The Official Ben Tate thread 2012 (1 Viewer)

[Sabertooth]

Ben Tate is a player that really interests me this year. Out of all the true handcuffs in the league, he would seem to have the best value as a replacement. He's very capable.

But even if Foster stays healthy, I think Tate's value increases in 2012. With a healthy Schaub and Johnson this team is borderline dominant.. I actually had them pegged to win it all last season ala Denver in the Terrell Davis years. I think that while the NFL is more a passing league right now, a truly dominant run team can still win tons of games. So I think Tate has more value because they are going to be leading in a lot of ballgames. The loss of Mario Williams on defense is going to be felt, but I think this Texans team picks up right where they left off with Schaub. Early in the season, the Texans were scoring about 30 points a game against divisional opponents. And they were just getting ready for a stretch run. I think Tate gets some cleanup duty along the way. And look who the Texans play in the fantasy playoffs "New England, Indy, Minnesota" not exactly a murderer's row.

Tate obviously has tremendous value as a handcuff to Foster. I think I'd even overpay for him as a handcuff to be honest. He can be used to cover a bye week to your RB2 so you can save a spot there because the Texans have a pretty nice schedule during the bye week period. Obviously he has a high replacement value if Foster were to get hurt (like Top 5 fantasy back if Foster were to be scratched from the lineup).

If I had to predict right now, I'd say Tate has at least 3 games of 20+ fantasy points in PPR leagues. And finishes with around 150 fantasy points this year. About a 10% uptick in his production due to Schaub and Johnson being in there. That puts him in the RB30. He makes an ideal RB4 with upside. He's an RB3 value for you if you have Foster. You almost have to go get him if you take Foster in the first. Who do you need to pass up for him? Ridley? Best? McGahee? Hillman? Ingram? Spiller? CJ Spiller is in a similar situation but he isn't as good as Tate. I like his chances against most of those guys.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

But even if Foster stays healthy, I think Tate's value increases in 2012.

I'd agree with this, but not necessarily for the reasons you give. I think his value will increase because he will get closer to becoming a FA. As long as the Texans don't extend his contract, he will be worth much more entering 2013.

 

[MAC_32]

I'm not going anywhere near him in redrafts at his current price unless I get Foster. Barring an injury to Foster you'll be dumping him or begging the Foster owner for scraps come the bye weeks. There are much more interesting options for the non-Foster owner inside the top 100. If I need a filler and the guy who drafted Tate dumped him to cover a bye/injury, sure, especially if they draw a good matchup. That's a decision for October though.

Dynasty? If you can, buy. I'm sitting on him in one (non Foster owner) but unfortunately the Foster owner has him in my other. I don't think he's a free agent until 2014 though, so you need to be patient.

 

[Sabertooth]

Who are backs you feel are stronger in that rb3-4 range?

 

[BuckeyeArt]

Who are backs you feel are stronger in that rb3-4 range?

He's listed at RB31 on MFL. Above him are BJGE and Redman. Below are Wilson and Donald Brown.

 

[MAC_32]

Who are backs you feel are stronger in that rb3-4 range?

I'm probably not taking any backs in that range, maybe McGahee because I can shore up Hillman shortly thereafter. If I have drafts that go like MFL's ADP's I will have 2 RB's, 1 QB, and 2 WR's entering the 6th round and am seeing the value in wide receiver, TE, and QB2 over the next few rounds. Leshoure, Ryan Williams, LMJ, and Tim Hightower are routinely ending up on my teams later. If Redman or Law Firm slipped to the 8th in a flex league I'd consider dialing them up though.

 

[Sabertooth]

Who are backs you feel are stronger in that rb3-4 range?

He's listed at RB31 on MFL. Above him are BJGE and Redman. Below are Wilson and Donald Brown.

Ok, take Wilson for instance. He's behind a former pro bowler. He's also on a team that stunk running the ball last season. He's also not built for the pounding like Tate is should he get meaningful playing time. Hillman and McGahee should be interested but you have to use to picks and roster spots to get them. They are not without warts either.

 

[Sabertooth]

Who are backs you feel are stronger in that rb3-4 range?

He's listed at RB31 on MFL. Above him are BJGE and Redman. Below are Wilson and Donald Brown.

I like him better than just about everyone on that list based on A) Upside if he gets in there

B) Floor if Arian Foster stays healthy.

There are no guarantees that Hillman or Starks are going to do much more than Tate. Ben Tate dang near rushed for a thousand yards last season...does anyone really think that Donald Brown or DeAngelo Williams or Steven Ridley realistically have a shot at that? I don't. Maybe Starks or McGahee are safer picks. But if you hit the lotto on McGahee for instance and he gets a ton of carries, what is his upside? Now if you hit the lotto on Tate, what is his upside? 125 and a TD per game or so? Something like that? Obviously he needs Foster to get hurt to hit those numbers, but McGahee and Starks don't even have that kind of upside at all.

Tate is exactly the kind of guy to gamble on in that range. Upside is Top 5 RB. Nobody else after him on that list has that kind of upside. Maybe Hillman if he goes all Portis on us. Or Pead if Sjax went down. But that's about it. I don't think David Wilson or Michael Bush do.

