cantstop1999
Footballguy
why has w. parker moved up so high ? no one knows who is going to get the goaline carries. is there some new info im missing?
i agree but there are still question marks. his avag. draft position is 24He's a stud.
Oh you didn't hear? Staley and Haynes were cut and Parker will get about 500 carries and the GL touches as well.why has w. parker moved up so high ? no one knows who is going to get the goaline carries. is there some new info im missing?
LOL your just so funny, maybe you should be a comedianOh you didn't hear? Staley and Haynes were cut and Parker will get about 500 carries and the GL touches as well.why has w. parker moved up so high ? no one knows who is going to get the goaline carries. is there some new info im missing?
![]()
LOL your just so funny, maybe you should be a comedianOh you didn't hear? Staley and Haynes were cut and Parker will get about 500 carries and the GL touches as well.why has w. parker moved up so high ? no one knows who is going to get the goaline carries. is there some new info im missing?
![]()
Parker won't be the starter in Pittsburgh come 2007.
![]()
Elaborate?Draft choice in 2007?Parker won't be the starter in Pittsburgh come 2007.
![]()
![]()
Wouldn't shock me at all.Parker won't be the starter in Pittsburgh come 2007.
![]()
Willy Parker experiment = Amos Zeroue experiment?They will find out this year that he just can not carry the load at RB. They will look to replace him next year.
Willy Parker experiment = Amos Zeroue experiment?They will find out this year that he just can not carry the load at RB. They will look to replace him next year.
Parker is a lot better than Zeroue. Look at W. Dunn. He might just suprise this year. They need another guy to run though to bruise up the D. Haynes might be the guy. If they use Parker to slam into the pile 15 times a game, he won't be breaking many 75 yard TDs. I look for Parker to get 15-20 carries a game and Haynes/Staley to get 15. But if Parker busts a long one a game....look out.Willy Parker experiment = Amos Zeroue experiment?
Willie as a starter >>>>> Zereoue as a starter.Willie already proved he can take on a decent rushing load. This year, we'll see if he can improve on it.Willy Parker experiment = Amos Zeroue experiment?They will find out this year that he just can not carry the load at RB. They will look to replace him next year.
Strong argument here. Throw out 25% of his best performances, and he wasn't good. I bet he's the only RB ever who would suffer under that criteria.Throw out 4 weeks of last season and he was a terrible starting RB from a FF perspective.
Yes, it is a strong argument. Simple math tells you that any RB suffers by that criterion. Now:1. Flip your brain to the on position.Strong argument here. Throw out 25% of his best performances, and he wasn't good. I bet he's the only RB ever who would suffer under that criteria.Throw out 4 weeks of last season and he was a terrible starting RB from a FF perspective.
over his final 13 games he only had 1 rushing TD.
Here is a list of all the running backs who had 200 attempts last year and how many of those carries came in the redzone:# Running Back NFL TotAtt RedAtt 1 Alexander,Shaun SEA 370 64 17.30%2 James,Edgerrin IND 360 78 21.67%3 Barber,Tiki NYG 357 51 14.29%4 Portis,Clinton WAS 352 47 13.35%5 Tomlinson,Ladainian SD 340 53 15.59%6 Johnson,Rudi CIN 337 67 19.88%7 Johnson,Larry KC 336 57 16.96%8 McGahee,Willis BUF 325 59 18.15%9 Jones,Thomas CHI 314 37 11.78%10 Droughns,Reuben CLE 309 34 11.00%11 Williams,Carnell TB 290 29 10.00%12 Dunn,Warrick ATL 280 35 12.50%13 Jordan,Lamont OAK 272 42 15.44%14 Lewis,Jamal BAL 269 38 14.13%15 Jones,Julius DAL 257 33 12.84%16 Parker,Willie PIT 255 21 8.24%17 Jackson,Steven STL 254 39 15.35%18 Anderson,Mike DEN 239 57 23.85%19 Davis,Domanick HOU 230 23 10.00%20 Brown,Chris TEN 224 36 16.07%21 Martin,Curtis NYJ 220 42 19.09%22 Dillon,Corey NE 209 34 16.27%23 Brown,Ronnie MIA 207 29 14.01%24 Foster,De'shaun CAR 206 27 13.11%WP was the only guy with under 10% of his carries coming in the red zone, and the others with low %s were on either teams with a TD vulture (Caddy) or teams with extremely poor passing games (TJ, Droughns, DD).I think with the departure of Bettis (who had 34.55% of his carries come in the red zone), one can reasonably expect Willie's percentage to go up. Who knows if that will mean he gets more TDs, but it certainly means he has a bit more upside as compared to last year.4. See that FWP is one of the only RBs that had a "good" year last year but wouldn't even have warranted a roster spot if you throw out his 4 best games.
He did have a few receiving scores though, and those count in FF.over his final 13 games he only had 1 rushing TD.
Has anyone said he deserves the #13 ranking?I was hoping the FWP support crew would respond to my post but I guess not. I want some solid reasoning out of them, not just FWP is "The Man". Why should he be #13 .... look at the stats!
He had 1 recieving TD and only 18 receptions, so a little more than 1 catch per game. Not of significant value.He did have a few receiving scores though, and those count in FF.
