What's up with the McFadden hate? (1 Viewer)

[LawFitz]

The guy is an animal. In my league where we give .5 pts for a reception, his lowest total was 3 points one week (Pittsburgh) and then after that, his lowest total was 9. I think having one game under 9 points in 13 weeks is pretty DARN reliable. Chris Johnson had 3 games last year under 9 points and Steven Jackson also had 3 games last year under 9 points. Regarding the team argument, who cares. The Raiders weren't a great team last year but do you really think they will be worse now? Even if they are down, they aren't going to take out their playmaker who is also a great receiver and score 6 points with the quickness.

Thanks for this comment.In my 0.5 PPR league here is his 13 game breakdown from last season when they were installing a new offense, a new QB, the OL was average at best and the WR were the suck.2 ridiculous games (40+ pts)1 very good (24 pts)6 solid (15-20ish range)3 serviceable (10ish range) - one of these due to in-game injury1 horrible (4 pts) - against Pitt D.Aside from injury, I don't consider DMC at all unreliable. Quite the opposite actually.

 

[LawFitz]

1. The WRs are not nearly as bad as you think. Ford, Murphy, Schilens, Moore are better than a lot of NFL WR corps.

What in the world are you basing this assessment on? Not production at the NFL level, that's for sure.The Oakland receiving corps is all potential and no production. As a group they are bottom six going into the 2011 season. Based on potential they might (should?) finish better than that but don't bank on that just yet.

Your point is very fair.I am giving Glass Schilens and Moore way too much credit and Murphy has suspect hands.Ford is legit IMO.ETA: I'm also ignoring the elephant in the room, which is that DHB will be starting for at least the early part of the season. That said, he's having a good camp/preseason for the first time in his career. It's not saying much, but he is improving. I don't think his leash will be long though. Not if the rest of the team is performing and he isn't.

 

[Flying Elvis]

I don't understand how two years of ineffectiveness do to injury and so many missed games - including 3 last year - can all be washed away. That many missed games = unreliable. Regardless of what his production was last year, he was unreliable in that he had 2 games that were poor production @ 9 & 3 points and 3 games that were big fat goose-eggs. By my count that is 5 games, not 2. Ergo, unreliable. And it's even worse when you consider his first 2 years, which I do.

IDK, I feel like I'm arguing a point that isn't necessarily contradictory to yours. lol

He's good, but calling him reliable is . . . questionable, at best.

 

[eoMMan]

I don't understand how two years of ineffectiveness do to injury and so many missed games - including 3 last year - can all be washed away. That many missed games = unreliable. Regardless of what his production was last year, he was unreliable in that he had 2 games that were poor production @ 9 & 3 points and 3 games that were big fat goose-eggs. By my count that is 5 games, not 2. Ergo, unreliable. And it's even worse when you consider his first 2 years, which I do.IDK, I feel like I'm arguing a point that isn't necessarily contradictory to yours. lolHe's good, but calling him reliable is . . . questionable, at best.

Yeah, no offense, but it doesn't sound like anything we say will convince you of McFadden's awesomeness.Good day, sir.

 

[need2know]

In my .5 ppr I am pretty sure he will be there when I pick @ 12 and I am taking him .

Yes, hes got an injury history but if you have depth at RB you can navigate the 2 games he will probably miss. Not many RBs out there have the potential to give you 40 pts in a game. It would be nice to have one of those RBs on your team. Hell if I go RB/RB he might be my RB2....

 

[Flying Elvis]

I don't understand how two years of ineffectiveness do to injury and so many missed games - including 3 last year - can all be washed away. That many missed games = unreliable. Regardless of what his production was last year, he was unreliable in that he had 2 games that were poor production @ 9 & 3 points and 3 games that were big fat goose-eggs. By my count that is 5 games, not 2. Ergo, unreliable. And it's even worse when you consider his first 2 years, which I do.IDK, I feel like I'm arguing a point that isn't necessarily contradictory to yours. lolHe's good, but calling him reliable is . . . questionable, at best.

Yeah, no offense, but it doesn't sound like anything we say will convince you of McFadden's awesomeness.Good day, sir.

Ha! That's why I was saying I feel like I'm arguing something different. He is awesome, as long as he can stay on the field. Pfffft. I'm taking my ball and going home!

