Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Ranking Rookie RBs for Dynasty


Zooty
 Share

Recommended Posts

I don't like Chris Johnson despite the obvious need in TEN as I stated above. He wasn't on anyone's radar until the combine (rightfully so), and it takes a lot more than speed to play RB in the NFL. The opportunity will be there - but is he another Chris Henry?

 

I don't like Kevin Smith. I think he put up superb numbers against incredibly weak run Ds in college, and he reminds me of a lot of MAC RBs from 5-10 years ago who put up hugh college numbers but never had their game translate to the pros.

 

I don't like Jamal Charles. He reminds me of Tatum Bell and Quentin Griffin. His game is all at the edge of the LoS, and he goes down with very little contact.

 

I don't like Rashard Mendenhall. I think he was a one year wonder who made his bones in a spread O where the QB had to be accounted for because he was such a legit threat to run and pass, and he had a lot of O talent around him. His less than auspiscious start - the hammy injury & being held up at 2:00 am make me even more jittery.

 

There are others, but those ought to make for some good fodder...

 

I have to agree with the Kevin Smith assessment. I went to NIU when LaShon Johnson was tearing up the Huskies' turf. He was fast and had decent size....but was a total bust in the NFL...even though, at the time, he had a chance to break the single season college rushing record.

 

And, again, I have to agree with your assessment on Tim Hightower. Arrington has showed he has little or nothing to offer, and shipp is a goalline back. All it is gonna take is Edge getting dinged...and voila...a starting running back with a great build and decent speed. I took Hightower over lots of other higher rated backs in the 5th round of our rookie IDP draft and thought I was stealing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way does Rice PUSH McGahee out the door by year 3.

McGahee contract:

2010: $3.6 million - will be age 29

2011: $6 million - will be age 30

 

Year 3, he is likely to be paid and phased out. Year 4, he'll be gone.

It's not as if McGahee is headed to the Hall of Fame. He's just a normal NFL RB.

Rice will just be entering his prime years. Maybe he doesn't push out McGahee, maybe he does.

..........

In April and May, fantasy owners still believe that 4-5 rookie RBs will be starters. (Some are thinking 8 or 9 this year, LOL)

Reality is that only 2 or 3 will even be serviceable 3 years from now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with the Kevin Smith assessment. I went to NIU when LaShon Johnson was tearing up the Huskies' turf. He was fast and had decent size....but was a total bust in the NFL...even though, at the time, he had a chance to break the single season college rushing record.

:wacko: Two completely different backs, and sorry, NIU is nowhere close to what UCF is.

 

Smith rumbled for 149 yards and 2 scores against UT. He tore up Tulsa in both of their games, a team that won 10 games in '07. Go ahead and scan his games from '07.

 

Sorry, horrible comparison w/ Johnson.

 

E2A: In no way am I going to make a direct comparison here, but go look up Tomlinson's stats from a similarly-tiered TCU team back from the late 90's.

Edited by darin3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way does Rice PUSH McGahee out the door by year 3.

 

 

McGahee contract:

2010: $3.6 million - will be age 29

2011: $6 million - will be age 30

 

Year 3, he is likely to be paid and phased out. Year 4, he'll be gone.

It's not as if McGahee is headed to the Hall of Fame. He's just a normal NFL RB.

Rice will just be entering his prime years. Maybe he doesn't push out McGahee, maybe he does.

 

I have to agree with tazinib1 here, Riff. No way does Rice PUSH McGahee out the door by year 3. It ought to happen before that, maybe well before that.

 

 

 

In April and May, fantasy owners still believe that 4-5 rookie RBs will be starters. (Some are thinking 8 or 9 this year, LOL)

Reality is that only 2 or 3 will even be serviceable 3 years from now.

 

This one I really do disagree with. This RB class is special. We haven't seen the likes of it come along in a long time. I think there are at least 4 legitimate players capable of being a featured RB, and at least another 4 to 5 capable of getting a decent share of a RBBC. I also see opportunity opening up in a lot of places, both with coaches in some cases wanting to build a RBBC corps (the copycat principle) and in other cases because previous classes that ought to be in their primes have turned out to be weaker than originally thought.

 

That said, some of these rookies may have to wait a year or two before they get a good opportunity to shine. The way the draft shook out was really peculiar, but I also think that has to do with some coaches adopting the RBBC philosophy, and so teams with critical RB needs may have waited longer than normal to fill their RB need, allowing RBs to drop further to teams where the need wasn't so great.

Edited by Bronco Billy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll agree that there are probably 2 more than normal decent RBs, but not 5 or 6.

People are valuing RBs more in dynasty drafts because the WR and QB classes are weak.

There are plenty of Norwood, Shelton, Caddy, Benson, and Arrington types in this year's draft. Not many Gore or MJDs.

 

It's also an over-reaction to the RB injury bug from last year. It was a higher than normal year.

It's not a RBBC league, other than for injuries. If a team had a true lead back, they went with them.

In the 2000's, there were more lead backs than in the 90's, 80's, or 70's (not combined). That's anti-RBBC.