 

[gandalas]

In a recent Dynasty Startup, I managed to land Foster at 1.4 (QBs went 1-3), and spent the 8.5 (89 overall) pick to grab Tate. Was not sure if he would be there later or not, and did not want to risk it.

RBs immediately following Tate in there were:

Michael Bush (8.10)

David Wilson (9.4)

Stephen Ridley (9.8)

BJGE (10.4)

Ronnie Hillman (10.12)

I feel that he was a good value where I got him, especially considering the Foster Handcuff. He is my RB3 on that team, although I have D.Williams (13.4) and Willis McGahee (23.8!) to help hold down the fort for this season. Basically, I see him as a possible bye-week fill-in absent a Foster injury, with a possible HUGE increase in value should he become the lead back elsewhere later in his career.

 

[Sabertooth]

In a recent Dynasty Startup, I managed to land Foster at 1.4 (QBs went 1-3), and spent the 8.5 (89 overall) pick to grab Tate. Was not sure if he would be there later or not, and did not want to risk it.RBs immediately following Tate in there were:Michael Bush (8.10)David Wilson (9.4)Stephen Ridley (9.8)BJGE (10.4)Ronnie Hillman (10.12)I feel that he was a good value where I got him, especially considering the Foster Handcuff. He is my RB3 on that team, although I have D.Williams (13.4) and Willis McGahee (23.8!) to help hold down the fort for this season. Basically, I see him as a possible bye-week fill-in absent a Foster injury, with a possible HUGE increase in value should he become the lead back elsewhere later in his career.

Nice move especially with the handcuff going on. I don't own him but see him as the next Michael Turner to be honest. I could see him starting someplace else like Cincinatti in the next few seasons. Maybe even the Jets or Jaguars after MJD expires. I have Tate, Hillman, and Turbin and rate them in that order as far as my depth guys go right now in Dynasty. That said, I doubt the David Wilson owner would give me Wilson straight up for him. I'll report back though.

 

[One]

I like Tate a lot, but for PPR leagues I think his upside is limited.

I'd rather gamble on a handcuff who catches passes.

He isn't an Arian Foster scoring clone.

 

[Shutout]

I'll probably get blasted for this by everyone except perhaps Rizzler, but I think this is vastly overblown with Tate.

I see a lot of people typing that tate is a "surefire RB1" if Foster misses time. Based on performance so far; that's false.

When he had his shot at the beginning of the season, he was averaging about the same as felix Jones was. He was far from a RB1. He was about the 16-22nd RB, depending on scoring. But for some reason, people seems to keep stirring this notion that he is a plug and play replacement for Foster and that's not the case.

We saw that Tate is not foster. He can't be as dynamic (FF-wise) and as long as Foster is there, its HIS show. That's the first issue with this. You're going to pay high on a guy that, in theory, could frustrate you more than JSEW or VJAX ever does. Sure, there will be a game or two somewhere where he goes in, mops up, or has more usuage and ends up with a nice day. But you don't know when that is..or IF it will be. So do you start him every week and gripe about the 11 days where he gets 6 points? Based on general perception, its way too much to pay for a guy that is only TRULY useful to you if an injury occurs. Why not pay a lot less and grab Felix or Gerhardt or Michael Bush or someone like that then because its really a lottery, otherwise.

At the end of the day, we are talking about a guy that is overhyped and you need an injury to occur before you can actually use him. Then you have to contend with the fact that he has NOT produced as Foster has. Then you have to contend with the price you have to pay to get (and hold) him. I honestly think a lot of people have misread this one. With a Foster injury, sure, he's serviceable. But you can say that about a LOT of guys (but don't have to pay the price for them). I think a lot of it stems from the overall perception that a lot of people STILL see foster as a product of the system and, just as they were saying last year, believe anybody could come in and tear it up for the Texans. But those people have forgotten (or didn't see at the time) that when Foster was out those weeks, this was not the same texans team and the fantasy points didn't flow like it is being discussed.

For me, I'd rather take Foster and forget it and not overpay and pick up something needed more instead of reaching.

 

[Sabertooth]

I like Tate a lot, but for PPR leagues I think his upside is limited. I'd rather gamble on a handcuff who catches passes.He isn't an Arian Foster scoring clone.

Like who? He caught 8 balls in the games Foster missed last season. Foster is still obviously better at everything than Tate, but then again he's better than everyone else too.

 

[Sabertooth]

I'll probably get blasted for this by everyone except perhaps Rizzler, but I think this is vastly overblown with Tate.



I see a lot of people typing that tate is a "surefire RB1" if Foster misses time. Based on performance so far; that's false.

When he had his shot at the beginning of the season, he was averaging about the same as felix Jones was. He was far from a RB1. He was about the 16-22nd RB, depending on scoring. But for some reason, people seems to keep stirring this notion that he is a plug and play replacement for Foster and that's not the case.