 

[LawFitz]

For anyone who thinks the Raiders have horrible WRs. This guy is far from that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHTaEjIGSPE

Brandon Flowers is a decent corner, right?

 

[PhantomJB]

A reasonable comparable seems to be Jamaal Charles.

In my mind there are a lot of perceived similarities including:

1) Explosiveness/upside

2) Usage within the respective offensive system

3) Coaching change (HC or OC)

4) Weak/unproven passing game

5) Timeshare / vulture risk

6) Schedule (both last year and this year)

The perceived differences seem to be twofold:

1) OL line quality (KC gets an "A" in run blocking, OAK a "B" according to certain sources)

2) Injury history

The differences seem to rationally explain the differences in current ADP (Charles at RB4 / 1.04) and DMC at RB9 / 1.12 (according to FF Calc). BTW, in between the two gs are CJ, Mendy, MJD and McCoy.

I would love to hear more from the DMC proponents why people considering DMC shouldn't be concerned after losing Gallery and Cable (other than "Gallery sucked"), otherwise it seems DMC is appropriately being valued given the perceived risks involved. He may overcome those risks and finish #1 but those risks are legitimate.

 

[LawFitz]

I would love to hear more from the DMC proponents why people considering DMC shouldn't be concerned after losing Gallery and Cable (other than "Gallery sucked"), otherwise it seems DMC is appropriately being valued given the perceived risks involved. He may overcome those risks and finish #1 but those risks are legitimate.

McFadden broke out big time last season in Hue Jackson's offense and blocking scheme after sucking for two years under Tom Cable's scheme.Girllery was a good G. Not great, good. He may not be easily replaced, but he is not irreplaceable. I do find it interesting that everyone considered him a bum until he left. Now all of a sudden he is considered a huge loss. I don't buy that. Raiders OLine is most certainly in flux, but it's not like they were all world last season. Girllery didn't even play a good portion of the year if I recall correctly. They were moving parts around almost the entire season due to injury and performance issues.

 

[krsone21]

I don't think people are "hating" on him. But when you compare the risk to other top 10 RBs, there is greater risk than some of the others.

1) He plays for the Raiders. Personally, I am not optimistic about the Raider's offense in 2011. They have one of the worst group of recievers and they lost a key offensive lineman and TE. New coaching staff that has had little time to work with team.

2) In this already shortened off season, McFadden has missed more time to work with team because of the injury. I don't think anyone thinks the orbital injury is going to affect his play--but it has meant that he is on the sidelines while the team installs a new offense.

3) He has had one great, but again, incoomplete season, and two poor seasons. Which one will he have this season? Was last year his ceiling or his break out year? While there is reason to be optimistic about his talent based on last year, why would I take him over a guy who has put up multiple years of top production?

4) Injury risk. It isn't just that he has been injured each of his years in the NFL so far, but minor injuries seem to sideline him. He can't play injured and be productive.

5) How many goal line TDs will Bush vulture?

I DO like him in PPR. I think he will get a ton of receptions because I don't think Oakland has too many legit receivers and I question the QB's ability to get the ball downfield to the open man consistently. But in standard scoring I wouldn't want him as my RB1. In PPR, I would be happy to get him near the end of the first round and then handcuff with Bush.

1. The WRs are not nearly as bad as you think. Ford, Murphy, Schilens, Moore are better than a lot of NFL WR corps. And that's assuming nothing from DHB. Gallery and Miller are far from irreplaceable.2. The are not installing a new offense. They're using Hue's offense from last season and adding new wrinkles from Al Saunders who has run the same offense for the last three decades.

3. This is the snake bitten analysis. I guess some wounds take longer than others to heal.

4. I agree with this, though the presence of Bush will mitigate on multiple levels.

5. DMC was at his best when he and Bush were playing last season. One is a transcendent talent. The other is simply good. And the coaches know it.

Have to disagree slightly LawFitz.
[*]I think the loss of Gallery will hurt more than you think. He has played fairly solid for them and IMO his loss will be felt.

[*]In regards to the WR squad, I am a believer that they will have a lot of looks, as the OAK defense took a huge blow with the loss of Asomogh. They are going to have to throw, which makes the receivers more valuable. What hurts is that Miller has consistently been the "go-to" WR. Now we have a new TE, some more rookies, and a shortened training camp. Those factors do not bode well for a good season. So if they are out of it early, they have to throw which is a plus for DMC, but will hurt him from a pure rushing standpoint.

