Why Vereen fits the Pats' offense so well (1 Viewer)

[Tau837]

Bolden is practicing on the first team punt return and punt coverage teams, as well as the first team kick return and kick coverage teams. He's probably on the squad as a special teamer, but seems to have lost ground to Blount as a RB.

Which would again indicate that he isn't the solution to the matchup/hernandez problem. Right?

I'm not disputing your original point in terms of it being a possibility, but isn't it also a possibility that the Pats braintrust simply morph the offense into a form that suits the talents of who they have?

The use of Gronk and Hernandez was innovative. Why assume the innovators are now going to stick with a static form and try and make pieces fit into it?

Right. A lot of this argument is based on terrible assumptions.

First of all, Hernandez's role as a ball carrier is being grossly over-stated in this thread. I don't even think he had 20 carries in three years in the NFL. Yes, he lined up in the backfield occasionally, but most of the time it was in the "wing" position, which is not typically a ball-carrier spot in the NFL. Hernandez's value as a match-up asset was that he was bigger than a WR, but more nimble than a TE. Having him on the field didn't show the offense's hand with respect to running vs. passing as much as many TE's would because he could participate in both types of plays as a blocker or a receiver.

Secondly, it's not necessarily always better to put "hybrid" players on the field. It only makes sense if that player is a better offensive asset than another WR or RB. The Patriots had pretty terrible WR depth last year, and Hernandez was a very good player, so it made sense do have him on the field and do as much with him as you can. This year, the team make-up is very different. It makes no sense to talk about this offense as if there's X number of "versatile guy" snaps that Belichick needs to give to someone. Hernandez vs. Edelman is an easy call. Vereen vs. Dobson vs. Thompkins vs. Sudfield vs. Boyce is totally different.

Next, early indications are Sudfield is viewed as a versatile player, much like Hernandez was. He lined up in the wing spot on the vast majority of his snaps in the first pre-season game, and also lined up as a split out wide receiver on a few plays.

Vereen is a good players, and is versatile, but that doesn't guarantee him a huge role in this offense this year. He's a RB who can catch really well, let's not get carried away.

And people continue to underestimate Ridley. Ridley is a very good RB.

 

[Lavachebeadsman]

Bolden is practicing on the first team punt return and punt coverage teams, as well as the first team kick return and kick coverage teams. He's probably on the squad as a special teamer, but seems to have lost ground to Blount as a RB.

Which would again indicate that he isn't the solution to the matchup/hernandez problem. Right?

I'm not disputing your original point in terms of it being a possibility, but isn't it also a possibility that the Pats braintrust simply morph the offense into a form that suits the talents of who they have?

The use of Gronk and Hernandez was innovative. Why assume the innovators are now going to stick with a static form and try and make pieces fit into it?

Right. A lot of this argument is based on terrible assumptions.

First of all, Hernandez's role as a ball carrier is being grossly over-stated in this thread. I don't even think he had 20 carries in three years in the NFL. Yes, he lined up in the backfield occasionally, but most of the time it was in the "wing" position, which is not typically a ball-carrier spot in the NFL. Hernandez's value as a match-up asset was that he was bigger than a WR, but more nimble than a TE. Having him on the field didn't show the offense's hand with respect to running vs. passing as much as many TE's would because he could participate in both types of plays as a blocker or a receiver.

Secondly, it's not necessarily always better to put "hybrid" players on the field. It only makes sense if that player is a better offensive asset than another WR or RB. The Patriots had pretty terrible WR depth last year, and Hernandez was a very good player, so it made sense do have him on the field and do as much with him as you can. This year, the team make-up is very different. It makes no sense to talk about this offense as if there's X number of "versatile guy" snaps that Belichick needs to give to someone. Hernandez vs. Edelman is an easy call. Vereen vs. Dobson vs. Thompkins vs. Sudfield vs. Boyce is totally different.

Next, early indications are Sudfield is viewed as a versatile player, much like Hernandez was. He lined up in the wing spot on the vast majority of his snaps in the first pre-season game, and also lined up as a split out wide receiver on a few plays.

Vereen is a good players, and is versatile, but that doesn't guarantee him a huge role in this offense this year. He's a RB who can catch really well, let's not get carried away.

And people continue to underestimate Ridley. Ridley is a very good RB.

