Unlock More Content Like This With A
Footballguys Premium Subscription
"Footballguys is the best premium
fantasy football only site on the planet."
Matthew Berry, NBC Sports EDGE
This week we discuss the following:
RB Injuries
For however long Jamaal Charles is out, what is Knile Davis' value? Is he a top-ten fantasy RB, or is there a bigger drop-off than that between Charles and Davis?
Stephen Holloway: Knile Davis, while not nearly as dynamic as Charles is a well-rounded back. He runs hard and gets the most out of his opportunities and he is a decent receiver out of the backfield. Since he will be playing with Alex Smith, who has been known to look for a drop-off, he should see consistent targets and receptions as well. Even though Davis did fumble out of bounds, he looked to be focused on ball possession and that will be the key to how long he will be the primary back for the Chiefs in Charles absence. Top-ten running back on a week-to-week basis is possible, but if he fumbles, then you will see less of Davis.
Chad Parsons: Davis will be the only show in town (Cyrus Gray will see situational snaps along the way), which alone makes him an RB2 weekly play. With Davis' athleticism and the lack of a strong passing game, Davis is a weekly top-15 option on my board. With neutral or positive matchups, Davis can get into the top ten.
Ryan Hester: Davis is probably a top-15 back due to volume alone. In "plus" matchups, that bar obviously goes up. One thing I worry about in terms of those who broke the bank for him on waivers is the Kansas City schedule. At Miami and versus New England aren't bad matchups, but after that, Kansas City travels to San Francisco and then has a bye week. Charles could return after that bye week, leaving Davis' owners with only two real RB1-expected matchups. If he were to finish as an RB1 in those two games, I'm sure his owners would say it was worth the investment. However, we all know that simply being forecast as an RB1 doesn't mean that type of finish is guaranteed.
Matt Harmon: Knile Davis isn’t Jamaal Charles, but that won’t stop the Chiefs from treating him like Charles. The second year runner has just been dropped into the exhaustive Jamaal Charles workload whenever the veteran misses time—including 28 touches last week against Denver. That kind of volume, on a run-heavy offense, alone makes Davis a weekly RB2 caliber rusher as long as he remains the starter. The fact that he’s shown well when playing, and is a big back with 4.3 speed, gives Davis top-10 upside whenever the matchup is favorable. The Chiefs might even be encouraged to continue giving him playing time even after Charles returns. The allure of his ability and not bogging down their best play in Jamaal Charles could be all too tempting.
Steve Buzzard: I think Davis is the key pickup this week if he is available in your shallow league. He will be an immediate RB2 or RB1 in the right matchup while Charles is out. He can certainly help plug the hole of all these running backs that were lost this last week. The Chiefs will ride Davis hard because they like to stick to a single back and there isn't much other competition on the team. There's a reason I was riding Davis hard in the preseason and this is it. There are two things that worry me about Davis. First is if a game gets out of hand quickly. We saw how quickly Reid was to abandon the running game Week 1 with Charles. He will be even quicker with Davis. The second is fumbles. If Davis has a fumble this week I might look to trade him next week as he had some fumbling troubles in college and that is the quickest way to the bench in the NFL.
John Lee: Knile Davis may not be Jamaal Charles, but he would be the starting RB on at least a dozen NFL teams. When Charles has missed time, Davis has filled in at a level that is comparable to Charles; last year, Charles averaged 2.22 yards after contact, while Davis averaged a respectable 1.91. Likewise, there has been no appreciable drop-off in receptions at the RB position when Davis has taken over for Charles. Until Jamaal is able to return, consider Knile Davis a solid RB2 with RB1 upside in an offense that favors the running back position.
For however long Ryan Mathews is out, how do you view Donald Brown and Danny Woodhead as fantasy running backs? Are they both solid flex options? Better? Worse? Is one clearly preferable to the other?
Stephen Holloway: For the Chargers, expect a true running-back-by-committee situation until Mathews can return. Woodhead had 76 receptions and was expected to get the majority of the running back targets and some carries all year. Surprisingly, through the first two games, the running back target distribution has been Woodhead six, Mathews four, and Brown four. The carries have also been split more than many anticipated with Mathews 23, Woodhead 14 and Brown nine. Woodhead may see a few more targets while Mathews is out, but expect both Woodhead and Brown to share the carries and targets.
