Jump to content



Photo

coleman or freeman for starter role


  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#1 Mark91G

Mark91G

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 190 posts

Posted 12 April 2017 - 04:18 AM

just thinking ahead, with a new OC and both player playing well last season coleman better in the air and speed and freeman better on the ground trucking and making people miss ( IMO ) think coleman has more left on the tyres but has that slimmer taller build that knee injuries love to happen at RB.

 

will it continue to be around the 50/50 mark or dose the falcons choose this year a clear number 1 with a solid back up and if so who ?

 

also thinking that if they pick a solid number 1 who shows he can handle it on his own then it gives the falcons a solid bargaining chip with the other still being a top 10 rb to trade off as I think most teams would jump at the chance of adding either rb to their roaster. 



#2 cousinal111

cousinal111

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 780 posts

Posted 12 April 2017 - 07:00 AM

I wouldn't expect much change from last year barring injuries. They both are solid and bring different things to the table.

Keepers for 2017

TY Hilton

Devonta Freeman

Jarvis Landry

Dante Moncrief


#3 weepaws

weepaws

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 12,861 posts

Posted 12 April 2017 - 08:10 AM

Very good question , the lost of their OC could effect how they are used.

Right now i agree with the above post, I see about the same as last season.

Thanks for the post.

#4 SpenceToons

SpenceToons

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 419 posts

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:35 AM

I would advocate that they stay close to the 50/50 mark to keep it a little more difficult for defenses to do their game planning.

 

As to a trade....in chess, the queen has the strength of about 9 pawns, the rook - 5, the bishop - 3, the knight - 3. What you're seeking are dynamic positions where you can coordinate your pieces so well that their combined strength is higher than the sum of their parts. A well-placed queen, bishop, and knight in a King-side attack functioning as a unit with the strength of 18 pawns, say, instead of 15. The Falcons have just such an advantaged  situation going on with Freeman and Coleman and would risk losing the magic by parting with one of them.



#5 Ray_T

Ray_T

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 4,834 posts

Posted 12 April 2017 - 12:37 PM

I would advocate that they stay close to the 50/50 mark to keep it a little more difficult for defenses to do their game planning.

 

As to a trade....in chess, the queen has the strength of about 9 pawns, the rook - 5, the bishop - 3, the knight - 3. What you're seeking are dynamic positions where you can coordinate your pieces so well that their combined strength is higher than the sum of their parts. A well-placed queen, bishop, and knight in a King-side attack functioning as a unit with the strength of 18 pawns, say, instead of 15. The Falcons have just such an advantaged  situation going on with Freeman and Coleman and would risk losing the magic by parting with one of them.

I think it will be interesting to see how the new OC manages the talent on that team.

 

both RB's are capable receivers, but I'd say Freeman is a bit better than Coleman as a pass catcher.

 

Coleman is a bit better running between the tackles.

 

so the production of both backs largely depends on what the OC wants to do in the offense.

 

I would suggest that there is slightly more risk for both players and slightly more upside to both.   Net value should be about the same, but I wouldnt want to have to choose between the two at the draft table.

 

I'd say that Freemans value may take a small hit just simply because his value is more than Colemans, and he(potentially) has more to lose.  but in the end, I'd say it is likely to remain a very productive committee where both players put up reasonable numbers, but neither is a full on stud.  Devonta will likely lead the committee, but that can easily change.

 

This is one of those situations where you really want to keep an eye on what goes on in Atlanta early in the season.   There are a lot of possible combinations that could change things for either player (or both)


3 keeper, 12 team league Standard scoring with QB getting -1 pt for an interception & fumbles 5 points for a defensive safety & 6 points for a defensive TD.

Start 2 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE, 1 Kicker, one Def/Sp Tms

 

 

 

Also expert Fly Fisherman and story teller.


#6 weepaws

weepaws

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 12,861 posts

Posted 12 April 2017 - 12:41 PM

Would agree, but I also see teams make moves that are head shakers.

I think the lost of their OC will be an interesting situation based on how their new OC sees the situation based on their new OC system.

I can see them making the mistake and trying to lean more on Coleman.

I don't think they should, I do think they should keep it the same.

#7 Ray_T

Ray_T

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 4,834 posts

Posted 12 April 2017 - 02:53 PM

Would agree, but I also see teams make moves that are head shakers.

