Carolina on my mind

[gunnergip 0]

From rotoworld:

 

"John Fox admits that DeShaun Foster is the team's "featured back."

While we're still two months away from camp, Fox doesn't see DeAngelo Williams as a true threat to Foster's starting role. "This will be the first time coming into a season he's been the featured guy. He's definitely capable. We've just got to kill off that injury bug," Fox said. May. 31 - 10:25 pm et

 

Source: Panthers.com

 

Coach John Fox was effusive in his praise of DeAngelo Williams's minicamp work.

"He's looked very, very quick thus far. He's got great explosion, great vision. As far as where we are right now, he's looked very good," Fox said. Of course, in the next moment, Fox called DeShaun Foster the "featured guy." May. 31 - 10:17 pm et

 

Source: Panthers.com

 

Anyone moving up Foster in their preseason rankings? I know I am....the guy does have all the potential if, and only if, he can stay healthy. Can you say handcuff city?

[Sweetness_34 0]

From rotoworld:

 

"John Fox admits that DeShaun Foster is the team's "featured back."

While we're still two months away from camp, Fox doesn't see DeAngelo Williams as a true threat to Foster's starting role. "This will be the first time coming into a season he's been the featured guy. He's definitely capable. We've just got to kill off that injury bug," Fox said. May. 31 - 10:25 pm et

 

Source: Panthers.com

 

Coach John Fox was effusive in his praise of DeAngelo Williams's minicamp work.

"He's looked very, very quick thus far. He's got great explosion, great vision. As far as where we are right now, he's looked very good," Fox said. Of course, in the next moment, Fox called DeShaun Foster the "featured guy." May. 31 - 10:17 pm et

 

Source: Panthers.com

 

Anyone moving up Foster in their preseason rankings? I know I am....the guy does have all the potential if, and only if, he can stay healthy. Can you say handcuff city?

 

BS....Foster has never carried the rock more than 200 times a year. Car will run it 400 times. Expect Foster to wear down and De Angelo to be the man when it matters i.e. playoff time.

[football_scooter 0]

IF Foster can stay healthy, he's going to be a PPR/long TD league monster.

 

The guy can flat out fly.

 

I am not as convinced as some of you that he's fragile...guy's had a couple of bad breaks early in his career (no pun intended) but it's only been a couple years...I read that he was fairly healthy in college.

 

I think he has terrific upside, and I'd gladly grab him as a RB2 in the late 3rd if I took a WR in the 2nd, or as a RB3 in the early 4th if he's on the board.

 

In a flex league, he's a guy I'm looking at pretty closely.

[sharkie22 0]

IF Foster can stay healthy, he's going to be a PPR/long TD league monster.

 

The guy can flat out fly.

 

I am not as convinced as some of you that he's fragile...guy's had a couple of bad breaks early in his career (no pun intended) but it's only been a couple years...I read that he was fairly healthy in college.

 

I think he has terrific upside, and I'd gladly grab him as a RB2 in the late 3rd if I took a WR in the 2nd, or as a RB3 in the early 4th if he's on the board.

 

In a flex league, he's a guy I'm looking at pretty closely.

 

 

Unfortunately I can't find my '03 rookie draft mag but I'm 75% sure that the knock on Foster coming out of UCLA was that he was injury prone. Three NFL seasons and three injuries. I'll let someone else take him if he moves into the 3rd round and grab Goings very late. I doubt he'll be available past that.

[football_scooter 0]

Unfortunately I can't find my '03 rookie draft mag but I'm 75% sure that the knock on Foster coming out of UCLA was that he was injury prone. Three NFL seasons and three injuries. I'll let someone else take him if he moves into the 3rd round and grab Goings very late. I doubt he'll be available past that.

 

That's the rough part...4th round+ = worth the risk...3rd round- = not worth the risk. It's close for me...and I'd probably take a RB again soon, and take Goings late.

[Sweetness_34 0]

Why would you take Goings when they have DeAngelo available?

 

ANd what about Eric Shelton????

[football_scooter 0]

Why would you take Goings when they have DeAngelo available?

 

ANd what about Eric Shelton????

 

just mroe proof of what a mess it is. Too many handcuffs.

 

I guess I'd take goings because if Foster goes down he's the most experienced RB on the roster, and while likely they'll try to get deAngelo involved, I'm not convinced he can tote the rock as a rookie. I think Goings can be had much much much later and will get about the same # of carries if Foster goes gimpy.

[famousb 11]

this is Foster's career stat line:

| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| 2003 car | 14 | 113 429 3.8 0 | 26 207 8.0 2 |

| 2004 car | 4 | 59 255 4.3 2 | 9 76 8.4 0 |

| 2005 car | 15 | 205 879 4.3 2 | 34 372 10.9 1 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| TOTAL | 33 | 377 1563 4.1 4 | 69 655 9.5 3 |

 

 

 

last year he had a total combined yards of about 1200 yds. w/ 3 tds - and that's w/ Stephen Davis vulturing 12 tds from him.