We saw that Tate is not foster. He can't be as dynamic (FF-wise) and as long as Foster is there, its HIS show. That's the first issue with this. You're going to pay high on a guy that, in theory, could frustrate you more than JSEW or VJAX ever does. Sure, there will be a game or two somewhere where he goes in, mops up, or has more usuage and ends up with a nice day. But you don't know when that is..or IF it will be. So do you start him every week and gripe about the 11 days where he gets 6 points? Based on general perception, its way too much to pay for a guy that is only TRULY useful to you if an injury occurs. Why not pay a lot less and grab Felix or Gerhardt or Michael Bush or someone like that then because its really a lottery, otherwise.

At the end of the day, we are talking about a guy that is overhyped and you need an injury to occur before you can actually use him. Then you have to contend with the fact that he has NOT produced as Foster has. Then you have to contend with the price you have to pay to get (and hold) him. I honestly think a lot of people have misread this one. With a Foster injury, sure, he's serviceable. But you can say that about a LOT of guys (but don't have to pay the price for them). I think a lot of it stems from the overall perception that a lot of people STILL see foster as a product of the system and, just as they were saying last year, believe anybody could come in and tear it up for the Texans. But those people have forgotten (or didn't see at the time) that when Foster was out those weeks, this was not the same texans team and the fantasy points didn't flow like it is being discussed.

For me, I'd rather take Foster and forget it and not overpay and pick up something needed more instead of reaching.

In the weeks Foster missed he ranked 11th, 15th, and 3rd. That averages to about 9th or 10th best. Voila...RB1! Not false. Not in the 16-22 range.

 

[One]

I like Tate a lot, but for PPR leagues I think his upside is limited. I'd rather gamble on a handcuff who catches passes.He isn't an Arian Foster scoring clone.

Like who? He caught 8 balls in the games Foster missed last season. Foster is still obviously better at everything than Tate, but then again he's better than everyone else too.

Don't get me wrong, love me some Tate and I'm already an owner, but a huge part of Foster's game is the screen game and Tate isn't anywhere near as natural in that facet of the offense. When teams are stopping the run, you can always count on Foster contributing in the passing game. Let's say Houston falls behind, Tate doesn't have nearly the point-potential as Foster. Like you said, Foster is better at everything than most in the league, but I don't think Tate can step in and replace Foster point for point. If Foster were to miss time, I wonder if Tate would be a 3-down back. Forsett will probably take that duty unless it was 3rd and short. While Foster will only come out of a game if he's gassed or taking a series off. I like to target backs who will or have potential to be involved in every phase of the game. Nothing worse than getting a single digit game out of your fantasy back who wasn't used much cause his team fell behind.I'd prefer taking someone like Stewart or Spiller at that point of a PPR draft. If they take over the sole RB role, you know you'll score points weather ahead, behind, or in 2 minute O. We all know Foster is the better back, I'm not trying to prove who is better, but rather that Tate doesn't have the handcuff upside most are hoping for. This isn't LJ/Holmes, IMO.

 

[Sabertooth]

I like Tate a lot, but for PPR leagues I think his upside is limited. I'd rather gamble on a handcuff who catches passes.He isn't an Arian Foster scoring clone.

Like who? He caught 8 balls in the games Foster missed last season. Foster is still obviously better at everything than Tate, but then again he's better than everyone else too.

Don't get me wrong, love me some Tate and I'm already an owner, but a huge part of Foster's game is the screen game and Tate isn't anywhere near as natural in that facet of the offense. When teams are stopping the run, you can always count on Foster contributing in the passing game. Let's say Houston falls behind, Tate doesn't have nearly the point-potential as Foster. Like you said, Foster is better at everything than most in the league, but I don't think Tate can step in and replace Foster point for point. If Foster were to miss time, I wonder if Tate would be a 3-down back. Forsett will probably take that duty unless it was 3rd and short. While Foster will only come out of a game if he's gassed or taking a series off. I like to target backs who will or have potential to be involved in every phase of the game. Nothing worse than getting a single digit game out of your fantasy back who wasn't used much cause his team fell behind.I'd prefer taking someone like Stewart or Spiller at that point of a PPR draft. If they take over the sole RB role, you know you'll score points weather ahead, behind, or in 2 minute O. We all know Foster is the better back, I'm not trying to prove who is better, but rather that Tate doesn't have the handcuff upside most are hoping for. This isn't LJ/Holmes, IMO.

You are correct, he isn't LJ to Foster's Holmes.

 

[Shutout]

I'll probably get blasted for this by everyone except perhaps Rizzler, but I think this is vastly overblown with Tate.



I see a lot of people typing that tate is a "surefire RB1" if Foster misses time. Based on performance so far; that's false.

When he had his shot at the beginning of the season, he was averaging about the same as felix Jones was. He was far from a RB1. He was about the 16-22nd RB, depending on scoring. But for some reason, people seems to keep stirring this notion that he is a plug and play replacement for Foster and that's not the case.

We saw that Tate is not foster. He can't be as dynamic (FF-wise) and as long as Foster is there, its HIS show. That's the first issue with this. You're going to pay high on a guy that, in theory, could frustrate you more than JSEW or VJAX ever does. Sure, there will be a game or two somewhere where he goes in, mops up, or has more usuage and ends up with a nice day. But you don't know when that is..or IF it will be. So do you start him every week and gripe about the 11 days where he gets 6 points? Based on general perception, its way too much to pay for a guy that is only TRULY useful to you if an injury occurs. Why not pay a lot less and grab Felix or Gerhardt or Michael Bush or someone like that then because its really a lottery, otherwise.

