Geaux Saints

Jamaal Williams 2018 Outlook

Recommended Posts

I think something that a lot of people miss is that the “best pure runner” (which is what everyone anoints Jones as)  is rarely the best fit for heavy snaps/touches in a n offense led by a generational talent at QB. 

 

When your QB is essentially your offensive coordinator on the field and your passing game is your bread and butter, the snaps are going to either go to the guy who is the most versatile and capable in all three phases (pass blocking, rushing, receiving) or the roles are going to be split up among different players who excel in particular phases depending on game situation. 

 

The teams who feed the ball to their best “pure runner” are typically those without a good QB who need someone other than their QB to make plays. OR they have a generational talent at RB and an above average/good QB...but not an Aaron Rodgers. 

 

This isn’t why I can’t get behind the Aaron jones narrative in GB. If he isn’t the best pass blocker (by a long shot) and if he’s not the best receiver (also by a long shot) his role will remain limited unless something happens to the $134 million man. 

Edited by mjb03003
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ilovepelas said:

in the 50s or 60s on my boards. I tend to always draft chris carson over him though. 

I did the same but keep debating if that was the right decision. Williams went two after my pick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the hell isnt there more hype about the starting RB in an Aaron Rodgers offense?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chwf3rd said:

Why the hell isnt there more hype about the starting RB in an Aaron Rodgers offense?

 

 

 

Shhh...let me steal Williams and Jones in every draft this year. Easily one of the best situations to be in to have a 6th-7th round pick producing RB1-2 value.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people think Jones is going to come in Week 3 and take the job from him or require McCarthy to shift to a timeshare. I don't feel that to be the case but there's a definite chance of that. I think Williams has an opportunity to run away with the job and based on what I've read about him and heard from the coaching staff, it sounds like he's going to do everything he can to seize the job. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Chwf3rd said:

Why the hell isnt there more hype about the starting RB in an Aaron Rodgers offense?

 

 

Ryan Grant, Alex Green, James Stark, Brandon Jackson, Cedric Benson, Eddie Lacy, Ty Montgomery etc etc.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Chwf3rd said:

Why the hell isnt there more hype about the starting RB in an Aaron Rodgers offense?

 

 

6 minutes ago, Baur10 said:

 

Ryan Grant, Alex Green, James Stark, Brandon Jackson, Cedric Benson, Eddie Lacy, Ty Montgomery etc etc.

 

Exactly.  GB RB's always tease you of potential.  But end up as RB2/3.  Not since Ahman Green had they had a true RB1. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Baur10 said:

 

Ryan Grant, Alex Green, James Stark, Brandon Jackson, Cedric Benson, Eddie Lacy, Ty Montgomery etc etc.

 

Is that supposed to be an argument against Williams?

 

Here are the RB stats since ARod took over:

 

2008: Ryan Grant - 1200 yards

2009: Ryan Grant - 1200/11

2010: Brandon’s Jackson - 700/3

2011: committee between Grant and Starks

2012: committee

2013: Eddie Lacey - 1200/11

2014: Lacey - 1150/9

2015: Lacey was hurt

2016: Lacey was hurt but both Lacey + Ty Mont were locked in RB1s/2s when they played

2017: ARod gone but whoever the starting RB was received a heavy workload.

 

Maybe this turns into a full blown committee but given the scoring opportunities in this offense, the RB usage last season, and McCarthy’s comments regarding Williams, he has HUGE upside this year and isn’t really being talked about.  

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, nbay23 said:

 

 

Exactly.  GB RB's always tease you of potential.  But end up as RB2/3.  Not since Ahman Green had they had a true RB1. 

 

Both Grant and Lacey were RB1s, not sure why they’re on this list

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Baur10 said:

 

Ryan Grant, Alex Green, James Stark, Brandon Jackson, Cedric Benson, Eddie Lacy, Ty Montgomery etc etc.

 

Thank you!