 

These are CAR's total rushing attempts for the last 5 years:

 

2001 - 355

2002 - 452

2003 - 521

2004 - 422

2005 - 487

 

and just twice since there inception in 1995 have they had a 1000+ yd. rusher:

 

1996

Anthony Johnson | 16 | 300 1120 3.7 6 | 26 192 7.4 0

2003

Stephen Davis | 14 | 318 1444 4.5 8 | 14 159 11.4 0 |

 

now they spend a late first round pick on an all-star college RB who was the rushing leader last year (310 carries, 1964 yds, 18 tds) and who in his college career has carried the rock 969 times for over 6,000 yds and 55 tds.

 

this says 3 things to me:

1. they plan on rushing the ball alot like usual

2. they want a back that can handle the majority of the carries, and be an every down back

3. they don't think Foster is it because of his injury bug.

[akareckas 0]

I agree with B...it will soon be Williams' job.

 

I think Foster has all the talent but he really is not a reliable player....if Fox wants a workhorse that he can rely on for a few years, he's going to have to look elsewhere...that's just what he did in the draft.

 

The writing's on the wall.

 

This might be a 'transition' year, but i"m thinking barring injury Williams is the feature by the end of this season and enters next year in a similar position as Caddy this year (fantasy wise).

[ggroovy17 0]

I think Foster will be the man this year, but it is his last chance to prove he can stay healthy. He(Foster) was given a pretty nice contract in the offseason not to be the featured back. Although anyone who drafts Foster must have D'angelo.

[g5jamz 0]

Remember last year...I picked Priest. I got screwed not getting Larry Johnson and we all see how that turned out. You're talking about a run-first team. Could be a beautiful handcuff moment with both De-players on your team.

[Jarvis Basnight 119]

just mroe proof of what a mess it is. Too many handcuffs.

 

I guess I'd take goings because if Foster goes down he's the most experienced RB on the roster, and while likely they'll try to get deAngelo involved, I'm not convinced he can tote the rock as a rookie. I think Goings can be had much much much later and will get about the same # of carries if Foster goes gimpy.

 

 

I agree that it's too messy. Goings is pretty decent and the staff trusts him. Foster is brittle. Williams will definitely be the man there soon but not yet and Goings may coming in when they're inside the 10/5.

 

This is not the best rbbc to hitch your wagon to. I'm thinking Chicago, New England, and Indy are the places to grab the rookies and their veterans ahead of them.

[hoffdaddy 1]

Too many variables at play here. Personally, I think Foster is going to surprise some people. He's in a great situation, and needs to catch some breaks. A guy like Fred Taylor was able to fight off the injury bug that plagued him early in his career, so it's not like it can't be done. Foster is in a very good position to offer someone very good value late.

 

As for the rest. Williams is the real deal, but this is Foster's show to start with. Going is just a body. I had really high hopes for Shelton, but he's sure looking like the odd man out here. He'll need a very, very good training camp to even stay in the mix.

[onejayhawk 3]

Too many variables at play here. Personally, I think Foster is going to surprise some people. He's in a great situation, and needs to catch some breaks. A guy like Fred Taylor was able to fight off the injury bug that plagued him early in his career, so it's not like it can't be done. Foster is in a very good position to offer someone very good value late.

 

As for the rest. Williams is the real deal, but this is Foster's show to start with. Going is just a body. I had really high hopes for Shelton, but he's sure looking like the odd man out here. He'll need a very, very good training camp to even stay in the mix.

I'll buy into this, though Fred Taylor proved durable once he fought off a single serious injury, that kept getting aggrivated. I dont think Foster is that tough, and I think the team will find a way to reduce his workload with Williams in house, but that will also keep him fresher for 4th quarter clock grinding.

 

J

[What is the deal? 1]

I agree with B...it will soon be Williams' job.

 

I think Foster has all the talent but he really is not a reliable player....if Fox wants a workhorse that he can rely on for a few years, he's going to have to look elsewhere...that's just what he did in the draft.

 

The writing's on the wall.

 

This might be a 'transition' year, but i"m thinking barring injury Williams is the feature by the end of this season and enters next year in a similar position as Caddy this year (fantasy wise).

where is this writing?

 

 

 

this is Foster's career stat line:

| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| 2003 car | 14 | 113 429 3.8 0 | 26 207 8.0 2 |

| 2004 car | 4 | 59 255 4.3 2 | 9 76 8.4 0 |

| 2005 car | 15 | 205 879 4.3 2 | 34 372 10.9 1 |

+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

| TOTAL | 33 | 377 1563 4.1 4 | 69 655 9.5 3 |

last year he had a total combined yards of about 1200 yds. w/ 3 tds - and that's w/ Stephen Davis vulturing 12 tds from him.

 

These are CAR's total rushing attempts for the last 5 years:

 

2001 - 355

2002 - 452

2003 - 521

2004 - 422

2005 - 487

 

and just twice since there inception in 1995 have they had a 1000+ yd. rusher:

 

1996

Anthony Johnson | 16 | 300 1120 3.7 6 | 26 192 7.4 0

2003

Stephen Davis | 14 | 318 1444 4.5 8 | 14 159 11.4 0 |

 

now they spend a late first round pick on an all-star college RB who was the rushing leader last year (310 carries, 1964 yds, 18 tds) and who in his college career has carried the rock 969 times for over 6,000 yds and 55 tds.

 

this says 3 things to me:

1. they plan on rushing the ball alot like usual

2. they want a back that can handle the majority of the carries, and be an every down back

3. they don't think Foster is it because of his injury bug.

