a receiver I find it hard to believe he'd be phased out.

Every time I see guys state how a player's build, esp young RBs, is going to impede his outlook, I simply shake my head as to how my next point isn't understood.These are developing young men,they WILL get stronger, and in most cases, bigger. Best, and others like Spiller, Charles, Felix, CJ4.24, are no longer in school, they are full-time professional athletes. If you work at a computer all day as your job and no longer have to sit through lenghty classes and do homework, worry about money, the next meal, and be bogged down by all the daily activities and stresses associated with a college student, you'd think you'd be able to advance in your chosen field, correct? With the needed dedication, of course.These guys work out extensively when they are no longer in school, as their livelihood is to become better athletes. And teams have the infrastructure in place to guide these guys on what they need to do to improve. Weight gain and adding muscle mass for full-time, dedicated pro athletes is not hard to accomplish. For top-fligh guys, it's pretty much a given that their bodies will transform to some degree in order to perform their job. I think it would be foolish to believe that Best is not working on his lower body strength and development in preparation for his pro career.Just take a look this year at guys like Charles, CJ4.24, and Felix (well, he was already confirmed to be at 218-220 lbs last season) and how they've transformed their physiques. Guys like Best and Spiler appear to be dedicated and have the desire, IMO, to follow this same path as have other smaller backs of the past (Faulk, Westy, Tiki, Portis, Barry) in building up their bodies to at least not let this be the reason impeding their performance at this level. And not everyone has to be 220 or so to excel, some guys may only need to add a few lbs and strengthen the right areas (legs and core) like Barry Sanders and Marshall Faulk, for example. Best & Spiller fit their profile, IMO, in this regard. They will probably not play above 210, but anything between 204-210 for these guys should be fine if the added strength is attained......

Did the weight gain work for Felix? He was still hurt last season.Jerious Norwood...he was skinny and talented and it didn't work.Slaton gained weight last year and was worse.Reggie Bush has never stayed healthy and is small.Story of Westy's career.I agree with your point....but it's a case by case basis. Best has already had concussion, neck, elbow, knee problems....in college. Could he gain weight in the NFL and stay completely healthy....it's possible. Is it likely...not so much.

One could counter with Clinton Portis, Emmitt Smith, Priest Holmes, and Terrell Davis as players that gained between 15-20 pounds after a rookie season in the NFL below 200 lbs and they worked out. Didn't see the knee problems for Best in college. Thought it was a hip injury that they thought might need surgery but he managed to heal without it. The elbow problem didn't keep him away from playing and playing well. Did any of these issues require surgery or missed time other than the concussion?