Roo Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 I like this guy. I think he's due for more success than most people are thinking right now. I am going to list some of the reasons why, but I am looking for the counterpoints. Someone give me the good reasons why he might NOT be a top RB this year. 1. One of the highest yards per carry averages in the league last year 2. Faulk will be an almost non-factor sooner than later - he's like 85 3. New friendly turf - should be better on his legs/knees 4. Well established productive offense 5. In the two games he got more than 20 carries, he broke loose for over 150 yards - as a rookie 6. He's only 21, with a nice blend of power and speed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 1)Faulk 2) Martz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS Miscreant Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 (edited) 1)Faulk 2) Martz 890916[/snapback] Ding ding ding!!! We have a winner! Edited July 22, 2005 by BS Miscreant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFFL Chump Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 1)Faulk 2) Martz 890916[/snapback] Could be a problem............ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynch Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Give him two-three years. Faulk won't be there stealing those 5-15 carries depending on who you ask. And by that time there might well be a little more conventional Offense. (Sans Martz) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roo Posted July 22, 2005 Author Share Posted July 22, 2005 (edited) Thanks for the smug replies. Faulk right now is thought to start as the "third down back." Do you guys seriously think that'll last all season? I mean, I know Faulk takes XLA, but still. Some projections I see don't have S. Jackson as a top 20 RB, and he never breaches the top 15. That seems low for a young talented RB on the Rams who I would bet gets 20-25 carries by midseason. Edited July 22, 2005 by Roo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS Miscreant Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Thanks for the smug replies. 890959[/snapback] Not a smug reply at all. The first things to pop into my head were Martz and Faulk. Martz can't seem to help the fact that he's a passing fiend regardless of the talent in the backfield. Faulk is still there and with fewer touches and the new turf he will sustain less wear and tear as well. The combination of those two things does not make StL a prime spot for a big time producer at RB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 (edited) Thanks for the smug replies. Faulk right now is thought to start as the "third down back." Do you guys seriously think that'll last all season? I mean, I know Faulk takes XLA, but still. Some projections I see don't have S. Jackson as a top 20 RB, and he never breaches the top 15. That seems low for a young talented RB on the Rams who I would bet gets 20-25 carries by midseason. 890959[/snapback] You expect a non-smug answer? Fine. Last year St. Louis passed the ball more than all but four teams (580 passing attempts), yet ran the ball the third fewest times of any NFL team (only 381 times). Now, go look up how many rushing TDs the Rams had last year. Then look up their average rushing yards per game. Then multiply both by whatever fraction of the RB load you realisiticly think Jackson will handle. I think you'll find that splitting time in the back field of a pass-first offense isn't exactly a guaranteed receipe for success at RB. Once Faulk is out of the picture, or Martz runs the ball a lot more, it'll be a different story. But until then, drafting Jackson early this year is a very risky move. However, his keeper potential is sky-high. Edited July 22, 2005 by yo mama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roo Posted July 22, 2005 Author Share Posted July 22, 2005 Ah, thank you, good points. I like stats. Anyone know anything about Jackson's ability to catch the ball? That seems like it might play in to things. I don't know, something just tells me that he's gonna be big - but you're right it might not be for another year or two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS Miscreant Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 Ah, thank you, good points. I like stats. Anyone know anything about Jackson's ability to catch the ball? That seems like it might play in to things. I don't know, something just tells me that he's gonna be big - but you're right it might not be for another year or two. 891006[/snapback] Don't get me wrong here, I've got Jackson in a $$$ keeper league and obviously hope the best from him. I just don't think he breaks out big time this year. He may but I just don't see taking any more of a risk on him in redrafts than where I've seen him going(late 2nd/early 3rd). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted July 22, 2005 Share Posted July 22, 2005 (edited) Thanks for the smug replies. Faulk right now is thought to start as the "third down back." Do you guys seriously think that'll last all season? I mean, I know Faulk takes XLA, but still. Some projections I see don't have S. Jackson as a top 20 RB, and he never breaches the top 15. That seems low for a young talented RB on the Rams who I would bet gets 20-25 carries by midseason. 