The key is late 1st round pick. Go back and look at how many late 1st round picks started on their teams.

 

Let's look at recent history-

 

2000

1.05 Jamal Lewis (started 13 of 16 games)

1.07 Thomas Jones (4 of 14)

1.11 Ron Dayne (4 of 16)

1.19 Shaun Alexander (1 of 16)

1.30 Trung Canidate (0 of 3)

 

2001

1.5 LT (16 of 16)

1.23 Duece Mac (4 of 16)

1.27 Bennett (13 of 13)

 

2002

1.16 Willy Green (started 10 of 16)

1.18 TJ Duckett (3 of 12)

 

2003

1.23 McGahee (0 of 0)

1.27 Larry Johnson (3rd string, 0 of 6)

 

 

2004

1.24 Stevan Jackson (3 of 14)

1.26 Chris Perry (0 of 2)

1.30 Kevin Jones (14 of 15)

 

2005

1.2 Ronnie Brown (14 of 15)

1.4 Ced Benson (1 of 9)

1.5 Caddy (14 of 14)

 

For those of you keeping track at home- 7 of 18 rookie RB's drafted in the 1st round in the past 6 years started more than a third of the games they played in. Of those 6 backs, 4 were drafted in the top 5 picks. So 3 of 13 backs drafted in the 1st round outside of the top 5 started more than 1/3rd of the games they played in, but they had little competition for those spots. Bennett beat out the lights out Doug Chapman for his starting job. Willy Green beat out the spectacular Jamel White (and James Jackson) for his gig. Kevin Jones beat out allstar Shawn Bryson (and Artose Pinner).

 

This completely blows up the theory that 1st round picks are going to take the job of the incumbent. Especially 1st round picks taken out of the top 5.

 

Bottom line is it's Foster's job to lose. He has to stay healthy sometime and I think this is his year. They didn't sign him to $5 mil a year to have him ride the pine.

 

BTW, I grabbed him in the 5th round dynasty draft (w/o rookies)

[famousb 11]

The key is late 1st round pick. Go back and look at how many late 1st round picks started on their teams.

 

Let's look at recent history-

 

2000

1.05 Jamal Lewis (started 13 of 16 games)

1.07 Thomas Jones (4 of 14)

1.11 Ron Dayne (4 of 16)

1.19 Shaun Alexander (1 of 16)

1.30 Trung Canidate (0 of 3)

 

2001

1.5 LT (16 of 16)

1.23 Duece Mac (4 of 16)

1.27 Bennett (13 of 13)

 

2002

1.16 Willy Green (started 10 of 16)

1.18 TJ Duckett (3 of 12)

 

2003

1.23 McGahee (0 of 0)

1.27 Larry Johnson (3rd string, 0 of 6)

2004

1.24 Stevan Jackson (3 of 14)

1.26 Chris Perry (0 of 2)

1.30 Kevin Jones (14 of 15)

 

2005

1.2 Ronnie Brown (14 of 15)

1.4 Ced Benson (1 of 9)

1.5 Caddy (14 of 14)

 

For those of you keeping track at home- 7 of 18 rookie RB's drafted in the 1st round in the past 6 years started more than a third of the games they played in. Of those 6 backs, 4 were drafted in the top 5 picks. So 3 of 13 backs drafted in the 1st round outside of the top 5 started more than 1/3rd of the games they played in, but they had little competition for those spots. Bennett beat out the lights out Doug Chapman for his starting job. Willy Green beat out the spectacular Jamel White (and James Jackson) for his gig. Kevin Jones beat out allstar Shawn Bryson (and Artose Pinner).

 

This completely blows up the theory that 1st round picks are going to take the job of the incumbent. Especially 1st round picks taken out of the top 5.

 

Bottom line is it's Foster's job to lose. He has to stay healthy sometime and I think this is his year. They didn't sign him to $5 mil a year to have him ride the pine.

 

BTW, I grabbed him in the 5th round dynasty draft (w/o rookies)

 

where is this writing other than coach's speak?

 

Let's address the FTaylor thing in here too. FTaylor had at least shown he was a great back before the whole injury bug thing. So the team was able to suffer through those games when he would get hurt because they knew a healthy Fred was better than 1/2 the RBs in the league.

Foster has not yet shown he is capable of being an explosive every down back. Foster is not better than 1/2 the backs in the league.

 

I have yet to say that Foster is not going to start the year as the #1 guy, but come end of the year, and into next year, DWilliams will be the man.

You're whole "late 1st round selection" analysis means nothing. Foster was a 2nd round pick - go do an analysis for how many of them are the starting RB on their team in their 4th year, it'll mean just about as much.

Do you really think Fox was sitting there going, "hmm. Let's see, over the last n years, x out of y RBs selected in the first became the starting RB in their rookie year." or do you think he was saying "hey, SDavis is done, DFoster has injury problems, and the NCAA leading rusher from last year is sitting on the board for us to pick - we need to bolster that position so we don't have to go 3-4 RB deep again this year. Plus, this guy could be our future."

 

and about signing a guy to sit on the bench - it's not the first time it's happened in the NFL's history. Plus, let's do a little timeline analysis...

March 2006 - Foster gets a new 3-year deal.