1. The hernandez as a ball carrier bit comes from the best-selling The Essential Smart Football. Author Chris Brown was On The Couch last week and 2 of the smartest fantasy dudes behind the whole FBG curtain just sat and listened. If Brown says something about an offensive scheme, I'm inclined to believe him over a random message board poster.

2. Why exactly isn't it better to have versatile players on the field? They drafted Vereen in the 2nd round and from a measureables and production standpoint, I'm going to prefer him to all of those options, given his versatility.

3. If Sudfeld ends up taking Hernandez's old spot, then I still think Vereen takes over Woodhead's old role and gains some extra snaps. With so much uncertainty at wide receiver, why not use a player who has known your system for 3 years?

4. I think if anything, Ridley is overrated but that's just me.

 

[karmarooster]

I'm super high on Vereen. To demonstrate why, I'll start with what I think is his floor:

Last year, Woodhead and Vereen himself combined = 138 rushes for 550 yards, 48 receptions for 600 yards, 8 TDs.

This is before we even begin to take into account the loss of AHern and whatever tricks Bill and Josh have up their sleeves for the RB who was consistently referred to as the more dynamic, better all around runner as compared to Ridley. Ridley is still going to get his - 1,000-1,200 yards rushing, 10+ TDs and minimal receiving totals.

If Vereen's floor is around 1,100 total yards, 48 receptions, and 8 TDs... his ceiling is sky high. Just giving him 20% of AHern's averages from the last 3 years (ignoring the fact that Hern missed some games), easily tacks on another 12 receptions for 120ish yards and another TD.

Giving him 20% of Hernandez's production is IMO a very conservative estimate, and you could make an argument for increasing that percentage. But already Vereen is looking like he could easily produce 1,300 combined yards, 60 receptions, and 9-10 TDs. Last year that would equate to a low end RB1/high end RB2 depending on PPR scoring for RBs.

 

[humpback]

I'm super high on Vereen. To demonstrate why, I'll start with what I think is his floor:

Last year, Woodhead and Vereen himself combined = 138 rushes for 550 yards, 48 receptions for 600 yards, 8 TDs.

This is before we even begin to take into account the loss of AHern and whatever tricks Bill and Josh have up their sleeves for the RB who was consistently referred to as the more dynamic, better all around runner as compared to Ridley. Ridley is still going to get his - 1,000-1,200 yards rushing, 10+ TDs and minimal receiving totals.

If Vereen's floor is around 1,100 total yards, 48 receptions, and 8 TDs... his ceiling is sky high. Just giving him 20% of AHern's averages from the last 3 years (ignoring the fact that Hern missed some games), easily tacks on another 12 receptions for 120ish yards and another TD.

Giving him 20% of Hernandez's production is IMO a very conservative estimate, and you could make an argument for increasing that percentage. But already Vereen is looking like he could easily produce 1,300 combined yards, 60 receptions, and 9-10 TDs. Last year that would equate to a low end RB1/high end RB2 depending on PPR scoring for RBs.

Time to see if anyone in my leagues feels the same way I guess. That "floor" is so ridiculously high.

 

[BC3]

Think NO Saints offense on speed with Vereen playin Sproles role.

 

[KCitons]

As a FF owner would you rather have Sproles right now, or Vereen?

 

[karmarooster]

As a FF owner would you rather have Sproles right now, or Vereen?

Straight PPR, still probably prefer Sproles. Over the last two years he averages 5.5 receptions per game, so is a safe bet for 80 receptions if he plays all 16. Vereen might have about 75% of that reception total. But that's just because you asked straight up... if the question is Sproles in the 2nd vs. Vereen in the 5th, I'd call Vereen a much better value.

Non-PPR, I think the case could be made to prefer Vereen over Sproles because he'll probably have 2-3x as many carries.

 

[silentcoach]

As a FF owner would you rather have Sproles right now, or Vereen?

PPR--Sproles because we know his floor.

Vereen is still a question mark in terms of how much opportunity he will get in the offense.

He *only* had 1 target in the first preseason game, so let's see some more tape!

 

[ImTheScientist]

This thread would have been mind blowing at the end of last year. But knowing what we know it seems a bit like the Vereen thread regurgitated.

Nothing here that isn't in that thread I guess.

 

[karmarooster]

This thread would have been mind blowing at the end of last year. But knowing what we know it seems a bit like the Vereen thread regurgitated.

