Who Wins the Jacobs/Droughns RB Battle? (1 Viewer)

[TheBradyBunch]

Also, the more carries Jacobs gets, the more likely he is to break a long one. That needs to be factored in as well.

And the more likely he is to wear down a defense, which gives him more chances to square his shoulders.And once he does that, it's 3 yards. At least. There's no getting stood up in the hole, and stopped for a loss. He gets hit, he is falling forward, and that's 2 yards, minimum. I don't think the Giants brough in Ruben to be part of a RBBC. I think they brought in Ruben in case Jacobs can't handle the load.

The stats from last season indicate that Jacobs became less productive as the season went on. NFL lifespans of big rb's are short for a reason. They're big targets. Regardless of who gets the touches, I think the Giants are in for a world of hurt w/o Tiki. He was their offense and the reason Jacobs got his TD's. Without him, that team's a mess, imo. Look at Tiki's all-time Giants records:Longest Touchdown Run: 95 yards, December 31, 2005 vs. the Oakland Raiders Most Rushing Touchdowns, Career: 55 Most Rushing Attempts, Season: 357, 2005 season Most Rushing Attempts, Career: 2,217 Most 100 Yard Games, Season: 9, 2004 season Most 200 Yard Games, Season: 3, 2005 season Most Rushing Yards, Single Game: 234 yards, December 30, 2006 vs. the Washington Redskins Most Rushing Yards, Season: 1,860 yards, 2005 season Most Rushing Yards, Career: 10,449 yards Most Receptions, Career: 586 Most Total Yards, Season: 2,390 yards, 2005 season Most 1,000 Yard Seasons: 6 Yards Per Carry, Career: 4.7 Most Total Yards, Game: 276 (203 rushing yards, 73 receiving yards), December 28, 2002 vs. the Philadelphia Eagles Most Total Yards (Rushing, Receiving, Returns and Fumble Yardage), Career: 17,359 Most Yards From Scrimmage (Rushing and Receiving), Career: 15,632 Highest Average 100+ yards from scrimmage per game, Career (min: 150 games): 101.5 Most Fumble Recoveries, Game: 3, October 29, 2000 vs. the Philadelphia Eagles

 

[packersfan]

I don't think anyone disputes the impact of Barber's departure. I know I'm not. But I think what needs to be asked is can the Giants offset at least a part of that (if not more) due to the return of Toomer, perhaps better health from Shockey as well as potential improvement from Manning? And that's not taking into consideration any talent Jacobs may bring.

Now, none of these things may come to pass. Toomer may be a shell of his former self; Shockey may continue to have durability issues; Manning may not progress and Jacobs may stink. But at this point in time I don't think it's unrealistic to think the passing game at least potentially has a chance to be better, which helps the offense and reduces the pressure on Jacobs and the running game.

 

[Construction Man Jim]

How much of that do you attribute to Tiki Barber? [Hint: A LOT]

Tiki was supremely talented. There's no question about that. I wouldn't take anything away from him in that respect. However, I also wouldn't underestimate the importance of the o-line and system in his success, or in general.Are you seriously arguing that Giants o-line hasn't been one of the best run blocking units in the NFL the past couple years?

 

[TheBradyBunch]

How much of that do you attribute to Tiki Barber? [Hint: A LOT]

Tiki was supremely talented. There's no question about that. I wouldn't take anything away from him in that respect. However, I also wouldn't underestimate the importance of the o-line and system in his success, or in general.Are you seriously arguing that Giants o-line hasn't been one of the best run blocking units in the NFL the past couple years?

I honestly don't know enough about the Giants OL to comment, but Tiki's pass-catching skills had to open a lot in the run game, no? Not only did Tiki lead the rushing attack, but he had the most receptions in Giants history. Jacobs has 11 catches in 2 years. They've become one-dimensional in that regard. I think Jacobs could put up huge fantasy numbers if the Giants could somehow find their way to the redzone. I just think it's a huge mistake for people to look at BJ's TD totals in limited play WITH Tiki and project them to be greater WITHOUT Tiki. I just don't see it....

 

[Construction Man Jim]

Watch the Jacobs highlights I posted earlier in the thread. He catches the ball very well. Screens, dumps, even split out wide. They will emphasize some things more than others but the offense isn't going to change. Gilbride just made that point his press conference.

 

[DA RAIDERS]

70/30 droughns. they will go with the sure thing.

 

[corpcow]

Does anyone really think David Diehl can hold up as the left tackle for the entire season?

Diehl worries me at LT. He's a good G, but man... we're gonna miss Luke. Look how much they struggled after he went down last year.I predict at the very least we'll hear "69 is an eligible receiver" a lot this year...

 

[Riffraff]

Ahmad Bradshaw

hey... shut up

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/...0&s=1511968Safe to post it now that my rookie drafts are to the point that I grabbed him.

Very Tiki-esque, at least a poor man's version of him.