At the end of the day, we are talking about a guy that is overhyped and you need an injury to occur before you can actually use him. Then you have to contend with the fact that he has NOT produced as Foster has. Then you have to contend with the price you have to pay to get (and hold) him. I honestly think a lot of people have misread this one. With a Foster injury, sure, he's serviceable. But you can say that about a LOT of guys (but don't have to pay the price for them). I think a lot of it stems from the overall perception that a lot of people STILL see foster as a product of the system and, just as they were saying last year, believe anybody could come in and tear it up for the Texans. But those people have forgotten (or didn't see at the time) that when Foster was out those weeks, this was not the same texans team and the fantasy points didn't flow like it is being discussed.

For me, I'd rather take Foster and forget it and not overpay and pick up something needed more instead of reaching.

In the weeks Foster missed he ranked 11th, 15th, and 3rd. That averages to about 9th or 10th best. Voila...RB1! Not false. Not in the 16-22 range.

Again, guess it depends on scoring, but in my leagues, a quick query shows him as RB15 for that period. But again, that's just a small part of the real issue. Unless foster is out, he averages points in the same range as guys like DWIL, Pierre thomas, Felix, etc.

Just a lot of really good players you have to pass on that could be used every week in your lineup for the price you have to give, without the likelihood that he will actually be what you might expect.

Again, just seems the perceived potential is very different than the realistic potential, given the price. And what is Potential? A French word that means hasn't done jack yet. Last year, there were people hyping him the same way. I remember a good number of posts where people were saying outright that Foster wouldn't get his job back because Tate was so good. But in reality, tate never came close to providing what Foster does.

I'm perfectly fine being in the minority on this one. Just sharing what I actually saw and not what I'm going along with people, saying "If A,B, AND C happens, then we got something here boys!" I owned both of these guys last year in one league and I have watched A LOT of texans games and the biggest memory I recall when I think about this scenario is last year, when I was startign tate, thinking "Man, I can't wait until foster gets back". It was an immediate boost in my fantasy team and it opened up so much for the Texans.

I actually think that tate's best chance at FF sucess is if Foster STAYS HEALHTY. That's when he is at his best in how the Texans use him and likely his best chance to snag some cheap scores that make for a good fantasy day.

 

[Instinctive]

Who are backs you feel are stronger in that rb3-4 range?

He's listed at RB31 on MFL. Above him are BJGE and Redman. Below are Wilson and Donald Brown.

I like him better than just about everyone on that list based on A) Upside if he gets in there

B) Floor if Arian Foster stays healthy.

There are no guarantees that Hillman or Starks are going to do much more than Tate. Ben Tate dang near rushed for a thousand yards last season...does anyone really think that Donald Brown or DeAngelo Williams or Steven Ridley realistically have a shot at that? I don't. Maybe Starks or McGahee are safer picks. But if you hit the lotto on McGahee for instance and he gets a ton of carries, what is his upside? Now if you hit the lotto on Tate, what is his upside? 125 and a TD per game or so? Something like that? Obviously he needs Foster to get hurt to hit those numbers, but McGahee and Starks don't even have that kind of upside at all.

Tate is exactly the kind of guy to gamble on in that range. Upside is Top 5 RB. Nobody else after him on that list has that kind of upside. Maybe Hillman if he goes all Portis on us. Or Pead if Sjax went down. But that's about it. I don't think David Wilson or Michael Bush do.

I don't like lumping Brown and Starks in with him. Those guys have clear, direct paths to 250+ touches. I would much rather have each in a redraft.Tate follows relatively closely after them though. I want him on my teams with Stewart/Starks/Brown if I can swing it.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

Who are backs you feel are stronger in that rb3-4 range?

He's listed at RB31 on MFL. Above him are BJGE and Redman. Below are Wilson and Donald Brown.

I like him better than just about everyone on that list based on A) Upside if he gets in there

B) Floor if Arian Foster stays healthy.

He isn't worth much at all if Foster stays healthy. I think you're overstating his floor. In weeks other than 1-3 and 17, when Foster was out or injured, Tate was 83-544-2 (11 games). That projects to a full season of 121-791-3. Those aren't bad numbers, but since they will be very inconsistent, he won't be useful as a starter.One of the other RBs around him is more useful as a fill in starter. BJGE, Redman, and Donald Brown will likely outproduce Tate on a regular basis and be a much better spot starter than Tate. I love Tate in a dynasty but in a redraft, Tate is purely a handcuff or injury play this year.

 

[QB Bills]

I picked him up for very cheap in two dynasty leagues last season. I think we will get an opportunity to start with a new team in 2013.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

I actually think that tate's best chance at FF sucess is if Foster STAYS HEALHTY. That's when he is at his best in how the Texans use him and likely his best chance to snag some cheap scores that make for a good fantasy day.

