Who's on third?

[Seahawks21]

His numbers were almost exactly the same as Lamont Jordan's in his one big year thanks also to being the NFL RB leader in catches that year. Westbrook only had a 4.0 YPC last year because of injury (he missed two games as well.). The two previous seasons had Westy gaining either 4.8 or 5.1 YPC. SJax missed four games and was injured as well. Hegained 4.4 YPC in his one big season with catches (90).

 

Forte does get the benefit of a heavier load most likely, but the dynamics are changing from 2008. But he was the entire CHI offense last year and his 392 plays were second in the league (Peterson had 402). CHI may actually have more to use than Forte this year which means Forte does not have upside at all. His risk is how ever much Cutler uses other players instead of him. Forte only ranked 10th last year considering just rushing and CHI says they want to rest him more. I cannot see how he can have upside when he is certain to not have as big a role.

While I don't project him to have a bigger year, I certainly think it is possible. If Cutler has success, teams will have to respect him a little bit, meaning Forte won't have 22 eyes on him every single play. Maybe this will open him up for a few more big plays than he had last year. I'm not ready to pencil him in for a sub 4.0 YPC career just yet, he's still young. Maybe through watching tapes he becomes a more efficient runner. Maybe with a little less work he becomes more explosive. There are a lot of maybes in this statement but I don't think any of them are incredibly "stretchy". I would have a hard time saying any player at his experience level doesn't have upside or room to improve, unless they had 3000 combined yards or something crazy that simply couldn't be topped.

[Square]

While I don't project him to have a bigger year, I certainly think it is possible. If Cutler has success, teams will have to respect him a little bit, meaning Forte won't have 22 eyes on him every single play. Maybe this will open him up for a few more big plays than he had last year. I'm not ready to pencil him in for a sub 4.0 YPC career just yet, he's still young. Maybe through watching tapes he becomes a more efficient runner. Maybe with a little less work he becomes more explosive. There are a lot of maybes in this statement but I don't think any of them are incredibly "stretchy". I would have a hard time saying any player at his experience level doesn't have upside or room to improve, unless they had 3000 combined yards or something crazy that simply couldn't be topped.

I'm not going to say I agree with Seahawks much, but I'm optimistic about Forte. So whether it is real or an illusion remains to be seen, but I think he could be more explosive on less touches when not facing 8 in the box.But, I'm sure I'll be drafting from the 8-10 spot where I'll have to gamble on a RB and pay more attention to what top WR I want.

[tonorator]

I cannot see how he can have upside when he is certain to not have as big a role.

 

i can see how you would think that if (a) all of the conditions in chicago remained unchanged and he just gets lesser touches or ( you assume that forte has not improved at all as a player. this is a rookie that kicked butt and demonstrated that he could carry the entire load. putting more weapons around him and allowing him to grow in his 2nd year as a pro are two big positive factors imo, not negatives.

 

if chicago's offense is better, doesn't that mean that they stay out on the field longer? the bears were 27th last season in time of possession and 25th in terms of 3rd down conversion percentage. you improve those numbers and forte's touches could stay the same or even go up and he has more chances to score.

 

your thinking is one-dimensional grasshopper.

[Bronco Billy]

CHI may actually have more to use than Forte this year which means Forte does not have upside at all. I cannot see how he can have upside when he is certain to not have as big a role.

 

I quite frankly do not understand this logic. Did people not see Cutler checking down to Hillis last year in DEN despite having far superior weapons at WR than CHI can ever hope to have? Hillis had a whopping 12.8 ypc last year, with the main reason being that Cutler had such superb ball placement that Hillis only needed a one step seperation to both receive the ball and then catch it in full stride for YAC afterwards. Cutler has no issue with checking down to RBs if they present the best option, and Forte catching the football is obviously a large part of the CHI O. If anything, I would expect Forte's receiving yardage numbers and receiving TDs to increase even if his receptions drop a bit - which is no lock with no proven big-numbers target among the CHI WRs. It's the exact same reason Olsen should expect to benefit. You don't acquire a weapon like Cutler and then not give him his opportunities. Those 528 attempts the CHI QBs had last year look just about right for Cutler this year. But what you won't see in those attempts with Cutler at QB are the paultry 5.80 ypa or the just-as-weak 57.6% completion percentage. That means that despite my projections of CHI throwing the ball about as much, I'd figure that there will be about 25 more completions available and 750 more passing yards available given Cutler's ability and what he has shown in his first 3 years in the league. Forte figures to benfit from some of those additional passing stats - and that's without CHI throwing one more pass than they did last year.