 

[DaDaDaDawg]

I can't picture Jacobs doing much outside the tackles

Maybe this will help:http://www.khanhdom.com/cms/htmlos/047.21....0_brandonjacobs

You guys better look at this clip of BJ posted by Construction Man Jim.BJ sure as hell looks like the real deal & kind of reminds me of Earl Cambell. No way is he not the primary RB in NY...his running style will assure that. Of course, he could get hurt with that running style but the guy seems tough as nails (like Earl ).

BJ plays the kind of football that most fans find exciting and the Giants' brass are very much aware of that potential marketing bonanza...plodding, boring Droughns versus young, smashmouth wrecking ball with attitude that DBs are afraid to try to tackle...that's not even really a contest is it?

BJ 70%...Droughns 25%...Bradshaw 5%

 

[Jason Wood]

I can't picture Jacobs doing much outside the tackles

Maybe this will help:http://www.khanhdom.com/cms/htmlos/047.21....0_brandonjacobs

You guys better look at this clip of BJ posted by Construction Man Jim.BJ sure as hell looks like the real deal & kind of reminds me of Earl Cambell. No way is he not the primary RB in NY...his running style will assure that. Of course, he could get hurt with that running style but the guy seems tough as nails (like Earl ).

BJ plays the kind of football that most fans find exciting and the Giants' brass are very much aware of that potential marketing bonanza...plodding, boring Droughns versus young, smashmouth wrecking ball with attitude that DBs are afraid to try to tackle...that's not even really a contest is it?

BJ 70%...Droughns 25%...Bradshaw 5%

You realize you can make an impressive highlight reel clip on just about anyone, right? It's the body of work you need to judge, or, in this case, the lack of one.

 

[Construction Man Jim]

I think we all understand the limitations of highlight reels...

There were people on this thread questioning whether Jacobs could run outside, catch, make people miss etc. The highlights show that he's a complete back who can do all those things and more. That's why it was posted.

Jason, if you've got a Droughns highlight package that is equally as impressive, feel free to post it.

 

[Routilla]

I want Jacobs but RD has experience on his side. This looks like a full blown RBBC if you ask me. The only good thing is it is going to show us what kind of a QB Eli really is. Without Tiki he will have to become the heart of the offense. I think we will finally see what he brings to the table in terms of ability, whether that is good or bad remains to be seen.

 

[humans_being]

I think we all understand the limitations of highlight reels...

There were people on this thread questioning whether Jacobs could run outside, catch, make people miss etc. The highlights show that he's a complete back who can do all those things and more. That's why it was posted.

Jason, if you've got a Droughns highlight package that is equally as impressive, feel free to post it.

 

[DaDaDaDawg]

I can't picture Jacobs doing much outside the tackles

Maybe this will help:http://www.khanhdom.com/cms/htmlos/047.21....0_brandonjacobs

You guys better look at this clip of BJ posted by Construction Man Jim.BJ sure as hell looks like the real deal & kind of reminds me of Earl Cambell. No way is he not the primary RB in NY...his running style will assure that. Of course, he could get hurt with that running style but the guy seems tough as nails (like Earl ).

BJ plays the kind of football that most fans find exciting and the Giants' brass are very much aware of that potential marketing bonanza...plodding, boring Droughns versus young, smashmouth wrecking ball with attitude that DBs are afraid to try to tackle...that's not even really a contest is it?

BJ 70%...Droughns 25%...Bradshaw 5%

You realize you can make an impressive highlight reel clip on just about anyone, right? It's the body of work you need to judge, or, in this case, the lack of one.

My critique is not based only on the highlight clip that was posted...I just said you guys need to watch the clip. The point being that you have to watch BJ run before you can make a judgement on whether he'll be the primary ball carrier or not. I think some people are too enamored with statistics and situations...they make "paper" critiques. Style counts much more than people give it credit for...that smashmouth style of football with attitude is what gets fans excited about a particular player ala Earl Campbell and more recently The Bus and LJ.I don't care what his statistics were last year or his situation as a BU behind a future HOFer...Brandon Jacobs is a star in the making because of his style of running...anyone that thinks Droughns plodding, boring style will put Jacobs on the bench is really over-thinking this year's RB "situation".

Droughns is not remotely close to Tiki Barber and Tiki couldn't even keep Jacobs on the bench...its just plain insane to think Droughns "experience" will get the majority of the carries in NY this year.

 

[Construction Man Jim]

My critique is not based only on the highlight clip that was posted...I just said you guys need to watch the clip. The point being that you have to watch BJ run before you can make a judgement on whether he'll be the primary ball carrier or not. I think some people are too enamored with statistics and situations...they make "paper" critiques. Style counts much more than people give it credit for...that smashmouth style of football with attitude is what gets fans excited about a particular player ala Earl Campbell and more recently The Bus and LJ.I don't care what his statistics were last year or his situation as a BU behind a future HOFer...Brandon Jacobs is a star in the making because of his style of running...anyone that thinks Droughns plodding, boring style will put Jacobs on the bench is really over-thinking this "situation".