I think the lost of their OC will be an interesting situation based on how their new OC sees the situation based on their new OC system.

I can see them making the mistake and trying to lean more on Coleman.

I don't think they should, I do think they should keep it the same.

tough to say.   If they want to run more between the tackles, I dont see how they cant give Coleman more work without accomplishing that goal successfully. 

 

Personally, if I was the OC, I'd try to draw up as many plays as possible where you can use 2 back sets.

 

Then I'd run one (or both) out on pass routes on every play.   Because the D does not know which one stays to block and which goes out for a pass (or which RB will run the ball) you will see a lot of good things:

 

1) all play action passes will (for the most part) be quite effective.

2) this will put pressure on LB's or safety's to cover the RB(s) coming out of the backfield.   I'm thinking a RB version of Gronk and Hernandez.  Teams will really have a hard time managing this on passing downs.

3)  If LB's have a hard time covering the RB's then teams will have to use the safety which opens things up for Julio.

 

I really see no downside here.

 

it's a nice setup if the OC is even halfway competent.


3 keeper, 12 team league Standard scoring with QB getting -1 pt for an interception & fumbles 5 points for a defensive safety & 6 points for a defensive TD.

Start 2 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE, 1 Kicker, one Def/Sp Tms

 

 

 

Also expert Fly Fisherman and story teller.


#8 weepaws

weepaws

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 12,861 posts

Posted 12 April 2017 - 03:53 PM

Agree with you Ray, they give them an advantage if they where to do your ideal.

Problem is anytime there is a change with a teams Coaching staff that can change the whole system.

I think the Falcons would like to see Coleman be rb1 and Feeeman rb1b.

I wouldn't change anything they did with their two Rbs last season, but I think it's a possibility that change might take place.

#9 Ray_T

Ray_T

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 4,834 posts

Posted 12 April 2017 - 07:40 PM

Agree with you Ray, they give them an advantage if they where to do your ideal.

Problem is anytime there is a change with a teams Coaching staff that can change the whole system.

I think the Falcons would like to see Coleman be rb1 and Feeeman rb1b.

I wouldn't change anything they did with their two Rbs last season, but I think it's a possibility that change might take place.

That is always a risk when the OC or the HC change as it has here.

 

Best advice to anyone thinking of picking these guys:   do your homework before you draft them.


3 keeper, 12 team league Standard scoring with QB getting -1 pt for an interception & fumbles 5 points for a defensive safety & 6 points for a defensive TD.

Start 2 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE, 1 Kicker, one Def/Sp Tms

 

 

 

Also expert Fly Fisherman and story teller.


#10 polecatt

polecatt

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 1,932 posts

Posted 13 April 2017 - 05:56 PM

I wouldn't think it would change a whole lot. Of course a new OC may change that up some what but I wouldn't think they would want to do a whole lot different.

Both RBs have produced exceptionally well in their current roles. The past two seasons there has been strong speculation that Coleman would win the job but Freeman has been the more solid and consistent player.

Freeman has been healthier too. He's been a workhorse kind of RB and is can score fantasy points in all ways. He's done that the past two seasons and there is no reason he can't be relied on for a 3rd.

Coleman was a good fantasy RB last season in the change up role. He seemed at home there. He may eventually be the starter but I don't expect that this season.

Each season is different so anything like this could change on a whim. That said I believe Freeman is a RB1 and Coleman a RB2.



#11 weepaws

weepaws

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 12,861 posts

Posted 13 April 2017 - 08:30 PM

Keeping it the same is the best advise.

I would agree I see Freeman rb1 and Coleman rb2.

But I'm thinking that the Falcons might like to see Coleman take the next step and become the lead back.

I'm just not sure that it happens this season.

But either way a new OC makes the situation interesting.

#12 murf74

murf74

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 13,907 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 09:29 PM

I have both in dynasty and will start both weekly
........+
Steelers +
........+
THE NFL'S ONLY 6 TIME SUPER BOWL CHAMPIONS

#13 weepaws

weepaws

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 12,861 posts

Posted 14 April 2017 - 11:40 PM

Starting both works.

Sorry about Mr Rooney Murf, you being a Steelers fan I'm sure felt a little sadnes.

#14 kenedy

kenedy

    FF Rookie

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 16 April 2017 - 01:17 AM

This is a very good question and I am agree with Cousinal111's saying...

