Roo Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 We're talking about if Priest Holmes were to get injured in the preseason, enough so that LJ would be named starter. Let's say the report said "out for 6-8 weeks." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loaf Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 that's still too tough to call. a first round pick for 6 weeks is tough to take. but we all know how quickly Priest heals so it could last all season. I'd take him in the 2nd if available. As my RB2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Top 5 for sure. Just like Priest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 (edited) Towards the end of the first round, beginning of the second. He doesn't have the receiving skills of Holmes; more of a pure runner. He'd be nearly worthy of a RB1 spot, just not in the uber-stud realm of Holmes. He'd be a perfect, solid RB2. However, if Holmes was set to return in as little as 6 weeks, I would wait until LJ had a HUGH game and then try and trade him for maximum value. Edited August 19, 2005 by darin3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Towards the end of the first round, beginning of the second. He doesn't have the receiving skills of Holmes; more of a pure runner. He'd still be worthy of a RB1 spot, just not in the uber-stud realm of Holmes. 938304[/snapback] Looks like Darin3 missed the versatility article... :doah: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Looks like Darin3 missed the versatility article... :doah: 938307[/snapback] Nope, I read it. But you have to take those stats with a grain of salt. How much garbage time did LJ play last season? And remember, those are averages. If he were to play a FULL season, I seriously think he'd be in the 15-20 receiving ypg category. Then again, they don't have Blaylock anymore... would be interesting to see LJ as a starter and how he panned out as a full-time back, receiving and running. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Nope, I read it. But you have to take those stats with a grain of salt. How much garbage time did LJ play last season? And remember, those are averages. If he were to play a FULL season, I seriously think he'd be in the 15-20 receiving ypg category. Then again, they don't have Blaylock anymore... would be interesting to see LJ as a starter and how he panned out as a full-time back, receiving and running. 938309[/snapback] He played alost no garbage time last season. If you remember, he didn't even get off the bench until late in the season. Blaylock was getting all the time early on. I keep seeing this number in my head: 30PPGM average in 5 games as a starter. 5 games is not a season, but I did not see a thing that would make me doubt that LJ could do it for 16 games. IMHO, if the Chiefs were smart, they would make LJ the primary back, and be able to get another 3 or so seasons out of Priest as the change of pace. As the primary, I'd imagine he's in his last productive season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Switch their current drafting value....Larry in the 1st round and then handcuff Priest in the 5th round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 He played alost no garbage time last season. If you remember, he didn't even get off the bench until late in the season. Blaylock was getting all the time early on. I keep seeing this number in my head: 30PPGM average in 5 games as a starter. 5 games is not a season, but I did not see a thing that would make me doubt that LJ could do it for 16 games. IMHO, if the Chiefs were smart, they would make LJ the primary back, and be able to get another 3 or so seasons out of Priest as the change of pace. As the primary, I'd imagine he's in his last productive season. 938316[/snapback] Interesting concept; maybe he really did get out of diapers.... I still say LJ would be a guy that'd get you 80-90 rushing and 15-20 receiving each game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Maybe darin doesn't buy it. I certainly can take issue one major point of the article. It is all based on past statistics. While generally I find that to be an excellent starting point let's look at the #29 back in the V-factor since I think I know quite a bit about him since I wanted the Cowboys to draft him well before the 2004 draft was on most folks mind. Jackson was not used properly by Martz last year, IMHO. Maybe Martz didn't trust him or something. Jackson is a quality v-factor guy. I've seen it with my own two eyes. From the nfl.com website prospect report for the 2004 draft: "Very effective receiver on swings and screens, showing natural hands and body control to make adjustments on the ball … Maintains concentration and has good upper body flexibility going for the pass at its high point (won't flinch when getting hit). " His receiving stats in 3 seasons with the Beavers combined with what he did when the ball was actually thrown to him last yera back me up, I think: 66 rec 680 yards 6 TDs 10.3 ypc at OSU 18 rec 168 yards 0 TDs 9.3 ypc (they only threw to him 24 times while they threw to Faulk 66 times) Now sure you could argue that the V-factor takes into consideration the fact that they didn't throw to him that much last year which is valid but with whacky running the show in St. Louis I expect that to change this year. I'm not bashing the v-factor article because I believe it but it is not projecting anything it is simply sumarizing past info in a particular method. That being said I totally agree with darin on Johnson in that he'd be a late 1st rounder uner the hypothetical and he's not a receiving threat the same way Holmes is. Just MHO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 Maybe darin doesn't buy it. I certainly can take issue one major point of the article. It is all based on past statistics. While generally I find that to be an excellent starting point let's look at the #29 back in the V-factor since I think I know quite a bit about him since I wanted the Cowboys to draft him well before the 2004 draft was on most folks mind. Jackson was not used properly by Martz last year, IMHO. Maybe Martz didn't trust him or something. Jackson is a quality v-factor guy. I've seen it with my own two eyes. From the nfl.com website prospect report for the 2004 draft: "Very effective receiver on swings and screens, showing natural hands and body control to make adjustments on the ball … Maintains concentration