April 2006 - Carolina drafts DeAngelo Williams.

 

So it's not like they knew DWilliams was going to fall to them at the end of the first round. Heck, look at NO. How much did they sign MBennett for, only to find out Bush was going to fall to them??

[56 0]

Might be a bit of paralysis from analysis here.

 

IMO, the only reason to stay away from Foster is the injury history. The Panthers resigned Foster at over 5 million per this past off season. If anyone should have a good read on the injury prone lable, it would be the Panthers, yet they still gave Foster the money.

 

Foolish? Perhaps, but right or wrong, they must have plans for him. Fox's comments about Foster being the featured back only solidifies that notion, and is a bit more than coachspeak.

 

I think they know that if he can just stay healthy he could be really, really good.

[What is the deal? 1]

Might be a bit of paralysis from analysis here.

 

IMO, the only reason to stay away from Foster is the injury history. The Panthers resigned Foster at over 5 million per this past off season. If anyone should have a good read on the injury prone lable, it would be the Panthers, yet they still gave Foster the money.

 

Foolish? Perhaps, but right or wrong, they must have plans for him. Fox's comments about Foster being the featured back only solidifies that notion, and is a bit more than coachspeak.

 

I think they know that if he can just stay healthy he could be really, really good.

[football_scooter 0]

where is this writing other than coach's speak?

 

Let's address the FTaylor thing in here too. FTaylor had at least shown he was a great back before the whole injury bug thing. So the team was able to suffer through those games when he would get hurt because they knew a healthy Fred was better than 1/2 the RBs in the league.

Foster has not yet shown he is capable of being an explosive every down back. Foster is not better than 1/2 the backs in the league.

 

I have yet to say that Foster is not going to start the year as the #1 guy, but come end of the year, and into next year, DWilliams will be the man.

You're whole "late 1st round selection" analysis means nothing. Foster was a 2nd round pick - go do an analysis for how many of them are the starting RB on their team in their 4th year, it'll mean just about as much.

Do you really think Fox was sitting there going, "hmm. Let's see, over the last n years, x out of y RBs selected in the first became the starting RB in their rookie year." or do you think he was saying "hey, SDavis is done, DFoster has injury problems, and the NCAA leading rusher from last year is sitting on the board for us to pick - we need to bolster that position so we don't have to go 3-4 RB deep again this year. Plus, this guy could be our future."

 

and about signing a guy to sit on the bench - it's not the first time it's happened in the NFL's history. Plus, let's do a little timeline analysis...

March 2006 - Foster gets a new 3-year deal.

April 2006 - Carolina drafts DeAngelo Williams.

 

So it's not like they knew DWilliams was going to fall to them at the end of the first round. Heck, look at NO. How much did they sign MBennett for, only to find out Bush was going to fall to them??

 

 

Sorry, but in reading the post by What is the deal and then reading through your retort, he clearly owns you in this subject. What is the deal provides solid supporting commentary which you offhandidly dismiss with very little substance.

 

Your response is 99% hyperbole and fails to counter What is the deal's points. Further, you pose the rhetorical question "what's Foster done" when discussing that Fred Taylor was already a good RB prior to getting hurt - apparently you haven't seen Foster play or you would never make this comment. When healthy, Foster is one of the fastest, most elusive RBs in the game. An outstanding receicer, if you give him a hole, *bam!* he's gone. Last year he opened a lot of people's eyes with some loooooong TDs, outrunning 3 and 4 defenders and even breaking a tackle or 2.

 

Foster's talent is not in question....it's his durability that has people concerned. And I am one of those guys who feels that a broken bone is more of a fluke than a trend.

[famousb 11]

Sorry, but in reading the post by What is the deal and then reading through your retort, he clearly owns you in this subject. What is the deal provides solid supporting commentary which you offhandidly dismiss with very little substance.

 

Your response is 99% hyperbole and fails to counter What is the deal's points. Further, you pose the rhetorical question "what's Foster done" when discussing that Fred Taylor was already a good RB prior to getting hurt - apparently you haven't seen Foster play or you would never make this comment. When healthy, Foster is one of the fastest, most elusive RBs in the game. An outstanding receicer, if you give him a hole, *bam!* he's gone. Last year he opened a lot of people's eyes with some loooooong TDs, outrunning 3 and 4 defenders and even breaking a tackle or 2.

 

Foster's talent is not in question....it's his durability that has people concerned. And I am one of those guys who feels that a broken bone is more of a fluke than a trend.

 

 

first, i am so tired of reading the word hyperbole in every other thread this year. it is f'ing ridiculous, it's like you all finally learned a new word, and try to use it whenever you think it may be appropriate. Learn a new word.

 

i could care less if you think my retort to his analysis of 1st rd'ers is good or not and if you think he 'owned' me or not. because his analysis means nothing. it's simply a look at 5 years of 1st round RBs. look at 20 years and it may mean something w/ some substance.

How many of those RBs were in the exact situation DWilliams is in?

 

And your comment about not watching Foster play and his "loooooong TDs, outrunning 3 and 4 defenders and even breaking a tackle or 2" only incriminates yourself into not watching him play - he only had a total of TWO td runs last year - were they BOTH long?? Do you even know who they came against?

