WSHRedskins3ATLBraves3 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 http://nfl.com/fantasy/story/10244962 Mike, what sort of numbers do you predict for Clinton Portis this season? With Ladell Betts now in the mix for the Redskins, will Portis be as valuable as he has been in the past? -- R. Allenson; St. Paul, Minn. Michael Fabiano: Portis has lost some value headed into this season because of the presence of Betts, not to mention the surgical procedures he had on his hand and shoulder in the offseason. There were also some concerns over a sore knee, but Portis was able to participate in some minicamp drills last month so it can't be too serious. The former Miami standout should be considered more of a No. 2 fantasy back rather than a surefire elite runner, but he will see enough work to post 1,200-plus rushing yards and seven to nine scores. I know it could have gone in the fantasy forum but I felt it related directly to the team.:helmet: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD5 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 This was already posted over a week ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InsaneBoost Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 I picked Clinton as my Fantasy Runner. I have Clinton and Cooley on my team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willmb5 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Portis had what, like 7 touchdowns in like 9 starts last year??? I see him scoring at least 10 touchdowns and maybe around 1300-1400 yards. He's still the primary back in a run first offense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Portis ha 7 touchdowns in 8 games while being injured all year last year. He's a top fantasy player if he's healthy. Betts has nothing to do with it, though you will see him used more often than last year. Portis is good for 1,500 years and double digit touchdowns if he plays 16 games. More if Betts is hurt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD5 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Portis ha 7 touchdowns in 8 games while being injured all year last year. He's a top fantasy player if he's healthy. Betts has nothing to do with it, though you will see him used more often than last year. Portis is good for 1,500 years and double digit touchdowns if he plays 16 games. More if Betts is hurt. How can Betts have "nothing to do with it," yet Portis will do even better "if Betts is hurt." Contradictory. Having said that, I think if Betts can get the fumbling under control, and continue to run for a higher ypc and ypg than Portis again this season, and at a fraction of the salary, of course the Redskins would rather move in that direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor 36 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Portis ha 7 touchdowns in 8 games while being injured all year last year. He's a top fantasy player if he's healthy. Betts has nothing to do with it, though you will see him used more often than last year. Portis is good for 1,500 years and double digit touchdowns if he plays 16 games. More if Betts is hurt. I like the optimism, Art. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 How can Betts have "nothing to do with it," yet Portis will do even better "if Betts is hurt."Contradictory. Having said that, I think if Betts can get the fumbling under control, and continue to run for a higher ypc and ypg than Portis again this season, and at a fraction of the salary, of course the Redskins would rather move in that direction. Not at all contradictory. Betts will open things up for Portis and vice versa used in tandem, but, Portis will still have two or three carries for every one Betts gets. Portis changes how defenses play us. Betts doesn't. If Betts is hurt and Portis gets even more of the carries, he'll do even better, but, he'll still get his carries, whether Betts gets 10 or more a game or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD5 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Not at all contradictory.Betts will open things up for Portis and vice versa used in tandem, but, Portis will still have two or three carries for every one Betts gets. Portis changes how defenses play us. Betts doesn't. If Betts is hurt and Portis gets even more of the carries, he'll do even better, but, he'll still get his carries, whether Betts gets 10 or more a game or not. I understand your line of thinking.....and respect your opinion. However, I do think that with Betts' performance last season, that the coaching staff will now play him more, where if he had not done so well, the staff would have continued to run Portis more even if extremely tired, because we had no solid alternative. Now with Betts' emergence as a viable option, and with the injuries that Portis has accumulated, they will be much more likely to play Betts at the first sign of Portis being tired. I think this is a risk to any fantasy player interested primarily in the stats of Portis. I would like to know what you think would happen if Betts can continue to perform at the rate of last season, AND fix the fumbling problem. With a better receiving threat, a higher ypc, a higher ypg, and a salary a fraction of what Portis gets....do you think that the Skins would prefer to make him the face of the future? Or do you think that Portis brings so much to the table, that the staff would overlook his criticism of Gibbs, his desire to avoid preseason games, and/or his desire to avoid practice, and his inflated salary which could be used to improve other areas of need, and just continue to focus on him because he is simply that much better, despite any drawbacks he may have? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcarey032 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Yeah I saw that portis might be tagged now with a player who is prone to injury. Hard to imagine because of his age. But, I saw in some drafts that he is was definitely outside the top 10, which I think sucks. I think that he is actually going to be pretty productive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terpfan Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Because of Betts and injury history, he is definitely a #2. Upper tier of #2, but still a #2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flinchin88 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 the searching isnt really working. it was posted a week ago but i wouldnt be surprised if it didnt show up... it needs to be fixed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CRobi21 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 With the holes the line made for Ladell last year, my little sister could have rushed for 1,000 runs. He made good runs, nothing spectacular. CP will make those same good runs, but throw in his spectacular ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CM916 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 I picked Portis 4th overall last year and then accidentally drafted Betts very late. (the website was malfunctioning) I was really pissed at the time but it ended up working out for me. I may still go for one or both of them this year but not with a high pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD5 Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 With the holes the line made for Ladell last year, my little sister could have rushed for 1,000 runs. He made good runs, nothing spectacular. CP will make those same good runs, but throw in his spectacular ones. Really? So your sister is a better NFL running back than TJ Duckett? Or did TJ get 1000 yards behind that incredible line that makes anyone look good? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WSHRedskins3ATLBraves3 Posted July 14, 2007 Author Share Posted July 14, 2007 Duckett was running in short yardage situations where the other defense stacked the box. I'm not saying that anyone could have rushed for 1,000 yards last year, but Ladell wasn't the reason our running game was so potent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOOG Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Something interesting would be to look at the stats of numbers of carries/touches for the year Johnson/Holmes were at the top of their forms. It would be interesting to see how many touches JOHNSON got. Holmes was established(much like Portis) but Johnson had the momentum going into the season(Betts). And before you say I'm comparing Betts to Johnson I'm not..I'm talking more ball distribution. I just hope they both get enough carries to get in the "flow" of the game and they arent stepping all over each other. I dont see Portis as a number one back this year, but I hope he is.:logo: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmchairRedskin Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Let's not forget how explosive Portis can be. If he has the holes open for him that Betts had late in the season he's gonna be great. He only needed 273 and 290 carries to eclipse 1500 yards and score 29 TD's in his two seasons in Denver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmchairRedskin Posted July 14, 2007 Share Posted July 14, 2007 Really? So your sister is a better NFL running back than TJ Duckett?Or did TJ get 1000 yards behind that incredible line that makes anyone look good? TJ had 38 total carries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 Betts is a nice, shifty player. Portis is a once-in-a-lifetime talent. Portis has unique speed. He has the stop and start ability that changes games. There's a reason defenses still play Portis like he can take an 80-yarder to the house every down. It's because he can. Betts is a nice runner. He is a good pick and player. The difference is, with Portis in the backfield, teams game plan for him, period. With Betts there, teams take other things away, knownig Betts, as good as he can perform, doesn't change games the same way Portis does. As coaches on the team have said about last year, if Portis had those holes to run through that Betts did, he'd have had 15 touchdown runs of 50 or more yards, because teams simply can't risk playing the same way with Portis there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Truant Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 We're all happy to have both Betts and Portis. I think it's amusing that people forget how good Portis is. Campbell's willingness to stretch defenses took that extra man out of the box. The offensive line wasn't being tee-ed off on by 8 defenders at the snap and that unit really started to jell. Those holes Betts scampered thru were absolutely massive and Portis would turn some of those 15 yard runs into 40+ yard touchdowns. I really like Betts, I think he's a fine runner. He does run a bit upright, he doesn't have the power that you'd expect from a player his size/style, and he puts the ball down more than you like. But he's probably a better receiver than Portis and when he's in a rhythm he hardly misses a hole. We've seen Portis twist his body and make 2nd and 3rd efforts to get into the endzone or pick up a first down. Betts has a tendency to topple once he is met with solid contact. I have more confidence in Portis as a short-yardage threat and homerun threat. That's a rather unique talent, as Art eloquently mentioned above. However the coaches decide to deploy these two, it will reap rewards for the team. This is a good debate to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dance04 Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 his desire to avoid preseason games im only gonna comment on this sentence cuz it's a new one i read from you. desire to avoid preseason games? Guess what there slick, HE SHOULD NOT be playing in preseason games. Do you see LT in preseason games? Anyways, i also suppose his "desire" is super evident after giving 110% in that preseason game he played. he chased down the DB ( that's his breakaway speed at work) then blew him up. Too bad he just blew his shoulder too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD5 Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 im only gonna comment on this sentence cuz it's a new one i read from you. desire to avoid preseason games? Guess what there slick, HE SHOULD NOT be playing in preseason games. Do you see LT in preseason games? Shouldn't play in any preseason games? Really? The starting running back can't play one series a game, the first year that we have a new offensive coordinator, with the biggest, most creative playbook in the entire league? You don't see how one series a game could actually benefit him and our offense as the team tries to build chemistry with this entirely new scheme? Come on.....no one is asking him to play a full game....a half a game....even a single quarter. But to think that he doesn't need to play in one single series with a brand new, overwhelingly intricate playbook, and then to just expect him to come in the first game and blow the doors off like he had been playing with Al for 6 seasons is just a little bit ridiculous. And judging by comments from our players saying that only now are they actually beginning to feel more comfortable with the playbook, and judging by how disjointed our offense was on the field--we probably could have benefitted from having 10 preseason games last season. And tell Jansen....a guy that has played games with broken bones, that he isn't good enough to miss preseason games.....but that our star running back is. Please. Let's be real. Our starting qb plays a series....our starting corners and receivers play a series....our star offensive line plays a series. The guy can play one series. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McD5 Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 [quote name=Dance04 Anyways' date=' i also suppose his "desire" is super evident after giving 110% in that preseason game he played. he chased down the DB ( that's his breakaway speed at work) then blew him up. Too bad he just blew his shoulder too.[/quote] ' No, his belief that he is "too important" is evident in his own words...claiming that he shouldn't have to play in any preseason games. And by saying this to the media, and criticizing our HOF head coach in public instead of behind closed doors, makes other parts of his character more evident too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dance04 Posted July 15, 2007 Share Posted July 15, 2007 'No, his belief that he is "too important" he is too important. Had he been healthy all year, we would have won many more games. Of course this cannot be proven in anyway, just my personal opinion. He was and arguably is, our franchise player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.