This is Starks and Lacy plus one.

The only thing worse than not having any of them, is having all 3 of them.

DND and count your blessings.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Chwf3rd said:

 

Is that supposed to be an argument against Williams?

 

Here are the RB stats since ARod took over:

 

2008: Ryan Grant - 1200 yards

2009: Ryan Grant - 1200/11

2010: Brandon’s Jackson - 700/3

2011: committee between Grant and Starks

2012: committee

2013: Eddie Lacey - 1200/11

2014: Lacey - 1150/9

2015: Lacey was hurt

2016: Lacey was hurt but both Lacey + Ty Mont were locked in RB1s/2s when they played

2017: ARod gone but whoever the starting RB was received a heavy workload.

 

Maybe this turns into a full blown committee but given the scoring opportunities in this offense, the RB usage last season, and McCarthy’s comments regarding Williams, he has HUGE upside this year and isn’t really being talked about.  

 

I'm using it to show why he's not receiving a lot of "hype" in the draft. About half those years multiple running backs started throughout the year. Sure you can say that "committee but whoever started put up good numbers" but in a yearly league that needs to be factored in on draft day.  Outside of 2009, 2013, and 2014 no GB running back has ended up in the top 20 in standard scoring with Rodgers as a starter.

 

He should absolutely be talked about and typically has a solid draft price IMO. But I get the lack of "hype".   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Baur10 said:

 

I'm using it to show why he's not receiving a lot of "hype" in the draft. About half those years multiple running backs started throughout the year. Sure you can say that "committee but whoever started put up good numbers" but in a yearly league that needs to be factored in on draft day.  Outside of 2009, 2013, and 2014 no GB running back has ended up in the top 20 in standard scoring with Rodgers as a starter.

 

He should absolutely be talked about and typically has a solid draft price IMO. But I get the lack of "hype".   

 

Agree:

Lacy went from 4th  to 5th, to 22.  GB RBs are getting 10-15 touches per game.  Accept that.  They need to be incredibly special to be fantasy relevant.

 

Aaron Rogers is throwing 40 TDs.  The RB he targets in the end zone is usually a fullback you've never heard of. 

40+ passing TDs doesn't leave a lot of rushing TDs.  Rushing TDs are coming from guys like Jones to takes a 50 yard run to the house.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had to bring my bro Jamaal back after he single handedly anchored my running backs late last year and got me to the semis despite unending injuries. Very excited for him. Hoping he can run away with the full-time job this season next to Rodgers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's called managing. If you had every GB RB last season, you were fine. Once Rodgers went down it was obviously a mess,  but every RB in a high powered offense is worth something. It's not a matter of one player being an RB1 but rather that RB slot producing at an RB1 no matter whose behind. Ty Mont had his weeks, so did A Jones, and J Williams. I'd rather have the GB RB than Lynch, Crowell, TB backs, Ayaji, and the list goes on.

 

GB RB's last year combined stats:

 

1277/11 TD's with 57 catches/457/3 TD's...yea don't draft them, let me steal them.

Edited by hamburglar628
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hamburglar628 said:

It's called managing. If you had every GB RB last season, you were fine. Once Rodgers went down it was obviously a mess,  but every RB in a high powered offense is worth something. It's not a matter of one player being an RB1 but rather that RB slot producing at an RB1 no matter whose behind. Ty Mont had his weeks, so did A Jones, and J Williams. I'd rather have the GB RB than Lynch, Crowell, TB backs, Ayaji, and the list goes on.

Excellent point.    Disagree about Ajayi, especially if you have Clement in tow...but that’s another issue for another thread.  

 

Theres rb2+ pts to be had WEEKLY by whichever back is the starter.  This should not be so easily discarded because it’s “messy” 

Edited by Impreza178
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Impreza178 said:

Excellent point.    Disagree about Ajayi, especially if you have Clement in tow...but that’s another issue for another thread.  