Not only that, but he doesn't get the chance to show that he might only be average. His dynasty (and future FA) value will continue to rise if Foster stays healthy. If Foster goes down for any extended period of time, Tate gets a chance to show his flaws.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Has anyone mentioned the free agency poaching of the right side of Texans O-line? Texans incumbent starting RG Mike Brisiel left to the Raiders and starting RT Eric Winston to the Chiefs. Is anyone at all concerned with the turnover of key lineman and continuity of line play that has been very good in the past?

 

[Sabertooth]

Who are backs you feel are stronger in that rb3-4 range?

He's listed at RB31 on MFL. Above him are BJGE and Redman. Below are Wilson and Donald Brown.

I like him better than just about everyone on that list based on A) Upside if he gets in there

B) Floor if Arian Foster stays healthy.

He isn't worth much at all if Foster stays healthy. I think you're overstating his floor. In weeks other than 1-3 and 17, when Foster was out or injured, Tate was 83-544-2 (11 games). That projects to a full season of 121-791-3. Those aren't bad numbers, but since they will be very inconsistent, he won't be useful as a starter.

One of the other RBs around him is more useful as a fill in starter. BJGE, Redman, and Donald Brown will likely outproduce Tate on a regular basis and be a much better spot starter than Tate. I love Tate in a dynasty but in a redraft, Tate is purely a handcuff or injury play this year.

I can agree with all of this. However you don't have to draft him as an every week starter either. He is a great "what the heck flex" just about every week. Remember you are drafting him to mostly cover bye weeks to your starters. But if Foster gets hurt, he becomes one of your every week starters most likely.

 

[Shutout]

Has anyone mentioned the free agency poaching of the right side of Texans O-line? Texans incumbent starting RG Mike Brisiel left to the Raiders and starting RT Eric Winston to the Chiefs. Is anyone at all concerned with the turnover of key lineman and continuity of line play that has been very good in the past?

They actually cut Winston. I was surprised at that one move when it happened but the guys they have HAVE been on the field and I guess the team is comfortable with them. I won't pretend to know what type of impact that will have but I will take solice in two things:I have a good friend who actually played O-line in college and he usually nails these things in terms of O-line. He told me it was time. He was seeing that a change wouldn't hurt the Texans. I trust his opinion.I also trust the opinions of the Texans. They have made a LOT of slick personnel moves the past few seasons. Sometimes, the teams just happen to be a step ahead of us here on the forums.

 

[Shutout]

Who are backs you feel are stronger in that rb3-4 range?

He's listed at RB31 on MFL. Above him are BJGE and Redman. Below are Wilson and Donald Brown.

I like him better than just about everyone on that list based on A) Upside if he gets in there

B) Floor if Arian Foster stays healthy.

He isn't worth much at all if Foster stays healthy. I think you're overstating his floor. In weeks other than 1-3 and 17, when Foster was out or injured, Tate was 83-544-2 (11 games). That projects to a full season of 121-791-3. Those aren't bad numbers, but since they will be very inconsistent, he won't be useful as a starter.One of the other RBs around him is more useful as a fill in starter. BJGE, Redman, and Donald Brown will likely outproduce Tate on a regular basis and be a much better spot starter than Tate. I love Tate in a dynasty but in a redraft, Tate is purely a handcuff or injury play this year.

I really need to find a way to say things in a more concise manner. You basically said everything I was drivign at in about 85% less words

 

[Sabertooth]

Has anyone mentioned the free agency poaching of the right side of Texans O-line? Texans incumbent starting RG Mike Brisiel left to the Raiders and starting RT Eric Winston to the Chiefs. Is anyone at all concerned with the turnover of key lineman and continuity of line play that has been very good in the past?

Was not aware of this.

 

[Tanner9919]

Tate's situation is identical to that of Michael Turner during his San Diego days..quality, more-than-capable backup RB who is just one hit away, but...........

as other's have said, 2013 is what you're gunning for..

if you're in a dynasty league, get him now,hold him with the chance he could start if Foster goes down in 2012,but you're banking on a very productive 2013 and beyond, playing/starting for another team..

best thing about Tate is that he carries tremendous trade value to the A. Foster owner.

 

[Sabertooth]

Tate's situation is identical to that of Michael Turner during his San Diego days..quality, more-than-capable backup RB who is just one hit away, but...........

as other's have said, 2013 is what you're gunning for..

if you're in a dynasty league, get him now,hold him with the chance he could start if Foster goes down in 2012,but you're banking on a very productive 2013 and beyond, playing/starting for another team..

best thing about Tate is that he carries tremendous trade value to the A. Foster owner.

I was offered Tim Tebow for Tate in a Superflex today (I own Sanchez as well) - I declined, I think Tate has more value now and in the future although I am a fan of Tebow.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Has anyone mentioned the free agency poaching of the right side of Texans O-line? Texans incumbent starting RG Mike Brisiel left to the Raiders and starting RT Eric Winston to the Chiefs. Is anyone at all concerned with the turnover of key lineman and continuity of line play that has been very good in the past?