 

Graduated from Soran  University with First Class Degree with Honours in Computer Science.

 


#15 TBayXXXVII

TBayXXXVII

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 636 posts

Posted 17 April 2017 - 08:12 AM

Meh, I expect nothing to change.  Freeman will get the Lion's share and Coleman will get his, but it'll be like last year.  That said, they won't be as productive.  Ryan had a fluke year, he'll go back to being mediocre and as a result, everyone else's production will fall in line.  Regression to the mean, so to speak.



#16 weepaws

weepaws

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 12,861 posts

Posted 17 April 2017 - 10:30 AM

That's a good point, and I agree I think the production from Ryan and company will take a hit.

#17 Ray_T

Ray_T

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 4,834 posts

Posted 17 April 2017 - 02:25 PM

Meh, I expect nothing to change.  Freeman will get the Lion's share and Coleman will get his, but it'll be like last year.  That said, they won't be as productive.  Ryan had a fluke year, he'll go back to being mediocre and as a result, everyone else's production will fall in line.  Regression to the mean, so to speak.

a Fluke year?

 

Ryan was considered a very good QB for a long time prior to this.  His biggest problem was he played on a bad team.

 

Lots of times, the QB and RB stats are indicative of how the team plays as a whole.

 

I believe his season went a lot better because his offense has multiple threats and the D is better.   Teams cant just shut down the offense by double covering Julio.  That's why Ryan's stats are so much better. 


3 keeper, 12 team league Standard scoring with QB getting -1 pt for an interception & fumbles 5 points for a defensive safety & 6 points for a defensive TD.

Start 2 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE, 1 Kicker, one Def/Sp Tms

 

 

 

Also expert Fly Fisherman and story teller.


#18 ROCKFORD

ROCKFORD

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 3,541 posts

Posted 17 April 2017 - 04:20 PM

I would advocate that they stay close to the 50/50 mark to keep it a little more difficult for defenses to do their game planning.

 

As to a trade....in chess, the queen has the strength of about 9 pawns, the rook - 5, the bishop - 3, the knight - 3. What you're seeking are dynamic positions where you can coordinate your pieces so well that their combined strength is higher than the sum of their parts. A well-placed queen, bishop, and knight in a King-side attack functioning as a unit with the strength of 18 pawns, say, instead of 15. The Falcons have just such an advantaged  situation going on with Freeman and Coleman and would risk losing the magic by parting with one of them.

 

solid analysis, terrible analogy.


my official fan club:  jerryskids, sux, wiff, big guy ...


#19 ralphster

ralphster

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 2,774 posts

Posted 17 April 2017 - 05:41 PM

I dug the chess reference actually.

That said, I'm watching the contract situation w Freeman pretty carefully. If he doesn't get a deal done before camp he could hold out. Should he do so I'll drop him in my rankings.
“When I played pro football, I never set out to hurt anyone deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something” ~ D. Butkus

#20 TBayXXXVII

TBayXXXVII

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 636 posts

Posted 18 April 2017 - 07:49 AM

a Fluke year?

 

Ryan was considered a very good QB for a long time prior to this.  His biggest problem was he played on a bad team.

 

Lots of times, the QB and RB stats are indicative of how the team plays as a whole.

 

I believe his season went a lot better because his offense has multiple threats and the D is better.   Teams cant just shut down the offense by double covering Julio.  That's why Ryan's stats are so much better. 

 

Ryan is mediocre and not special in any way.  As you said, he got better because the team around him got better... i.e., he's like Joe Flacco and Alex Smith, he needs the team to carry him - not the other way around.  He doesn't make anyone around him better.  He is the perfect example of what happens when everything goes right.  As in, no sustained injuries to anyone on the team.  Easy strength of schedule.  Timing of scheduled opponents.  Things worked out just right.  This year, odds are that there'll be a few OLine injuries, tougher schedule, they'll now have the target on their backs, and more focused opponent preparation.  Because Matt Ryan isn't all that great, he isn't good enough to adjust.  

 

Next year, the Falcons will have to travel to Chicago, Detroit, Seattle, New England and the Jets.  I see 2 wins there... if they play the Bears early enough in the season.  At home, they get Green Bay, Minnesota, Dallas, Miami, and Buffalo.  I see 3 wins there as I don't see them beating the Packers and Dallas.  I'll give them a split in the division. That puts them at an 8-8 record.  Add that to the fact that they'll probably have injuries that didn't happen last year... I put that at 6 or 7 wins next season because Matt Ryan just isn't all that good.