Chad Parsons: Woodhead is the back I want in PPR scoring and would consider him in the RB20-30 range in that format. Brown is a poor man's Ryan Mathews, so he would be in the RB16-30 range in non-PPR and then a little lower than Woodhead in a PPR format.
Ryan Hester: As opposed to the Knile Davis and Jamaal Charles situation where we aren't sure of the injury timetable, Mathews has been given a timetable of four to five weeks. In that time, San Diego does not have a bye week like Kansas City does, and their schedule is more favorable. At Buffalo isn't a terrible draw, versus Jacksonville is potentially a dream, versus New York Jets is difficult because of their front four, but at Oakland is another cakewalk, and versus Kansas City isn't fearsome. Even though he'll be splitting touches with Woodhead, Brown is an RB2 candidate in all but the Jets game. Woodhead is a PPR RB2 candidate in each of those matchups as well. His downfall could be that the game scripts won't dictate too many passing situations, which are where he's on the field the most. I'd prefer to have Brown in standard leagues by a wide margin. In PPR leagues, I'd value them very similarly.
Matt Harmon: Danny Woodhead already has an entrenched role, but that should expand with Ryan Mathews out. The Chargers will not be such a power-run–dependent team with their best running back out of the picture. If they pass the ball more, Woodhead should see an increase in his already decent PPR standings. Brown will inherit Mathews job, but isn’t quite as good of a player, or a similar style of back. He’ll be a flex play, but his lack of touchdown and receiving upside really limits his ceiling.
Steve Buzzard: The simple answer is Brown in non-PPR and Woodhead in PPR formats. But I am going out of my way to get as much exposure to Brown as possible. I liked what I saw out of Brown last year with the Colts as he seemed to finally get it and looked the best he has in his career. I think that will continue this year and he will put up low end RB2 numbers while Mathews is out and I wouldn't have a problem dropping him into my lineup. If Brown plays as I expect he may eat into Mathews playing time when he returns.
John Lee: The San Diego RB situation is not something I want to touch in season-long format; for daily purposes, I might consider Danny Woodhead on DraftKings, where receptions are highly-valued, but Donald Brown will come nowhere near any of my season-long or daily rosters because both his floor and his upside are limited. In his six years in the NFL, Brown has never carried the ball 20 times in a game, so it is near-impossible to see him stealing the attempt-heavy Ryan Mathews role...and because the value of the RB in San Diego's offense comes from the sheer number of opportunities given to Mathews on a weekly basis, there is almost no upside in rostering Brown. In PPR leagues, Woodhead can become a what-the-heck-flex on days where the Chargers will be chasing points in the second half. Otherwise, this backfield is not fantasy-worthy.
With Mark Ingram out for a while, how do you view the fantasy prospects of Pierre Thomas and Khiry Robinson?
Stephen Holloway: Ingram was a pleasant surprise and it allowed the Saints the luxury of keeping Pierre Thomas fresh for mandatory passing situations and late-in-the-game comebacks. I think that Robinson will get more carries than he had been getting, but Thomas will also get more carries and continue to be the primary receiving back. You could also see Travaris Cadet log more running back plays and he would be the more likely to spell Thomas in the receiving role. Overall, the needle will point up slightly for both Thomas and Robinson.
Chad Parsons: Khiry Robinson is the natural fit into the power back role in the offense. Pierre Thomas will see a few more carries as the second option in that role, with Travaris Cadet picking up a few snaps and likely receptions as the third option. Robinson was in the RB3/4 matchup cloud, but now moves into RB2 territory in non-PPR. Pierre Thomas gets a boost into the RB2-RB3 PPR range.
Ryan Hester: Pierre Thomas is certainly the safer player to own, particularly in PPR leagues, as he's a known commodity. However, in games where New Orleans should be in control, Robinson will handle the fantasy-valuable clock-killing work and is likely the top candidate for goal-line work. Thomas is a middle-to-low RB2 while Ingram is out. Any touchdowns he gets would be a bonus and could vault him into low RB1 status in any given week. Robinson has that same prognosis for standard leagues.
