Page 1 of 1

Draftsharks 2006 First Round Bust Candidate

Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 7:41 pm
by Die-Hard-Fan
This is an article written at Draftsharks, it's one of those sites that you pay to join and rank players for fantasy football fans. It is a very good (as much as any site can be) site that I use for my fantasy football insight. This article has me asking questions not about Clinton so much but about our offensive line...tell me I don't have to worry so much....please. Anyways here is the article I could post a link but as I said you need to pay for this site to read any of the articles.

2006 First-Round Bust Candidate
Possibly the toughest Bust call our staff has ever faced because we love the guy. We’re selecting Clinton Portis as our 2006 First-Round Bust Candidate. There's a criteria of downside factors we use when assessing busts and Portis qualified in nearly every category. It’s ironic because we ranked him higher than anyone last year (#4) even though he was coming off a sub-par season as the 12th ranked RB. Portis delivered with a #6 ranking, so the love is there. But our job is to be objective and ignore not only our feelings for a player, but the consensus opinions too. Over 85% of the fantasy community is selecting Portis with the 4th or 5th pick of the draft… We say that’s not your best move.

The Mileage… is the first thing we noticed. ESPN’s Sean Salisbury spends his afternoons blowing hot air about Terrell Owens’ “punk attitude” or Peyton Manning’s “failure to win big games” but last week he said something that caught our attention. “With running backs it’s not so much about age breaking them down, it’s their mileage,” he said. “In some cases an 8-year old car with 90,000 miles is more reliable than a 4 year-old car with 90,000 miles. Different backs carry their mileage differently.” In other words, you don’t have to be a 30-year old back to start experiencing ups and downs in production. Some of the best backs were spinning the odometer too much in their early years, and for whatever reason they couldn’t sustain the pace. Not everyone can be a Walter Payton, Emmitt Smith, or Curtis Martin – even though many, like Portis, are just as talented. Here are a few examples of great young backs who hit a down cycle early:

RB Early yrs Tot. touch Avg/rush TDs/game Next yr Avg/rush TDs/game
Earl Campbell 78-81 1479 4.6 1.03 82 3.4 0.22
Ottis Anderson 79-82 1247 4.5 0.55 83 4.3 0.33
Curt Warner 83-88 1625 4.2 0.75 89 3.3 0.19
Terrell Davis 95-98 1495 4.8 1.00 99 3.1 0.50
Eddie George 96-00 1927 3.9 0.63 01 3.0 0.32
Warrick Dunn 97-00 1103 4.1 0.32 01 2.8 0.46
Clinton Portis 02-05 1399 4.7 0.82 06 ? ?

Look, it’s easy to cherry-pick a few backs that hit some bumps in the road or fizzled entirely. We know that. The point is, they’re out there. Studs can’t be studs every single season of their career. Fred Taylor, Jamal Lewis, Stephen Davis, Ahman Green, and even Edgerrin James had ups and downs way before they were 30. And only 5 RBs were able to repeat their top-10 ranking from 2004 to 2005. Think about that…

Portis actually beefed up to 215 (from 205) for most of the season to adjust to Joe Gibbs’ counter-treys and off-tackle runs. He was pretty amazing, gaining 1,516 yards despite a big list of injuries: elbow bursitis, strained calf, bruised shin, minor concussion, bruised lower back, sprained wrist & shoulder stinger. We counted 7 different games where Portis spent time with trainer Bubba Tyer on the sidelines. “He got beat up,” Tyer said in December. After the playoff loss to Seattle, Tyer added that Portis “might require some attention” from doctors, though he never actually had any surgery.

Mileage is mileage, and Portis racked up a career-high 418 touches last season including the playoffs. We ran some numbers: Since 1996, RBs coming off 400-touch seasons only make the fantasy top-10 the next year 53% of the time. Portis actually has 801 total touches the last two years - a really big workload. Did you see him constantly wincing in those two playoff games while limping to 2.8 yards per carry? Heroic, but mileage realized…

