Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron


    
      
        Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron
        (https://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi)
      

        the Gridiron >> the Red Zone >>  Is there a Rookie
        
(Message started by: steelkings on Dec 27^th, 2005, 7:02am)

Title: Is there a Rookie
Post by steelkings on Dec 27^th, 2005, 7:02am

I have one more free agent pick up left. I was eliminated from the playoffs by 2 pnts last nite. Mike friggin Vrable? That belong on a different thread.

Heres my question. Is there a rookie runningback waiting in the wings who might see more time next year? I'm looking for an undrafted keeper if theres one out there. Any guesses?

Title: Re: Is there a Rookie
Post by Chumpzilla on Dec 27^th, 2005, 9:01am

If you're talikng pure rookies, that's going to be limited. Most of them should already be taken. I may gamble on one of the following:

Cedric Benson
J.J. Arrington
Cedric Houston
Alvin Pearman

Other longer shots would include:

Ryan Moats (won't jump over Westbrook but could have a more prominent role in the offense)
Eric Shelton (Davis should be gone and Foster is fragile)
Ciatric Fason ?.?.?

Some real stretches:

Vernand Morency
Noah Herron

Just some thoughts.

Title: Re: Is there a Rookie
Post by StegRock on Dec 27^th, 2005, 5:16pm

Unless you are just a total rookie skeptic, who doesn't buy into potential at all and won't budge until a guy has proven it on the field (which, of course, ultimately he must do, but when he does, he isn't to be evaluated qua rookie anymore), and while I agree with much of Chumpman's analysis, I don't agree with his labeling Cedric Benson a "gamble", moreover, along with Arrington, Houston and Pearman and Eric Shelton a "long shot" along with Fason (at least not qua rookie; qua veteran, yes, but not qua rookie) (I am also going to include some guys on my list missing from Chumpman's probably because he believed them to likely be on teams). As (pretty much yet unproven) rookies, sk, Benson, an absolutely prototypical tailback who fits the offense he is slated to "participate" in to a t and was paid a BUTT-LOAD to do so, who showed flashes on the field of what he is capable of and outstanding durability by not being knocked out for the season by that vicious knee twist, who, if you have any intuition, you could sense the team was... is dying to get in despite Jones's (and Peterson's) fantastic play, and who really just screwed himself with an ill-advised overly long hold-out, but who, because of that and the minor injury, comes back TOTALLY well-rested and raring to go in '06, but also, moreover, may get a chance to strut some of his stuff when it really counts during the crunch-time of the playoffs, should not be lumped in with any of the others, namely Arrington, who has pretty much proven himself to be Thomas Jones circa his Arizona Cardinals years, Houston, who really has just been "eh", and Pearman, who is the Jaguars' next LeBrandon Toefield at best as I see it. Look, I have Benson. You couldn't offer me Arrington, Houston, Pearman and EVERY OTHER dude on Chumpman's list for him. Would you trade Benson for Arrington, Houston AND Pearman, no less for just Arrington OR Houston OR Pearman (Chumpman)? Hell, to use the DEEP keeper format of the GBRFLeagues as a litmus, the latter two I don't even think will be protectable come July/August. Arrington might not be, either. From a fantasy valuation standpoint, I think that is how you MUST think about it. Fantasy football is ALL about acquiring value and then exchanging value at the right moment. As regards sk's question here, Benson, of the guys mentioned, should alone be considered in a class along with one other dude who had an opportunity to make himself "known" this year, Samkon Gado (missing from Chumpman's list; I am sure he wasn't even thinking of him as a "rookie" anymore, which in a way he isn't, but... for argument's sake, I'm including him), who may just be the beneficiary of a vacant position again next season and, despite the qualms I've expressed about him heretofore, if (you believe) what he did this season really is a preview of what he could do over the long haul, then he's a great get. These two alone should be labelled something along the lines of "pretty safe bets"... as rookies go. After that, leap-frogging over at least Houston and Pearman, the group of "upswing gambles" should be comprised of (probably in this order): 1) Shelton, who showed great flashes during the preseason and is TOTALLY well-rested and will be TOTALLY raring to go in '06 as really he could have already been back a couple weeks ago and Davis will likely be out of the way, Foster's old-man knees just can't support his slashing style of play for a full season and, anyway, Foster hasn't really looked that good this season, 2) Frank Gore (not on Chumpman's list), who has shown he has a "real-deal" level of skills and could just end up being the starter if the 49ers do not win (or is it lose ?.?.?) the "Bush Bowl" and do the right thing for their team and show Barlow the door and, furthermore, even if they are in a position to draft Bush, do NOT and instead opt to trade the pick for a BUTT-LOAD of value that could garner them some solid offensive linemen, or, for that matter, if they do draft Bush and he pulls "a Benson" and holds out forever, 3) Moats, who, yes, will be stuck behind Westbrook, but has shown a "real-deal" level of skills that will entrench him as their #2 next year and, again, "is behind Westbrook", whose style of play vis-a-vis his stature lends itself to injuries as we have witnessed, 4) Marion Barber (not on Chumpman's list), who too seems to have displayed a "real-deal" level of skills and, moreover, a "Parcells-desired" set of skills, but who likely will end up being stuck behind Jones, who has shown to be on the fragile side, though, and 5) Arrington, who, especially if you drafted him, you probably will not be able to afford giving up on just yet. After that, there are the "long shots to place", Houston, who has shown "something" and is in an intriguing situation, and Fason, who came in somewhat highly touted and is also in an intriguing situation, and then the "long shots to show", in no particular order, Morency, Herron and Pearman, to whom apply some admixture of intriguing situation and show of talent, different for each. That's my take! [smiley=threed.gif]

Title: Re: Is there a Rookie
Post by Chumpzilla on Dec 27^th, 2005, 6:10pm

Just for clarification, I used the term "gamble" very loosely. I offered some names, some obvious and some not so obvious, that SK may want to consider. Also, while I thought Benson would not be avaialble, he was on the list only because of his injury. People gave up on him in several leagues I am in and I was the fortunate recipient of Benson. For what it's worth.