They actually cut Winston. I was surprised at that one move when it happened but the guys they have HAVE been on the field and I guess the team is comfortable with them. I won't pretend to know what type of impact that will have but I will take solice in two things:I have a good friend who actually played O-line in college and he usually nails these things in terms of O-line. He told me it was time. He was seeing that a change wouldn't hurt the Texans. I trust his opinion.I also trust the opinions of the Texans. They have made a LOT of slick personnel moves the past few seasons. Sometimes, the teams just happen to be a step ahead of us here on the forums.

I'm not going question the Texans offseason moves, as they are a well run organization. But it's interesting that on top of losing Brisiel and Wiston, they exposed starting center Chris Myers in free agency for 3 or 4 days till they finally re-signed him. That seems like a curious way to protect your offense, potentially turning over most of your starting O-line. I'm sure they are happy to have Myers back, but I don't buy that it was part of a grand scheme. And it sure didn't look like a slick move.

 

[MAC_32]

Has anyone mentioned the free agency poaching of the right side of Texans O-line? Texans incumbent starting RG Mike Brisiel left to the Raiders and starting RT Eric Winston to the Chiefs. Is anyone at all concerned with the turnover of key lineman and continuity of line play that has been very good in the past?

They actually cut Winston. I was surprised at that one move when it happened but the guys they have HAVE been on the field and I guess the team is comfortable with them. I won't pretend to know what type of impact that will have but I will take solice in two things:I have a good friend who actually played O-line in college and he usually nails these things in terms of O-line. He told me it was time. He was seeing that a change wouldn't hurt the Texans. I trust his opinion.I also trust the opinions of the Texans. They have made a LOT of slick personnel moves the past few seasons. Sometimes, the teams just happen to be a step ahead of us here on the forums.

I'm not going question the Texans offseason moves, as they are a well run organization. But it's interesting that on top of losing Brisiel and Wiston, they exposed starting center Chris Myers in free agency for 3 or 4 days till they finally re-signed him. That seems like a curious way to protect your offense, potentially turning over most of your starting O-line. I'm sure they are happy to have Myers back, but I don't buy that it was part of a grand scheme. And it sure didn't look like a slick move.

iirc they didn't cut Winston until after re-signing Myers. Their problem is they're up against the cap and have players with expiring contracts coming up at the end of this season. Notably, Schaub. They couldn't retain everybody.

 

[[icon]]

In redraft Tate only really has value to the Foster owner unless we're talking some pretty deep leagues.

 

[Sabertooth]

In redraft Tate only really has value to the Foster owner unless we're talking some pretty deep leagues.

I think he's a nice RB4 "swing for the fences" type of guy. He ran for almost 1000 last season.

 

[MAC_32]

In redraft Tate only really has value to the Foster owner unless we're talking some pretty deep leagues.

I think he's a nice RB4 "swing for the fences" type of guy. He ran for almost 1000 last season.

...but when could you start him? Other than the 1st 3 games when Foster was hurt he never got more than 15 touches in a game until week 17 when Foster was rested. That's not swinging for the fences and if he's your RB4 given his current ADP you will only have 3 non RB's on your roster when you draft him, the rest of your starting lineup suffers substantially. If Foster doesn't get hurt you're dropping him by October.

 

[[icon]]

In redraft Tate only really has value to the Foster owner unless we're talking some pretty deep leagues.

I think he's a nice RB4 "swing for the fences" type of guy. He ran for almost 1000 last season.

There are all sorts of RB4 options that have greater chances of contributing and have higher floors that Tate. Sure, if Foster goes down then Tate is instantly a RB1. I guess it just depends on how many bench slots you have an if you're willing to tie one up for an entire season on that gamble.

 

[Sabertooth]

In redraft Tate only really has value to the Foster owner unless we're talking some pretty deep leagues.

I think he's a nice RB4 "swing for the fences" type of guy. He ran for almost 1000 last season.

There are all sorts of RB4 options that have greater chances of contributing and have higher floors that Tate. Sure, if Foster goes down then Tate is instantly a RB1. I guess it just depends on how many bench slots you have an if you're willing to tie one up for an entire season on that gamble.

Who can be selected outside the top 30 that fits your description?

 

[Hoosier16]

In redraft Tate only really has value to the Foster owner unless we're talking some pretty deep leagues.

I think he's a nice RB4 "swing for the fences" type of guy. He ran for almost 1000 last season.

There are all sorts of RB4 options that have greater chances of contributing and have higher floors that Tate. Sure, if Foster goes down then Tate is instantly a RB1. I guess it just depends on how many bench slots you have an if you're willing to tie one up for an entire season on that gamble.

Who can be selected outside the top 30 that fits your description?

Ingram, Redman, and BJGE are 28, 29, and 30. Brown is 36. All likely have a higher floor due to an easier path to the#1 job (no injury required).

 

[Sabertooth]

Kubiak thinks Tate can breakout this year according to this blurb right from the horse's mouth.

(Rotoworld) Texans coach Gary Kubiak believes No. 2 running back Ben Tate is capable of becoming a "top player in this league."

Analysis: "If Ben stays healthy, has a good offseason, camp, here's a player who can break out," said Kubiak. Tate obviously won't "break out" so long as he's behind every-down back Arian Foster on the depth chart, but he commands playing time, particularly when the Texans are protecting leads. Tate finished 2011 with 175 carries for 942 yards (5.38 YPC), four touchdowns, and 13 receptions.