Nothing here that isn't in that thread I guess.

What's the point of this post?

 

[ImTheScientist]

This thread would have been mind blowing at the end of last year. But knowing what we know it seems a bit like the Vereen thread regurgitated.

Nothing here that isn't in that thread I guess.

What's the point of this post?

That is what I was wondering.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Bolden is practicing on the first team punt return and punt coverage teams, as well as the first team kick return and kick coverage teams. He's probably on the squad as a special teamer, but seems to have lost ground to Blount as a RB.

Which would again indicate that he isn't the solution to the matchup/hernandez problem. Right?

I'm not disputing your original point in terms of it being a possibility, but isn't it also a possibility that the Pats braintrust simply morph the offense into a form that suits the talents of who they have?

The use of Gronk and Hernandez was innovative. Why assume the innovators are now going to stick with a static form and try and make pieces fit into it?

Right. A lot of this argument is based on terrible assumptions.

First of all, Hernandez's role as a ball carrier is being grossly over-stated in this thread. I don't even think he had 20 carries in three years in the NFL. Yes, he lined up in the backfield occasionally, but most of the time it was in the "wing" position, which is not typically a ball-carrier spot in the NFL. Hernandez's value as a match-up asset was that he was bigger than a WR, but more nimble than a TE. Having him on the field didn't show the offense's hand with respect to running vs. passing as much as many TE's would because he could participate in both types of plays as a blocker or a receiver.

Secondly, it's not necessarily always better to put "hybrid" players on the field. It only makes sense if that player is a better offensive asset than another WR or RB. The Patriots had pretty terrible WR depth last year, and Hernandez was a very good player, so it made sense do have him on the field and do as much with him as you can. This year, the team make-up is very different. It makes no sense to talk about this offense as if there's X number of "versatile guy" snaps that Belichick needs to give to someone. Hernandez vs. Edelman is an easy call. Vereen vs. Dobson vs. Thompkins vs. Sudfield vs. Boyce is totally different.

Next, early indications are Sudfield is viewed as a versatile player, much like Hernandez was. He lined up in the wing spot on the vast majority of his snaps in the first pre-season game, and also lined up as a split out wide receiver on a few plays.

Vereen is a good players, and is versatile, but that doesn't guarantee him a huge role in this offense this year. He's a RB who can catch really well, let's not get carried away.

And people continue to underestimate Ridley. Ridley is a very good RB.

1. The hernandez as a ball carrier bit comes from the best-selling The Essential Smart Football. Author Chris Brown was On The Couch last week and 2 of the smartest fantasy dudes behind the whole FBG curtain just sat and listened. If Brown says something about an offensive scheme, I'm inclined to believe him over a random message board poster.

2. Why exactly isn't it better to have versatile players on the field? They drafted Vereen in the 2nd round and from a measureables and production standpoint, I'm going to prefer him to all of those options, given his versatility.

3. If Sudfeld ends up taking Hernandez's old spot, then I still think Vereen takes over Woodhead's old role and gains some extra snaps. With so much uncertainty at wide receiver, why not use a player who has known your system for 3 years?

4. I think if anything, Ridley is overrated but that's just me.

1) That's nice that Chris Brown wrote a book and was on a podcast, I'm sure he's a very smart guy. Whether or not what he said is being distorted or not, I don't know, but if he made it sound like Hernandez was anything but a OCCASIONAL ball carrier, he's wrong, regardless of how many books and podcasts he's on. Hernandez had about 18 career carries, including regular season and playoff games, of which he participated in many. He was a versatile weapon and a touch match-up, but not because he posed a threat at carrying the ball (other than those occasional times that he did).

2) Versatility is nice, but not if it puts a better "non-versatile" player on the sidelines. Yes, Belichick likes using versatile pieces to make things harder for defenses. That doesn't mean that WR's who only play WR but are good at playing WR aren't going to play.

3) Vereen definitely takes Woodhead's old role, and will be Woodhead + in my opinion. I think he might be a nice flex option this year in PPR leagues. Notice nothing in that sentence mentioned Hernandez.

4) Okay, sure.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Think NO Saints offense on speed with Vereen playin Sproles role.

Except for the relatively small fact that the Patriots were 2nd in the league in rush attempts last year and the Saints were among the bottom of the league.

