Free Bagel wrote:Personally I think ypc allowed s a much more accurate measure of the defense than total yards allowed are, to which (as mtryanks pointed out) KC was 2nd to last.
Foster isn't a bad RB because he ran for 174 against KC, he's not necessarily a bad RB at all. My point was simply that he's been in the league 3 years, and has all of one good game, and it came against one of the worst rush D's out there. Heck, even beyond the 70 yarder in that game he averaged around 3.3ypc the rest of the game.
My main point is that people seem to be under the (false) impression that when Foster has been healthy and starting he's been a monster, and that just isn't true. Really, in 3 years he's had two good runs and a whole lotta nothin else.
As for the "Fragile Fred" thing, well personally I think we should rename that to "Fragile Foster." Even "Fragile Fred" was never hurt with the consistency that Foster has been. In 3 years Foster has already missed basically as many (if not more) games than Taylor has in his entire 7 year career. Not to mention Foster's injury concerns date all the way back to his college days (which Taylor's did not).
I was just about to post this but apparently my thoughts automatically spilled onto the cafe while I was answering something else.
Pete123444 wrote:Priest Holmes averaged 505 yards per season in his first 3 seasons. What does that really prove?
He was young and inexperienced back then, just like Deshaun foster is. If you try to fight back, just check FB's post. He has the stats to shut you down. And most RB's don't end up like Priest Holmes, and I would be very surpirsed if Deshaun Foster was the next Priest Holmes.
Deshaun Foster is not free of injuries himself, but as far as I know he hasn't had a major reconstructive knee surgery in the offseason and he is perfectly healthy as of right now.[/quote]
Granted it wasn't this offseason, but he had the exact same surgery in 2002. And pretty much no one has done well after having microfracture surgery.
Stephen Davis had microfracture surgery on his right knee. It's the same procedure that DeShaun Foster underwent in 2002.
The reviews concern me, but here's my view on Shelton:
He's a late round pick in redraft leagues. He's two guys with surgericly repaired knees in front of him. One may not be coming back because his rehab isn't done. The other is a) not the same mold of RB their team prefers to use, b) has been oft injured in a short career.
Now, I'm not advocating Shelton over Foster. However, a late round pick, making him your #4 RB or so, is well worth the upside in my opinion. It would not take much for Shelton to at least become a TD vulture, and you can have him well after Duckett or Bettis most of the time. His upside on the other hand, is being the featured RB in the powerful Carolina running game.
Free Bagel wrote:I think we're arguing different things here. I don't think the point of the thread was whether or not Foster was worth a 5th round pick. The issue was Shelton as a 10th, to which you said why bother. I was giving some reasons as to why to bother (Foster can't stay on the field) and demonstrating that Foster had plenty of risk associated with him as well.
While we're at it though, I would like to bring up a study that I saw someone do a while ago about RBs that didn't come out of the gates great, and it showed that in the last 15 or 20 years or something if a RB hadn't rushed for 1000 yards by the end of his 3rd season he had a very slim chance of doing it. If I recall correctly, only two guys have done it. Those two guys were Tyrone Wheatley and Amos Zerouoeueoueoueoeuoeeoue, each of which barely cracked 1000 yards once.
History is certainly not on his side.
And really, even when Foster's been healthy, what has he done outside of one 70 yard run against the porous KC run defense and a pretty looking TD run in the playoffs against Philly?
Ran well against Baltimore and New England in the playoffs?
Foster has only been playing for 2 years. IN 2003 Stephen Davis was a surprise top10 RB. 2004 Foster gets his chance and gets an unlucky injury. Way too early to close the books on him IMO.
I agree, I guess I overstated the case for Foster compared to Shelton. But if I'm gambling for the starting RB and the front runner is only costing a 5th round pick, why should the backup (or 3rd string) guy be more valuable as a 10th round pick? We all know that Carolina is going to give their starting back 20 carries a game and it can't be both of them.
Medical science has improved in leaps and bounds in the past decade and ailments that used to be career ending are now commonly repaired. That's like saying no one got to the moon in 1950, guess what, there weren't any space shuttles back then. After watching Mcgahee gets his knee reveresed on him and to see him running WELL at the NFL level 2 years later, I put no weight whatsoever on injuries that appear to be recovered fully.
Recurring injuries are a problem, and players fresh off of surgery are a problem, Deshaun Foster's knee is no longer a problem. He is coming off a collarbone injury similar to Charles Rogers and people have written off that player as well. I guess medical science can now fix ACL tears but collarbones are a career ender...