BUF, MIA, NYJ, BAL, CIN, CLE, PIT, HOU, TEN, KC, SD, NYG, PHI, WAS, CHI, DET, MIN, ARI, STL, SF, and SEA all used a primary RB.

That's two-thirds of the league using a primary RB.

 

* Injuries caused some of them to go with other RBs (MIA, CIN, PIT, HOU, TEN, KC, NYG, CHI, DET, STL, NE, and MIN). SD in the play-offs.

* Hardly any lost their job due to ineffectiveness (SEA).

* OAK and GB eventually found their lead back after going RBBC initially.

 

The sky is not falling, except for the Chicken Littles of the fantasy world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:wacko: Two completely different backs, and sorry, NIU is nowhere close to what UCF is.

 

Smith rumbled for 149 yards and 2 scores against UT. He tore up Tulsa in both of their games, a team that won 10 games in '07. Go ahead and scan his games from '07.

 

Sorry, horrible comparison w/ Johnson.

 

E2A: In no way am I going to make a direct comparison here, but go look up Tomlinson's stats from a similarly-tiered TCU team back from the late 90's.

 

OK....he ran for 315 yards against IOWA in IOWA....is that a tough enough test?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the 2000's, there were more lead backs than in the 90's, 80's, or 70's (not combined). That's anti-RBBC.

BUF, MIA, NYJ, BAL, CIN, CLE, PIT, HOU, TEN, KC, SD, NYG, PHI, WAS, CHI, DET, MIN, ARI, STL, SF, and SEA all used a primary RB.

That's two-thirds of the league using a primary RB.

 

That's a very valid point. But the pendulum appears to have started swinging. Let's look at the teams you have listed above:

 

BUF - Lynch is clearly their guy.

MIA - Who knows, but if they had their choice, I think Brown would be the featured RB

NYJ - Jones is clearly the lead RB

BAL - Despite McGahee in the lead, they draft Rice and already have disclosed they plan to use him. Switch to RBBC.

CIN - They've been trying to get a partner for Rudi for a while, but whomever they draft gets hurt. Featured RB, but by accident, IMO.

CLE - Lewis is the guy (mostly by default at first, I think, but now by intent)

PIT - Obvious they plan to go RBBC with Parker & Mendenhall.

HOU - Drafting Slaton and grabbing Brown in FA would indiacte they plan to spell Green. That looks like an intentional RBBC.

TEN - obviously trying to pair White with a speed RB. They have clearly gone RBBC.

KC - LJ is the guy as long as his health holds out.

SD - LT. Period.

NYG - Obvious RBBC with Jacobs & Bradshaw.

PHI - Westbrook is the guy. It seems like they're trying to get a bigger RB to run with him, but can't find one. Lucky for them.

WAS - Portis is the guy when healthy. When he's not, it's Betts.

CHI - They are a one back team, no doubt.

DET - a one RB team, maybe Smith.

MIN - Obviously this is now AD's team

AZ - Edge is the guy.

STL - Jackson is #1.

SF - Gore is the top dog.

SEA - Obviously going RBBC after SA.

 

So you have 6 of those teams actively running or trying to run a RBBC. That changes the balance from 21 of 32 teams using featured RBs to 15 of 32, or from 2/3rds of the league to now slightly less than half. I think we'll see ATL be a featured RB team, so you can put them into that category. I think DEN wants to go back to a one featured RB system also. I also think GB will go with a featured RB for as long as it works.

 

That makes the balance 18 teams that want to run a featured RB and 14 who don't. That's a status change, IMO. Especially when the teams that changed to RBBC have done so with a clear purpose in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kevin Smith, 2007 season

 

Opponent - Carries/yds - Opponent rushing rank (out of 120 teams)

 

at NC State (Sep. 1) 35/217 91/120

Texas (Sep. 15) 27/149 11/120

Memphis (Sep. 22) 22/124 111/120

Louisiana-Laf. (Sep. 29) 33/223 114/120

at East Carolina (Oct. 6) 29/147 54/120

at South Florida (Oct. 13) 18/55 19/120

Tulsa (Oct. 20) 33/170 98/120

at Southern Miss. (Oct. 28) 43/75 49/120

Marshall (Nov. 3) 29/188 94/120

at UAB (Nov. 10) 41/320 120/120

at SMU (Nov. 17) 20/177 101/120

Texas-El Paso (Nov. 24) 46/219 105/120

Tulsa (Dec. 1) 39/284 98/120

at Miss. State (Dec. 29) 35/119 66/120

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair enough assessment except for Rice and Choice and Slaton. No way does Rice PUSH McGahee out the door by year 3. And I don't think you've given Choice a fair shake. I see Slaton getting lots of love by mid-season and could, COULD, be another Grant this year.

Three years down the road McGahee will have close to 2,000 rushing attempts, which is a wall for durable backs, which McGahee isn't, so I don't think it's that far fetched.

Slaton's comparison to Grant is far fetched... Grant is has an NFL body where as Slaton is undersized for an everydown back... Grant had Favre, Jennings, Driver, Jones, Lee and a stout defense to help him... What is surrounding Slaton again?

Link to comment
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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information