890959[/snapback] Wrong. please. Reports I've read indicate Martz is doing everything in his power to make sure Faulk is ON the field as much as possible, varying from him being a split-end to double RB sets. That's not why I'm down on SJax, however. I'll provide a link to this information at some point -- forgot where I read it but I know I read it.... ... A few experts point out that SJax lacks the "fire in the belly" and/or the desire/hunger that's all but necessary to really be considered a stud . Apparently this is why he slipped so far in the draft. He's obviously a physical specimen with tons of UPSIDE, but he apparently lacks the desire to work hard and live up to the stud tagging. That's combined with the fact that Mad Martz is still at the helm and the Rams will remain a pass-first offensive team. Don't get me wrong, if SJax slipped to me in a draft where I thought he was a solid value pick, I'd take him. He obviously has ability, and the Rams will put points on the board... I just wouldn't go overboard and draft him over the likes of one of the Jones boys or CuMar, etc. Edited July 22, 2005 by darin3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roo Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 (edited) "Faulk has been demoted to second on the depth chart and will serve as the immediate backup to No. 1 running back Steven Jackson in St. Louis. Once the most valuable player in Fantasy Football, Faulk has seen his stock decrease over the past two seasons and will now serve as a third-down and change-of-pace option for head coach Mike Martz. The future Hall-of-Fame back will be a decent middle-round selection in drafts, and is nice insurance for owners who land Jackson. (Updated 6/22/05)" - CBSSL And ESPN consistantly refers to him as the "change of pace" back. Ok, to be fair, this news goes back and forth a lot. I have actually read both. I have read the above, and also read that both will share much time on the field together, as you were saying. So, let's not go around acusing each other fo being wrong. It seems to be mostly guessing right now. What I do think is a fair guess however, is that as time goes on, SJ will emerge as the premier back. Doesn't that seem like a fair assumtion, since he's the 21 year old starter while Faulk is the 33 year old relic? Would it be so crazy to think by midseason, Jackson would be getting 20-25 carries, and Faulk, if not a pile of dust, would get 5-6? Edited July 23, 2005 by Roo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chessmaster Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Faulk Article Read it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chessmaster Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Jackson will be the main running back, but in Martz system the main running back has only recieved 250-260 carries anyway. Don't believe me, check out Faulk's carries back in 99, 2000, 2001 when he was the premier back. 250ish each time. When you take into account that Faulk is still in the mix and will likely get between 80-100 carries over the course of the season, that leaves only 180-200 carries for Jackson. That drops Jackson to the late teens in my rankings automatically. I also believe that in passing situations, Martz will still be more comfortable with Faulk on the field than Jackson. Simply put, Faulk is the best pass-catching RB the game has ever seen, IMO. He has slipped a bit, but he is still very good catching screen passes, pass blocking, and doing anything else required of him in the passing game. Even if Jackson might be better than Faulk in this role, you have to expect Faulk to see significant time here anyway. I expect Faulk and Jackson to see similar numbers in the passing game. The only way Jackson becomes an elite runner this season is if Faulk gets hurt and misses significant time. You can't bank on that, so you have to drop him in your rankings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roo Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 Good article and good stats, thanks. Everything you're saying makes sense. It's true you can't 100% bank on a Faulk injury, but you almost can. Also isn't there a certain contradiction when you point out Faulk's low # of carries, and then take in to account his high receiving totals? It seems like Jackson can catch too no? (not saying he's Faulk calibur, but if he eventually fits in to Faulk's role, he'll see lots of passes) I think too, that what I see in Jackson's stats, shows some serious abillity - that's somewhat overlooked. Sure, if he makes mistakes in the early season, he might lose carries. What if he continues averaging 5yrds+ and finds the endzone well (he faces San Fran, Ten, Giants, and Seattle in the first 5 weeks)? It's certainly debatable, that's why I brought it up. I think in a keeps league you'd be silly not to draft him as a top 15 RB. Otherwise I think he's maybe 16 or 17th, if you consider his talent, and Faulk's decline. Thanks for the imput (everyone). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chessmaster Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 (edited) Good article and good stats, thanks. Everything you're saying makes sense. It's true you can't 100% bank on a Faulk injury, but you almost can. Also isn't there a certain contradiction when you point out Faulk's low # of carries, and then take in to account his high receiving totals? It seems like Jackson can catch too no? (not saying he's Faulk calibur, but if he eventually fits in to Faulk's role, he'll see lots of passes) I think too, that what I see in Jackson's stats, shows some serious abillity - that's somewhat overlooked. Sure, if he makes mistakes in the early season, he might lose carries. What if he continues averaging 5yrds+ and finds the endzone well (he faces San Fran, Ten, Giants, and Seattle in the first 5 weeks)? It's certainly debatable, that's why I brought it up. I think in a keeps league you'd be silly not to draft him as a top 15 RB. Otherwise I think he's maybe 16 or 17th, if you consider his talent, and Faulk's decline. Thanks for the imput (everyone). 891528[/snapback] Well, Faulk has played at least 14 games in every season but one since 1997, and his reduced workload should help him stay healthy this year. So, Faulk will probably get dinged up, but he'll likely see the field in 14 games yet again. No contradiction when I point out Faulk's recieving totals, as he was the best recieving RB ever to play this game. I still think, as I said earlier, that in clear passing situations Faulk will see the field ahead of Jackson, while in clear running situations Jackson will play. Both Faulk and Jackson could catch 40 passes this year, but a 190 rush 40 catch running back will never be elite, sorry. I agree that Jackson is a huge talent, and if Faulk was gone I would have him as a top 5 back. As it is though, he struggles to make the top 20 in my rankings (he is currently 19) and I could understand if some people had him out of the top 20. Clearly in keeper and dynasty leagues, you have to draft him very early, but in redraft leagues he is a below-average starting back, IMO. Edited July 23, 2005 by Chessmaster Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaos Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 As long as Martz is around, Jackson's touches will vary greatly from game to game, regardless if Faulk is getting touches or hurt. Martz at times seems to forget that you can run the ball. I can see games with 30 total carries easily followed by 10 carries by both back combined. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildbluefan Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Mike martz, more so than Marshall !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Weasel Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Roo, it seems you wanted the honest negatives from fellow FFL'ers, and are not happy with the responses. Draft him as you see fit. Just know that Martz is a huge Faulk fan, and will not think twice about FFL owners who have Jackson. Marshall will get his touches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KC Crazy Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 I really like SJax as well and just have a "feeling" he will do well. However, there are some GREAT posts in this thread that make me ponder how high he should be as well. I think the receiving talent Jackson demonstrated in college should show itself more this year with reduced usage of Faulk but it is clear from the stats you guys have shown the carries will be reduced unless the play calling (coach) changes. Good info! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roo Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 Yes, great info. Weasel, I am happy with the responses, and they have tempered my enthusiasm for Jackson. I am sort of riding a gut feeling here, and needed a dose of facts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS Miscreant Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Yes, great info. Weasel, I am happy with the responses, and they have tempered my enthusiasm for Jackson. I am sort of riding a gut feeling here, and needed a dose of facts. 892142[/snapback] Nothing wrong with gut feelings as long they don't interfere with doing things that make sense. Even if you feel that he's gonna be a top 10 back, you can still get him late in the second round or early in the third in most drafts so there's no need to mortgage the house to get a guy you have a gut feeling about. Hey, KC. Nice cameltoe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KC Crazy Posted July 23, 2005 Share Posted July 23, 2005 Nothing wrong with gut feelings as long they don't interfere with doing things that make sense. Even if you feel that he's gonna be a top 10 back, you can still get him late in the second round or early in the third in most drafts so there's no need to mortgage the house to get a guy you have a gut feeling about.Hey, KC. Nice cameltoe. 892161[/snapback] Yeah people think the KC is Kansas City. It is actually King Cameltoe! Check out the Wicked Weasel website for more wonderful bathing suits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roo Posted July 23, 2005 Author Share Posted July 23, 2005 I heard S. Jackson has a pretty sweet cameltoe - I'll post the link later - talk about top 15 RB material! 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.