Matt Harmon: Pierre Thomas probably sees a minimal boost in value with Mark Ingram out of the picture. Their roles hardly intersect at all. Thomas will pretty much continue to be Thomas—a safe option in PPR leagues only. Khiry Robinson was one of my favorite sleepers in the early stages of the offseason. In my opinion, he’s the most talented runner the Saints have on their roster, and has the ability of a featured back. He might never get that role, but Ingram’s absence will be the closest he ever gets to it. I expect Robinson to return a fantasy RB2 to high-end RB3 output, depending on game scripts and matchups. Don’t totally rule out the possibility that Robinson seizes this job for good. The Saints haven’t seemed willing to trust Ingram even during his best moments, and already declined his fifth-year contract option. If Robinson is as good as I think, there is potentially something special here.
Steve Buzzard: I think Thomas will continue to play a similar role that he has played all year which makes him a startable but unexciting RB2. Robinson on the other hand will get a lot more work by moving into the Ingram role. With that role he can be plugged into your starting lineup as a low end RB2 and have the opportunity for more in games where the Saints build a lead like this week against the Vikings. In those games Robinson can be treated as the closer and rack up a lot of garbage time stats. If on the other hand the Saints find themselves behind I would look more towards Thomas. The Vegas line will be your friend in deciding between these two.
John Lee: Sean Payton is a master at getting the most out of his players and putting them into situations where they will thrive. Khiry Robinson and Pierre Thomas should both see slight upticks in productivity during Ingram's absence, but neither back will become the full-fledged beneficiary of the injury to Ingram because of their respective skill sets. Pierre Thomas is best when his time in the game is spelled by another RB—Payton generally limits Thomas to ~ 40% of the offensive snaps each game, which probably gets a bump to ~50% after the Ingram injury. I expect to see Khiry Robinson more often on first downs and near the goal line, where both his youth and body frame would provide more of an advantage over Thomas.
With Knowshon Moreno out for a while, Lamar Miller should get a chance to be the featured back. What are his chances of fantasy success?
Stephen Holloway: The Dolphin running game should tilt more one sided than these other scenarios with Lamar Miller getting as much work as he can shoulder, but that has always been the question with Miller. He has had only four games in his two plus NFL seasons where he has had over 15 rushes in a game. He has shown decent hands catching 38 passes on 53 targets (72%), but only averages 6.3 yards per reception.
Chad Parsons: Miller has played well this season and is a mid-RB2 without Moreno in the lineup. The team signed the fantasy carcass known as Daniel Thomas, so that cannot be a good sign for Damien Williams or Orleans Darkwa, who saw time behind Miller. Thomas' presence is likely an indicator that if Miller were out in the coming week or two, the team wants a veteran option in the mix. Williams excels as a pass-catcher, but has very little to offer other than above-average straight-line speed. Darkwa has a more well-rounded game and skillset.
Ryan Hester: Miller has been given multiple opportunities to live up to the hype bestowed upon him by many analysts. This hype came from his pure athleticism and talent, but he hasn't been able to translate that into consistent on-field production. This could be his last shot to take the job by the reigns and make it his. Otherwise, he'll be type-cast as a committee back. He has RB1 upside due to the volume and scheme of the Bill Lazor offense. But he'll likely be a middling RB2 or even a flex play during his time as a starter.
Matt Harmon: Lamar Miller has kind of shown us who he is at this stage of his career. I’m hardly buying into him all of a sudden making good on his alleged talent and becoming a featured back. Miller will have his moments in a good system, but expectations should be severely tempered from the usual optimism surrounding him. There is some intrigue in the seemingly gifted Damien Williams, and Miller also isn’t the most durable cat around. Williams is a name worth monitoring that we need to see more of.
Steve Buzzard: Moreno has looked better this year than I expected but Lamar Miller has been a tease for a while now. It always seems like he should be in a good situation only to let you down. With the number of low end running backs getting a bump this week I am going to avoid the Dolphins situation until Moreno comes back. This might be a good opportunity to get Moreno (or any of the other injured players mentioned above) if you have room on your bench. There are a lot of teams desperate for running back help right now. If you have extra guys to spare you could upgrade your starting lineup elsewhere in one of the few times that doing a two for one trade may make sense for both sides of the deal.
John Lee: I am with fellow Footballguy Matt Harmon on this one. Miller has had sufficient opportunity to show us who he is at this point in his career and he has been less than impressive. He will get the carries by default, but the more interesting player here is Damien Williams. Williams is a talented back whose college career was tainted with continuous suspensions and an eventual release from the okayayayaylahoma Sooners in November of his Senior season; if Miller falters, it would not be surprising to see Joe Philbin slowly integrate Williams into this system to assess how well his NCAA talent translated to the NFL.