[*]Agreed with Michael Bush statements. Bush is the TD vulture here. He played well with DMC and I don't really see any change in that setup.

[*]DMC had a fantastic year last year. I drafted him late as I saw great potential as he has been written off over the last few years. But let's be honest, to think opposing defenses aren't going to game plan for this guy is ridiculous. They are going to plan for DMC and with the loss of Gallery, some new WRs who will make some basic mistakes, means DMC is not going to have a lot of holes.

So do I like DMC. Sure, he's an explosive runner. Is he worth a first rd or 2nd round pick? IMO, no way. I think he is overvalued. Just too many risk and concerns with the OAK Offense. Maybe I'm wrong, and then so be it, but I'm not touching him in the first round and I'd consider late second, but I am sure most people will overreach and take that decision away.

Why people outside of Oakland think that Gallery is a big loss is beyond me. He played OK at best, he missed a lot of games due to injury the past 2 years and we ran just fine without him. He was injured a lot. Not a big loss for Oakland and this is coming from a Hawkeye fan that watched Gallery from his Hawkeye days all through his Oakland days.

 

[PhantomJB]

I would love to hear more from the DMC proponents why people considering DMC shouldn't be concerned after losing Gallery and Cable (other than "Gallery sucked"), otherwise it seems DMC is appropriately being valued given the perceived risks involved. He may overcome those risks and finish #1 but those risks are legitimate.

McFadden broke out big time last season in Hue Jackson's offense and blocking scheme after sucking for two years under Tom Cable's scheme.Girllery was a good G. Not great, good. He may not be easily replaced, but he is not irreplaceable. I do find it interesting that everyone considered him a bum until he left. Now all of a sudden he is considered a huge loss. I don't buy that. Raiders OLine is most certainly in flux, but it's not like they were all world last season. Girllery didn't even play a good portion of the year if I recall correctly. They were moving parts around almost the entire season due to injury and performance issues.

Thanks for the direct response. This is a good discussion.

 

[Tau837]

Gallery left game 1 last year near the end of the third quarter and missed the Raiders' next 4 games.

McFadden left game 4 at the beginning of the 4th quarter and missed the Raiders' next 2 games.

So McFadden played 12 quarters in the first 4 games without Gallery. Here is McFadden's rushing production in those 12 quarters: 71/325/1 (4.6 ypc). He also had 12/117/1 receiving over that span. That is a 16 game pace of 2357 total yards and 8 TDs.

IMO there is little reason to worry about the loss of Gallery having any significant effect on McFadden.

 

[joffer]

i was ready to take him at the 1.12/2.01 turn last night but Vick fell so i passed. you've done a decent job of convincing me though. good thread.

 

[Raiderfan32904]

Gallery left game 1 last year near the end of the third quarter and missed the Raiders' next 4 games.McFadden left game 4 at the beginning of the 4th quarter and missed the Raiders' next 2 games.So McFadden played 12 quarters in the first 4 games without Gallery. Here is McFadden's rushing production in those 12 quarters: 71/325/1 (4.6 ypc). He also had 12/117/1 receiving over that span. That is a 16 game pace of 2357 total yards and 8 TDs.IMO there is little reason to worry about the loss of Gallery having any significant effect on McFadden.

There was a similar study done by Football Outsiders on the average yards per rush by all Raider RB's over each offensive line position. I don't have the link, but the LG spot, which was Gallery's was by far the lowest avg yardage per carry compared to other points of attack. It could just be an abberation, and it does encompass all the running backs and also does not isolate Gallery. But I think it paints a tale that Gallery was not a big contributor of many of DMAC's big gainers.

 

[dwarfboy]

What he did last year was ridiculous... I think he'll be better this year. Took him at 9 last night of a 12 team .5 ppr because i didnt want to risk him not coming back to me in the second. I believe he'll have a monster year this year. Left cj2k on the board to take him

Drafted Mcfadden in the 4th round(4.06) of a 12 team .5 ppr flex league on sunday. I certainly hope he's worth #9 overall.