I think your point about some people being too married to statistics is a valid one. However I would say the most significant factor in this situation is talent, not style. Jacobs is an immense talent. Droughns is nowhere near him in that respect. If people can't make that determination from watching football then they need to find a hobby that has more to do with statistical probability and doesn't involve evaluating football talent (i.e. Dungeons & Dragons).

 

[DaDaDaDawg]

My critique is not based only on the highlight clip that was posted...I just said you guys need to watch the clip. The point being that you have to watch BJ run before you can make a judgement on whether he'll be the primary ball carrier or not. I think some people are too enamored with statistics and situations...they make "paper" critiques. Style counts much more than people give it credit for...that smashmouth style of football with attitude is what gets fans excited about a particular player ala Earl Campbell and more recently The Bus and LJ.I don't care what his statistics were last year or his situation as a BU behind a future HOFer...Brandon Jacobs is a star in the making because of his style of running...anyone that thinks Droughns plodding, boring style will put Jacobs on the bench is really over-thinking this "situation".

I think your point about some people being too married to statistics is a valid one. However I would say the most significant factor in this situation is talent, not style. Jacobs is an immense talent. Droughns is nowhere near him in that respect. If people can't make that determination from watching football then they need to find a hobby that has more to do with statistical probability and doesn't involve evaluating football talent (i.e. Dungeons & Dragons).

You're absolutely right...I should have said he has amazing talent to back up up his exciting style of running

 

[dparker713]

Why would you presume every Giants skill player will improve this year? They lost their dominant offensive cog; and have suffered losses on an already mediocre offensive line. I would be surprised if the Giants scored more points offensively then they did in 2006.

They didn't "suffer losses". They cut Luke Petigout. In 2005 the Giants were 6th in the league with 2209 total rushing yards/ 138.1 yards per game. In 2006 they were 7th with 2156 and 134.8. How does that qualify as "mediocre"?

How much of that do you attribute to Tiki Barber? [Hint: A LOT]

As great a player as Tiki was, anyone that has followed the Giants the past several years could plainly see that he had lost a little something. The runs that he had taken to the end zone in 2005 became nice long runs in 2006. He was still a great player last year, but he was no longer an elite RB. So, while Jacobs has big shoes to fill, its as difficult as it could have been just a year earlier. Fact of the matter is, that when you watch Giants games, Jacobs stands out as a major talent. Running inside, outside, catching a screen, he was devastating in all aspects of the game. Durability is of course a concern, however Droughns is not a concern.

 

[Iron_Far]

My critique is not based only on the highlight clip that was posted...I just said you guys need to watch the clip. The point being that you have to watch BJ run before you can make a judgement on whether he'll be the primary ball carrier or not. I think some people are too enamored with statistics and situations...they make "paper" critiques. Style counts much more than people give it credit for...that smashmouth style of football with attitude is what gets fans excited about a particular player ala Earl Campbell and more recently The Bus and LJ.I don't care what his statistics were last year or his situation as a BU behind a future HOFer...Brandon Jacobs is a star in the making because of his style of running...anyone that thinks Droughns plodding, boring style will put Jacobs on the bench is really over-thinking this "situation".

I think your point about some people being too married to statistics is a valid one. However I would say the most significant factor in this situation is talent, not style. Jacobs is an immense talent. Droughns is nowhere near him in that respect. If people can't make that determination from watching football then they need to find a hobby that has more to do with statistical probability and doesn't involve evaluating football talent (i.e. Dungeons & Dragons).

Certainly wasn't expecting any statistical analysis from the "Construction Man".

 

[The Ref]

I say 60/40 Jacobs. But when it comes to the goaline it will be 95/5.

Best type of RBBC.

 

[Reservoir Dog]

I wish everyone would quit talking about Jacobs!

 

[Construction Man Jim]

From the Ahmad Bradshaw thread...

Precisely. Also lost in all this shuffle is that Jacobs does not have the frame to be an every down back, there is a reason his body is not the prototype for his position in the NFL.

Giants fans love his emotion and circus freak atmosphere he creates when he touches the ball, but in reality, he is not equipped to be a full time RB.

He's a big guy who can run fast, but he isn't elusive (despite what he says), or that hard to bring down. His highlight reel at Southern Illinois is filled with tiny, no talent DB's taking him down at first contact by hitting him low. He is too slow to juke someone, and he can't lower his shoulder enough to prevent getting taken out at the knees or ankles. He lacks the quick lateral movement that is much easier for a smaller RB to perform sharper cuts because of their physical make up.

Also, normal sized RB's can "get lost" behind big lineman and pop through creases quickly. However, every defender on the field will have no problem finding Jacobs slowly plodding his way behind the LOS.

Jacobs is a battleship in modern times, he's imposing and impressive, but has limited use for most practical purposes.

I honestly have to question whether you have ever seen Jacobs play?http://www.khanhdom.com/cms/htmlos/06354.5...0_brandonjacobs

The above-linked highlight package (which has been posted multiple times) provides incontrovertible evidence that can do all the things you say he can't:

- Has natural hands. Catches the ball away from his body. Has the ability to catch the ball on check downs, screens and split out wide.