Some TE comparisons
Which of the following tight ends, if any, would you cut Heath Miller to make room for? Delanie Walker, Travis Kelce, Larry Donnell, Niles Paul?
Chad Parsons: I would cut Miller for Travis Kelce or Larry Donnell. Kelce looks to have higher upside than Miller even if Miller rebounds from a slow start. Donnell has looked terrific in back to back weeks despite playing on a struggling Giants passing game.
Ryan Hester: I'd rank the players listed in the question as follows: Travis Kelce, [large gap], Larry Donnell, Heath Miller, Delanie Walker, [large gap], Niles Paul.
Stephen Holloway: I would be hesitant to cut Heath Miller for any of the listed tight ends, unless Miller was already my second tight end. Even though Donnell has been heavily targeted, I would expect improved play by the Giants wide receivers and the addition (eventually) of Beckham will swing the targets more to the wide receivers. I would look to add Kelce, but in addition to Miller and not as a replacement.
Matt Harmon: I would cut Miller without hesitation for Kelce, Donnell and Walker. Kelce is the overwhelming upside play, while Donnell and Walker appear to have excellent chemistry with their quarterbacks—that is actually leading to fantasy points. Niles Paul is very intriguing, but I’m not sure I’d outright cut Miller for him if Miller were my starter. If he is just your backup, I don’t think you’ll look back with much regret if you make the change. Paul could take Jordan Reed’s job if he and Kirk Cousins continue to make good on their second team connection.
Steve Buzzard: I am assuming you have Miller as your backup TE and are looking for an upside play with your backup. In this case I have no problems cutting Miller for any of these players. For Kelce in particular I have a feeling he is going to be on his share of championship teams as his role continues to grow through the season plus a week 14 dream matchup against the Cardinals.
John Lee: Heath Miller has, no doubt, been a disappointment thus far, but I think he still holds value in fantasy circles due to the fact that the Steelers will likely be playing from behind much of the year. Of the guys listed, I would probably consider dropping Miller for Kelce and Donnell, simply because their floors are similar, but their upside is likely higher than Heath Miller. The rest of those tight ends, however, are bye-week fillers, at best, because they will be very inconsistent from week to week.
Buy low, Sell high?
Is Vincent Jackson a buy-low candidate? Is Toby Gerhart? Or would you avoid those guys?
Chad Parsons: Vincent Jackson is a buy-low candidate, although it seems like the Tampa Bay passing game has limited upside as a unit. Jackson is probably in the WR20-30 range going forward with more week-to-week oscillation than in 2013. I would be avoiding Toby Gerhart, at least until Blake Bortles gets under center to revive the offense.
Ryan Hester: Jackson is a buy-low candidate, yes. He's still working with a quarterback that is being introduced to a new offense. He also had a difficult Week 1 matchup with Carolina, who did a pretty nice job on Calvin Johnson in Week 2. Gerhart isn't someone I'd be running out to go get via trade. However, if I owned him, I wouldn't be pressing the eject button quite yet either. Ideally for all Jacksonville players, rookie quarterback—and University of Central Florida alum (Go Knights)—Blake Bortles should breathe some life into this offense. If he doesn't right away, he will by the time his feet are totally wet.
Stephen Holloway: I would prefer to add Vincent Jackson by far over Gerhart, who is mired in a less than expected role on a dismal offense with a horrible offensive line.
Matt Harmon: Toby Gerhart have Vincent Jackson are but low candidates, and are better than what they have shown so far. However, it's clear that their weekly upside is very limited.
Steve Buzzard: Jackson is absolutely a buy-low candidate but I am not sure how cheaply you can get him. Jackson is such an inconsistent player that I chalk his start of the season up to random variance and would buy from any owner willing to sell. Gerhart is a little different. I think you can truly buy low on Gerhart and would look to do so. I have even seen him dropped in shallower leagues. Throw out some offers with someone like Bernard Pierce. You might be surprised.
John Lee: I have to admit that I was on the Toby Gerhart train entering the season, but the Jaguars' offensive line is dreadful (ranked last in rush blocking on PFF). I truly believe that any running back would have problems generating any fantasy points behind that line, so I would advocate cutting ties (i.e., trading) with Gerhart sooner rather than later.
