Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Dynasty & Redraft: RB Devontae Booker, N.Y. Giants


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, DocHolliday said:

Booker is not Jacobs.   Jets run D is solid.  Raiders are not a great team. 

He salvaged a few points late.  Wasn’t bad...wasn’t good.  Would have been nice to get that score over Carr...

Thinking I possibly drop him as not sure i could trust him in the playoffs if Jacobs misses any other games (their schedule is rough for a backup)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 766
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I thought he looked damn good at times last night but Kubiak was hell bent on forcing Bibbs in when it wasn't working. There were a several times when Booker busted off some nice plays and promptly ca

When I first saw that quote I thought it was in response to a question specifically about Booker but it wasn't and it makes the comment perhaps more telling. For those who haven't watched the cli

Cecil Lammey ‏@CecilLammey  Nov 8 Devontae Booker only 19 rushing yds before contact over the last 2 weeks, tied w/Andy Dalton for 54th lowest in the NFL #Broncos @1043TheFan Cecil Lamme

3 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

He salvaged a few points late.  Wasn’t bad...wasn’t good.  Would have been nice to get that score over Carr...

Thinking I possibly drop him as not sure i could trust him in the playoffs if Jacobs misses any other games (their schedule is rough for a backup)

Next week is not going to be pretty for the Raiders run game. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, LionOfGosforth said:

Another next to useless spot start RB statline. See Mattison, Edmonds and about two dozen others this year.

Were you expecting a breakout game against this run D?

His upside this week was if the Raiders got up fast and then could grind the clock. That didn't happen, but Booker got 16 carries (the vast majority) which is what I hoped for in starting him.

He ended with a floor game netting 50 and a catch. I don't regret starting him because of that opportunity, knowing sledding would be tough against the only thing the Jets are doing well this year -- stopping the run.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stompin' Tom Connors said:

Were you expecting a breakout game against this run D?

His upside this week was if the Raiders got up fast and then could grind the clock. That didn't happen, but Booker got 16 carries (the vast majority) which is what I hoped for in starting him.

He ended with a floor game netting 50 and a catch. I don't regret starting him because of that opportunity, knowing sledding would be tough against the only thing the Jets are doing well this year -- stopping the run.

Per this week's League Dominator, they have the Jets ranked as the 11th easiest against the run.  That hardly seems like a tough run D.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Down Under said:

Per this week's League Dominator, they have the Jets ranked as the 11th easiest against the run.  That hardly seems like a tough run D.

Either the site is wrong or you are reading it wrong -- they are 11th in both least rush yards allowed and yrds allowed per game, and 4th in yds per attempt -- though they can be scored on on the ground (21st in rush TDs allowed). 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Stompin' Tom Connors said:

Were you expecting a breakout game against this run D?

His upside this week was if the Raiders got up fast and then could grind the clock. That didn't happen, but Booker got 16 carries (the vast majority) which is what I hoped for in starting him.

He ended with a floor game netting 50 and a catch. I don't regret starting him because of that opportunity, knowing sledding would be tough against the only thing the Jets are doing well this year -- stopping the run.

No, not a breakout game but better than 50 yards, the majority of which were ground out late, he had almost nothing through 3 quarters. No, the comment was more specifically about the amount of times replacement RBs come along and get everyone excited to the extend they're talking of benching true studs to accommodate them, only for it to fail miserably. It happens many times, every year and I fall for it myself occasionally, Edmonds springs to mind. Booker got about his floor in this game while many were expecting top 10ish numbers. I'm glad I missed him on waivers and started Gallman instead. I must admit, i'd have fallen into that trap myself otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, oswizzle said:

He was not even used in the passing game like he is when Jacobs is healthy

Richard and Riddick both had one target and Booker had 2. So its within the average of 5 targets to the RB per game.

Booker only played 33 snaps (43%) but he had 18 opportunities in the game.

Richard played 32 snaps (41%) and had 5 opportunities.

Riddick played 13 snaps (17%) and had 4 opportunities.

This game was almost an even split in snaps between Booker and Richard but Booker gets the ball a lot more when he is on the field.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Faust changed the title to Dynasty & Redraft: RB Devontae Booker, N.Y. Giants
Quote

Giants signed RB Devontae Booker, formerly of the Raiders, to a two-year, $6 million contract.

Fresh off a season in which he handled 110 touches behind Josh Jacobs, Booker lands in a similar role that allowed Wayne Gallman to emerge for six touchdowns off the bench. It's not as ideal a situation as backing up oft-injured Jacobs, but it's possible Booker sees more time than expected if the Giants bring Saquon Barkley along slowly to start the year. 28-year-old Booker has also flashed proven pass-catching chops in the event Barkley does go down again.

SOURCE: Jeremy Fowler on Twitter

Mar 15, 2021, 8:23 PM ET

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

... so the Giants signed him because Gallman Jr.was going to make more? Booker is ok but I dunno about this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, The Frankman said:

... so the Giants signed him because Gallman Jr.was going to make more? Booker is ok but I dunno about this.

Yeah I'm surprised they couldn't get Gallman for around that. Although they kept taking him out for Alf Morris down the stretch, so maybe that staff wasn't enamored with Gallman. I thought he looked pretty good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, The Frankman said:

... so the Giants signed him because Gallman Jr.was going to make more? Booker is ok but I dunno about this.

Booker also plays on special teams and I've read is a better pass blocker than what we have at RB right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
Quote

Giants general manager Dave Gettleman said Devontae Booker is a three-down running back. 

“You can never have too many good player," Gettleman said in justifying the mystifying signing of Booker, 28, to a two year, $6 million deal. The Booker signing is the latest in Gettleman overpaying for replaceable backs, standard fare for a GM who has mocked the use of analytics in pro sports. Gettleman's praise of Booker makes the veteran a decent late-round selection for Zero RB drafters seeking potential volume in the case of a starter's injury. Booker has been a reliable pass catcher in his five NFL seasons, totaling more than 30 receptions in each of his first three years in the league. Saquon Barkely coming back after an ACL tear means Booker won't have much, if any, weekly fantasy usefulness. 

RELATED: 

Saquon Barkley

SOURCE: Zack Blatt on Twitter 

Apr 20, 2021, 12:38 PM ET

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...