One was a 70 yd'er in CAR against ATL where they won 24-6 (he also added a rec'ing TD that game)

The second was a 6 yd'er in ATL where they won 44-11

 

other than the games against ATL, his longest run at all was 19 yds last year. (and one 31 yd'er wk1 of playoffs against NYG) So you're telling me *bam* he's gone... yeah, 19 yds. is gone

 

go spout off at the mouth about how you have the ticket and try to watch every play of every game some more so someone else may believe your rhetoric...

 

plus if you look at Foster's ypc as he gets more carries in a game, his avg. actually goes down:

att: 1-10 : 4.5 avg.

att: 11-20 : 4.2 avg.

att: 20-30 : 1.9 avg.

 

and on a team like CAR that likes to run the ball when they are ahead (which is when he'd be getting carries 20+ late in the game), that doesn't spell out long-term answer...

[What is the deal? 1]

where is this writing other than coach's speak?

 

Let's address the FTaylor thing in here too. FTaylor had at least shown he was a great back before the whole injury bug thing. So the team was able to suffer through those games when he would get hurt because they knew a healthy Fred was better than 1/2 the RBs in the league.

Foster has not yet shown he is capable of being an explosive every down back. Foster is not better than 1/2 the backs in the league.

 

I have yet to say that Foster is not going to start the year as the #1 guy, but come end of the year, and into next year, DWilliams will be the man.

You're whole "late 1st round selection" analysis means nothing. Foster was a 2nd round pick - go do an analysis for how many of them are the starting RB on their team in their 4th year, it'll mean just about as much.

Do you really think Fox was sitting there going, "hmm. Let's see, over the last n years, x out of y RBs selected in the first became the starting RB in their rookie year." or do you think he was saying "hey, SDavis is done, DFoster has injury problems, and the NCAA leading rusher from last year is sitting on the board for us to pick - we need to bolster that position so we don't have to go 3-4 RB deep again this year. Plus, this guy could be our future."

 

and about signing a guy to sit on the bench - it's not the first time it's happened in the NFL's history. Plus, let's do a little timeline analysis...

March 2006 - Foster gets a new 3-year deal.

April 2006 - Carolina drafts DeAngelo Williams.

 

So it's not like they knew DWilliams was going to fall to them at the end of the first round. Heck, look at NO. How much did they sign MBennett for, only to find out Bush was going to fall to them??

I never said anything about Fred Taylor, so I am not going to respond to that.

 

Deangelo might be in the future plans of the Panthers, but they drafted him because they know important depth is at the position. They decided they would rather address depth at the position rather than elsewhere probably due because they felt they could address there needs later or had already addressed them.

 

My evaluation means nothing? Your and the others on Deangelo's jock are the ones saying that because he was a 1st round pick he will be annoited as the starter. I am just arguing against that and the evidence discounts that "theory"

 

Let's take a look at your point although it is vague. You say how many 2nd round picks start over the 1st round rookie. Let's look at the guys that didn't start, eliminating Bennett, Green, and Jones who did not have to compete w/ a back like Deshaun Foster (almost 1200 yards the year before, while only starting 6 games).

 

2000

1.07 Thomas Jones (4 of 14) (Pittman a 4th round pick in 1998)

1.11 Ron Dayne (4 of 16) (Tiki Barber 2nd round pick in 1997)

1.19 Shaun Alexander (1 of 16) (Watters 2nd round pick in 1991)

1.30 Trung Canidate (0 of 3) (Faulk, 1st round in 1994)

 

2001

1.23 Duece Mac (4 of 16) (Ricky Williams, 1st round)

 

2002

1.18 TJ Duckett (3 of 12) (Warrick Dunn, 1997 1st round)

 

2003

1.23 McGahee (0 of 0) (T. Henry, 2nd round 2001)

1.27 Larry Johnson (3rd string, 0 of 6) Priest Holmes (UDFA)

2004

1.24 Stevan Jackson (3 of 14) Faulk, 1st round

1.26 Chris Perry (0 of 2) Rudi, 4th round 2002

 

2005

1.4 Ced Benson (1 of 9) T. Jones 1st round, 2000

 

6 of 11 backs rode the pine behind a guy that was drafted in the 2nd round or later.

 

Fact is Foster had 1st round talent but he had some off-the-field issues that allowed him to slip in the draft and I am not arguing about his draft position although he would have broke records playing in a conference-USA. My point is that he is a proven veteran back that has been somewhat successful in this league and late 1st round rookies historically do not beat out proven backs in this league. It is Foster's job to lose. His fantasy draft value should not be affected by Deangelo after looking at the evidence for this type of situation. The only thing that will stop Deshaun is an injury. Yeah he's injury prone, but his upside is still there. If he stays healthy for the whole year I think he can be in the 1500-2000 total yards range with 10 or more TD's which was worth it in the 5th round.

 

Your point about Bennett and the Saints is null and void when talking about discounting the theory that late 1st rounders ride the pine when they have decent competition to push them for the job. Bush was a top 5 pick. Although, I still think if McAllister is healthy he will get more carries. Bush (who IMO is a high-priced Eric Metcalf) will be used more as a receiver and special teams ace because he can't run between the tackles.