Jackson, on the other hand, is going to be fine and is a nice buy-low candidate. The introduction of a new coach and a new quarterback has slowed the Buccaneers' offense, but it's difficult to envision a scenario where Vincent Jackson finishes the season with fewer than 70 receptions and eight touchdowns, particularly given that Lovie Smith and Josh McCown are arguably upgrades over their predecessors. Jackson will recover—don't panic.
Is Antonio Gates a sell-high? Or would you ride him for the rest of the season?
Chad Parsons: If I needed a running back hole filled, I would shop Gates for a stopgap. Also, if another tight end like Jordan Reed or Jordan Cameron is on my bench, Gates is expendable once they return.
Ryan Hester: Gates is the clear top tight end in San Diego, and he's in a 1A-1B relationship with Keenan Allen (who, coincidentally, should be considered a buy-low). Gates will have value as long as he's healthy. A bet against him should only be made if you are guessing that his body will let him down later in the season.
Stephen Holloway: I agree with Ryan and would hold onto Gates, who has long been a favorite of his quarterback Philip Rivers and will continue to play well as long as he can remain on the field. By the way, Gates has only missed one game since the beginning of the 2012 season.
Matt Harmon: The Ladarius Greene hype train loaded up a year too early yet again. Antonio Gates is a starting tight end the rest of the way in 2014.
Steve Buzzard: I will assume Gates was drafted as your TE2. If so, I certainly have no problems moving him as part of a two for one where you can upgrade one of your other positions. I don't think Gates continues on the pace he has been on.
John Lee: I never understood the hoopla surrounding Ladarius Green entering the season. Antonio Gates was hobbled much of 2013 and still managed to garner 113 targets in 2013. Nine months later, he appears to be fully recovered from his injuries and the future Hall-of-Famer is playing like he did 10 years ago. Unless you have a Graham/Gronkowski/Julius Thomas on your squad, I cannot imagine a scenario where I would recommend trading him...but everything has a price, I suppose.
Where will they rank?
Where do you expect Brian Quick and Andrew Hawkins to finish the year in the fantasy WR rankings? How about Sammy Watkins?
Chad Parsons: Sammy Watkins is in the WR2 to WR4 matchup cloud depending on the matchup. Mike Williams looks like no competition for targets and I predict a PPR finish for Watkins in the WR20-30 range. Brian Quick is next up with a finish in the WR30-45 range. Andrew Hawkins will finish in the WR36-50 area because of sheer volume and lack of competition.
Ryan Hester: Quick can be a high-end WR3 (top 30) in either standard or PPR formats. In weeks where his lackluster offense has a good matchup (this week against Dallas, for instance), Quick could possibly add a touchdown to his WR1-level target share and have WR1-WR2 upside.
Hawkins is lower, particularly in standard leagues. He's around WR40 in PPR leagues and WR50 in standard leagues. Watkins is dominating target shares in Buffalo, seeing 15 targets on the team's 48 pass attempts. The second-highest is Robert Woods, who has nine. In Week 2, Watkins out-targeted Woods 11-3, a trend that should continue as Watkins' health improves and the team's success continues.
Stephen Holloway: Quick is an excellent best-ball wide receiver, but I don't have enough faith in the Rams passing offense, even with his high number of targets over the first two weeks to add him in a lineup league. Andrew Hawkins looks like he will get enough targets to be a decent play, particularly in PPR leagues. Watkins has undeniable talent, but will be somewhat limited by the offensive play calling and quarterback play in Buffalo. Of the three, I expect Watkins to easily out-perform the other two.
Matt Harmon: Brian Quick and Andrew Hawkins are both the top targets among their team’s wide receiving corps. That alone makes them weekly flex type plays in PPR leagues. Quick has a tad more upside due to his youth, physical gifts and growth potential. Sammy Watkins could be a surprising WR2 the rest of the way. His quarterback and run-heavy offense still limits his season long upside, but he can be a boom in any given week.
Steve Buzzard: Of these I would certainly prefer Watkins. Rookie wide receivers tend to start the year slow and improve throughout. With the sheer number of targets Watkins is getting so far I think he is the one that has a chance to make it into your starting lineups as a WR3 with a chance at WR2 in the right matchup by the end of the year. Quick and Hawkins are solid flex plays but not someone I want to start on a weekly basis. That said, Hawkins was set up for a perfect game last week with the absence of Gordon and Cameron. If both are out again I would feel comfortable plugging him in again. For the rest of the year I would rate Quick higher than Hawkins with both falling the 40-50 range.