- Has plenty of speed to get to the outside and turn the corner.

- Can run inside and is obviously very effective in short yardage and goal line situations.

- Is tough to bring down. Breaks a lot of tackles. See the kick return vs. Arizona where he drags 5 guys 7+ yards after initial contact. See the entire New England defense trying and failing to bring him down. See 295 pound DT Chris Hovan get blown back and unable to tackle him. Ask Stuart Schweigert, Kerry Rhodes (knocked out), Marcus Washington (puked), Roy Williams and Ronde Barber (taken for a 7 yard ride) how easy he is to bring down one on one and if he "can't lower his shoulder enough"...

- Has remarkable agility for his size. Has no problem making guys miss.

- Has break away speed to outrun defenders.

Either provide some evidence of something a feature back is required to do that he can't do or how he's "limited"... Or stop with the incessant and baseless slander.

 

[H.K.]

From the Ahmad Bradshaw thread...

Precisely. Also lost in all this shuffle is that Jacobs does not have the frame to be an every down back, there is a reason his body is not the prototype for his position in the NFL.

Giants fans love his emotion and circus freak atmosphere he creates when he touches the ball, but in reality, he is not equipped to be a full time RB.

He's a big guy who can run fast, but he isn't elusive (despite what he says), or that hard to bring down. His highlight reel at Southern Illinois is filled with tiny, no talent DB's taking him down at first contact by hitting him low. He is too slow to juke someone, and he can't lower his shoulder enough to prevent getting taken out at the knees or ankles. He lacks the quick lateral movement that is much easier for a smaller RB to perform sharper cuts because of their physical make up.

Also, normal sized RB's can "get lost" behind big lineman and pop through creases quickly. However, every defender on the field will have no problem finding Jacobs slowly plodding his way behind the LOS.

Jacobs is a battleship in modern times, he's imposing and impressive, but has limited use for most practical purposes.

I honestly have to question whether you have ever seen Jacobs play?http://www.khanhdom.com/cms/htmlos/06354.5...0_brandonjacobs

The above-linked highlight package (which has been posted multiple times) provides incontrovertible evidence that can do all the things you say he can't:

- Has natural hands. Catches the ball away from his body. Has the ability to catch the ball on check downs, screens and split out wide.

- Has plenty of speed to get to the outside and turn the corner.

- Can run inside and is obviously very effective in short yardage and goal line situations.

- Is tough to bring down. Breaks a lot of tackles. See the kick return vs. Arizona where he drags 5 guys 7+ yards after initial contact. See the entire New England defense trying and failing to bring him down. See 295 pound DT Chris Hovan get blown back and unable to tackle him. Ask Stuart Schweigert, Kerry Rhodes (knocked out), Marcus Washington (puked), Roy Williams and Ronde Barber (taken for a 7 yard ride) how easy he is to bring down one on one and if he "can't lower his shoulder enough"...

- Has remarkable agility for his size. Has no problem making guys miss.

- Has break away speed to outrun defenders.

Either provide some evidence of something a feature back is required to do that he can't do or how he's "limited"... Or stop with the incessant and baseless slander.

From Dirty Weasel in the ideal RB size thread:

I don't think there is an answer for this. I decided to look up the top 25 RB's in terms of career yardage. Granted, they played during different eras, but here are some facts about the all-time top 25 list (stats gathered from http://www.pro-football-reference.com/):

- None of the top 4 were over 6'0"

- None of the top 4 were over 210lbs

- Avg size of the top 4 is 5'9.5"/204.25lbs, with none of them off this target by more than 1.5" or 4.25lbs

- Only 3 of the top 10 were over 6'0"

- Only 2 of the top 10 were over 220lbs

- 4 of the top 25 were under 200lbs

- None of the top 25 are under 5'8" or over 6'3"

Top 25 by height

6'3" - 2

6'2" - 5

6'1" - 3

6'0" - 3

5'11" - 4

5'10" - 5

5'9" - 1

5'8" - 2

Twenty of the top 25 were between 5'10" and 6'2". I was surprised that the number over 6'0" was as high as it was. Avg height is 5'11.75"

Top 25 by weight

240lbs and over - 2

236-240lbs - 0

231-235lbs - 3

226-230lbs - 2

221-225lbs - 1

216-220lbs - 6

211-215lbs - 1

206-210lbs - 4

201-205lbs - 1

200lbs and under - 5

Seems like the weight is more distributed than the height. 10 are 210lbs and under, 8 are 211-225lbs, and 7 are over 225lbs. Avg weight is 215.3lbs.

The one RB to change the game from a size perspective was Jim Brown. At the time, he was a big as linemen...but he was dominant in college, too. Jacobs has never been more than a part time guy.If defenders try to tackle Jacobs high, he will be tougher to bring down, but its easy to prepare against a back like him by focusing on technique the week before the game. When he is hit below the knee, he drops like a stone. Your post focuses on the things you hope he is or want him to be, but in reality he is not feature back material. The Giants already know this, and deep in your heart, you probably do, too.