 

[kutta]

What he did last year was ridiculous... I think he'll be better this year. Took him at 9 last night of a 12 team .5 ppr because i didnt want to risk him not coming back to me in the second. I believe he'll have a monster year this year. Left cj2k on the board to take him

Drafted Mcfadden in the 4th round(4.06) of a 12 team .5 ppr flex league on sunday. I certainly hope he's worth #9 overall.

Uh, really? Fourth round? Holy crap.

 

[kutta]

I've been struggling with this one for weeks. I have the 11th pick and had my mind made up to go WR/WR or WR/QB if Vick or Rogers fell. I just don't like any of the RB's at the 1/2 turn. But this thread has me thinking again about it, and D-mac is entering into the picture a bit.

I like the upside he offers at the end of the first round - pairing him with Fitz or CJ could be a great start to a draft. I really like a bunch of RB's at the 3/4 turn, so taking D-mac early and grabbing one of those guys later is interesting.

Bummer! I thought I had this figured out...

 

[az_prof]

For anyone who thinks the Raiders have horrible WRs. This guy is far from that.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHTaEjIGSPEBrandon Flowers is a decent corner, right?

Yeah...he is a regular Larry Fitzgerald or Roddy White. Without the elite pedigree or the elite production.

 

[LawFitz]

What he did last year was ridiculous... I think he'll be better this year. Took him at 9 last night of a 12 team .5 ppr because i didnt want to risk him not coming back to me in the second. I believe he'll have a monster year this year. Left cj2k on the board to take him

Drafted Mcfadden in the 4th round(4.06) of a 12 team .5 ppr flex league on sunday. I certainly hope he's worth #9 overall.

Now that is some hate.

 

[hines]

Drafted Mcfadden in the 4th round(4.06) of a 12 team .5 ppr flex league on sunday. I certainly hope he's worth #9 overall.

wow, can we see the full draft list leading up to this?

 

[LawFitz]

For anyone who thinks the Raiders have horrible WRs. This guy is far from that.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHTaEjIGSPEBrandon Flowers is a decent corner, right?

Yeah...he is a regular Larry Fitzgerald or Roddy White. Without the elite pedigree or the elite production.

I see him more as a young Steve Smiff or Santana Moss. Not sure why exactly you brought up two of the league's top 5 WRs to counter my argument that Ford doesn't suck.

 

[HeHateSteve]

Great upside with McFadden but very risky. I'm a Raider fan (believe it or not), and I know this guy gets hurt every damn season. Not to mention you have to waste a good pick on his handcuff. I actually have pick 9 in my FFPC footballguys draft and was considering him but think I'll take an elite WR instead if McCoy doesn't bounce down to 9.

 

[az_prof]

For anyone who thinks the Raiders have horrible WRs. This guy is far from that.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHTaEjIGSPEBrandon Flowers is a decent corner, right?

Yeah...he is a regular Larry Fitzgerald or Roddy White. Without the elite pedigree or the elite production.

I see him more as a young Steve Smiff or Santana Moss. Not sure why exactly you brought up two of the league's top 5 WRs to counter my argument that Ford doesn't suck.

Because he wouldn't start for two thirds of the teams in the NFL and he certainly wouldn't be a WR1 for anyone except MAYBE Jax.

 

[HeHateSteve]

For anyone who thinks the Raiders have horrible WRs. This guy is far from that.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHTaEjIGSPEBrandon Flowers is a decent corner, right?

I was actually front row for that game (gf got me tickets for my Bday). Was amazing. I like Ford this year where he's getting drafted.

 

[HeHateSteve]

Because he wouldn't start for two thirds of the teams in the NFL and he certainly wouldn't be a WR1 for anyone except MAYBE Jax.

Child please. You know that's not true. Granted maybe some WR2s might be better but he's worthy of WR3 status on any team for his big play factor alone.

 

[LawFitz]

For anyone who thinks the Raiders have horrible WRs. This guy is far from that.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHTaEjIGSPEBrandon Flowers is a decent corner, right?

Yeah...he is a regular Larry Fitzgerald or Roddy White. Without the elite pedigree or the elite production.

I see him more as a young Steve Smiff or Santana Moss. Not sure why exactly you brought up two of the league's top 5 WRs to counter my argument that Ford doesn't suck.

Because he wouldn't start for two thirds of the teams in the NFL and he certainly wouldn't be a WR1 for anyone except MAYBE Jax.