Oh, silly me. You said he had only 1 rushing TD in his last 13 games and I noticed he had 3 overall TDs in that span and assumed the other 2 were receiving. He actually had 2 rushing touchdowns over the last 13, not 1.He had 1 recieving TD and only 18 receptions, so a little more than 1 catch per game. Not of significant value.He did have a few receiving scores though, and those count in FF.
worst post evah!Throw out 25% of Caddy's game and he averaged 7.6 fantasy points per game, yet he is going in the first round.Yes, it is a strong argument. Simple math tells you that any RB suffers by that criterion. Now:1. Flip your brain to the on position.Strong argument here. Throw out 25% of his best performances, and he wasn't good. I bet he's the only RB ever who would suffer under that criteria.Throw out 4 weeks of last season and he was a terrible starting RB from a FF perspective.
2. Realize that the telling metric would be how much an RB suffers by this criterion.
3. Do a little research.
4. See that FWP is one of the only RBs that had a "good" year last year but wouldn't even have warranted a roster spot if you throw out his 4 best games.
But here's a simpler argument if you prefer:
over his final 13 games he only had 1 rushing TD.
http://subscribers.footballguys.com/players/ParkWi00-3.phpyour right ... 2 over a 13 game span.... but that was not the point I was trying to make.Oh, silly me. You said he had only 1 rushing TD in his last 13 games and I noticed he had 3 overall TDs in that span and assumed the other 2 were receiving. He actually had 2 rushing touchdowns over the last 13, not 1.He had 1 recieving TD and only 18 receptions, so a little more than 1 catch per game. Not of significant value.He did have a few receiving scores though, and those count in FF.
I'm not saying it's great, but your stat was wrong.
Caddy is going in the middle of the 1st round and Caddy was about as consistent as FWP last year.7.6 FP doesn't seem that bad given the metric. Did you happen to find the number for FWP for this?
Caddy was injured for a good 4 week portion of the season. During those 4 weeks his stats dramatically drop off. In addition to that Caddy is a lot more tallented than FWP ... see NFL Draft.Caddy is going in the middle of the 1st round and Caddy was about as consistent as FWP last year.7.6 FP doesn't seem that bad given the metric. Did you happen to find the number for FWP for this?
Caddy is more talented but in the world of FF FWP and Caddy are very similar players. Both have home run potential, but both are likely to be lifted on 3rd downs and short yardage. Both have durability concerns. I think both of these guys are overvalued on the FBG board.Caddy was injured for a good 4 week portion of the season. During those 4 weeks his stats dramatically drop off. In addition to that Caddy is a lot more tallented than FWP ... see NFL Draft.Caddy is going in the middle of the 1st round and Caddy was about as consistent as FWP last year.7.6 FP doesn't seem that bad given the metric. Did you happen to find the number for FWP for this?
same thing was said 2005. "Parker won't be the starter come 2006."Parker won't be the starter in Pittsburgh come 2007.
![]()
I love the irony of how you defend Caddy yet bash FWP. FWP finished the season higher than Caddy last year, they were both just as bad in the consistency department, it was both their 1st years as starters, yet Caddy is a FF 1st round pick for sure and you are calling for the head of FWP.Caddy was injured for a good 4 week portion of the season. During those 4 weeks his stats dramatically drop off. In addition to that Caddy is a lot more tallented than FWP ... see NFL Draft.Caddy is going in the middle of the 1st round and Caddy was about as consistent as FWP last year.7.6 FP doesn't seem that bad given the metric. Did you happen to find the number for FWP for this?
same thing was said 2005. "Parker won't be the starter come 2006."Parker won't be the starter in Pittsburgh come 2007.
![]()
Caddy was hurt, but was a stud before and after. FWP was not a go to player. He never took over a game as Cadillac did. Using stats while injured is dishonest.I love the irony of how you defend Caddy yet bash FWP. FWP finished the season higher than Caddy last year, they were both just as bad in the consistency department, it was both their 1st years as starters, yet Caddy is a FF 1st round pick for sure and you are calling for the head of FWP.Caddy was injured for a good 4 week portion of the season. During those 4 weeks his stats dramatically drop off. In addition to that Caddy is a lot more tallented than FWP ... see NFL Draft.Caddy is going in the middle of the 1st round and Caddy was about as consistent as FWP last year.7.6 FP doesn't seem that bad given the metric. Did you happen to find the number for FWP for this?
Yes. Looks like all the "homerism" was put aside.All homerism aside, I believe FWP is indeed the real deal. You fine gentlemen can say what you like, but FWP is NOT and should NOT be compared to Famous Amos Zereoue.
Look for some serious numbers to be put up by the Ex-Tar Heel this season.
or maybe, send Dodds a PMConsensus rankings by the staff have him at 26. I, personally, have him at 32.
Dave Dodds alone does the "top-200" - if you disagree, then check out the rest of the staff rankings.
even better. you might get him to respond here if you do that. you might not - he's kinda busy these next couple weeks.or maybe, send Dodds a PMConsensus rankings by the staff have him at 26. I, personally, have him at 32.
Dave Dodds alone does the "top-200" - if you disagree, then check out the rest of the staff rankings.
but, still better than calling him out for each "odd" top 200 placementeven better. you might get him to respond here if you do that. you might not - he's kinda busy these next couple weeks.or maybe, send Dodds a PMConsensus rankings by the staff have him at 26. I, personally, have him at 32.
Dave Dodds alone does the "top-200" - if you disagree, then check out the rest of the staff rankings.
well, it generated some good talk here, so we are not THAT concerned, but if someone REALLY wants a response to why a player is in a specific top-200 slot, PM'ing Dodds is the best way to get an answer.but, still better than calling him out for each "odd" top 200 placementeven better. you might get him to respond here if you do that. you might not - he's kinda busy these next couple weeks.or maybe, send Dodds a PMConsensus rankings by the staff have him at 26. I, personally, have him at 32.
Dave Dodds alone does the "top-200" - if you disagree, then check out the rest of the staff rankings.