 

On top of that, I keep hearing how people keep (correctly) say that Forte was the offense and then are disturbed by his 3.9 ypc. That seems to be at odds to me. If we morans can figure out that Forte was the CHI O's engine, don't we think that other teams' DCs can figure that out also? In other words, other teams game planned Forte as CHI's primary weapon and Forte still put up the superb numbers that he did. Now that Cutler is in town, do you think taking away Forte is the primary concern of opposing DCs? Game planning against CHI is going to be a nightmare - you can't focus on winning by taking away the run any more. That benefits Forte tremendously by getting SSs out of the box and starting LBs one yard deeper off the LoS to avoid Cutler picking teams apart. That will benefit Forte hughly, with wider running lanes and LBs scraping into gaps 1 to 2 yds deeper than last year - and it gives O linemen much better blocking angles with LBs pushed back a bit. So even if Forte doesn't get as many carries, his ypc figures to increase with the added running room and the explosiveness through the hole and the ability to turn 5 yd runs into 40 yd runs like he did last year.

 

There's one other thing: CHI ran almost exactly 100 less plays from scrimmage than opponents last year. This year with the added dynamic of Cutler, that figures to change. The O should be capable of sustaining more drives (which by the way also improves the D), meaning that the -100 play differential figures to close to nothing or even sway in CHI's favor. If that's the case, that means more work for CHI RBs, which means Forte may actually get more opportunity to touch the football, and in touching the football more also get better ypc and ypr.

 

If that doesn't spell upside from last year, I'm not quite sure what does. And these projections are hardly farfetched, but instead are more likely than not given what CHI did last year. And given these numbers, Forte could actually touch the ball less and put up better numbers in both the running and passing game. Underestimate Forte and let him drop in drafts at your own peril...

 

And I might add this is exactly the same reason that I like Turner this year. The addition of Gonzelez actually helps him by forcing Ds to respect the pass more (not to mention Ryan progressing up the QB learning curve) and that Gonzalez is a good run blocker - giving Turner more running room. Turner could touch the ball less and actually increase his rushing yds and rushing TDs because of the bigger lanes and that the SS can't hunker down in the box with his eyes on Turner any more. With Turner ability to kick his runs into another gear in a heartbeat and take the ball way down the field on what originally looked like a 5 yd gain (much like Forte), I like Turner for the same reason that I like Forte this year - both guys look like they will be able to take a lesser workload while putting up bigger numbers, with the possibility of upside if their workloads stay the same or increase.

[DMD]

Ah yes, the Lamont Jordan wow factor.

 

BB on 8/22/2006 - If I sit at the end of the first round, I can wait to see who of R Brown, Rudi Johnson, or Lamont Jordan falls to me

 

You really like those pass catching freak years, huh?

 

Let's stake out a few truths:

 

Cutler ranked 31st in the NFL last year with only 43 passes thrown to all RBs. Sure Hillis had a "whopping 12.8 ypc last year". He only caught 14 passes! And he was the leading receiver among RBs. That's merely 49 less catches than Forte had. Comparable? Really? Are you trying to prove my point? If Chicago wanted to settle for a check-down throw-it-to-Forte anway QB why drop Orton and get Cutler - one of the best downfield passers in the game? So he can wait for Forte to get further down the field? Probably not. But I am sure that Cutler can change the way he plays to fit what Orton did.

 

CHI with Ron Turner as OC (since 2005) has always preferred to use a committee. Last year the Bears dumped Benson after they had any decent chance of getting a suitable other RB. They acquired Kevin Jones late July who was coming off a knee injury. He is healthy and knows the playbook now.

 

Bears confident Forte will improve with reduced workload

By Brad Biggson May 7, 2009

 

The Bears continue to say the plan is to reduce the workload for running back Matt Forte this season after he was fourth in the league with 316 carries last season, averaging 19.8 per game. It was not just the carries--Forte was on the field a lot. He averaged being on the sideline less than 10 plays per game, a pretty remarkable number for a rookie. More on the playing time statistics in a little bit.

 

Veteran Kevin Jones said more playing time was not the primary factor in his decision to turn down an offer from the Buffalo Bills and return, but it did come up in the conversation.

 

"We definitely want him to be more involved and we told him that,'' offensive coordinator Ron Turner said. "He's a good football player. Last year he came in and he was coming off that knee and he came into camp and he wasn't in the best of shape. His knee wasn't 100 percent. Now, he's a year removed from knee surgery, he's had a year in our system. He's looking great out here. He looks totally different. He's quicker. He looks more confident in himself and in our offense. He looks really good."