and has good upper body flexibility going for the pass at its high point (won't flinch when getting hit). " His receiving stats in 3 seasons with the Beavers combined with what he did when the ball was actually thrown to him last yera back me up, I think: 66 rec 680 yards 6 TDs 10.3 ypc at OSU 18 rec 168 yards 0 TDs 9.3 ypc (they only threw to him 24 times while they threw to Faulk 66 times) Now sure you could argue that the V-factor takes into consideration the fact that they didn't throw to him that much last year which is valid but with whacky running the show in St. Louis I expect that to change this year. I'm not bashing the v-factor article because I believe it but it is not projecting anything it is simply sumarizing past info in a particular method. That being said I totally agree with darin on Johnson in that he'd be a late 1st rounder uner the hypothetical and he's not a receiving threat the same way Holmes is. Just MHO. 938330[/snapback] Good info... And to follow up on this and on my past statements, Holmes is such a fantastic receiver, they would call for screen and swing passes as part of the normal offense on a regular basis. With Johnson as the starter, or when he spelled Holmes, they shifted the offense to more of a run-oriented one. The receiving yards he did get were in the normal course of the regular offense... not on designed swing or screen passes. As far as I remember. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 (edited) Again, I think most would take Johnson late 1st or early second, my main point is that the v-factor article isn't even attempting to predict anything it is summarizing an extremely important aspect of ranking RBs. I don't think most people that follow this stuff closely would even attempt to claim Jackson would be 29 on that list. Maybe a good follow-up to the v-factor article would be vfactor predictions/projections. that's easy for me to say though since I don't have time to do it. Everyone have a great weekend. Edited for those that don't speak yukonese yet. Edited August 19, 2005 by Clubfoothead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here. The evidence I see is that the mix stayed roughly the same. Then you could look at Holmes 6 ReTDs in 4 years compared to LJs 2 in 5 games. Then you could see that Holmes had 19 catches in 8 games, while LJ had 22 catches in 5 games. Holmes had 62, 70, and 74 catches in 2001, 2002, 2003. Extrapolating LJs receptions to 16 games, it works out to around 70 catches. Holmes had 614, 672, and 690 yds in 2001, 2002, and 2003. Extrapolating LJs numbers to 16 games would yield over 800 yds receiving. So...again I don't see where you are coming up with this. Sure, LJ has lots to prove. I watched any chiefs game I could last year that LJ started, because I wanted to see the kid play. I thought he was fantastic as a rusher and a receiver, and at least in that short stint the numbers support it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 (edited) Nick, I think this is all 6 of one 1/2 dozen of the other. Even if Johnson can't catch the ball, if Holmes were to be out for the 2005 season today Johnson would be a late 1st early 2nd round pick, regardless of his v-factor. The stats from last year certainly do back up your contention that he can catch the ball. I don't know because I hadn't really followed him that much until Holmes went down. You and darin can debate his receiving skills all you want. I just wanted to make a point about what I thought to be a very good article and to simply point out to my fellow huddlers that the v-factor rankings were not projections. Now I'm going home. The wife is going to kill me. Edited August 19, 2005 by Clubfoothead Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 I just wanted to make a point about what I thought to be a very good article and to simply point out to my fellow huddlers that the v-factor rankings were not projections. Now I'm going home. The wife is going to kill me. 938361[/snapback] I was just ribbing Darin's receiving skills comment with that reference. Otherwise, I just think that article is interesting info to consider and adjust rankings with based on scoring system. Good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted August 19, 2005 Share Posted August 19, 2005 I was just ribbing Darin's receiving skills comment with that reference. Otherwise, I just think that article is interesting info to consider and adjust rankings with based on scoring system. Good luck! 938364[/snapback] Glad that was quick, I was afraid you were going to type a ton of $hit that was going to force me to call the wife and tell her the car had been stolen to buy me some time to respond. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loaf Posted August 20, 2005 Share Posted August 20, 2005 Switch their current drafting value....Larry in the 1st round and then handcuff Priest in the 5th round. 938324[/snapback] that was my thought but then I thought that no way Priest lasts till the 5th even with the injury. But I always think in terms of my long-running 16 Teamer...maybe in a 10 or 12 Teamer he might list till the 5th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caveman_Nick Posted August 20, 2005 Share Posted August 20, 2005 Glad that was quick, I was afraid you were going to type a ton of $hit that was going to force me to call the wife and tell her the car had been stolen to buy me some time to respond. 938369[/snapback] My reputation for being long winded proceeds me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted August 20, 2005 Share Posted August 20, 2005 My reputation for being long winded proceeds me 938371[/snapback] No, I just have to have the last word. Out for real this time. DMD, whose working on the vfactor projections? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roo Posted August 20, 2005 Author Share Posted August 20, 2005 Switch their current drafting value....Larry in the 1st round and then handcuff Priest in the 5th round. 938324[/snapback] I like that. Lots of good comments in here, and interesting poll results. It's crazy to think but I would definately consider LJ a top 5 pick if Priest went down in the preseason. He more than proved himself, and he seems durable too. He carried my team for 4 weeks last year, and I'd be happy to give him the ball again. It certainly would make everyone picking early first round stop and think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.