 

[PatsWillWin]

I'm super high on Vereen. To demonstrate why, I'll start with what I think is his floor:

Last year, Woodhead and Vereen himself combined = 138 rushes for 550 yards, 48 receptions for 600 yards, 8 TDs.

This is before we even begin to take into account the loss of AHern and whatever tricks Bill and Josh have up their sleeves for the RB who was consistently referred to as the more dynamic, better all around runner as compared to Ridley. Ridley is still going to get his - 1,000-1,200 yards rushing, 10+ TDs and minimal receiving totals.

If Vereen's floor is around 1,100 total yards, 48 receptions, and 8 TDs... his ceiling is sky high. Just giving him 20% of AHern's averages from the last 3 years (ignoring the fact that Hern missed some games), easily tacks on another 12 receptions for 120ish yards and another TD.

Giving him 20% of Hernandez's production is IMO a very conservative estimate, and you could make an argument for increasing that percentage. But already Vereen is looking like he could easily produce 1,300 combined yards, 60 receptions, and 9-10 TDs. Last year that would equate to a low end RB1/high end RB2 depending on PPR scoring for RBs.

Do you not see why taking 2012's statistics, taking out Hernandez, and replaying 2012 and pretending that this is a good way to predict 2013 makes no sense at all?

Also, is there any reason why you're ignoring the massive upgrades the Patriots have undergone at the receiver position? And that there's another TE that so far is being used in Hernandez's role?

Do I need to go on?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Think NO Saints offense on speed with Vereen playin Sproles role.

Except for the relatively small fact that the Patriots were 2nd in the league in rush attempts last year and the Saints were among the bottom of the league.

The Patriots were also top 5 in both passing offense and attempts. Oops.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Think NO Saints offense on speed with Vereen playin Sproles role.

Except for the relatively small fact that the Patriots were 2nd in the league in rush attempts last year and the Saints were among the bottom of the league.

The Patriots were also top 5 in both passing offense and attempts. Oops.

Yes, they were extremely well-balanced. Do you see how that is nothing like the Saints offense?

 

[Ghost Rider]

Think NO Saints offense on speed with Vereen playin Sproles role.

Except for the relatively small fact that the Patriots were 2nd in the league in rush attempts last year and the Saints were among the bottom of the league.

The Patriots were also top 5 in both passing offense and attempts. Oops.

Yes, they were extremely well-balanced. Do you see how that is nothing like the Saints offense?

It's not, but the Patriots still throw it a ton, and they love throwing to the RBs and TEs, and Vereen is suited perfected for the role previously filled by Woodhead, except that he is more dynamic.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Think NO Saints offense on speed with Vereen playin Sproles role.

Except for the relatively small fact that the Patriots were 2nd in the league in rush attempts last year and the Saints were among the bottom of the league.

The Patriots were also top 5 in both passing offense and attempts. Oops.

Yes, they were extremely well-balanced. Do you see how that is nothing like the Saints offense?

It's not, but the Patriots still throw it a ton, and they love throwing to the RBs and TEs, and Vereen is suited perfected for the role previously filled by Woodhead, except that he is more dynamic.

Totally agree.

 

[BC3]

What I meant by it being similar to NO offense is the personnel. I see thompkins or Dobson playing the Colton big possession WR. Amendola is underneath/slot target similar to lance Moore or welker. They have Gronk who can play all over the field like Jimmy Graham. Boyce probably compares to NO 3WR (Henderson, Morgan, etc.) with a lot more potential. And then they have a stable of backs that have various skill sets. Almost the spread to run mentality as opposed to spread to pass. The reason they ran it so much more is because they were playing with a lead much more than the saints and they go way faster. Notice I said the NO offense on speed. I just think there are similar type player roles in both offenses with the key obviously being Brees and Brady.

I could also see them returning to their roots and Playing a little smash mouth football like they did back in the Corey dillon days. I don't know but I can't wait to find out. Regardless I think Vereen is a lock for flex production with RB1 upside.

 

[Lavachebeadsman]

Bolden is practicing on the first team punt return and punt coverage teams, as well as the first team kick return and kick coverage teams. He's probably on the squad as a special teamer, but seems to have lost ground to Blount as a RB.

Which would again indicate that he isn't the solution to the matchup/hernandez problem. Right?