 

Jones didn't come on board until July last year and that meant Forte was ahead of him in terms of learning the playbook. He will not be behind this time, and one of the things he's trying to prove to Turner is that he can catch the ball. That's one thing Forte did well. He led all running backs in the league with 63 receptions, setting a Bears' record for catches by a rookie at the same time.

 

"Kevin doesn't want to be a guy that is just back there to run it,'' Turner said. ``He already told me, `I got 61 (catches) one year.' I said, `I know, Kevin.' He said he was just reminding me. We wanted to get him in more than we did and it was just a matter of comfort level. We had more confidence in Matt. He's got an offseason now. We need to get Matt off the field and Matt will be a better player because of it.''

 

So let's add in Jones as much more than last year including probably as a receiver as well.

 

So we have a new QB who has been one of the least likely QBs in the NFL to throw to a RB going to a team that found itself without a decent #2 last year thanks to Benson's ouster and Jones coming in too late to matter (and with a bad knee). But now this year, Jones is healthy according to the OC and looking good and will be a bigger factor at the expense of Forte. Cutler should do well with Olsen - he loves tight ends. He also loves wideouts and deep throws. How that all adds up to upside for Lamont Jordan Matt Forte I just do not see. Sure, he should get a higher YPC on fewer carries and have less receptions. But more effective does not mean better numbers.

 

Forte is an average back who had a fortuitous situation last year. That has changed now thanks to Cutler and Jones. Forte is not going to be worthless by any means. But considering him as a top 5 back requires still living in the unique situation of 2008, not the reaiity of 2009.

[gilthorp]

My vote was for Jackson. Just when you think he's done, a new look team will allow him to be very effective this year. The only question is not scheme, or talent...of course, it's injury. Tough choices, though.

[Bronco Billy]

Forte is an average back who had a fortuitous situation last year.

 

This has the makings of a very fun year...

 

 

As to the lack of cumulative passes to RBs by Cutler, that can be attributed to an offense that doesn't throw a lot of passes to RBs - Shanahan has always seemed to predominantly seperate the RBs from the passing game. Lovie has shown (and has worked in offenses as a coordinator) that he likes uses his RBs as targets provided they have the ability.

 

As to Forte being an average RB..well, I couldn't disagree more. They guy does a lot of good things on the field - and that's far from limited to running the football. He'll be on the field a lot. This will be interesting to watch shake out.

Edited June 28, 2009 by Bronco Billy

[Sugar Magnolia]

Why no love for Chris Johnson?

[Swiss Cheezhead]

Sorry, Mr. Dorey, but the LaMont Jordan comparison isn't quite right. Jordan was a fifth-year veteran playing on a team with Randy Moss taking the safety out of the box every play. Forte was a rookie playing on a team with a marginal O-line, weak QB play, and lame WRs. A 3.9-yard average is EXTREMELY impressive under those circumstances.

 

If you want a better comparison, here's the rookie stat line for a different RB:

 

16 games played, 339 carries, 1236 yards, 3.6 YPC, 59 catches, 367 rec yards, 10 total TDs

 

That, of course, was Tomlinson's rookie season in a Chargers offense that was VERY similar to the 2008 Bears. He followed it up with another 16 games played, 372 carries, 1683 yards, 4.5 YPC, 79 catches, 489 rec yards, and 15 total TDs.

 

Also, just in terms of the "upside" concept, you're forgetting that -- all other things equal -- better QB play instantly translates into more TD opportunities for everybody on the offense. So, even if his other numbers go down, Forte has a GREAT chance to score at least a few more TDs. Similarly, when Brees finally took off in San Diego, LT saw his TD average go from 14 (2001-2003) to 19 (2004-2005).

Edited June 29, 2009 by Swiss Cheezhead

[DMD]

Sorry, Mr. Dorey, but the LaMont Jordan comparison isn't quite right. Jordan was a fifth-year veteran playing on a team with Randy Moss taking the safety out of the box every play. Forte was a rookie playing on a team with a marginal O-line, weak QB play, and lame WRs. A 3.9-yard average is EXTREMELY impressive under those circumstances.

 

If you want a better comparison, here's the rookie stat line for a different RB:

 

16 games played, 339 carries, 1236 yards, 3.6 YPC, 59 catches, 367 rec yards, 10 total TDs

 

That, of course, was Tomlinson's rookie season in a Chargers offense that was VERY similar to the 2008 Bears. He followed it up with another 16 games played, 372 carries, 1683 yards, 4.5 YPC, 79 catches, 489 rec yards, and 15 total TDs.