What are the odds (barring injury) that Geno Smith finishes as a top-twelve fantasy QB this season?
Chad Parsons: Twenty-five percent. Smith is an ideal matchup-dependent QB2 part of a committee. He looks more consistent like 2013 and will have a handful of QB1-level performances along the way.
Ryan Hester: At first glance, I was going to put this at less than 15 percent. However, before committing to a response, I checked where Smith ranks in standard scoring leagues right now. Believe it or not, he's 13th through two weeks. If the "phantom timeout" touchdown to Jeremy Kerley had stood, Kerley would be QB9. Smith's weapons are lacking, but his ability to run yields fantasy-friendly stat lines. I still think that the chance of Smith being outside the top-12 is better than him being inside of it, but the odds aren't as long as most would think.
Putting on my #FFBookie hat, I'll set the prop as the following:
Will Geno Smith finish 2014 as a top-12 Fantasy Quarterback?
Yes: +230
No: -400
For those unfamiliar with how odds work, +225 converts to about a 30% chance, and -400 converts to about an 80% chance. Of course I realize these add up to 110 percent. The book has to make money, after all!
Stephen Holloway: Even though Geno Smith has played well and is completing almost two thirds of his passes, he is only averaging 6.6 yards per attempt. The chances of him finishing in the top twelve remain slim and none.
Matt Harmon: I’d probably bet that he finishes just outside the top 12. He’s playing very well so far, and has the extra ability as a rusher, which always skews things for quarterbacks. There isn’t a (likely) QB2 I’d rather have on my fantasy team.
Steve Buzzard: He has a good start of finishing there since he already has a bit of a lead over guys like Brady and Romo. It also looks like he has made some very nice improvements this year which builds on his improvements from the end of last season. But That said, I think it's far less likely that he ranks in the top 12 the rest of the season. I would say there is about a 10% chance that he finishes in the top 12 and about a 3% chance that he plays like a top-12 player the rest of the way.
John Lee: About 6-1 (or 14%). Due to the state of their porous secondary, the Jets look to be chasing points much of the 2014 season, but that does not set up well for a team with only one viable receiving weapon (Eric Decker). Jeremy Kerley cannot lift the rest of that load; if Jace Amaro and his remarkable skill set is incorporated into the game script as the season progresses, Geno may have a shot at finishing in the top 12 quarterbacks this year, but that is unlikely since Amaro has only seen five targets through two games.
Who's better?
Is Kirk Cousins better in Jay Gruden's offense than Robert Griffin III III?
Chad Parsons: Yes. Cousins can run an NFL offense from the pocket, makes quality reads and be situationally mobile. Griffin's production was felt like a house of cards built on a flimsy foundation. Without elite athleticism and rushing opportunity, Griffin has been average at best. The ball does not come out on time with Griffin under center, which creates problems on a snap-to-snap basis.
Ryan Hester: If the words "in Jay Gruden's offense" weren't in that question, I would've immediately dismissed the question altogether. Many in the far reaches of the internet are saying Cousins is flat out better than Griffin. Those people are incorrect. Within the confines of the younger Gruden's offense, however, Cousins might be a better fit. Gruden wants quick decisions and accurate passes from the pocket. Cousins is equipped to do that.
This brings a larger issue, though. Is Gruden really a good coach if he's unwilling to adjust his scheme to fit his franchise quarterback? Digging even deeper, was Gruden a good hire by the Washington brass if they had any indication that he wouldn't mold his philosophies to the franchise player? The Shanahans were run out of town due in part to differences in opinion with Griffin. Why pick another coach who isn't willing to do what your supremely talented but highly unique quarterback does best?
Stephen Holloway: Kirk Cousins is nowhere near capable of playing to the level that Robert Griffin III III played in the 2012 season. However, it appears that Griffin himself may no longer be capable of playing to that level. Since his knee injury at the end of this rookie season, he has played tentative and he still struggles to avoid hits when he scrambles. Cousins will have ample time this year to prove whether he can sustain the success he has had in short spurts. He may be capable, but we will get to see enough of him this year to make that determination. He does fit Gruden's system well and he has abundant receivers to help him be productive.