[Sweetness_34 0]

Foster is a turd ..... no way he can score TDs even if he gets carries between the 20s.....that will be someone else's job....the question is will it be Shelton, De Angelo or Goings

 

Personally I see DeAngelo getting it because rookie RBs struggle with pass coverage with the variety of blitzes seen in the NFL....once you are at the 5 yard line and you are planning to either run or throw a play action dump off to the FB or TE, a RB's blocking ability is not that critical like it is between the 20s where you are looking for a QB to have more time for the WR to get open.

[famousb 11]

I never said anything about Fred Taylor, so I am not going to respond to that.

completely different sentiment - wasn't intending as a response to you, just combining answers.

 

Deangelo might be in the future plans of the Panthers, but they drafted him because they know important depth is at the position. They decided they would rather address depth at the position rather than elsewhere probably due because they felt they could address there needs later or had already addressed them.

that is the point. DWilliams is their future. It's just a matter or when he takes over. They definitely drafted for depth at the position to some degree, but you also don't spend a 1st rd'er (even a late one) just for a guy you think provides depth

 

My evaluation means nothing? Your and the others on Deangelo's jock are the ones saying that because he was a 1st round pick he will be annoited as the starter. I am just arguing against that and the evidence discounts that "theory"

i never said he was annointed the starter already. I'm stating that Foster is not the answer in CAR.

 

 

Let's take a look at your point although it is vague. You say how many 2nd round picks start over the 1st round rookie. Let's look at the guys that didn't start, eliminating Bennett, Green, and Jones who did not have to compete w/ a back like Deshaun Foster (almost 1200 yards the year before, while only starting 6 games).

you mean Green, Bennet, and Jones didn't have to compete against a guy that has played 3 years and has a combined total of about 2200 total yds and 7 tds??

 

2000

1.07 Thomas Jones (4 of 14) (Pittman a 4th round pick in 1998)

1.11 Ron Dayne (4 of 16) (Tiki Barber 2nd round pick in 1997)

1.19 Shaun Alexander (1 of 16) (Watters 2nd round pick in 1991)

1.30 Trung Canidate (0 of 3) (Faulk, 1st round in 1994)

2001

1.23 Duece Mac (4 of 16) (Ricky Williams, 1st round)

2002

1.18 TJ Duckett (3 of 12) (Warrick Dunn, 1997 1st round)

2003

1.23 McGahee (0 of 0) (T. Henry, 2nd round 2001)

1.27 Larry Johnson (3rd string, 0 of 6) Priest Holmes (UDFA)

2004

1.24 Stevan Jackson (3 of 14) Faulk, 1st round

1.26 Chris Perry (0 of 2) Rudi, 4th round 2002

2005

1.4 Ced Benson (1 of 9) T. Jones 1st round, 2000

 

6 of 11 backs rode the pine behind a guy that was drafted in the 2nd round or later.

 

other than Pittman, i'm not seeing one incumbent that was of the same value as DFoster. All the rest were legit starters who had put up decent numbers in the previous year or more (and no, 1200 total w/ 3 tds does not count as decent).

 

 

 

Yeah he's injury prone, but his upside is still there. If he stays healthy for the whole year I think he can be in the 1500-2000 total yards range with 10 or more TD's which was worth it in the 5th round.

his upside is there IF if stays healthy, but even then by wk 12 he will definitely be splitting a good # of carries w/ someone whether it is DWilliams or NGoings, or EShelton... He will not put up 300+ carries this year.

 

Your point about Bennett and the Saints is null and void when talking about discounting the theory that late 1st rounders ride the pine when they have decent competition to push them for the job. Bush was a top 5 pick. Although, I still think if McAllister is healthy he will get more carries. Bush (who IMO is a high-priced Eric Metcalf) will be used more as a receiver and special teams ace because he can't run between the tackles.

my point about Bennett was moreso about timing of signing a guy before the draft - a team cannot be certain of who they're going to be able to draft so they sign/re-sign guys regardless of what possibilities may come up in the draft.

[What is the deal? 1]

i never said he was annointed the starter already. I'm stating that Foster is not the answer in CAR.

you mean Green, Bennet, and Jones didn't have to compete against a guy that has played 3 years and has a combined total of about 2200 total yds and 7 tds??

You really should do your research before jumping to conclusions...

What had Tiki done in New York prior to Dayne being drafted?

Warrick Dunn in Tampa Bay before going to Atlanta (Duckett)?

 

I think you are grossly underestimating the talent of Deshaun Foster. I have to get some work done, but will continue this argument later and I will respond to all of your posts.

 

What would Deshaun Foster have in a 16 game season based on all the starts in his career? I'll have that once i am able to crunch the numbers.

 

my point about Bennett was moreso about timing of signing a guy before the draft - a team cannot be certain of who they're going to be able to draft so they sign/re-sign guys regardless of what possibilities may come up in the draft.

so they invested $5 Mil a year on a guy that they don't think has starter quality...makes a lot of sense. If they didn't like Foster so much why didn't they go after one of the other FA backs this year? Like Edge for example?

[famousb 11]

You really should do your research before jumping to conclusions...

 

What had Tiki done in New York prior to Dayne being drafted?

Warrick Dunn in Tampa Bay before going to Atlanta (Duckett)?