 

[kentric]

BJ has a tendency to run straight up in situations where he should be lowering his head and moving the pile. If he doesn't adjust his style somewhat, he isn't likely to have a long-term tenor in the NFL. That said, he also had difficulty holding onto the ball when he first came up and the Giants staff did alot to improve that aspect of his game (as they did with Tiki who let quite a few go when he became the everyday back). It's possible they can adjust his running habits as well.

 

[dparker713]

From Dirty Weasel in the ideal RB size thread:

I don't think there is an answer for this. I decided to look up the top 25 RB's in terms of career yardage

The one RB to change the game from a size perspective was Jim Brown. At the time, he was a big as linemen...but he was dominant in college, too. Jacobs has never been more than a part time guy.If defenders try to tackle Jacobs high, he will be tougher to bring down, but its easy to prepare against a back like him by focusing on technique the week before the game. When he is hit below the knee, he drops like a stone. Your post focuses on the things you hope he is or want him to be, but in reality he is not feature back material. The Giants already know this, and deep in your heart, you probably do, too.

Why are you presenting career statistics? Single season might be persuasive, but really not all that much. The players in the NFL continue to evolve in terms of size and speed. I've seen more in terms of talent from Jacobs in limited time than I have from everyone's darling Turner. It has alot more to do with box scores and measurements than it does with game play. He has the chance to be special, Droughns has already been proven mediocre. I view their signing Droughns as evidence they agree with me, and not you. Also, seeing as he's repeatedly been proclaimed the primary back I dont see any reason to think the Giants aren't expecting big things from the big fella.

 

[Construction Man Jim]

The one RB to change the game from a size perspective was Jim Brown. At the time, he was a big as linemen...but he was dominant in college, too. Jacobs has never been more than a part time guy.If defenders try to tackle Jacobs high, he will be tougher to bring down, but its easy to prepare against a back like him by focusing on technique the week before the game. When he is hit below the knee, he drops like a stone. Your post focuses on the things you hope he is or want him to be, but in reality he is not feature back material. The Giants already know this, and deep in your heart, you probably do, too.

You're shifting the goal posts. You said he can't do a bunch of things. I provided video evidence showing him doing those things.Now you're saying his size is the issue. Nobody his size is in the All-Time Top 25... Well first of all, how many RBs his size have there been period? I feel like it's not much of a sample size.And why haven't there been more big backs? Is it because they're more likely to get injured? Is it that coaches pigeonhole guys at certain positions based on pre-conceived notions? Or is it that there aren't many guys that size athletic enough to play RB at the NFL level? Second of all, Jacobs doesn't need to end up as an all-time great to have a major fantasy impact. Certainly the question of whether he can hold up as a feature back in the long term is legit, but I don't see it as a major concern with regard to his short term prospects (the next 2-3 years).The reality is every RB in the league gets nicked up. Every RB is at risk of suffering a catastrophic season ending injury on practically every play. That's the position. It goes with the territory. Trying to predict "when" for anybody is pointless and futile. In Jacob's case he's never had a major injury or significant health issue. So there simply isn't a reasonable basis for saying he has significantly greater risk in the near term.

 

[H.K.]

You're shifting the goal posts.

Nope, I answered your request: "Either provide some evidence of something a feature back is required to do that he can't do or how he's "limited"... "

You said he can't do a bunch of things. I provided video evidence showing him doing those things.

No, you provided a highlight reel of his best plays. Review his entire body of work if you want the true picture. I could put together a reel of LT fumbling, dropping passes and getting tackled for losses but it wouldn't show the real player he is, would it?

Now you're saying his size is the issue. Nobody his size is in the All-Time Top 25...

Well first of all, how many RBs his size have there been period? I feel like it's not much of a sample size.

And why haven't there been more big backs? Is it because they're more likely to get injured? Is it that coaches pigeonhole guys at certain positions based on pre-conceived notions? Or is it that there aren't many guys that size athletic enough to play RB at the NFL level?

Probably all of the above and then some. The point you are realizing is there is a reason guys his size don't play the position.

Second of all, Jacobs doesn't need to end up as an all-time great to have a major fantasy impact. Certainly the question of whether he can hold up as a feature back in the long term is legit, but I don't see it as a major concern with regard to his short term prospects (the next 2-3 years).

I used all-time stats because they were available. However, there is a reason and logic to the results. There is a correlation between size and success at the RB position. On the flip side, there aren't a lot of 5'4" 145 lb RB's as feature backs, either. There is a range of physical attributes that NFL RB's fall into...Jacobs is outside that range.

The reality is every RB in the league gets nicked up. Every RB is at risk of suffering a catastrophic season ending injury on practically every play. That's the position. It goes with the territory. Trying to predict "when" for anybody is pointless and futile.

In Jacob's case he's never had a major injury or significant health issue. So there simply isn't a reasonable basis for saying he has significantly greater risk in the near term.

