Doug Martin

[irish]

took martin 2.03, every down back why not

 

 

Might be a little early but I agree.

[bostonsoxandy]

took martin 2.03, every down back why not

 

 

same logic as taking Mathews 2 years ago

[Bronco Billy]

This will be interesting to revisit at midseason.

[bostonsoxandy]

This will be interesting to revisit at midseason.

 

 

Yes...revisiting rookie RB hype threads in review after is always a good time...this sounds oddly familiar to me:

 

http://forums.thehuddle.com/index.php?/topic/364210-the-mark-ingram-hype/#entry3529119

 

The good 'ol "whopping earmark" must've been misplaced, eh BB?

[Pip's Invitation]

Went 3.02 in my 12-team PPR redraft today.

[SecondString]

$23 in my auction today....not too bad.

 

Speaking of rookie hype...Russell Wilson pretty impressive this weekend. Another rookie QB starter, it looks like.

[Whiskey Pimp]

Just went 4.01 in my local and we get to keep up to 2 rookies next year....and only rookies can be kept.

[bostonsoxandy]

$23 in my auction today....not too bad.

 

Speaking of rookie hype...Russell Wilson pretty impressive this weekend. Another rookie QB starter, it looks like.

 

 

I have my draft tomorrow and I'm hoping I can land Wilson as my QB2 for no more than $3 or so. QB is really really deep though so I think Wilson can be a good, cheap buy that can perform as a high-upside QB2

[Bronco Billy]

Yes...revisiting rookie RB hype threads in review after is always a good time...this sounds oddly familiar to me:

 

http://forums.thehud...e/#entry3529119

 

The good 'ol "whopping earmark" must've been misplaced, eh BB?

 

 

Yep, I misread the Ingram situation. I, and many others, expected NO to divest itself of one of its bigger limited RBs, and use 1st rounder Ingram as a RB1 with Sproles reprising his role in SD. Instead, NO diluted Ingram's opportunties while continuing to carry the RBs who could do some heaavy lifting and using them situationally in games. Thanks for reminding me.

 

So given the similar circumstances in TB, why do you anticipate such dramatically different results? TB hasn't divested itself of Blount, who has proven he can play successfully as a starter in the NFL. FWIW - I like Martin's chances as much as I liked Ingram's last year (and think Ingram can still have a fine career as a RB1 for NO). I'm not saying Martin won't be RB1 in TB, but rather that the presence of Blount as well as where TB is right now as a team on O will limit Martin's opportunities to the point where he won't be a FF RB1 or high FF RB2 as some seem to think.

Edited August 27, 2012 by Bronco Billy

[bostonsoxandy]

Yep, I misread the Ingram situation. I, and many others, expected NO to divest itself of one of its bigger limited RBs, and use 1st rounder Ingram as a RB1 with Sproles reprising his role in SD. Instead, NO diluted Ingram's opportunties while continuing to carry the RBs who could do some heaavy lifting and using them situationally in games. Thanks for reminding me.

 

So given the similar circumstances in TB, why do you anticipate such dramatically different results? TB hasn't divested itself of Blount, who has proven he can play successfully as a starter in the NFL. FWIW - I like Martin's chances as much as I liked Ingram's last year (and think Ingram can still have a fine career as a RB1 for NO). I'm not saying Martin won't be RB1 in TB, but rather that the presence of Blount as well as where TB is right now as a team on O will limit Martin's opportunities to the point where he won't be a FF RB1 or high FF RB2 as some seem to think.

 

 

All I'm saying is that I hate when you make these ominous statements that add nothing to a thread like "whopping earmark for next year." Instead of supporting or arguing your case further you just sort of seem to refuse to debate the topic and just act very confident...you do it quite a lot and it's frustrating to tolerate at times.

 

Just in this thread you have done something like it TWICE already - once by claiming that 8.3 YPR is/could be aggressive for Martin, and then when I ask you why you think so you just refuse to elaborate...then later on in the thread you just post that this will be interesting to revisit later.

 

I just dont see what all that adds to a thread, ever. It just sort of derails it slightly. From what I've seen, you are a great poster on this forum and it is awesome to hear you debate topics at times, but it's equally frustrating when you do stuff like this.

[irish]

Just went 4.01 in my local and we get to keep up to 2 rookies next year....and only rookies can be kept.

 

 

That's a tremendous pick then.

[Bronco Billy]

All I'm saying is that I hate when you make these ominous statements that add nothing to a thread like "whopping earmark for next year." Instead of supporting or arguing your case further you just sort of seem to refuse to debate the topic and just act very confident...you do it quite a lot and it's frustrating to tolerate at times.