#21 TBayXXXVII

TBayXXXVII

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 636 posts

Posted 18 April 2017 - 07:55 AM

I dug the chess reference actually.

That said, I'm watching the contract situation w Freeman pretty carefully. If he doesn't get a deal done before camp he could hold out. Should he do so I'll drop him in my rankings.

 

That's true about his contract.

 

If I were him though, I'd do everything I could to make sure I had the best season possible.  The situation he's in actually gives him more leverage than the Falcons.  The Falcons saw that they need both RB's to make Matt Ryan look good and better.  He's clearly a better back than Coleman.  He should just say "this is my price if you want me to re-sign", then go out and play the season.  If they don't give him his money, they'll either franchise him and pay him more than he probably asked for, or he'll walk and get his money elsewhere.



#22 Ray_T

Ray_T

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 4,834 posts

Posted 18 April 2017 - 08:30 AM

 

Ryan is mediocre and not special in any way.  As you said, he got better because the team around him got better... i.e., he's like Joe Flacco and Alex Smith, he needs the team to carry him - not the other way around.  He doesn't make anyone around him better.  He is the perfect example of what happens when everything goes right.  As in, no sustained injuries to anyone on the team.  Easy strength of schedule.  Timing of scheduled opponents.  Things worked out just right.  This year, odds are that there'll be a few OLine injuries, tougher schedule, they'll now have the target on their backs, and more focused opponent preparation.  Because Matt Ryan isn't all that great, he isn't good enough to adjust.  

 

Next year, the Falcons will have to travel to Chicago, Detroit, Seattle, New England and the Jets.  I see 2 wins there... if they play the Bears early enough in the season.  At home, they get Green Bay, Minnesota, Dallas, Miami, and Buffalo.  I see 3 wins there as I don't see them beating the Packers and Dallas.  I'll give them a split in the division. That puts them at an 8-8 record.  Add that to the fact that they'll probably have injuries that didn't happen last year... I put that at 6 or 7 wins next season because Matt Ryan just isn't all that good.

do you consider Eli Manning to be Mediocre as well?  his stats also declined seriously when his team started doing poorly.


3 keeper, 12 team league Standard scoring with QB getting -1 pt for an interception & fumbles 5 points for a defensive safety & 6 points for a defensive TD.

Start 2 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR, 1 TE, 1 Kicker, one Def/Sp Tms

 

 

 

Also expert Fly Fisherman and story teller.


#23 Frozenbeernuts

Frozenbeernuts

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 17,341 posts

Posted 18 April 2017 - 09:15 AM

 
That's true about his contract.
 
If I were him though, I'd do everything I could to make sure I had the best season possible.  The situation he's in actually gives him more leverage than the Falcons.  The Falcons saw that they need both RB's to make Matt Ryan look good and better.  He's clearly a better back than Coleman.  He should just say "this is my price if you want me to re-sign", then go out and play the season.  If they don't give him his money, they'll either franchise him and pay him more than he probably asked for, or he'll walk and get his money elsewhere.


Freeman is a healthier back than Coleman. Idk that Coleman wouldn't have the same success if not better if both healthy with the same work

#24 TBayXXXVII

TBayXXXVII

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 636 posts

Posted 18 April 2017 - 10:11 AM

do you consider Eli Manning to be Mediocre as well?  his stats also declined seriously when his team started doing poorly.

 

No, but I'd say he's in the tier just ahead of them.  To make things clear, this is how I see QB's...

 

Elite...
1 Tom Brady
2 Aaron Rodgers
 
Great...
3 Ben Roethlisberger
4 Drew Brees
 
Really Good...
5 Kirk Cousins
6 Matthew Stafford
7 Philip Rivers
8 Russell Wilson
 
Good... 
9 Cam Newton
10 Andy Dalton
11 Derek Carr
12 Eli Manning
 
Solid / Still have things to prove
13 Andrew Luck
14 Ryan Tannehill
15 Jameis Winston
16 Marcus Mariota
 
Average/Mediocre...
17 Joe Flacco
18 Matt Ryan
19 Alex Smith
 
Need more time...
20 Carson Wentz
21 Dak Prescott
 
The rest aren't worth ranking.
 