The New System… is a great one, but it’s still brand new. First let’s give Redskins owner Daniel Snyder credit for bringing in ex-Chiefs OC Al Saunders. His track record couldn’t be any better: he managed the league’s #1 offense in 2004 & 2005 and the Chiefs never ranked lower than 5th during his tenure. Houston, Detroit, Oakland, and Buffalo (and probably a few other teams) were after Saunders but Joe Gibbs took Snyder’s private jet to Kansas City armed with a contract guaranteed for over $6 million. Saunders’ Vermeilesque playbook is the most RB-friendly in the league. The first thing he did was sit Portis down and show him a highlight DVD featuring his last 3 pupils – Marshall Faulk, Priest Holmes, and Larry Johnson. “I remember saying this is the (expletive) I've been waiting for," said Portis. “Now I've got the golden opportunity. For two years, I had the opportunity of getting pounded. Pounded here and pounded there. But I found a way out of that and I have the opportunity of my career.”

However, it’s still a new system. Sometimes fantasy GMs are quick to latch onto new coordinators’ histories and automatically re-apply past successes in year #1. Then the next year we read about how the offensive line “is much more comfortable with the scheme” or how the quarterback “knows what to expect this season.” And make no mistake, the offensive line and the quarterback pay off Saunders’ bets. This playbook’s not driven by halfbacks, it just rewards them on execution.

The O-Line/Quarterback… has question marks that no one wants to talk about. Even if Brunell & Co. absorb Saunders’ brand new plays quickly, can they execute and sustain at a high level? Brunell isn’t Trent Green. Green’s hit 64% of his passes the last 3 years with up-tempo rhythm and line adjustments on the go. He operates like a surgeon. And he’s started every game the last 5 years. Only 3 other QBs have done that and none of them were coming off ACL surgery like Green had in 1999. Brunell also had ACL surgery (in ’97) and he’s been an injury magnet ever since: left elbow surgery, partially-torn hamstring, strained quad, last year’s sprained MCL (same right knee as ’97) and the broken left index finger two months ago. The pre-ACL Brunell was a major dual threat at QB. Now he’s a gimpy, streaky passer who rides the wave nicely when everyone around him is clicking. Portis and the linemen were all wrecked by the postseason and Brunell passed for only 130 yards in almost two full playoff games before Seattle relaxed in the 4th quarter. Note: Saunders will also cut back Brunell’s comfy shotgun and max-protect schemes and use more 3-step drops with multi-WR sets.

The Redskins offensive line doesn’t remind anybody of the Chiefs’ Willie Roaf, Brian Waters, Casey Wiegmann and Will Shields. Not even close in productivity, durability, mobility or depth. This is the key to Portis’ season. If the Hogs are chugging along then so will Portis, even if (gulp) Todd Collins or (double gulp) Jason Campbell is under center. But if they don’t execute these mobile zone-blocking schemes the holes won’t be there. “I do have my reservations about this [Redskins] line fitting the blueprint,” said FOX’s Brian Baldinger, who played all three o-line positions in his 12-year career.

Also 4 of the 5 starters have had surgery since Christmas. C Casey Rabach had a torn labrum repaired. Rabach also crashed his ATV and needed surgery for huge lacerations on his left calf and ankle. He missed minicamps. “Casey wanted to do some things,” said Joe Gibbs. “Our problem is that he is real tender there where he had the skin graft.” LT Chris Samuels had procedures on his right MCL and elbow. His play really improved last year but he still gets pushed around late in games. Just two years ago Samuels was named to Sporting News’ “All-Overrated Team.” RT Jon Jansen is a tremendous run-blocker, we saw him absolutely flatten Cardinals DE Chike Okeafor on a 15-yard Portis TD run last year. But Jansen had his 2nd thumb stabilization surgery and will wear a special brace in '06. He also tore his Achilles’ tendon in 2004. RG Randy Thomas had surgery on a nasty broken leg in December and was limited in minicamps. We’d feel better about him if he broke it in September. Finally, we heard whispers that LG Derrick Dockery reported "grossly overweight" to minicamps. Dockery’s already the weak link and he’s asked to replicate Chiefs LG Waters, a guy who hasn’t missed a game in 5 years and is one of the best pulling guards of the decade.