I didn't discuss his penchant for injury, I focused on his size as a liability for the requirements of the RB position.There is zero evidence to support whether ot not he can handle 200+ touches in a season, because he hasn't sniffed that level of workload in the college or pros.

 

[H.K.]

Why are you presenting career statistics?

Easiest data to find, also just as telling.

Single season might be persuasive, but really not all that much. The players in the NFL continue to evolve in terms of size and speed. I've seen more in terms of talent from Jacobs in limited time than I have from everyone's darling Turner. It has alot more to do with box scores and measurements than it does with game play. He has the chance to be special, Droughns has already been proven mediocre.

Again, 10 RB's in the past three seasons have rushed for 1200 yards twice in that time span. Droughns is one of them and you call him mediocre. Wow, you must think a lot of starting RB's really stink.

I view their signing Droughns as evidence they agree with me, and not you. Also, seeing as he's repeatedly been proclaimed the primary back I dont see any reason to think the Giants aren't expecting big things from the big fella.

If the Giants had any faith in Jacobs, they would not have gone after Droughns. They could have landed a lot of other FA's or traded for RB's that were suitable back-ups and not proven three down feature RB's. Actions speak much louder than words. Jacobs is not being proclaimed the primary, either. The public perception the Giants have promoted is that he'll be allowed to compete with the higher paid and proven Droughns for the role.

 

[Lombardi's Orphan Son]

just as i gambled on travis henry last year and won, never underestimate a RB that has already proven himself in the league.

Reuben has VALUE.

Jacobs is going to go way to early in most drafts for the question marks he presents. you will be able to get Reuben for a song and for the most part know that he will be giving you some production immediately with the possibility, as the season progresses to win the #1 job outright.

 

[dparker713]

Why are you presenting career statistics?

Easiest data to find, also just as telling.

Single season might be persuasive, but really not all that much. The players in the NFL continue to evolve in terms of size and speed. I've seen more in terms of talent from Jacobs in limited time than I have from everyone's darling Turner. It has alot more to do with box scores and measurements than it does with game play. He has the chance to be special, Droughns has already been proven mediocre.

Again, 10 RB's in the past three seasons have rushed for 1200 yards twice in that time span. Droughns is one of them and you call him mediocre. Wow, you must think a lot of starting RB's really stink.

I view their signing Droughns as evidence they agree with me, and not you. Also, seeing as he's repeatedly been proclaimed the primary back I dont see any reason to think the Giants aren't expecting big things from the big fella.

If the Giants had any faith in Jacobs, they would not have gone after Droughns. They could have landed a lot of other FA's or traded for RB's that were suitable back-ups and not proven three down feature RB's. Actions speak much louder than words. Jacobs is not being proclaimed the primary, either. The public perception the Giants have promoted is that he'll be allowed to compete with the higher paid and proven Droughns for the role.

Career data is not at all telling. Im not drafting Jacobs for his career, Im drafting him for a single season. Career data have just as much to do with longevity as talent. All I care about is talent. You keep coming back to this, so I'll address his 1200 yard seasons. First off, despite his yards, he still only accumulutated 14 TDs over 3 years. Second, while with Denver he had a very good 4.5 ypc in 2004 and 8 of his 14 TDs over this span. Of course Denver has had a great running game with good ypc with a rotation of RBs in the backfield. In '05 he averaged a pedestrian 4.0 ypc and only 2 TDs in his full time assignment in Cle. He reached 1200 yards because they just kept giving him the ball. He was durable. In '06 his ypc dropped to an absymal 3.4, on the bright side his TDs rebounded to 4. To sum up, one year he was in a great system he played well but not great. The next year he played average, but with no competition and no other options he got alot of chances. And last year he was horrid. Thats a 3 year trend thats not very positive. So I stand by my comments, infact now I think he's mediocre at best.

The Giants had to go after someone, and Droughns was about as cheap as they come. He cost them nothing other than a cheap incentive-laden contract. They needed another body in the backfield and they had other areas of need to address in the draft so this was the most sensible option. Basically, he's bust insurance for Jacobs, he's not there to suddenly become the feature back.

 

[H.K.]

The Giants had to go after someone, and Droughns was about as cheap good as they come. He cost them nothing other than a cheap incentive-laden contract. They needed another body proven feature RB in the backfield and they had other areas of need to address in the draft so this was the most sensible option. Basically, he's bust insurance for better than Jacobs, he's not there to suddenly become the feature back.

Nice job dismissing Jacobs efforts in your previous response, but his results speak much louder than your explanations.I am speaking about this year as well, and I edited the final part of your post for accuracy.

 

[Construction Man Jim]

H.K. - So just to clarify, you think Droughns is more talented than Jacobs?

If Droughns gets 300 carries how do you project his production?

 

[H.K.]

H.K. - So just to clarify, you think Droughns is more talented than Jacobs?If Droughns gets 300 carries how do you project his production?

I do not project Droughns to get 300 carries.