I'm not disputing your original point in terms of it being a possibility, but isn't it also a possibility that the Pats braintrust simply morph the offense into a form that suits the talents of who they have?

The use of Gronk and Hernandez was innovative. Why assume the innovators are now going to stick with a static form and try and make pieces fit into it?

Right. A lot of this argument is based on terrible assumptions.

First of all, Hernandez's role as a ball carrier is being grossly over-stated in this thread. I don't even think he had 20 carries in three years in the NFL. Yes, he lined up in the backfield occasionally, but most of the time it was in the "wing" position, which is not typically a ball-carrier spot in the NFL. Hernandez's value as a match-up asset was that he was bigger than a WR, but more nimble than a TE. Having him on the field didn't show the offense's hand with respect to running vs. passing as much as many TE's would because he could participate in both types of plays as a blocker or a receiver.

Secondly, it's not necessarily always better to put "hybrid" players on the field. It only makes sense if that player is a better offensive asset than another WR or RB. The Patriots had pretty terrible WR depth last year, and Hernandez was a very good player, so it made sense do have him on the field and do as much with him as you can. This year, the team make-up is very different. It makes no sense to talk about this offense as if there's X number of "versatile guy" snaps that Belichick needs to give to someone. Hernandez vs. Edelman is an easy call. Vereen vs. Dobson vs. Thompkins vs. Sudfield vs. Boyce is totally different.

Next, early indications are Sudfield is viewed as a versatile player, much like Hernandez was. He lined up in the wing spot on the vast majority of his snaps in the first pre-season game, and also lined up as a split out wide receiver on a few plays.

Vereen is a good players, and is versatile, but that doesn't guarantee him a huge role in this offense this year. He's a RB who can catch really well, let's not get carried away.

And people continue to underestimate Ridley. Ridley is a very good RB.

1. The hernandez as a ball carrier bit comes from the best-selling The Essential Smart Football. Author Chris Brown was On The Couch last week and 2 of the smartest fantasy dudes behind the whole FBG curtain just sat and listened. If Brown says something about an offensive scheme, I'm inclined to believe him over a random message board poster.

2. Why exactly isn't it better to have versatile players on the field? They drafted Vereen in the 2nd round and from a measureables and production standpoint, I'm going to prefer him to all of those options, given his versatility.

3. If Sudfeld ends up taking Hernandez's old spot, then I still think Vereen takes over Woodhead's old role and gains some extra snaps. With so much uncertainty at wide receiver, why not use a player who has known your system for 3 years?

4. I think if anything, Ridley is overrated but that's just me.

1) That's nice that Chris Brown wrote a book and was on a podcast, I'm sure he's a very smart guy. Whether or not what he said is being distorted or not, I don't know, but if he made it sound like Hernandez was anything but a OCCASIONAL ball carrier, he's wrong, regardless of how many books and podcasts he's on. Hernandez had about 18 career carries, including regular season and playoff games, of which he participated in many. He was a versatile weapon and a touch match-up, but not because he posed a threat at carrying the ball (other than those occasional times that he did).

2) Versatility is nice, but not if it puts a better "non-versatile" player on the sidelines. Yes, Belichick likes using versatile pieces to make things harder for defenses. That doesn't mean that WR's who only play WR but are good at playing WR aren't going to play.

3) Vereen definitely takes Woodhead's old role, and will be Woodhead + in my opinion. I think he might be a nice flex option this year in PPR leagues. Notice nothing in that sentence mentioned Hernandez.

4) Okay, sure.

1. I made mention of Hernandez's career touches in the OP. It's the THREAT of the run that forces a personnel shift. Even if it's a slight shift, Belichick felt it was an advantage, and why I believe Vereen will play that role because he would actually be better at it.

2. If you are telling me I can put Vereen, Boyce, Dobson OR Thompkins on the field for a while drive, I'm taking Vereen. To me, their best grouping is Vereen, Ridley, Gronk, Amendola, Sudfeld. With Vereen on the field that can be 2 WR, 1 RB or 2 RB, 1 WR personnel (not account for Gronk or Sudfeld splitting out wide or going in motion).

3. Okay. We differ here.

4. Pretty important point, if Vereen starts to siphon carries from Ridley.

 

[Sweet Love]

I'm hoping Vereen can be that player, but a couple of things that still bother me.