There are two types of Raider-colored glasses and you seem to be wearing one of them. In all fairness, I might be wearing the other. So we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

[Chaka]

For anyone who thinks the Raiders have horrible WRs. This guy is far from that.

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=oHTaEjIGSPE

Brandon Flowers is a decent corner, right?

Yeah...he is a regular Larry Fitzgerald or Roddy White. Without the elite pedigree or the elite production.

I see him more as a young Steve Smiff or Santana Moss. Not sure why exactly you brought up two of the league's top 5 WRs to counter my argument that Ford doesn't suck.

Because he wouldn't start for two thirds of the teams in the NFL and he certainly wouldn't be a WR1 for anyone except MAYBE Jax.

There are two types of Raider-colored glasses and you seem to be wearing one of them. In all fairness, I might be wearing the other. So we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

You are very high on a guy who caught 25 passes in 10 games (46% reception rate on targets).I like the guy and he was no doubt effective at times but he's hardly a bankable commodity at the WR position, particularly when he is so valuable on kick returns.

 

[LawFitz]

You are very high on a guy who caught 25 passes in 10 games (46% reception rate on targets).I like the guy and he was no doubt effective at times but he's hardly a bankable commodity at the WR position, particularly when he is so valuable on kick returns.

Where did you find that catch rate data? Does the source go back far enough to look up S. Smiff and S. Moss' rookie/early year catch rates. As I watched Jacoby emerge last season, those two kept popping into my head and I'm very curious as to how they fared when they were younger and returning kicks primarily.Catch rate can be skewed by errant passes, but 46 seems pretty low. Curious how it fared early in Smiff and Moss' careers.

 

[Gold Standard]

DMC is still too risky to take over someone like Turner / SJax, to me. As someone else mentioned, it's not that he's an injury risk, it's that any injury is enough to completely shelf him. Whereas, guys like Turner & SJax have consistently shown they can power through the nagging little stuff that consitently cost DMC entire games.Upside is great and all, but reliable points win more games than boom or bust points.

Properly handcuffing with Bush mitigates much of what you describe.I'll take the young guy with burst and hunger (and his more than capable handcuff) over tired and worn down Turner. SJax I can sort of see an argument for, but he looked pretty tired to me last year too. My personal eye test has had me down on Turner for the last couple years and down on SJax last year.IMO selecting a guy like Mike Turner early (esp in PPR or even 0.5 PPR) is a good way to increase your odds of being middle of the pack and dramatically decrease your odds of winning.

DMC is definitely a better choice than Turner in PPR. I'd take SJax over him in either format because of his consistency and reliability. Bush as a handcuff mitigates it, but doesn't eliminate the risk. He's a poor man's Turner, imo, and essentially ensures only that I've now invested two picks on one startable player. It also does nothing to mitigate the risk that the Raiders offense is prone to complete collapse in any given game and their DST is as well, which could easily lead to less touches for any Oakland RB.Ultimately, I agree DMC has better upside. Depending on how I expect a draft to go, I might take him over the more reliable type RBs. The trade off would be in the WR poisition, where I would then target a reliable guy like Wayne vs. an additional boom/bust guy like DJax.I just don't really see any "hate" with DMC, as he's correctly labeled a risky RB (injury / reliability / team) yet he's still a top 15 pick. It's prudence, not hate. lol

Regarding injury, yes, he's gotten hurt in the past but you usually know if a player is starting or not. Like others suggesed, I think drafting Bush is necessary. That being said, look at his numbers last year and keep in mind that this was all done in only 13 games. RuYd RuTD ReYd ReTD RuAtt Recpt 1157 7 507 3 223 47 The guy is an animal. In my league where we give .5 pts for a reception, his lowest total was 3 points one week (Pittsburgh) and then after that, his lowest total was 9. I think having one game under 9 points in 13 weeks is pretty DARN reliable. Chris Johnson had 3 games last year under 9 points and Steven Jackson also had 3 games last year under 9 points. Regarding the team argument, who cares. The Raiders weren't a great team last year but do you really think they will be worse now? Even if they are down, they aren't going to take out their playmaker who is also a great receiver and score 6 points with the quickness.