 

[Sabertooth]

In redraft Tate only really has value to the Foster owner unless we're talking some pretty deep leagues.

I think he's a nice RB4 "swing for the fences" type of guy. He ran for almost 1000 last season.

There are all sorts of RB4 options that have greater chances of contributing and have higher floors that Tate. Sure, if Foster goes down then Tate is instantly a RB1. I guess it just depends on how many bench slots you have an if you're willing to tie one up for an entire season on that gamble.

Who can be selected outside the top 30 that fits your description?

Ingram, Redman, and BJGE are 28, 29, and 30. Brown is 36. All likely have a higher floor due to an easier path to the#1 job (no injury required).

All do have a seemingly clearer path, I'll give you that. But none outside of possibly Ingram has Tate's skill level. In Dynasty, I'm not sure I like any of them over Tate.

 

[[icon]]

In redraft Tate only really has value to the Foster owner unless we're talking some pretty deep leagues.

I think he's a nice RB4 "swing for the fences" type of guy. He ran for almost 1000 last season.

There are all sorts of RB4 options that have greater chances of contributing and have higher floors that Tate. Sure, if Foster goes down then Tate is instantly a RB1. I guess it just depends on how many bench slots you have an if you're willing to tie one up for an entire season on that gamble.

Who can be selected outside the top 30 that fits your description?

Ingram, Redman, and BJGE are 28, 29, and 30. Brown is 36. All likely have a higher floor due to an easier path to the#1 job (no injury required).

All do have a seemingly clearer path, I'll give you that. But none outside of possibly Ingram has Tate's skill level. In Dynasty, I'm not sure I like any of them over Tate.

Well of course... which is why I specified Redraft Honestly I think we might be seeing a bit of a Matt Cassell effect with Tate as well. Cassell looked like Tom Brady 2.0 behind that patriots line and in that system and has looked like Brady Quinn 2.0 ever since joining up with the Chiefs. Tate has the benefit of a fantastic system/line in Houston that might be making him look better than he actually is. I'd personally be a little cautious here before assuming he's going to plug in anywhere and churn out like he's done in houston.

 

[We Tigers]

Two points here. The first is that when Foster and Tate both played, Tate caught a total of 4 passes in 11 games. He is a 2-down back, which isn't surprising considering Foster may be the best receiving back in the league. The second is about Tate's week to week scoring. Here are Tate's standard scoring totals (-2 for fumbles) for those 11 games.

2

4.1

10.4

2.2

17.5

12.3

2.6

4.1

7.7

3

-0.1

In 7 of 11 games, <4.1 points. 5 games of 3 points or less. Not so sure about him as a "what the heck" flex. Someone threw out 6 points earlier in the thread, and he wasn't even hitting that. However, you probably can at least guess when to use him, as his 3 double digit scoring weeks were all in blowouts against bad teams. Given how little he offered most weeks, I think he's a pretty expensive handcuff at his current ADP. I would rather find a third down back or any backup not behind a guy with a rushing title and two All-Pro teams in the last two seasons.

All that said, the Texans want to run, run, run. I think Tate showed last year that he can handle 8-10 carries a game quite well without taking away from what Foster does. There is room for improvement this year, but I still don't like the price for a backup 2-down RB.

 

[Shutout]

Tate's situation is identical to that of Michael Turner during his San Diego days..quality, more-than-capable backup RB who is just one hit away, but...........

as other's have said, 2013 is what you're gunning for..

if you're in a dynasty league, get him now,hold him with the chance he could start if Foster goes down in 2012,but you're banking on a very productive 2013 and beyond, playing/starting for another team..

best thing about Tate is that he carries tremendous trade value to the A. Foster owner.

That is either absoultely true OR absolutely false, depending on the owner. But its not universal. There are Foster owners that WILL call Team Geico and try to take out an insurance policy and pay heavily for it. But there are also Foster owners that see Tate as described above; a guy that takes up a roster spot that does very little for you for what YOU want (YOU being the foster owner). To a Foster owner who is confident enough to not think they need to buy insurance, Tate is relatively worthless because as long as Foster plays, Tate isn't doing anything for him. You won't start him over Foster and you don't ideally want his erratic points each week, never knowing when its 5 or when it might be 15; so you don't play him.

To a NON-Foster owner, however, I would argue that THERE is where you actually see more of a universal acceptance that he had tremendous value because those are the people that don't have foster and his production but blindly believe Tate=Foster should Foster miss time. So THOSE people are the ones more likely to call up Team 7-11 and pay up for a Tate lottery ticket.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

However, you probably can at least guess when to use him, as his 3 double digit scoring weeks were all in blowouts against bad teams.

I don't think you can do that. There probably wasn't a more juicy matchup last year than the week 16 game against Indy. They blew out Indy in the first meeting and Indy was one of the worst run defenses in the league, giving up almost 150 per game. The Texans should have rammed it down their throat with Foster and Tate. Tate finished with 6 carries for (-1) yards.

