rschroeder1

Members
  • Content count

    65
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

25 Excellent

About rschroeder1

  • Rank
    Triple-A

Previous Fields

  • Add to Mailing List?
    No

Recent Profile Visitors

266 profile views
  1. From a Bears fan's perspective here: if you place great value on offensive line play when drafting fantasy RBs, the Bears have one of the best situations available now. C Whitehair and RG Long are both Pro-Bowl caliber, and while tackles Leno, Jr. and Massie have questions in the pass game, they are adequate, if not above average, in the run game. The return of Hroniss Grasu from injury gives them starter-level depth on the bench in case of an injury. The other factor I like in Howard's favor is that the Bears' defense should be marginally better. Maybe not an actual good NFL defense, but with early strong showings from some of their draft picks and a competent defensive coordinator, even a middling defense would put the Bears in more situations in which they can rely on the run game and not Mike Glennon.
  2. Pro Football Reference helpfully has these stats for 2016 (receiving plays are when a player was targeted, does not include passing plays when they were on the field but not targeted): Isaiah Crowell Run plays: 122 - 1st Down, 71 - 2nd Down, 6 - 3rd Down, 2 - 4th Down Receiving Plays: 26 - 1st Down, 21 - 2nd Down, 6 - 3rd Down Duke Johnson Run plays: 36 - 1st Down, 24 - 2nd Down, 14 - 3rd Down, 2 - 4th Down Receiving plays: 20 - 1st Down, 25 - 2nd Down, 31 - 3rd Down
  3. I'm not as worried about the Jeffery pursuit for two reasons. One, they may have simply been trying to acquire him at a discount and had no desire to sign him at the market rate the Eagles offered. Two, teams with hot-seat head coaches sometimes make desperation one-year pushes. From Pagano's perspective, a one-year contract for Jeffery would be perfect for Pagano's situation of needing job security now. For me, I'm more curious to see if the Colts begin contract talks with Moncrief. If they don't, that's a tell-tale sign.
  4. I should have written more specifically. I was referring to my (amateur) evaluation of his technique. Especially in the red zone, he seems to have pretty developed skills positioning his body. It's definitely a small sample, as you pointed out, and thus perhaps not worth extrapolating from.
  5. I can't figure this guy out. When the ball gets thrown his way, in my opinion, he shows the traits of an elite WR. But the targets aren't there. The Colts played some odd games last year, in which they had ridiculous totals like 12 yards for the first half. Now this obviously can't be an excuse for Moncrief - see Hilton. If the Colts can generate a little more offensive consistency, which would start with the line play, perhaps Moncrief can better get involved in the game plan. There's so much negativity around Moncrief that I will probably seek to acquire right at or just above his ADP. Shouldn't require too much of an investment in that regard.
  6. I think the other question is whether the Browns have found a clever loophole to hit the salary floor without improving your team - i.e. still be in a good position for the 2018 draft, which would make some sense if they hoped to acquire a QB in that draft. Of course, this could be sheer insanity, or if they plan to trade for Garapolo, certainly a different story.
  7. I can't claim to know much about Sarkisian's play-calling, but I think there's a big difference between being a head coach and a coordinator - how many have succeeded at coordinator and failed as a head coach at the NFL level? I'm also leery about tying college head coaching success to coordinating success - recruiting teens to come to your school, particularly one that had a disastrous program and one recovering from NCAA sanctions - don't seem to correlate to coordinator success (or failure). None of that means Sarkisian will be a success, though. And his recent job transitions certainly are odd.
  8. Look, this is no slight on Coleman. But to say that Coleman won't be affected by the loss of the team's fullback when he has fewer catches, fewer targets and fewer receiving yards than Freeman, while saying that Freeman will, doesn't make sense to me. YPC is definitely more important in real life, but volume matters in fantasy as well. There's no parsing that Freeman finished with more receiving yards and thus more fantasy points from receiving yards (and more targets) than Coleman, despite having a lower YPC.
  9. I haven't been able to find anything like that. Would definitely be a useful marker.
  10. Of the Falcons 389 running plays, 75% were with a single back or from the shotgun. I don't have info on how these splits factored individually for Freeman and Coleman. http://www.espn.com/nfl/team/splits/_/name/atl/type/rushing In 2016, Freeman averaged 4.06 targets per game; Coleman averaged 3.07 targets per game. http://www.espn.com/nfl/team/stats/_/name/atl/atlanta-falcons