Matt Harmon: I think Kirk Cousins has always been a tad overrated off minimal strong games in a small sample size. By NFL standards, I think he is just a strong backup quarterback option. I’m also really not sure what a “Jay Gruden offense” is at this point. Gruden seemed to be a big backer of Andy Dalton when he was drafted, but did try to push the ball downfield at times in Cincinnati. That does not suit Cousins much, but does theoretically suit Griffin. To answer the questions, I really do not know. I do think we’ve seen that Gruden seems to like Kirk Cousins and what he brings to the table, and we should expect to see a lot of him going forward.
Steve Buzzard: I think Ryan hit this topic perfectly. The question specifically hinges on "in Jay Gruden's offense". Even when Robert Griffin III III is not close to 100% he is still more talented than Cousins and those that argue otherwise aren't paying close enough attention. However, in Gruden's offense I think you could make a decent argument that Cousins is more effective. I am still going to say that Griffin is better, just that it is a lot closer. The biggest question I have is: If your system isn't capable of using a player as talented as Griffin, how good is your system?
John Lee: I agree 100% with what others have said regarding talent versus fit—Cousins fits better into Gruden's offense than ROBERT GRIFFIN III, but ROBERT GRIFFIN III is, without question, the more talented athlete. I just hope we get to witness him doing remarkable things on the football field again.
Is Bobby Rainey better than Doug Martin?
Chad Parsons: For a year now it has sure seemed that way. Martin's production drop on a per-game basis from 2012 to 2013 was a historic one. The trend for running backs is when a fall-off occurs to that degree, it rarely comes back. The rebound rate is in the 5-10% range. This coaching staff also has no ties to Martin and they drafted Charles Sims on day two of the NFL draft. Rainey and Mike James both outperformed Doug Martin after Martin was out of the lineup last season. All signs point to a full committee, at best, for Doug Martin when he is healthy.
Ryan Hester: I'm undecided here. A big knock on Martin in both the 2013 and 2014 preseasons was that Martin's huge 2012 was due to a few huge games surrounding some rather modest ones. Rainey has a bit of the same thing going on. Last year, he rushed for 163 yards on 5.4 per carry against Atlanta and then followed it up with 98 yards combined in the next two weeks. Both players have skills. Whether it's due to health, an inconsistent unit around them, or difficult opposing defenses, neither has shown the ability to maintain those skills.
Stephen Holloway: Doug Martin is likely better than he has shown in limited play since his injury a year ago and Bobby Rainey is likely not quite as good as he played a week ago. They are definitely much closer in ability than the majority thought only a couple of months ago.
Matt Harmon: Martin seems to have lost some of the ability he had in his rookie season, or at least those few explosive games. Rainey has exceeded all expectations since entering the league. At the moment, I think Rainey presents the better option for the Buccaneers.
Steve Buzzard: Martin is the better talent than Rainey but the gap is a lot smaller than most analyst think. Where I think the value disconnect comes in is how high people tend to rate Martin based on such a small sample of successful plays. We are looking at a year's worth of stats now where Martin hasn't shown he is anything more than an average back. That's still better than Rainey, but not much.
John Lee: Bobby Rainey's athleticism is off-the-charts—his performance at Pro Day a few years back was nothing short of amazing. That said, he has been in Doug Martin's shadow since Martin was drafted in the first round of the 2012 draft and Rainey went undrafted. Rainey bounced around a bit with the Ravens and Browns, but landed in Tampa bay and has been serviceable in his backup role with the Buccaneers. This debate, however, is less about Rainey and more about Martin—Martin has one 100-yard rushing game in over a year...Rainey had one last week. It's difficult to concede that an UDFA could supplant a former first-round draft pick, but that is the situation in Tampa right now.
Is Terrance West better than Ben Tate?
Chad Parsons: Yes. West has looked excellent in his extended opportunities through two games. Tate has little lateral agility and seeks out contact far too often. When Tate returns, I would not be surprised to see a three-headed committee where Tate is second behind West in total touches per game.