O-line depth? None. Washington didn’t draft a lineman until the 7th round. They cut key reserve G/C Cory Raymer and signed Cowboys G/C Tyson Walter, but Walter has a high ankle sprain and didn’t do anything in OTA’s. “Depth is a big concern for us right now,” said Redskins OL coach Joe Bugel. “But we’ve got some young guys.” Young guys that hopefully won’t be called upon. That $11 million guaranteed payout for WR Antwaan Randle-El looks dumber every time we see it. Free-agent Pro Bowl LG Steve Hutchinson could have been had for $16 million up front.

The Other Guy… is Ladell Betts. He’s going to play more in ’06. "He's a three-dimensional player," said Saunders. "He runs the ball, he can catch it and he can block well enough to be successful. Having somebody like Ladell has been a surprise because I knew he was good, but not this good. We'll have situations where Ladell and Clinton will be in the game at the same time. Ladell deserves to play and we've got to find a way to get him on the field and not just as a backup player to Clinton." Betts has injury problems but there’s no question he’s a Moe Williams-type who could quietly chip stats off Portis’ week-to-week tally. In the only 4 career games Betts has carried 17+ times he's averaged 5 yards per attempt. After 4 years he’s learned how to pick up the blitz, and his career 4.0 per rush/9.8 per catch is impressive.

Look closely at our top-10 RB projections. None of them have a legitimate threat to steal touches this year. From Larry Johnson down to Willis McGahee, there’s no significant vulture factor expect maybe Brandon Jacobs with the Giants (though Tiki Barber plays all 3rd down packages to compensate). Sure, all lead backs have relievers to keep them fresh, but we don’t hear any other coordinators touting them. Saunders said Betts was “not just a backup player to Clinton.” Has Mike Mularkey gushed over Sammy Morris? Tom Walsh isn’t singing about Justin Fargas.

Don’t forget H-back Mike Sellers, he's sure to steal short TDs as well. Sellers is an especially damaging fantasy factor. The 275-pounder got 8 touches inside the 5-yard line last year and scored on 6 of them. Hopefully Saunders will put him on the shelf, but then again, Saunders never had a special resource like this: Sellers’ massive frame and quick feet make him useful near the goal line. Coaches like keeping $50 million dollar backs like Portis fresh if it’s convenient to the offense. Big physical backs like Betts and Sellers offer that convenience.

The Schedule… is a little harder in 2006. Last year they played 10 games against opponents that ended up ranking in the bottom half for rushing TDs allowed. Portis started a little slow, finally scoring his first TDs against the 49ers in the 6th game. In fact, 6 of his 11 TD runs came against the 49ers, Rams, and Cardinals. This year Portis draws the 10th toughest fantasy RB schedule for weeks 1-13. We like his opponents in weeks 15/16, the Saints and Rams, but will he be in one piece?

The Weight Issue… needs to be mentioned as well. As we said earlier, Portis gained about 10 lbs last year to adjust to Gibbs’ gap-scheme rushes. Kudos to Portis, he held up pretty well in the regular season despite his carries going up for the 3rd straight season. Now he’s going back to his lighter Broncos frame because Saunders wants more big play rushes out of his halfbacks. Portis only had 6 runs of 20+ yards last season compared to 13 for Denver in 2003 as a 202-pounder. We like the thicker version better. The injuries were worse when he was thinner: torn pectoral muscle, bruised heel, bruised ribs, hyper-extended knee, sprained ankles. He's not a rugged back, which is probably one of the reasons Mike Shanahan traded him (and why Tatum Bell doesn't get more carries). And besides, most elite tailbacks don't swing their weight index back and forth like this. Tiki Barber bulked up a few years ago and stayed there. L.T. and Shaun Alexander have never adapted their frames to mesh with a system.

The 4th Pick… of 2006 Fantasy Football has never looked so tricky to us. After the Big Three (Johnson, Alexander, Tomlinson) there’s likely a large drop in production. We understand why Portis is the herd’s choice to go #4. He’s much younger than Barber and looks sexier on paper than LaMont Jordan. Rudi Johnson is tough to pick because of Carson Palmer’s knee. Edgerrin James’ new red jersey (and fat wallet) scares others off.

Everyone appreciates this flashy ex-Hurricane. Last year he was terrific. With a few more 1,000-yard seasons and a Super Bowl ring they might actually whisper “HOF” when talking about him. Portis’ career is far from over. But think about all these potential downside factors in 2006 and make a careful, forward-looking decision.