 

Just in this thread you have done something like it TWICE already - once by claiming that 8.3 YPR is/could be aggressive for Martin, and then when I ask you why you think so you just refuse to elaborate...then later on in the thread you just post that this will be interesting to revisit later.

 

I just dont see what all that adds to a thread, ever. It just sort of derails it slightly. From what I've seen, you are a great poster on this forum and it is awesome to hear you debate topics at times, but it's equally frustrating when you do stuff like this.

 

 

As I clearly stated, I thought the 8.3 ypc was an opinion. Research of the top 20 RBs from last year would show that 60% of them didn't meet or exceed that mark - and some of those top 20 RBs were substantially below 8.3 ypr. But I really didn't think it was worth the debate. Do you think it is? I thought we were discussing the amount of opporunity that Martin would get, which is a different discussion.

 

And when I say something like it will be interesting to rehash the matter after facts occur rather than conjecture, I mean that. What's ominous about revisting a discussion after facts prove themselves out one way or another? Is that threatening to you somehow? If you would have brought back up the Ingram thread at the end of last year and invited me to post a response then, I would have admitted that my prognostication was wrong - which it was, which hopefully would have lead to a discussion about Ingram's future.

 

I'm not sure where you get the impression that I am so Machivellian...

Edited August 27, 2012 by Bronco Billy

[bostonsoxandy]

As I clearly stated, I thought the 8.3 ypc was an opinion. Research of the top 20 RBs from last year would show that 60% of them didn't meet or exceed that mark - and some of those top 20 RBs were substantially below 8.3 ypr. But I really didn't think it was worth the debate. Do you think it is? I thought we were discussing the amount of opporunity that Martin would get, which is a different discussion.

 

 

I think we are discussing all of it. If it pertains to Martin's value it's relevant here. As far as opportunity goes I thought it is near-consensus now that Martin is gonna be the leadback, and as rotoworld states it there has been a changing of the guard:

The Tampa Bay Times expects the Bucs' changing of the backfield guard to be "permanent," with first-round pick Doug Martin taking the reins going forward.

Martin "consistently impressed" in training camp practices, and on Friday night was the Bucs' bellcow back while LeGarrette Blount was sprinkled in only lightly with the first-team offense. "It felt really good that the coaches would trust me to be an every-down back," Martin said afterwards. Martin is going to open the season as a 17-22 touch-per-game player, which is even better than we optimistically anticipated. He's robbery at his current late third-round ADP

 

 

I think the debate shouldn't be about if Martin will get carries, I think it's obvious he will now. But it is about how much he can do with his touches.

[Bronco Billy]

I think we are discussing all of it. If it pertains to Martin's value it's relevant here. As far as opportunity goes I thought it is near-consensus now that Martin is gonna be the leadback, and as rotoworld states it there has been a changing of the guard:

 

 

The Tampa Bay Times expects the Bucs' changing of the backfield guard to be "permanent," with first-round pick Doug Martin taking the reins going forward.

 

 

How many passes do you think Martin will catch? If you want to add that to the discussion, be more thorough yourself and put it on the table rather than fishing for information. Do you think TB will throw enough to him to catch 25 passes? 40? 60? What kind of production are you anticipating out of him as a receiver?

[Tford]

98 balls went to all running backs in TBB last year (41 to Kregg Lumpkin, 26 to Earnest Graham, 15 to LeGarrette Blount, 16 to other backs) for 727 yards for a 7.42 YPR.

 

For the purposes of this discussion, I'm going to make three assumptions.

 

1) The passing game in terms of total volumes to the running backs (98 rec for 727 yards) will not go up (and in all likelihood, it goes down).

 

Vincent Jackson and Dallas Clark were added but Kellen Winslow and Desmon Briscoe (110 rec for 1150 yards) were subtracted. While I think Jackson will get in the 1000 yard range alone, I think his yards will come at the expense of the Preston Parkers and Arrelious Benns of the world as well as the short passing game instead of a large uptick in TBB passing yards. I think the remainder of the passing offense that used to go through Kellen Winslow will be mopped up by the combination of Dallas Clark and Luke Stocker. The Bucs threw for 3838 yards as a team last year, tough to predict a higher number this year IMO. An upgrade to the passing options on the outside should mean less passing to the checkdown option. Less rec but maybe more YPR although that's debatable.

 

Only these teams completed more total passes to their backs than TBB:

 

NOS (158)

TEN (101)

BAL (104)

SDC (124)

 

 

 

2) Assume that the developmental guys / fullbacks production stays static (removing 16 rec and 128 yards from the available numbers). Therefore, the catches that went to guys like Erik Lorig and Mossis Madu will likely remain with similar players this year.