 

[Sabertooth]

In redraft Tate only really has value to the Foster owner unless we're talking some pretty deep leagues.

I think he's a nice RB4 "swing for the fences" type of guy. He ran for almost 1000 last season.

There are all sorts of RB4 options that have greater chances of contributing and have higher floors that Tate. Sure, if Foster goes down then Tate is instantly a RB1. I guess it just depends on how many bench slots you have an if you're willing to tie one up for an entire season on that gamble.

Who can be selected outside the top 30 that fits your description?

Ingram, Redman, and BJGE are 28, 29, and 30. Brown is 36. All likely have a higher floor due to an easier path to the#1 job (no injury required).

All do have a seemingly clearer path, I'll give you that. But none outside of possibly Ingram has Tate's skill level. In Dynasty, I'm not sure I like any of them over Tate.

Well of course... which is why I specified Redraft Honestly I think we might be seeing a bit of a Matt Cassell effect with Tate as well. Cassell looked like Tom Brady 2.0 behind that patriots line and in that system and has looked like Brady Quinn 2.0 ever since joining up with the Chiefs. Tate has the benefit of a fantastic system/line in Houston that might be making him look better than he actually is. I'd personally be a little cautious here before assuming he's going to plug in anywhere and churn out like he's done in houston.

I agree. He may be the next Lamont Jordan instead of Michael Turner.

 

[We Tigers]

However, you probably can at least guess when to use him, as his 3 double digit scoring weeks were all in blowouts against bad teams.

I don't think you can do that. There probably wasn't a more juicy matchup last year than the week 16 game against Indy. They blew out Indy in the first meeting and Indy was one of the worst run defenses in the league, giving up almost 150 per game. The Texans should have rammed it down their throat with Foster and Tate. Tate finished with 6 carries for (-1) yards.

Yes, but it was certainly true for the other games. 3 outta 4 ain't bad. Overall though, I agree that you can call that another point against him having week to week upside.

 

[sspunisher]

Tate's numbers were very misleading last year, looking at them as a whole you see a player who ran for damn near 1,000 yards. That magic number makes us think of Tate as a player that might contribute as a bye week FLEX or a desperation RB play, with the immense upside of elite production if Foster goes down.

But when I reviewed his game by game stats, a lot of his production came in a handful of games and he was pretty useless in a majority of the rest. He was far from reliable, and I'd be extremely nervous plugging him in my lineup if Foster was healthy. Now whether Houston runs more this year or evens up the workload, remains to be seen.

But regardless, his ADP is ridiculously high considering you're banking on a Foster injury. I'm only taking him if I have Foster on my team, or if I'm extremely desperate at RB and he's the best RB on my board. Though I will say that he is intriguing in best ball formats.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

I'm not a fan of Tate.

In redraft, Hillis and Donald Brown are going in the same vicinity and are much more likely to see the touches necessary for fantasy relevance. If you want to gamble on an injury, I think DeAngelo Williams is twice the player that Tate is and would outperform Tate easily if both Foster and Stewart were lost for the year tomorrow.

In dynasty, I'm just not sold on Tate as dynamic enough to be counted on as a surefire starter. He's a "take what's there" power RB; there happens to be quite a bit "there" in Houston, but elsewhere he's less effective and a probable committee guy. Just based on what I've seen randomly, as opposed to seriously digging in to Ben Tate.

 

[Sabertooth]

What do all the naysayers think about Kubiak's statement that this could be a breakout year? Coachspeak perhaps. But to what end? Trying to motivate a potential free agent? Trying to motivate Foster? Trying to drive up his price tag in free agency? Why say that?

 

[Coeur de Lion]

What's any coach gonna say when asked about any player? Totally grasping at straws to read anything into that. It's clearly Foster's show in Houston.

 

[Sabertooth]

What's any coach gonna say when asked about any player? Totally grasping at straws to read anything into that. It's clearly Foster's show in Houston.

Here is what I can find. Sounds like he views them as different types of backs. Kubiak: Tate poised to break out: The Texans official team website reports that coach Gary Kubiak has high expectations for running back Ben Tate this year. Even though Tate will remain the No. 2 running back behind Arian Foster, Kubiak expects him to remain productive. Tate, a second-round draft pick in 2010, ranked seventh in the NFL last season with 5.4 yards per carry, just 0.2 yards off the league lead. He had four 100-yard games after missing his entire rookie season with an ankle injury. He became the 11th player in NFL history to run for more than 100 yards in both of the first two games of his career. “Ben brought a lot of big-play ability to our football team,” Kubiak said. “Arian is a big, physical runner. Ben is more of a speed-type guy. If Ben stays healthy, has a good offseason, camp, here's a player who can break out and become a top player in this league, also.”(Updated 07/19/2012)

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Here is what I can find. Sounds like he views them as different types of backs.

Yeah, they are different. Mainly in that Foster is one of the best RBs in the NFL and Tate is a solid back up. Night and day between the two in terms of ability. The team would appear to be in agreement that Foster is the guy considering the extension he just got vs. the players that they let walk.You seem to be looking for evidence that this might be RBBC based on a blurb of coachspeak in mid-July, which is about as big as a reach can get, IMO.