- With Boyce, Dobson, and Thompkins, do we really know what the Patriots will do? Could BB line up any of these players in the backfield ?

- Vereen and Hernandez are completely different body types. I don't see them as interchangeable when it comes to blocking. AH matches up better against D-linemen, especially if he lines up as a Fullback and then motions out to the slot.

Of course we don't know exactly what the Pats will do, but I feel pretty confident in saying that Boyce, Dobson and Thompkins won't be asked to run the football. They all have awkward body types for pass blocking and running (more long-stride type runners, and none of them excel in lateral agility)

Not trying to argue with you. But AH didn't have a lot of lateral agility either.

Again, I own Vereen and am cautiously optimistic. I get the feeling that people are anointing Vereen based more on lack of another option. If a better option arises (Boyce, Dobson, Amendola, Edelman, even Bolden or Washington ) it could cut into Vereen's production.

After all, Ridley appears to RB1 in that offense. I'm concerned that Vereen may become more of the gimmick player. A jack of all trades, but master of none.

I think gimmick player is probably the most appropriate term for Vereen, but adjusting for the Pats offensive pace and how prolific they are at scoring, a gadget player in their offense is probably no worse than a flex play

Honestly, Sproles is a gadget player too...I think a select few of those guys can survive if (1) they get touches and (2) have a really good QB and offense. While places like NO, GB and NE could sustain a viable FF option like Vereen, few other places could (maybe an ATL).

 

[PatsWillWin]

1. I made mention of Hernandez's career touches in the OP. It's the THREAT of the run that forces a personnel shift. Even if it's a slight shift, Belichick felt it was an advantage, and why I believe Vereen will play that role because he would actually be better at it.

2. If you are telling me I can put Vereen, Boyce, Dobson OR Thompkins on the field for a while drive, I'm taking Vereen. To me, their best grouping is Vereen, Ridley, Gronk, Amendola, Sudfeld. With Vereen on the field that can be 2 WR, 1 RB or 2 RB, 1 WR personnel (not account for Gronk or Sudfeld splitting out wide or going in motion).

3. Okay. We differ here.

4. Pretty important point, if Vereen starts to siphon carries from Ridley.

On very, very, very rare occasions, Hernandez lined up in the backfield, behind Brady as a RB. On those plays, certainly, the defense had to adjust to him running. That happened maybe 30 times in 3 years. The main "advantage" Hernandez provided to Belichick was that he was a very good player first and foremost, 0.00001% of his value was as a ball carrier.

I think it's extremely unlikely the Patriots use 1 WR sets that often in non-short yardage situations. Dobson and Thompkins are going to get a lot of playing time, one of them as a starter.

Ridley vs. Vereen would be important, I just don't think it's something I can argue as this part of it is 100% opinion. I think Ridley is a very good player, prevented from being called a "great" one only by a lack of breakaway speed and some ball security issues. Vereen is very talented as well, clearly has excellent hands, and is very dynamic. I don't think it's impossible that if Ridley has some fumbles or appears to be setting back the offense by getting tackled from behind like he did against the Eagles the other night that Vereen could overtake him. I just don't see the point in trying to predict it. It's certainly Ridley's job right now.

 

[DeaLerZ]

I'm super high on Vereen. To demonstrate why, I'll start with what I think is his floor:

Last year, Woodhead and Vereen himself combined = 138 rushes for 550 yards, 48 receptions for 600 yards, 8 TDs.

This is before we even begin to take into account the loss of AHern and whatever tricks Bill and Josh have up their sleeves for the RB who was consistently referred to as the more dynamic, better all around runner as compared to Ridley. Ridley is still going to get his - 1,000-1,200 yards rushing, 10+ TDs and minimal receiving totals.

If Vereen's floor is around 1,100 total yards, 48 receptions, and 8 TDs... his ceiling is sky high. Just giving him 20% of AHern's averages from the last 3 years (ignoring the fact that Hern missed some games), easily tacks on another 12 receptions for 120ish yards and another TD.

Giving him 20% of Hernandez's production is IMO a very conservative estimate, and you could make an argument for increasing that percentage. But already Vereen is looking like he could easily produce 1,300 combined yards, 60 receptions, and 9-10 TDs. Last year that would equate to a low end RB1/high end RB2 depending on PPR scoring for RBs.