  11. I think you're drawing a lot of unfounded conclusions here, based on a sample of one half of football. Freeman averaged 6.8 YPC in the Super Bowl, Coleman 4.1, yet they decided to abandon the running game because Coleman got hurt? We have a larger sample from the regular season when Coleman missed Weeks 8-10. The Falcons averaged 26.3 carries per game this year, and ran the ball 19, 34 and 13 times in Weeks 8-10. There are obvious explanations for the dips; the 19 came in the aerial shootout against the Packers, and the 13 against the Eagles' stiff run defense. In those three games, Freeman averaged 13.3 carries per game, compared with 14.2 on the season. Coleman played 12 games in 2015 and 13 in 2016, so I'm not sure how you have determined that he missed a year. He lost his job due to injury in '15, had a chance to recapture it when Freeman got hurt, and didn't. That said, I would expect the Falcons to continue to use the two equally moving forward. Caveats to that: I don't know what Sarkisian's plans are. If the Falcons don't want to offer Freeman a contract extension, they could run him into the ground this year.
  12. Maybe Henry is not an athletic specimen. Who is in the NFL who is also a successfully producing tight end? Gronk and Reed? If we were talking about WR or RB, I might be more inclined to listen to discussions of athleticism. But there are only 32 starting tight ends, and I have to have one of them for my team. After Gronk, Reed and Olsen, there's not much left. Gronk and Reed remain injury risks and Olsen is aging. I'm not trying to claim that Henry is going to be the overall TE1. But I'm going to chase his production, which is pretty rare at the TE position for a rookie.
  13. I think these numbers need a little context. For starters, the Falcons finished the 2016 season ranked 26th in plays executed. They also finished 4th in total number of big plays (run 10+, pass 25+) and 3rd in big play percentage. Simply put, not only did the Falcons execute fewer plays than the majority of the league, they also gashed huge chunks of yardage on the more limited set of plays that they executed. The clear outcomes here are fewer attempts for any fantasy player, and more limited chances to gain yards. I will admit, I am a Freeman keeper owner for the last two years and will be keeping him for a third year. But I find some of the criticisms of him to be unfair. Gohawks, I'm not saying that you made the following claim here, but prior to the 2016 season, this board was filled with comments that Freeman's 2015 success was based on volume. His 2016 season in totality was a success, with a definite decrease in volume. Yes, he had some games where he was in the 6-8 fantasy point category, but that was largely because he was surrounded by playmakers having awesome years (Coleman, Jones, Ryan). If he's succeeded with heavy volume, and without heavy volume, what more does he need to do? If he needs more volume, there's every sign the volume of plays should increase next year. We would expect big plays to decrease next year as well, but it seems silly to say that's a limiting factor for Freeman while also saying the volume of plays needs to go up. I also think the following is relevant: 1. Alex Mack is still Alex Mack. I don't know much about Steve Sarkisian and if he's a fan of the zone-blocking scheme, but Mack remains one of the premiere lineman in the game. 2. Tevin Coleman hasn't exactly been a model of health in his first two years. 3. If you accept the fact that Freeman isn't Le'veon Bell or David Johnson or Ezekiel Elliott, there's not much to not like. No, I don't think Freeman will ever be a bellcow. As a keeper owner, I don't want him to. I think a fresh Freeman who is part of a balanced attack has ample opportunity to put his freak skills on display to get the big gains and scores that you want out of a guy. 4. Freeman has produced some inconsistent weeks. For some reason, in his first two years, his TDs have come in bunches. I'm hesitant to say that's a trend though. Would you really label a player as someone who scores TDs in bunches? More likely, it seems that he is a player who has happened to score TDs in bunches.
  14. In 2016, the Chargers ran 398 rushing plays (23rd league average) and 580 passing attempts (15th league average). 93 targets went to running backs or fullbacks (only 4 to a fullback, so won't swing things too much here). So total backfield attempts were 491, total non-backfield targets 487, essentially about 28-29 per game in each category. So I'm not sure how much more emphasis SD can put on using its backfield, given they have some legitimate weapons in the receiving game to use as well. With Ken Wisenhunt staying on, I'm not too worried about passing game volume decreasing. Combining Gates' and Henry's stats into one player, a hypothetical single SD tight end would have finished in the top 5 in fantasy scoring last year. A 50/50 backs to non-backs ratio sustained Tyrell last year as a legitimate WR2. I guess the question is whether Keenan remains a favorite target of Rivers, assuming health, or whether Tyrell is legitimate enough to force a split in targets. I would envision Keenan as more of a target hog than Tyrell, though.
  15. I think you have Freeman tiered pretty well at 1.12, but I'm not as concerned about loss of work via Coleman. Looking at their stats for the first six games of 2016, when both were healthy: Freeman: 75.7 standard on 112 carries/targets Coleman: 79 standard on 74 carries/targets Extrapolation to entire season (16 weeks) Freeman: 201.8 standard Actual 2016 fantasy points (16 weeks) Freeman: 230.1 standard (1541 yards + 13 TD - 1 fumble, I think my math is correct) Weekly difference in points: 1.7 To me, that small of a difference in points from the "Coleman effect" is right in the threshold of natural variability in fantasy. I really think Freeman is a better fantasy asset WITH Coleman, to keep Freeman fresh. His end of the year this year is markedly different from the end of '15, for what it's worth.