Ryan Hester: Here's another one where I have a hard time picking one over the other. Tate's skills fit the one-cut zone-blocking system really well. However, his inability to stay on the field consistently hurts his evaluation. Many evaluators believe that durability is a skill. If that's the case, Tate isn't an all-around talent. West has shown quite a bit of wiggle and acceleration in his two games. He also has shown durability (at least as much as can be shown in two games) by tallying 35 carries. That number is tied for sixth in the NFL, and keep in mind that he has done so in just six quarters as Tate carried most of the load in the first half of Week 1. If pressed to pick one for the rest of the season, I would choose West. For the rest of their careers, the choice is easily West due to the ages of the players.
Of course, none of this mentioned the Cleveland running back with the most pure talent—Isaiah Crowell.
Stephen Holloway: Ben Tate just hasn't proved that he can stay on the field. Terrance West and Isaiah Crowell have already shown that they are both capable so Tate's production potential has been severely reduced for 2014. The combination of a solid offensive line and the lack of quality receivers looks like a perfect storm for a three-headed RBBC for the Browns as long as they can stay competitive.
Matt Harmon: There is no question in my mind that Terrance West is better than Ben Tate. West offers more explosion, power and instincts that Tate does. He is a very talented runner, who is just now getting the feel of the NFL game down. When West gets to even 80% of the knowledge that Tate has of this system, look out.
Steve Buzzard: West is a better talent than Tate at this point in their careers. I do think there was a point that Tate would have ranked higher but through age and injuries I think that time has come and gone. If all three backs are healthy I don't see much difference between them and as a coach would try to rotate each of them in to keep them healthy, especially with such a poor passing attack. The value for fantasy owners is going to come when one is injured. We all know that is most likely Tate which makes West a better own.
John Lee: Frankly, I am beginning to wonder if even Trent Richardson could run behind this offensive line! The Browns entered the season with a lot of optimism surrounding their offensive line and through two games, and they had reason to be excited; the holes that are being generated at the line of scrimmage are huge, and West and Crowell have taken advantage. Regarding the talent comparison between West and Tate, I think this one is a tough call because Tate was injured so early in the season. It is sexy to back the rookie, but I would not count out Tate just yet.
Is Ahmad Bradshaw better than Trent Richardson?
Chad Parsons: Bradshaw as looked great most of his NFL career when healthy. Richardson was off to his best start in a game since 2012 on Monday Night Football against the Eagles only to fumble and turn back into a pumpkin in the second half. Bradshaw does everything well and will continue to see more snaps than Richardson.
Ryan Hester: This is the easiest question on the list. It's a resounding yes. Not only is Bradshaw more explosive, he's better at making opposing defenders miss. And, as he showed on Monday night, he's a very capable pass-catcher. Bradshaw's only concern is his injury history. Whereas Richardson has been consistently mediocre, he has also been consistently on the field. Bradshaw seems to miss at least a couple of games each season.
Stephen Holloway: Richardson played well on Monday night, but his fumble was disastrous. Bradshaw and Richardson will each have a role in the Colts offense going forward, but their defenses short-comings may force the Colts to use their outstanding quarterback and their solid wide receivers to the detriment of their running game to improve their team's prospects of winning.
Matt Harmon: Can this even be an argument anymore? Trent Richardson is an outright hindrance to the Colts offense. When there are holes against a poor defense, Richardson can look competent, as he did Monday night against Philadelphia. When healthy, Bradshaw can actually create plays on his own. The elder veteran is the better option, but I don’t even slightly trust Indianapolis to do the right thing on offense anymore.
Steve Buzzard: How can Bradshaw not be better than Richardson at this point? Bradshaw is averaging 5.3 yards per carry and Richardson is at 3.7, which would actually be a career high following 3.0 and 3.6 per carry averages the last two years. So we are going on three years of below average production for Richardson. On top of this Richardson had two fumbles in Monday night loss to the Eagles. At this point Richardson isn't getting yards and isn't holding on to the ball so I am not sure what he brings to the table other than a body to rack up carries. Richardson will continue to get caries because the Colts staff really wants Richardson to succeed but they need to continue to move more and more carries to Bradshaw and Bradshaw is the back I would rather own at this point.
John Lee: I agree with the others—Bradshaw is the better back and Richardson is only in the NFL at this point due to the hubris of those front office personnel who have invested in him. I fully expect Richardson to share duties with Bradshaw, but it's the latter running back who is more talented...their statistics currently substantiate that premise and I am confident the end of season stats will do the same.
That will do it for this edition of the Footballguys Roundtable. Please join us again next week.