I definitely see potential for him to have a similar season to Sproles... 16th best RB in my league last year

Darren Sproles 2012

244 yds rushing 1 rush TD

75 Receptions, 667 yds receiving, 7 rec td's

 

[Shawn]

Umm isn't Vereen a running back? so if he stays in they wouldn't switch out their anti RB personnel...

 

[karmarooster]

Umm isn't Vereen a running back? so if he stays in they wouldn't switch out their anti RB personnel...

Yeah, and what is the defenses "anti-RB personnel" (LBs) going to do when Vereen goes in motion from the backfield to the slot or out wide? The formation that I'd like to see run by the Pats is a 2 RB set with Vereen and Ridley both there. Of course he'll also assume the 3rd down back role that has been a staple of this offense from Faulk through Woodhead. Vereen is bigger, better, and more dynamic than either of those guys.

 

[karmarooster]

I'm super high on Vereen. To demonstrate why, I'll start with what I think is his floor:

Last year, Woodhead and Vereen himself combined = 138 rushes for 550 yards, 48 receptions for 600 yards, 8 TDs.

This is before we even begin to take into account the loss of AHern and whatever tricks Bill and Josh have up their sleeves for the RB who was consistently referred to as the more dynamic, better all around runner as compared to Ridley. Ridley is still going to get his - 1,000-1,200 yards rushing, 10+ TDs and minimal receiving totals.

If Vereen's floor is around 1,100 total yards, 48 receptions, and 8 TDs... his ceiling is sky high. Just giving him 20% of AHern's averages from the last 3 years (ignoring the fact that Hern missed some games), easily tacks on another 12 receptions for 120ish yards and another TD.

Giving him 20% of Hernandez's production is IMO a very conservative estimate, and you could make an argument for increasing that percentage. But already Vereen is looking like he could easily produce 1,300 combined yards, 60 receptions, and 9-10 TDs. Last year that would equate to a low end RB1/high end RB2 depending on PPR scoring for RBs.

Do you not see why taking 2012's statistics, taking out Hernandez, and replaying 2012 and pretending that this is a good way to predict 2013 makes no sense at all?

Also, is there any reason why you're ignoring the massive upgrades the Patriots have undergone at the receiver position? And that there's another TE that so far is being used in Hernandez's role?

Do I need to go on?

Whoa, wasn't quite expecting a reply from a Pats fan with that tone. Let's see. Maybe instead of replying with what is essentially "Do you realize why you're such an idiot, idiot??"... maybe we can work on something more constructive. I'll start and you fill in the blanks.

"I disagree with using 2012 stats for the purposes of projecting 2013, and the assumption that Vereen accounts for some of Hernandez's production, because..." (and this is where you come in). I'm actually interested to hear your take as a homer... are you expecting fewer plays from scrimmage? A less effective offense? A move away from the Ducks speed of play?

Also, I googled "massive upgrades" for the Patriots wide receivers... but I'm still looking.

 

[Shawn]

Massive Upgrades? Massive would be bringing in someone like Julio, not all these rookies...

 

[therokie0070]

Well Vereen looked pretty good tonight!!!

 

[Sabertooth]

Massive Upgrades? Massive would be bringing in someone like Julio, not all these rookies...

Yeah the delusion is hilarious. This team hasn't done #### in 10 years.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Massive Upgrades? Massive would be bringing in someone like Julio, not all these rookies...

Amendola from Welker looks like a wash. Lloyd sucked last year. Edelman was the #3 and this year is probably no better than #5. Top to bottom, much better.

 

[PatsWillWin]

Massive Upgrades? Massive would be bringing in someone like Julio, not all these rookies...

Yeah the delusion is hilarious. This team hasn't done #### in 10 years.

Yeah, mired in mediocrity out there, been a tough decade.

 

[menobrown]

Massive Upgrades? Massive would be bringing in someone like Julio, not all these rookies...

Amendola from Welker looks like a wash. Lloyd sucked last year. Edelman was the #3 and this year is probably no better than #5. Top to bottom, much better.

Edelman is still the #3. Maybe he gets bumped up or down a spot but to say he's no better than the #5 is just plain incorrect.

The Patriots were correct in their assessment of Amendola, he's more versatile than Welker and I think in terms of performance he's a slight upgrade. But the big question is how can an oft injured player stay on the field when by all accounts his involvement and hits will increase?