 

Dunn's #s up until ATL when Duckett was drafted:

1997 tam | 16 | 224 978 4.4 4 | 39 462 11.8 3 |

| 1998 tam | 16 | 245 1026 4.2 2 | 44 344 7.8 0 |

| 1999 tam | 15 | 195 616 3.2 0 | 64 589 9.2 2 |

| 2000 tam | 16 | 248 1133 4.6 8 | 44 422 9.6 1 |

| 2001 tam | 13 | 158 447 2.8 3 | 68 557 8.2 3

 

only in the 2 yrs where he did not play a full 16 games did he drop below 1200 combined yds - and this was also when he was splitting carries w/ Alstott. Exactly why ATL drafted Duckett - to be their Alstott.

 

Tiki was not an every down back either. Both were labeled as "small" and "utility" backs. Both Dayne & Duckett were supposed to be the "pounders"... Thunder & Lightning. neither was touted to be an every down starter when drafted.

 

I think you are grossly underestimating the talent of Deshaun Foster. I have to get some work done, but will continue this argument later and I will respond to all of your posts.

not an argument, a discussion or debate...

 

What would Deshaun Foster have in a 16 game season based on all the starts in his career? I'll have that once i am able to crunch the numbers.

so they invested $5 Mil a year on a guy that they don't think has starter quality...makes a lot of sense. If they didn't like Foster so much why didn't they go after one of the other FA backs this year? Like Edge for example?

i'm not a big believer in the "if 16 game scenario ala LJ scoring 1,000 tds...", but go ahead and work them out.... i'm too lazy.

 

and they did look at FA RBs, they just couldn't land any:

The Charlotte Observer reports Seahawks RB Shaun Alexander prefers returning to Seattle, but picked the Panthers as his second choice. "I tell everybody I don't think Seattle's going to let it get to that. But, if it does get to that, Carolina would definitely be a good place," he said. "Those guys are awesome. It's fun and there's a family atmosphere. They keep it close and you can tell why they do good things together."

there were also rumors of others, i just can't remember them all right now.

[akareckas 0]

where is this writing?

 

 

Duh. It's on the wall

 

As for your point on the rookies, I think you are correct. It is foster's job to lose. What I"m saying is that he will lose it for a couple of reasons:

 

1. He will likely get hurt.

2. I believe that Williams is the better all around back and better suited to the Carolina Offense.

3. The team has invested the money in Williams to make him a starter eventually. May not be in the first few weeks, but I believe it will happen by the end of the season.

[famousb 11]

Foster's talent is not in question....it's his durability that has people concerned. And I am one of those guys who feels that a broken bone is more of a fluke than a trend.

 

one more fyi for you;

last year it was a broken ankle,

2004 it was a shoulder injury.

his rookie season it was a knee injury...

 

that smells like more than just a fluke...

 

 

and just to show i'm impartial,

here's a link to an article on Foster in today's local paper:

 

Foster seeks healthy season

[gatorbait7391 0]

wow hard to beleive but if true this is awesome. might take him round 4-5.

[hoffdaddy 1]

The point of the Fred Taylor comment was that players who are labeled injury prone, can and do come back from that label and prove to be durable. That's it. It's not a talent comparison at all.

 

Carry on with the ###### fest.

[Raider 84 29]

He will be replaced by week 4 by Williams. Due to injury or lack of output. I don' t think he can carry the ball more than 15 times a game.

[What is the deal? 1]

He will be replaced by week 4 by Williams. Due to injury or lack of output. I don' t think he can carry the ball more than 15 times a game.

glad you have an opinion, but it's far from backed up by logic and looking at the numbers.

 

In 5 of 6 starts last year, he carried the ball more than 15 times and in his career he averages 5 yards a carry during his 16th-20th carry of the game.

[Parja 0]

Hyperbole!

 

[What is the deal? 1]

Dunn's #s up until ATL when Duckett was drafted:

1997 tam | 16 | 224 978 4.4 4 | 39 462 11.8 3 |

| 1998 tam | 16 | 245 1026 4.2 2 | 44 344 7.8 0 |

| 1999 tam | 15 | 195 616 3.2 0 | 64 589 9.2 2 |

| 2000 tam | 16 | 248 1133 4.6 8 | 44 422 9.6 1 |

| 2001 tam | 13 | 158 447 2.8 3 | 68 557 8.2 3

 

only in the 2 yrs where he did not play a full 16 games did he drop below 1200 combined yds - and this was also when he was splitting carries w/ Alstott. Exactly why ATL drafted Duckett - to be their Alstott.

 

Tiki was not an every down back either. Both were labeled as "small" and "utility" backs. Both Dayne & Duckett were supposed to be the "pounders"... Thunder & Lightning. neither was touted to be an every down starter when drafted.

not an argument, a discussion or debate...

i'm not a big believer in the "if 16 game scenario ala LJ scoring 1,000 tds...", but go ahead and work them out.... i'm too lazy.

 

and they did look at FA RBs, they just couldn't land any:

 

there were also rumors of others, i just can't remember them all right now.

 

As a starter Foster has average 76.6 YPG, 4.2 YPC His TD #'s aren't there though and he has been used as a receiver more when he was coming off the bench. This slightly concerns me, but when they are designing an offense around a Stephan Davis and Foster steps into that role it is understandable. I think he will be more involved in the passing game since Carolina is preparing for him to be the "feature" back.