 

This may be a tough one because Earnest Graham could easily be lumped into the fullback category but for the purposes of my projection here, I am assuming Graham's production is that of a tailback.

 

3) I believe Michael Smith is going to be much more of a factor than he is being given credit for currently. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see Smith carve out a part-time role on 3rd downs/no-huddle. I doubt that is a popular opinion currently and it is difficult for me to back up that assertion but it is a scenario that I am projecting.

 

 

 

Therefore, I think the division of reception amongst the remaining RBs (Martin, Blount and Smith) will look like this given that Martin has been given the starting gig. I had him at 30ish before he was announced the starter but I'm assuming that he might be good for

 

Martin - 40 rec for 325 yards

Blount - 10 rec for 100 yards

Smith - 25 rec for 200 yards

 

Total passing to the backs - 90 rec for 750 yards (8.33 YPR)

 

Edited August 27, 2012 by Tford

[Bronco Billy]

Cripes, nice job canook!

[detlef]

Oh, and it's official, I will not likely be getting Martin in any of my drafts this year:

 

In a 12-team league that devalues RBs because you can start as few as 1 and PPR goes .5 for RB, 1 for WR, 1.5 for TEs, my last picks before he went (picking at the horn) Hernandez and Steve Smith and was able to get A Bradshaw and BGE 16 picks later.

 

8-team BOTH best ball, out of the 3 hole, I took Lynch one pick before him and got Bradshaw in the next round.

 

10 team QB heavy league (start 2 and they get 6 pts for passing TDs, but there's also .5 PPR and 2 flex), took Gates one pick before him and was able to get Sproles in the next round (as my 4th RB).

 

Sorry, I like Martin about as much as the next guy, but there's just too many good players on the board when it appears I need to be taking him.

Edited August 27, 2012 by detlef

[MrTed46]

I really hate taking rookie RBs as my starters but I had to take him as my #2..hope it pans out. Jon Stewart and Jacuuzi Rodgers are my bench so I'm f'ed if I'm wrong.

[bostonsoxandy]

How many passes do you think Martin will catch? If you want to add that to the discussion, be more thorough yourself and put it on the table rather than fishing for information. Do you think TB will throw enough to him to catch 25 passes? 40? 60? What kind of production are you anticipating out of him as a receiver?

 

 

Well if you actually read the thread you would know I gave a very detailed prediction on the THIRD post of this thread. Go back and look. I said 50 catches then and I still like that number. I would just add some more carries to that initial prediction, maybe 40-60 more carries and I will back those #'s

 

Still haven't seen your prediction at all...anywhere

[irish]

98 balls went to all running backs in TBB last year (41 to Kregg Lumpkin, 26 to Earnest Graham, 15 to LeGarrette Blount, 16 to other backs) for 727 yards for a 7.42 YPR.

 

For the purposes of this discussion, I'm going to make three assumptions.

 

1) The passing game in terms of total volumes to the running backs (98 rec for 727 yards) will not go up (and in all likelihood, it goes down).

 

Vincent Jackson and Dallas Clark were added but Kellen Winslow and Desmon Briscoe (110 rec for 1150 yards) were subtracted. While I think Jackson will get in the 1000 yard range alone, I think his yards will come at the expense of the Preston Parkers and Arrelious Benns of the world as well as the short passing game instead of a large uptick in TBB passing yards. I think the remainder of the passing offense that used to go through Kellen Winslow will be mopped up by the combination of Dallas Clark and Luke Stocker. The Bucs threw for 3838 yards as a team last year, tough to predict a higher number this year IMO. An upgrade to the passing options on the outside should mean less passing to the checkdown option. Less rec but maybe more YPR although that's debatable.

 

Only these teams completed more total passes to their backs than TBB:

 

NOS (158)

TEN (101)

BAL (104)

SDC (124)

 

 

 

2) Assume that the developmental guys / fullbacks production stays static (removing 16 rec and 128 yards from the available numbers). Therefore, the catches that went to guys like Erik Lorig and Mossis Madu will likely remain with similar players this year.

 

This may be a tough one because Earnest Graham could easily be lumped into the fullback category but for the purposes of my projection here, I am assuming Graham's production is that of a tailback.

 

3) I believe Michael Smith is going to be much more of a factor than he is being given credit for currently. It wouldn't surprise me in the least to see Smith carve out a part-time role on 3rd downs/no-huddle. I doubt that is a popular opinion currently and it is difficult for me to back up that assertion but it is a scenario that I am projecting.