 

Also, just in terms of the "upside" concept, you're forgetting that -- all other things equal -- better QB play instantly translates into more TD opportunities for everybody on the offense. So, even if his other numbers go down, Forte has a GREAT chance to score at least a few more TDs. Similarly, when Brees finally took off in San Diego, LT saw his TD average go from 14 (2001-2003) to 19 (2004-2005).

 

I was calling him Lamont Jordan mainly to see what Bronco would say (though they did have the same stats). It does smack some of 2007 when Jordan - like Forte - led the league in pass receptions and then fell off the map the next year (and every other). But a lot of people expected him to somehow repeat his big season even though the situation ithe next year was different - like Forte.

 

I would contend that Forte is really just an average back who benefitted from being one of the most heavily used players in the entire NFL last year and that will not happen again. And I would never, ever put Forte in the same company as Tomlinson by any means. That's even less comparable than Lamont Jordan is. Tomlinson was heavily used because he was a stud in college and was the 5th overall pick in 2001. Forte was the sixth back drafted last year and fell into a his situation when Benson got released. Huge difference.

[Bronco Billy]

Forte was the sixth back drafted last year and fell into a his situation when Benson got released. Huge difference.

 

That's the crux of your argument? That Forte wasn't drafted until the 6th RB off the board and fell into his position?

 

Should I go through all the drafts and find a bunch of first round RB busts and then list a bunch of 3rd+ round RB studs? What difference does draft position have to do with any of this?

 

I'm not quite sure why you are so down on Forte. The guy was a stud in college. He rushed for over 2100 yds & 23 TDs his senior year, and likely dropped to the draft position he did because of the school he played for, and there were questions about his speed and blocking ability. Ask some NFL D players about his open field ability, how easy it is to run him down from behind, and how his blocking ability is.

 

The guy has ideal size, very goods hands, blocks well, can run inside & out, and doesn't put the football on the carpet. What's not to like, and how does he figure to be an "average" back?

[DMD]

That's the crux of your argument? That Forte wasn't drafted until the 6th RB off the board and fell into his position?

 

Should I go through all the drafts and find a bunch of first round RB busts and then list a bunch of 3rd+ round RB studs? What difference does draft position have to do with any of this?

 

I'm not quite sure why you are so down on Forte. The guy was a stud in college. He rushed for over 2100 yds & 23 TDs his senior year, and likely dropped to the draft position he did because of the school he played for, and there were questions about his speed and blocking ability. Ask some NFL D players about his open field ability, how easy it is to run him down from behind, and how his blocking ability is.

 

The guy has ideal size, very goods hands, blocks well, can run inside & out, and doesn't put the football on the carpet. What's not to like, and how does he figure to be an "average" back?

 

I'm sorry, did I say average back? At 3.9 yards per carry he doesn't really qualify.

 

 

 

You make me feel like I am calling the guy a bust which I am not by any means. I just do not see him as the next Tomlinson. He's still ranked top ten and he remains one of the lower risk RBs. I just see a different situation that does not warrant making him a top 5 back to me.

[Brentastic]

I'm sorry, did I say average back? At 3.9 yards per carry he doesn't really qualify.

 

 

 

You make me feel like I am calling the guy a bust which I am not by any means. I just do not see him as the next Tomlinson. He's still ranked top ten and he remains one of the lower risk RBs. I just see a different situation that does not warrant making him a top 5 back to me.

Chicago homer and fantasy guru here and I totally agree with your assesment DMD. Forte is not a top 5 RB. The top 10 RBs are something like this, although I won't touch Portis this year:

 

1) ADP

2) L.T.

3) D-Will

4) Sjax

5) Michael Turner

6) MJD

7) Clinton Portis

8) Matt Forte

9) Frank Gore

10) Chris Johnson

[Bronco Billy]

I'm sorry, did I say average back? At 3.9 yards per carry he doesn't really qualify.

 

 

 

You make me feel like I am calling the guy a bust which I am not by any means. I just do not see him as the next Tomlinson. He's still ranked top ten and he remains one of the lower risk RBs. I just see a different situation that does not warrant making him a top 5 back to me.

 

 

No, but I do take issue with the "average" tag. I would not compare him to LT either. He'd need to show some improvement in this coming year (which I do think is possible and you don't) as well as some staying power for a few years once (or should I say if) he boosts his numbers to the next level. I'm not sure he can do that, either. But then I recognize what special talents guys like LT & Faulk were, which I think some tend to take for granted. But you don't have to be a LT or a Faulk to be considered a top 5 RB.