 

[dparker713]

The Giants had to go after someone, and Droughns was about as cheap good as they come. He cost them nothing other than a cheap incentive-laden contract. They needed another body proven feature RB in the backfield and they had other areas of need to address in the draft so this was the most sensible option. Basically, he's bust insurance for better than Jacobs, he's not there to suddenly become the feature back.

Nice job dismissing Jacobs Droughns efforts in your previous response, but his results speak much louder than your explanations for themselves.I am speaking about this year as well, and I edited the final part of your post for accuracy.

So you think that Droughns was the best option on the market? Not TJones, Henry, McGahee, Rhodes, or JLewis? All of those guys were available. All have proven track records more extensive (well, not Rhodes) All cost more in money/draft picks. I edited your post for accuracy too!

 

[Construction Man Jim]

H.K. - So just to clarify, you think Droughns is more talented than Jacobs?If Droughns gets 300 carries how do you project his production?

I do not project Droughns to get 300 carries.

OK. How do you foresee the NYG running game breaking out?And again, are you saying Droughns is more talented than Jacobs?

 

[H.K.]

H.K. - So just to clarify, you think Droughns is more talented than Jacobs?

If Droughns gets 300 carries how do you project his production?

I do not project Droughns to get 300 carries.

OK. How do you foresee the NYG running game breaking out?And again, are you saying Droughns is more talented than Jacobs?

Construction Man Jim May 11 2007, 06:06 PM Post #33

link

Conservatively I'd project the numbers breaking out something like:

Jacobs: 300 carries, 1400 yards rushing, 13 TDs; 40 receptions, 350 yards receiving, 2 TDs.

Droughns: 125 carries, 480 yards, 2 TDs; 30 receptions, 220 yards, 0 TDs.

Jim, Your projection has Jacobs as the #6 RB in a PPR format. I'll sig bet you that Jacobs doesn't even finish in the top 20 for PPR leagues with decimal scoring.

He won't even have 200 carries, let alone 300.

 

[H.K.]

Well, Construction Man Jim's silence speaks volumes and he obviously doesn't want any part of the sig bet....I can't blame him. However, I'll offer it up to anyone else if they care.

 

[Chunky Soup]

Well, Construction Man Jim's silence speaks volumes and he obviously doesn't want any part of the sig bet....I can't blame him. However, I'll offer it up to anyone else if they care.

So I see you really pimping Droughns. Tell me, what do you project for him this year?

 

[3C's]

Well, Construction Man Jim's silence speaks volumes and he obviously doesn't want any part of the sig bet....I can't blame him. However, I'll offer it up to anyone else if they care.

Top 20? I could see it, but he could just as easily be in the high 20's. Definitely not #6, or top 10 even.

 

[ShadowMaster]

I went 60/40 Droughens

I agree with Wood that I think the Giants want Jacobs to be the man, but they brought in a vet backup as insurance.

I think Droughens recent prdocutivity has been fair when you look at the Cleveland O line and Offense as a whole. His value has been limited due to his TD production (unrealisticly low) and not by this yardage or opportunities.

Droughens could surprise here and take the job and run with it. he produced well in Denver when given the chance. As the second of the 2 RBs off the board (by a couplke of rounds), RD is the much better value pick.

 

[Chunky Soup]

I went 60/40 DroughensI agree with Wood that I think the Giants want Jacobs to be the man, but they brought in a vet backup as insurance.I think Droughens recent prdocutivity has been fair when you look at the Cleveland O line and Offense as a whole. His value has been limited due to his TD production (unrealisticly low) and not by this yardage or opportunities. Droughens could surprise here and take the job and run with it. he produced well in Denver when given the chance. As the second of the 2 RBs off the board (by a couplke of rounds), RD is the much better value pick.

Just blaming Droughns poor production on Cleveland is a horrible scapegoat. He looked awfully sluggish/slow/went down easy/unable to move piles. The coaches benched him at one point in favor of an UDFA, and honestly, was outplayed by him. I think you're right that Droughns offers insurance, but otherwise has low upside. Droughns can be had much later in the draft, but I would exactly call that value. His upside is waay too low to consider that value. Droughns couldn't cut it as a 3-down back, and at times even a 2 down back in Cleveland. With Jacobs on the roster, it won't be getting better for Droughns.

 

[KellysHeroes]

Theres a lot of BJ love here

80% Jacobs/20% Droughns [ 27 ] [9.96%]

70% Jacobs/30% Droughns [ 75 ] [27.68%]

60% Jacobs/40% Droughns [ 83 ] [30.63%]

 

[H.K.]

Well, Construction Man Jim's silence speaks volumes and he obviously doesn't want any part of the sig bet....I can't blame him. However, I'll offer it up to anyone else if they care.

So I see you really pimping Droughns. Tell me, what do you project for him this year?