Got him at 3.06 in a no ppr 10 Teamer - Insane value for my #1 back

 

[Chaka]

You are very high on a guy who caught 25 passes in 10 games (46% reception rate on targets).I like the guy and he was no doubt effective at times but he's hardly a bankable commodity at the WR position, particularly when he is so valuable on kick returns.

Where did you find that catch rate data? Does the source go back far enough to look up S. Smiff and S. Moss' rookie/early year catch rates. As I watched Jacoby emerge last season, those two kept popping into my head and I'm very curious as to how they fared when they were younger and returning kicks primarily.Catch rate can be skewed by errant passes, but 46 seems pretty low. Curious how it fared early in Smiff and Moss' careers.

Steve Smith had 54 receptions on 94 targets (57.4%) in his second year with Rodney Peete, Chris Weinke and Randy Fasani at QB (10 receptions in his first year, unknown targets).Santana had 30 receptions on 52 targets (57.7%) in his second year with Vinny and Chad Pennington at QB (2 receptions as a rookie).Jason Campbell, Kyle Boller & Trent Edwards are the QBs in Oakland, I am expecting at least the same number of errant passes this season as in 2010.

 

[LawFitz]

You are very high on a guy who caught 25 passes in 10 games (46% reception rate on targets).I like the guy and he was no doubt effective at times but he's hardly a bankable commodity at the WR position, particularly when he is so valuable on kick returns.

Where did you find that catch rate data? Does the source go back far enough to look up S. Smiff and S. Moss' rookie/early year catch rates. As I watched Jacoby emerge last season, those two kept popping into my head and I'm very curious as to how they fared when they were younger and returning kicks primarily.Catch rate can be skewed by errant passes, but 46 seems pretty low. Curious how it fared early in Smiff and Moss' careers.

Steve Smith had 54 receptions on 94 targets (57.4%) in his second year with Rodney Peete, Chris Weinke and Randy Fasani at QB (10 receptions in his first year, unknown targets).Santana had 30 receptions on 52 targets (57.7%) in his second year with Vinny and Chad Pennington at QB (2 receptions as a rookie).Jason Campbell, Kyle Boller & Trent Edwards are the QBs in Oakland, I am expecting at least the same number of errant passes this season as in 2010.

Thank you. This is a a very fair point in this debate.

 

[LawFitz]

Also want to add that Taiwan Jones looked electric against the Saints last night. In addition to short area burst and ridiculous top end speed, he displayed excellent vision, patience and lateral movement. Frankly, he didn't look like another Al Davis speedster, but an actual football player.

A viable RB3, especially with Jones' skill set will devalue DMC to at least a small degree. And his presence creates added problems because it undercuts the handcuff insurance considerably. He's rail thin though so we'll see if he can handle the rigors of this league, but the first glimpse was impressive.

 

[LawFitz]

Also, those who are looking for a decline in Raider OL play due to the loss of Gallery will be pleasantly surprised by this unit IMO. They looked good last night, including the rookie Wisnewski replacing Girllery at LG and Stephon Heyer outplaying Barnes at RT. Satele did get pushed back a lot by big Shaun Rodgers, but that happened a lot last season too against bigger DTs, so it's not a downgrade, but still a weakness. Veldheer and Carlysle both played well against the Saints' DL.

 

[Leeroy Jenkins]

Is he practicing full contact and ready to go for week 1?

 

[az_prof]

Also want to add that Taiwan Jones looked electric against the Saints last night. In addition to short area burst and ridiculous top end speed, he displayed excellent vision, patience and lateral movement. Frankly, he didn't look like another Al Davis speedster, but an actual football player. A viable RB3, especially with Jones' skill set will devalue DMC to at least a small degree. And his presence creates added problems because it undercuts the handcuff insurance considerably. He's rail thin though so we'll see if he can handle the rigors of this league, but the first glimpse was impressive.

I have been one of the critics of DMac (not that he sucks but just that people are over rating him) in here, but I don't find this claim about Jones valid at all. He's a rookie. He has looked horrible in pass blocking. And his skill set is sort of DMAC light; in other words, he won't see the field unless DMAC is hurt. Bush was the first back on the field all preseason and is the clear RB2. I think Jones may have a future but he will be used as a RB3 this season and is not rosterable unless DMAC and Bush are both hurt. And his presence does not hurt DMAC's production at all. What can he do better?