LOL, until you look at the league as a whole, I didn't realize the full scope of just how bad the QB situation is in the NFL.


#25 DocNiner

DocNiner

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 566 posts

Posted 18 April 2017 - 08:51 PM

Should stay about the same. Workedla

#26 DocNiner

DocNiner

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 566 posts

Posted 18 April 2017 - 08:57 PM

Hit wrong button. I'be had a couple early drafts, sucks but was fun. I drafted Freeman but made sure I also got Coleman, even if I had to take him a,little early. Get 1 you really need both. Falcons are lucky to have 2 backs of their caliber. I have 2 good backs to start & Coleman cold be a good flex play.

#27 TBayXXXVII

TBayXXXVII

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 636 posts

Posted 19 April 2017 - 09:49 AM

Hit wrong button. I'be had a couple early drafts, sucks but was fun. I drafted Freeman but made sure I also got Coleman, even if I had to take him a,little early. Get 1 you really need both. Falcons are lucky to have 2 backs of their caliber. I have 2 good backs to start & Coleman cold be a good flex play.

 

I don't know about that.  I drafted Freeman his rookie season in my keeper league.  The following year, someone else drafted Coleman.  Every year since, the guy who got Coleman has been dying to get Freeman... I never once entertained the idea of trying to get Coleman.  I don't need or want him.  Freeman will get about 300 touches, and produce just like every other lead back.



#28 weepaws

weepaws

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 12,861 posts

Posted 19 April 2017 - 10:46 AM

Having both is a very good ideal.

You have both a rb1 and a rb2, just so happen to be on the same team.

I like the move Doc.

#29 TBayXXXVII

TBayXXXVII

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 636 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 08:52 AM

Having both is a very good ideal.

You have both a rb1 and a rb2, just so happen to be on the same team.

I like the move Doc.

 

If an opportunity arises where you can get both, then that's fine.  I think it could be beneficial, but if you say "really need both", I'm certainly not on board with that.

 

According to fantasy football calculator, Freeman's ADP is 1.11 where as Coleman is 4.05.  Yeah, I'm not doing that.  That's essentially saying if you take Freeman, the next RB you have to take is Coleman.  Nope.  Not me.  I'm not starting my team with 2 RB's from the same team.  If I'm picking that late, I'm taking an RB in round 1 and then in the 2nd or 3rd.  Going by that ADP, I'll take Freeman at 1.11 and then take Hyde or someone like him in the 2nd or 3rd, maybe Ajayi or a rookie.  I'm certainly not taking Coleman.



#30 weepaws

weepaws

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 12,861 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 10:23 AM

Good points and thanks for the reply.

One thing I should update.

Going into this season I'm not sure how Freeman and Coleman will be used based on the Falcons having a new OC , so that clearly will hinder my personal ranking of both players until I see more.

Looking at fantasy football calculator in a ppr league, that's what I play, they also have A Peterson ranked has a 3rd draft pick and Rawls has a 4th rd draft pick.

So I don't put a lot of stock in the rankings of others. I will check them out but I don't base my own on the rankings of others.

I like the ideal of having both, but it sure is tricky to start two Rbs from the same team, and especially going into this season with a new OC.

#31 TBayXXXVII

TBayXXXVII

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 636 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 03:36 PM

Good points and thanks for the reply.

One thing I should update.

Going into this season I'm not sure how Freeman and Coleman will be used based on the Falcons having a new OC , so that clearly will hinder my personal ranking of both players until I see more.

Looking at fantasy football calculator in a ppr league, that's what I play, they also have A Peterson ranked has a 3rd draft pick and Rawls has a 4th rd draft pick.

So I don't put a lot of stock in the rankings of others. I will check them out but I don't base my own on the rankings of others.

I like the ideal of having both, but it sure is tricky to start two Rbs from the same team, and especially going into this season with a new OC.

 

I noticed that too, but because it's so early and there's nothing really to go by right now, that's all I can go by.  Personally, while I think people learned last year by going 0 RB was a mistake (at least every league I was in, they should have learned that), I still think more WR's will be taken than that website is leading me to believe.



#32 weepaws

weepaws

    FF Geek

  • Members
  • 12,861 posts

Posted 20 April 2017 - 03:38 PM

I would agree.