I am not "pimping" Droughns. I am just letting people know that Jacobs is not the gold at the end of the rainbow where leagues will be won. Here's my serious analysis of how the Giants backfield will shake out based on what we know today.In 2006 Giants RB's combined for 426 rushes and 77 recepts & 14 TD's.Barber was the primary offensive weapon for the Giants, as such, the RB usage numbers were probably inflated by the team's reliance on him. Also, his success perpetuated his success, meaning his ability to control drives kept the offense on the field and kept him getting the ball.Losing Barber will do two things to the Giants:1) Become less "RB focused" on offense2) Have a dip in production because they lost a great playerTherefore it is fair to conclude that the Giants will run less than last season, and see a decline in RB recepts, and TD's because Barber won't be taking them down the field any more for Jacobs to cash in on Tiki's efforts.I'll estimate 380 carries and 55 recepts for all RB's & 10 TD's in 2007....about 3 fewer rush attempts per game and 1.5 recpts from the RB position.Right off the top, Guys like Ward, Finn, and Bradshaw are going to get some of the work, it could be anywhere from 5% to 15% of the RB load...With Bradshaw eating into some of the coveted catches in PPR leagues. This group will take at least 50 carries and 25 recepts and a few scores from Droughns/Jacobs. This number could be considerably more, but right now Bradshaw is an unknown. If he looks good with live bullets, even more production goes away.That leaves 330 carries and 30 receptions to divide among Droughns/Jacobs. Here is how it should break down right nowroughns 180 for 720 yards and 20 recepts 160 with 3 total TD'sJacobs 150 carries for 615 and 10 recepts for 65 with 5 total TD's

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Theres a lot of BJ love here

80% Jacobs/20% Droughns [ 27 ] [9.96%]

70% Jacobs/30% Droughns [ 75 ] [27.68%]

60% Jacobs/40% Droughns [ 83 ] [30.63%]

I think alot of people expect the Giants to give him every opportunity to win the job. And most people like him better than Droughns, save HK. I think there are alot of unknowns about him, can he hold up to a full work load, can he catch? it he too big? too upright?

 

[Construction Man Jim]

Well, Construction Man Jim's silence speaks volumes and he obviously doesn't want any part of the sig bet....I can't blame him. However, I'll offer it up to anyone else if they care.

I was away for the weekend, and sans internet access... And I don't know what a "sig bet" entails, but I'll take it.One caveat: a major injury to Jacobs voids the bet. That's the only thing that keeps Jacobs out of the top 5-10 range and the only way Droughns ends up with more touches.

 

[H.K.]

Well, Construction Man Jim's silence speaks volumes and he obviously doesn't want any part of the sig bet....I can't blame him. However, I'll offer it up to anyone else if they care.

I was away for the weekend, and sans internet access... And I don't know what a "sig bet" entails, but I'll take it.One caveat: a major injury to Jacobs voids the bet. That's the only thing that keeps Jacobs out of the top 5-10 range and the only way Droughns ends up with more touches.

At the projection you have for him, he only needs to play in 10 games to make the top 20. Do you have major reservations on his ability to handle the load (assuming he actualy gets the opportunity)?

 

[AB in DC]

I am not "pimping" Droughns. I am just letting people know that Jacobs is not the gold at the end of the rainbow where leagues will be won. Here's my serious analysis of how the Giants backfield will shake out based on what we know today.

Is this like your "serious analysis" last year that showed that Chester Taylor and Antonio Gates would be busts, when it was really just a reverse jinx attempt?

 

[H.K.]

I am not "pimping" Droughns. I am just letting people know that Jacobs is not the gold at the end of the rainbow where leagues will be won. Here's my serious analysis of how the Giants backfield will shake out based on what we know today.

Is this like your "serious analysis" last year that showed that Chester Taylor and Antonio Gates would be busts, when it was really just a reverse jinx attempt?

This is different, I mean it this time.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I am not "pimping" Droughns. I am just letting people know that Jacobs is not the gold at the end of the rainbow where leagues will be won. Here's my serious analysis of how the Giants backfield will shake out based on what we know today.

Is this like your "serious analysis" last year that showed that Chester Taylor and Antonio Gates would be busts, when it was really just a reverse jinx attempt?

This is different, I mean it this time.

 

[dparker713]

Droughns 180 for 720 yards and 20 recepts 160 with 3 total TD'sJacobs 150 carries for 615 and 10 recepts for 65 with 5 total TD's

You realize you have Jacobs with a higher ypc, but lower rushes, right? Also, you have both of them averaging right around 10 rushes per game, about the only way that happens is if they both suck to high heaven.

 

[H.K.]

Droughns 180 for 720 yards and 20 recepts 160 with 3 total TD'sJacobs 150 carries for 615 and 10 recepts for 65 with 5 total TD's

You realize you have Jacobs with a higher ypc, but lower rushes, right? Also, you have both of them averaging right around 10 rushes per game, about the only way that happens is if they both suck to high heaven.

Droughns at 4.0, Jacobs at 4.1. Not much of a difference, nor is it uncommon for a back-up to have a higher YPC. I don't think both will suck to high heaven, they just have differnent styles and skills, but Droughns has more versatility and experience, so he'll be on the field the most.