[bugsbrain 0]

To the posters talking up Williams, would you draft Foster at all and if so how early? When would you look to draft Williams? If you truly believe that Foster can't last the whole year &/or Williams will win the job from him then you should not allow Williams to fall too far in your draft. In situation only, it's similar to last year's Priest/LJ debate. I am NOT equating LJ's potential last year with William's potential this year, but a talented full-time starter in that offence should put up at least top 10-15 RB numbers.

 

To those expecting a healthy good year from Foster, what round would you look to draft him and will you be looking to handcuff him with Williams? I'm keeping him in one of my leagues and I will definitely be looking to draft Williams, probably a little earlier than most.

[What is the deal? 1]

To the posters talking up Williams, would you draft Foster at all and if so how early? When would you look to draft Williams? If you truly believe that Foster can't last the whole year &/or Williams will win the job from him then you should not allow Williams to fall too far in your draft. In situation only, it's similar to last year's Priest/LJ debate. I am NOT equating LJ's potential last year with William's potential this year, but a talented full-time starter in that offence should put up at least top 10-15 RB numbers.

 

To those expecting a healthy good year from Foster, what round would you look to draft him and will you be looking to handcuff him with Williams? I'm keeping him in one of my leagues and I will definitely be looking to draft Williams, probably a little earlier than most.

If you can get Williams good. In re-drafts, Foster will be off the board around round 5 and Williams will be following shortly there after.

 

In my situation, I drafted a dynasty team and snatched up Foster @ 5.10, unfortunately I didn't have one of the top picks in the rookie draft so I didn't end up with Deangelo.

 

In re-drafts I wouldn't bother with Deangelo until late 7th/early 8th unless your league has deep rosters.

 

We will know more once mock's have enough sample size to generate an accurate estimate of ADP. The problem is that people are so confident that Williams will take off the job despite everything in the media telling them otherwise they may overpay for him. Sitting around waiting for Foster to get hurt, some will drop Deangelo in shallow leagues.

 

The funny thing is some had Foster has a late 2nd and early 3rd before Deangelo was drafted. This should not change his value that much, as I have already established enough evidence that a late 1st round pick does not mean the guy will start.

[What is the deal? 1]

3. The team has invested the money in Williams to make him a starter eventually. May not be in the first few weeks, but I believe it will happen by the end of the season.

 

Who's contract is more lucrative? The one Deangelo hasn't signed yet, or Deshaun's $5 Mil a year? If Deangelo gets paid over 5 mil a year, come talk to me. That's top of 1st round money...

[famousb 11]

To the posters talking up Williams, would you draft Foster at all and if so how early? When would you look to draft Williams? If you truly believe that Foster can't last the whole year &/or Williams will win the job from him then you should not allow Williams to fall too far in your draft. In situation only, it's similar to last year's Priest/LJ debate. I am NOT equating LJ's potential last year with William's potential this year, but a talented full-time starter in that offence should put up at least top 10-15 RB numbers.

 

To those expecting a healthy good year from Foster, what round would you look to draft him and will you be looking to handcuff him with Williams? I'm keeping him in one of my leagues and I will definitely be looking to draft Williams, probably a little earlier than most.

 

 

ideally, I would rather target Dillon instead of Foster, and then take Maroney as the handcuff. I just think Dillon will have a better year than Foster. If i could get Dillon in say the 4th, i would then probably target Maroney around 9/10... that being said, and if things went a certain way, i would also try to get DWilliams in around 7/8 as i think he has a better chance of playing this year....

[Leonard Henry -2 Yds 0]

this just in, Charles Rogers didn't get injured last year!

[Belushi 9]

Wow, lots of people with no idea of what's going to happen getting very upset here. It's like the Dayne/Bell post all over again!

 

But I think Foster's the starter and will have a great year. I'd have no problem with him as my RB3, with RB2 potential.

 

I also think that if Foster is hurt for any length of time, Williams will have a great opportunity to steal the job. Big contract or no, Carolina needs a RB they can rely on. If Foster has another serious injury, I think they'll look for Williams to take over and see if he can carry the load.

[Sweetness_34 0]

Sorry, but in reading the post by What is the deal and then reading through your retort, he clearly owns you in this subject. What is the deal provides solid supporting commentary which you offhandidly dismiss with very little substance.

 

Your response is 99% hyperbole and fails to counter What is the deal's points. Further, you pose the rhetorical question "what's Foster done" when discussing that Fred Taylor was already a good RB prior to getting hurt - apparently you haven't seen Foster play or you would never make this comment. When healthy, Foster is one of the fastest, most elusive RBs in the game. An outstanding receicer, if you give him a hole, *bam!* he's gone. Last year he opened a lot of people's eyes with some loooooong TDs, outrunning 3 and 4 defenders and even breaking a tackle or 2.

 

Foster's talent is not in question....it's his durability that has people concerned. And I am one of those guys who feels that a broken bone is more of a fluke than a trend.

 

So scooter - you call Foster being injured in every one of his 3 years in the league as a fluke and not a trend, but you keep telling me in my "real draft" thread how Randy Moss, Tiki Barber, Curtis Martin are all always injured?

 

Ok I get it.....typical hypocrisy