 

 

 

Therefore, I think the division of reception amongst the remaining RBs (Martin, Blount and Smith) will look like this given that Martin has been given the starting gig. I had him at 30ish before he was announced the starter but I'm assuming that he might be good for

 

Martin - 40 rec for 325 yards

Blount - 10 rec for 100 yards

Smith - 25 rec for 200 yards

 

Total passing to the backs - 90 rec for 750 yards (8.33 YPR)

 

 

 

Or mine. See below...

 

How about Michael Smith as the 3rd back getting about 15-25 carries and a couple catches. I see Blount as getting a lot less work than 150 carries. How's this scenario...

 

Martin- 230-240 carries - 1,000 yards 5 TDs with 40-45 rec for 375 yards 2TDs = 219.5 - 224.5 (Top 10 or just outside for 2012)

Blount 90 carries- 385 yards 3 TDs with 10 rec for 75 yards.

 

[Luger]

Doug Martin 4th round of 14 team league this weekend. Happy with him as rb2.

[irish]

How about Michael Smith as the 3rd back getting about 15-25 carries and a couple catches. I see Blount as getting a lot less work than 150 carries. How's this scenario...

 

Martin- 230-240 carries - 1,000 yards 5 TDs with 40-45 rec for 375 yards 2TDs = 219.5 - 224.5 (Top 10 or just outside for 2012)

Blount 90 carries- 385 yards 3 TDs with 10 rec for 75 yards.

 

 

So after 7 weeks (almost half of the season but not quite), the stats look like such:

 

Martin - 129 carries- 543 yards- 3 TDs and 16 rec (28 targets)- 224 yards- 1 TD = 116.7 pts

Project those numbers for the full 16 weeks- 295 carries - 1,241 yds - 6-7 TDs and 37 rec- 512 yds- 2 TDs = 263.3 pts.

 

Blount - 33 carries- 116 yds- 2 TDs and 1 rec (2 targets)- 2 yds- 0 TDs = 24.8 pts

Project those numbers for the full 16 weeks- 75 carries- 265 yds - 4-5 TDs and 2-3 rec - 5 yds- 0 TDs = 57 pts.

 

Now, I'm expecting Martin, as a rookie to hit the wall at some point, and therefore, Blount may get a slight uptick. Plus, Martin just had a HUGH night, which sways the totals a bit but it's still part of the whole. However, I think the above projection is looking pretty good so far.

 

So Flemingd, BB, Detlef and others, how are we feeling now, at almost the halfway point, in regard to Martin (barring injury)?

[Sunday Couch Potatoe]

So after 7 weeks (almost half of the season but not quite), the stats look like such:

 

Martin - 129 carries- 543 yards- 3 TDs and 16 rec (28 targets)- 224 yards- 1 TD = 116.7 pts

Project those numbers for the full 16 weeks- 295 carries - 1,241 yds - 6-7 TDs and 37 rec- 512 yds- 2 TDs = 263.3 pts.

 

Blount - 33 carries- 116 yds- 2 TDs and 1 rec (2 targets)- 2 yds- 0 TDs = 24.8 pts

Project those numbers for the full 16 weeks- 75 carries- 265 yds - 4-5 TDs and 2-3 rec - 5 yds- 0 TDs = 57 pts.

 

Now, I'm expecting Martin, as a rookie to hit the wall at some point, and therefore, Blount may get a slight uptick. Plus, Martin just had a HUGH night, which sways the totals a bit but it's still part of the whole. However, I think the above projection is looking pretty good so far.

 

So Flemingd, BB, Detlef and others, how are we feeling now, at almost the halfway point, in regard to Martin (barring injury)?

 

Don't break your arm patting your own back

[irish]

Don't break your arm patting your own back

 

 

Just saying brother. And you gotta admit it's pretty spot on. People here are very good at calling you out when you're wrong but not so good at pointing out when you get it right. My arm's just fine, thanks for your concern.

[Bronco Billy]

Just saying brother. And you gotta admit it's pretty spot on. People here are very good at calling you out when you're wrong but not so good at pointing out when you get it right. My arm's just fine, thanks for your concern.

 

 

Like you're calling me out now?

 

That's okay, I don't mind. I never have. Noone reads every situation correctly, and I've missed on my share of projected success/failure of rookies in the NFL. I missed on this one. Blount has had his chances but hasn't taken advantage, so the TB RB situation never blew up into a RBBC. Martin has taken the RB1 job with a vengeance and looks great. I thought Martin would need someone to reduce his workload to perform at optimum, but so far he's been up to the task of being a bell cow. I think it's great, honestly - we need more bell cows RBs in the NFL, IMO.

 

It also means that I am wrong in this case. Is that what you were jonesing to hear?

Edited October 26, 2012 by Bronco Billy