 

Theres rb2+ pts to be had WEEKLY by whichever back is the starter.  This should not be so easily discarded because it’s “messy” 

 

Yes, I just added the stats to prove my point...it's not hard to draft A Jones + Williams, especially knowing that Williams is that guy for the first two weeks. It's a better situation than Brieda/Alf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hamburglar628 said:

It's called managing. If you had every GB RB last season, you were fine. Once Rodgers went down it was obviously a mess,  but every RB in a high powered offense is worth something. It's not a matter of one player being an RB1 but rather that RB slot producing at an RB1 no matter whose behind. Ty Mont had his weeks, so did A Jones, and J Williams. I'd rather have the GB RB than Lynch, Crowell, TB backs, Ayaji, and the list goes on.

If you had a huge bench OR #1 waiver every week.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, this guy right here said:

If you had a huge bench OR #1 waiver every week.

 

6 bench spots. I love to handcuff highly productive RB slots...Pitt, GB, wherever Shanhan is at...teams that have guys that will produce no matter what...it's worth the bench spot, especially if you have just a bye week flier on your bench. I'll take 1 starting spot and 2 bench spots for an RB1 all year than a boom or bust WR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just like everyone’s saying, it seems like s pretty good strategy to collect RBs on high scoring offenses (Saints, Packers, New England, etc).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chwf3rd said:

Just like everyone’s saying, it seems like s pretty good strategy to collect RBs on high scoring offenses (Saints, Packers, New England, etc).

 

Even more so this year with the new bs tackling rule, expect a lot of 1st and goal situations from those penalties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hamburglar628 said:

 

6 bench spots. I love to handcuff highly productive RB slots...Pitt, GB, wherever Shanhan is at...teams that have guys that will produce no matter what...it's worth the bench spot, especially if you have just a bye week flier on your bench. I'll take 1 starting spot and 2 bench spots for an RB1 all year than a boom or bust WR.

The injury flip flopping made it hard to own though guys last year. Hard to keep RBs with leg injuries and undefined roles. You don't draft and keep three RBs all year. If you had all three for their productive games you needed some luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, this guy right here said:

The injury flip flopping made it hard to own though guys last year. Hard to keep RBs with leg injuries and undefined roles. You don't draft and keep three RBs all year. If you had all three for their productive games you needed some luck.

Most likely u didn’t own all three- so yes, luck was involved.   But we did see GB still prefers to roll with the hot hand and give their lead 15+ touches weekly.   There’s no guarantee injuries force this situation again in 2018.    The role is very productive.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chwf3rd said:

Just like everyone’s saying, it seems like s pretty good strategy to collect RBs on high scoring offenses (Saints, Packers, New England, etc).

 

I agree with the sentiment but New England?  I drafted Michel but it hasn't exactly been the easiest fantasy RB landscape to navigate.  Sure they churn out a few stud performers but it almost always is difficult to predict at the start of the year.

 

6 minutes ago, hamburglar628 said:

 

6 bench spots. I love to handcuff highly productive RB slots...Pitt, GB, wherever Shanhan is at...teams that have guys that will produce no matter what...it's worth the bench spot, especially if you have just a bye week flier on your bench. I'll take 1 starting spot and 2 bench spots for an RB1 all year than a boom or bust WR.

 

I like to do this too but you have to admit there's a downside there. You have to factor in the opportunity cost of using multiple draft picks (Williams' ADP is now 94, Morris at 64, Burkhead 68, not saying it's an unreasonable price but at that range it's not just "boom or bust WRs" available at there), using multiple bench spots, the lack of defined roles prior to games when the hierarchy changes (eg last year if you owned and started GB RB every week there were probably multiple games where even the best fantasy players would have started the wrong one as different guys take over roles).

 

No ones arguing that Williams isn't a worthwhile pick (well OK there's probably some people saying that but still). There's just some reasonable risk as well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...