Good luck!

Coming Aug. 2nd: We’ll post 4 more high-priced Bust picks with analysis...

Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 9:29 pm
by Deadskins
Wow. A lot of good info there that I never considered. I was planning on trying to pry Portis away from another owner in my keeper fantasy league, but now I'm not so sure. I still think the 'skins are going all the way, but I just don't know if we will be riding Clinton's back to get there.

Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 9:50 pm
by John Manfreda
For fantasy football yes I would worry, for Skins sake I wouldn't. It just says that he won't be a fantasy stud.

Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 9:51 pm
by Hoss
clinton's the man.

Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:04 pm
by air_hog
Dude, what are you guys talking about.

Why would you listen to some Fantasy Football geek who has never put on pads but does know stuff like,

"Well uh, you see about only 53.65% of RB's with 400 touches in one season have better stats the next year..."

Shut up loser.

I don't get why people always look at the past for answers in the future. CP isn't Stephen Davis or whoever they listed in their stupid graphing charts.

I mean look at CPs numbers after he got some help on offense with Santana.

Now with the help of BLloyd and El and Al Saunders... you seriously have to be retarted to think CP's numbers will go down.

You can either listend to what those computer number nerds say, or using your head and look at the awesome situation CP is comming into.

Posted: Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:10 pm
by 1niksder
CP's #s WILL go down, He is hoping the Offense will be a quick hitting offense. There is no way around it.


He's already dropped 8lbs.

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 4:48 am
by DaRealistJoka
air_hog wrote:Dude, what are you guys talking about.

Why would you listen to some Fantasy Football geek who has never put on pads but does know stuff like,

"Well uh, you see about only 53.65% of RB's with 400 touches in one season have better stats the next year..."

Shut up loser.

I don't get why people always look at the past for answers in the future. CP isn't Stephen Davis or whoever they listed in their stupid graphing charts.

I mean look at CPs numbers after he got some help on offense with Santana.

Now with the help of BLloyd and El and Al Saunders... you seriously have to be retarted to think CP's numbers will go down.

You can either listend to what those computer number nerds say, or using your head and look at the awesome situation CP is comming into.


Amen : Look at the backs that has been in Al Saunders system. Did pretty damn good.

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:55 am
by Mursilis
This sort of crap is why I hate fantasy football.

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 9:04 am
by DCGloryYears828791
I just don't see how this makes any sense. I can understand the learning a new offense thing, i can understand ladell getting more touches but Clinton is the #1 back in DC. I'll tell you why his TD production will probably stay even to last years if not better, with Al Saunders offense we will be scoring more than we did last year. Plain and simple. If i have the 4th pick in my fantasy league you can be rest assured if Clinton is there, he will be gone.

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 9:33 am
by yupchagee
1niksder wrote:CP's #s WILL go down, He is hoping the Offense will be a quick hitting offense. There is no way around it.


He's already dropped 8lbs.


The only # that will go down is carries. Tds/carry willbe way up & total yds will be at least as good.

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:39 am
by Countertrey
CP's #s WILL go down, He is hoping the Offense will be a quick hitting offense. There is no way around it.


Yupchags is right.

Touches will go down. Yards per Carry will go up to compensate, as, with fewer men in the box, he has more room to manuver. All those long Portis highlight runs from his Denver days? Plan on more of those.

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:39 am
by BossHog
The only number I care about is W's... and anybody paying attention to Clinton last year knows that that's all he's concerned with as well.

Will his fantasy numbers go down? Maybe, maybe not. You could refute EVERYTHING written by just stating the obvious that a more successful offense (as the Redskins will hopefully have) will mean many more opportunities to score. IF the fantasy pool is about yards and touches... as well as TD's... then Clinton's numbers may go down.

If the pool is MORE about TDs, then I actually see his numbers going up from last year. If the pool rewards catches for RBs, then he'll put up better numbers this year than last.

Fortunately... winning a fantasy pool has no bearing on how your team fares in the regular season. :wink:

Personally, I'm of the mind that if you're going to play fantasy football, leave your heart at the door and stay off your team unless it's stupid not to and ANYONE in the pool would pull the trigger on it.