[MikesVikes]

It speaks volumes that MJD is even considered a #2 overall pick and we're deciding on #3. Although there are RBs that will and should produce like a #2 or #3 overall pick should, drafting one will be a iffy proposition. I went with Turner btw. Tomlinson could have another great season in him, Forte could become a workhorse, and SJax could actually perform up to expectations.

[TRU SOLDJA 22]

ADP was on 3rd for my redraft last night

 

 

MJD

Forte

Edited June 29, 2009 by TRU SOLDJA 22

[Brentastic]

ADP was on 3rd for my redraft last night

 

 

MJD

Forte

Wait, are you saying that MJD and Forte were selected 1st and 2nd, THEN ADP went? Can I join this league?!?!

[Bronco Billy]

Wait, are you saying that MJD and Forte were selected 1st and 2nd, THEN ADP went? Can I join this league?!?!

 

Don't be too condescending. AD has yet to finish above RB3 in ppw and above RB5 in overall RB scoring. Either one of those guys could finish above him in 2009 ppw and overall FF totals - although the risk would seem a bit higher with the other two.

[Brentastic]

Don't be too condescending. AD has yet to finish above RB3 in ppw and above RB5 in overall RB scoring. Either one of those guys could finish above him in 2009 ppw and overall FF totals - although the risk would seem a bit higher with the other two.

Yeah, I dig what you're shoveling but ADP is only getting better and his elite talent level combined with a phenominal O-line makes him the undisputed #1 pick, IMO. I understand fully that any RB in the right situation can end up as #1. But before hindsight gives us the full picture, probability is the only tool we can use to determine the unknown. ADP has the highest probability to be that guy.

[TRU SOLDJA 22]

i took ADP and ran...

[Bronco Billy]

Yeah, I dig what you're shoveling but ADP is only getting better and his elite talent level combined with a phenominal O-line makes him the undisputed #1 pick, IMO. I understand fully that any RB in the right situation can end up as #1. But before hindsight gives us the full picture, probability is the only tool we can use to determine the unknown. ADP has the highest probability to be that guy.

 

I've very likely got the 1.01 in JLA and barring injury won't consider anyone but AD. But if someone were to manage sneaking ahead of me, I'd be hard pressed to state as unequivacobly who I would take at 1.02. I'd certainly consider the possibility of Forte over MJD, but I'd be watching Stewart's injury recovery during TC very carefully - thinking that if Stewart looks impaired for a portion of 2009, DWill may be my guy.

[Brentastic]

I've very likely got the 1.01 in JLA and barring injury won't consider anyone but AD. But if someone were to manage sneaking ahead of me, I'd be hard pressed to state as unequivacobly who I would take at 1.02. I'd certainly consider the possibility of Forte over MJD, but I'd be watching Stewart's injury recovery during TC very carefully - thinking that if Stewart looks impaired for a portion of 2009, DWill may be my guy.

Well, in another thread I have LT at #2 and D-Will at #3. LT is risky because he is now 30, had a down year last year and Sproles emerged as a stud. However, LT is once-every-ten-years special and I keep that in mind while evaluating. All that being said, as the season approaches, I can easily see my opinion being strong towards D-Will being the undisputable #2.

 

As it stands right now, if I draw anything other than the #1 pick, I would trade down in the 1st to upgrade in the 2nd and possibly 4th rounds. There are just too many guys that I have ranked too closely. ADP for me, is the only 'sure thing' - fully understanding that there is no such thing (as a sure thing).

[darin3]

Don't be too condescending.

[NAUgrad]

Well, in another thread I have LT at #2 and D-Will at #3. LT is risky because he is now 30, had a down year last year and Sproles emerged as a stud. However, LT is once-every-ten-years special and I keep that in mind while evaluating. All that being said, as the season approaches, I can easily see my opinion being strong towards D-Will being the undisputable #2.

 

As it stands right now, if I draw anything other than the #1 pick, I would trade down in the 1st to upgrade in the 2nd and possibly 4th rounds. There are just too many guys that I have ranked too closely. ADP for me, is the only 'sure thing' - fully understanding that there is no such thing (as a sure thing).

I can't see how LT can possible be even a top 10 RB this year. For 2 years now he has been going down hill. I finally traded him about half way through the season last year for Turner and never looked back on my way to a championship. LT is at best an upside #2 back but still holds alot of risk in my mind. Having one of the top 3 picks is in some ways more about consistency than anything and Dwill has not established any consistency whatsoever. If he pulls off this year what he did last year then he obviously moves up, but right now there is no way I would draft Dwill #2 or #3.

[Bronco Billy]