The article had some merit I think... but it kind of lost me a bit when it said... 'We understand why Portis is the herd’s choice to go #4'... and then went on to list the also-rans without any real reason as to why or why not they would be a better choice at #4. :hmm:

If they're saying he's not a top 3 fantasy back then I don't have much problem with that... but I think if they were saying he's not right there next at number four, and they failed to prove to the contrary.

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 7:42 pm
by TincoSkin
Countertrey wrote:
CP's #s WILL go down, He is hoping the Offense will be a quick hitting offense. There is no way around it.


Yupchags is right.

Touches will go down. Yards per Carry will go up to compensate, as, with fewer men in the box, he has more room to manuver. All those long Portis highlight runs from his Denver days? Plan on more of those.



right on both of you... also if your fantasy league gives points for breaking long runs then portis will be your man.. few touches, more big breaks more TDs same number of total yards. im picking him up first round (unless i can get payton)

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:54 pm
by Steve Spurrier III
I'm not worried about Portis in 2006, but those carries are going to take their toll at some point. The reality is that all those carries do come at a price. It's one of the reasons the Redskins need either Betts or Cartwright to step up and actually give them a significant amount of the load. Portis looked worn down at the end of the season, and there's no reason he shouldn't be kept fresh with the caliber of backups we have.

air_hog wrote:I don't get why people always look at the past for answers in the future.


I don't have anything to add, I just thought this was very funny.

Posted: Thu Jul 20, 2006 10:37 pm
by TincoSkin
air_hog wrote:I don't get why people always look at the past for answers in the future.




you know youre right, we shouldnt learn from the past. we should ignore the things that led to the first two world wars.. we should ignore how past sports teams accomplished growing and forming into championship caliber, we should ignore why crucial failiurs could have been avoided.


never learn from the past never

Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 8:35 am
by EA7649
I picked Portis #4 last night...Espn Fantasy Football is definatly the best i have tried. The free Espn's is way better than the free Yahoo's.

Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 10:00 am
by Deadskins
EA7649 wrote:The free Espn's is way better than the free Yahoo's.

How so?

Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 1:11 pm
by Mursilis
Countertrey wrote:
CP's #s WILL go down, He is hoping the Offense will be a quick hitting offense. There is no way around it.


Yupchags is right.

Touches will go down. Yards per Carry will go up to compensate, as, with fewer men in the box, he has more room to manuver. All those long Portis highlight runs from his Denver days? Plan on more of those.


Well, assuming Moss, Lloyd, Patten, or ARE don't get in the endzone first. There's just so much offensive potential on the team this year, it's going to be hard for the ball to get spread around enough. I wouldn't at all be surprised to see Portis's yards go down because of that. But I don't think he's lost a step or anything, and I don't think he's 'worn out' yet. It would probably be a good thing for him to have fewer touches in the regular season, because there will be the post-season to worry about!

Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 3:45 pm
by skinsfan#33
air_hog wrote:I don't get why people always look at the past for answers in the future. CP isn't Stephen Davis or whoever they listed in their stupid graphing charts.


A wise man once said,"Those whom don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it!"

That is why people look at the past for some glimps into the future. Lets face it, unless you can see the future, studing the past is the best way at gaining an insite into the future.

That isn't to say that you should base every decision on the past, but unless you are a fool you should factor it into your "educated guess about the Future".

An example: Larry Johnson scares me as the first pick in anyfantasy draft. I would take Manning, Tommelison, or Alexander over Johnson. The worst case senario with those three (barring injury) is you just get a really good player instead of a stud. With LJ you could end up with a total flop! Sauders is gone and so is LJs competetion, Priest Holmes. Speaking of Holmes he was a nobody before Sauders! You go out on a limb with your lower picks. LJ is HIGH risk/ HIGH reward, and takine him over even a Chad Jonson or Steve Smith is not worth the risk!

Posted: Fri Jul 21, 2006 3:48 pm
by yupchagee
A wise man once said,"Those whom don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat it!"


Wasn't it George Santayane?

Posted: Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:26 pm
by JPM36
I think that was a very good read with some good info.

From what I gathered, the main reason not to draft Portis is that sellers will be taking away TDs at the goal line and betts will be taking away touches because he is such an effective backup RB.

Unless you have Portis on your fantasy team, that's very good news for Redskins fans.