Jump to content
NBC Sports EDGE Forums

Dwayne Washington 2016 Season Outlook


hard1
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, dudeondacouch said:

with what has happened to the RB pool, a safe RB2 at 12fp/gm can easily be a championship winning pickup.

 

12 points per game is a lot.  192 over course of season and clear RB1 numbers.

 

I think if Dwayne gives you a floor of 5 points and an upside of 20, then he's in RB2 territory, which is just fine for a waiver wire pickup.

 

If Theo goes down, THEN you're talking about a league winning pick.  RB is used in this offense.  A lot of that is on passes and checkdowns.  But it's used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Lord_Varys said:

 

12 points per game is a lot.  192 over course of season and clear RB1 numbers.

 

I think if Dwayne gives you a floor of 5 points and an upside of 20, then he's in RB2 territory, which is just fine for a waiver wire pickup.

 

If Theo goes down, THEN you're talking about a league winning pick.  RB is used in this offense.  A lot of that is on passes and checkdowns.  But it's used.

 

Floor of 5 points? Last week he had 35 total yards.... but agree about Riddick going down as should everyone. But if David johnson goes down Chris Johnson has elite upside...

Edited by boltup15
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, boltup15 said:

 

Floor of 5 points? Last week he had 35 total yards.... 

 

While getting destroyed by the packers and being a two down back.

 

I agree with you floor's are hard with questionable definitions, but that game was also about as much of a floor game as you can get (3.8 YPC, -3 receiving yards, 0 TDs) with a as-bad-as-possible game flow. I highly doubt the hoyer bears are wooping the Lions by 20 by half. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, taobball said:

 

While getting destroyed by the packers and being a two down back.

 

I agree with you floor's are hard with questionable definitions, but that game was also about as much of a floor game as you can get (3.8 YPC, -3 receiving yards, 0 TDs) with a as-bad-as-possible game flow. I highly doubt the hoyer bears are wooping the Lions by 20 by half. 

 

Oh yea I think the Bears is a great matchup for him... the best matchup for him. But Washington didn't come in until they were down by a lot. So it's still to be decided how Washington will be used on a week to week basis. I expect a lesser Crowell from him. If he logs less than 15 carries this game against the Bears then I would be worried and switch Dwayne for someone like Deangelo or Chris Johnson. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, boltup15 said:

 

Oh yea I think the Bears is a great matchup for him... the best matchup for him. But Washington didn't come in until they were down by a lot. So it's still to be decided how Washington will be used on a week to week basis. I expect a lesser Crowell from him. If he logs less than 15 carries this game against the Bears then I would be worried and switch Dwayne for someone like Deangelo or Chris Johnson. 

 

I don't know, I am very optimistic with Jim Bob's comments . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, taobball said:

 

I don't know, I am very optimistic with Jim Bob's comments . 

 

I mean those comments don't really look the most optimistic for Washington's work load. It looks like he thinks Washington is doing good and that's that. Nothing head turning that makes Dwayne more fantasy relevant imo.

 

On if RB Dwayne Washington is earning a bigger role in the backfield: “I think he’s building confidence in our coaching staff and the other offensive players on the team with the way he’s going about his business, the way he’s playing on Sunday. That’s a good thing for a young player to do. Generally bodes well as he’s going along to kind of keep doing that, keep building confidence in the coaches, the play caller, the quarterback, your offensive teammates, all that stuff. I think he’s doing a good job of that. He’s got to keep it going.”

On what they coaches done to help eliminate ball security issues from Washington’s game: “Obviously it’s a very big point of emphasis for us. I’m a little bit of a believer that you work on it, it’s important, but I’m not a big believer in talking about it. Kind of like, you know, you go play golf, you don’t want to say, ‘Don’t hit it in the water.’ That’s usually a bad thing to say, so we talk about ball security a lot. It hasn’t been an issue, he’s been good with it. A lot of our guys have been really good with it.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, 1st DownSyndrome said:

 

 

Back to Dwayne...

9 hours ago, boltup15 said:

The one thing I love about this thread is everyone was doubting Abdullah being a big factor (except me) and now we have an RB come in who is not even close to as talented as Abdullah and playing less snaps but he has 'RB1 upside' and is a 'solid RB2'

 

For the record, I was sold on Abdullah this year, too.

 

That said, Abdullah lacks things that Washington has.  And those things are important: 1) size and strength enough to deliver blows to defenders, 2) goal line work.

 

To start the year, we saw Abdullah as the early down guy who would get a few catches but no goal line.

 

Now, we have Washington who will probably become the early down guy, who also will get a few catches, AND get the goal line.

 

It's more about the situation than it is about the individual talent.  But the individual talent (again: size, physical ability to be a battering ram) is different, and not necessarily tilted in Abdullah's favor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, boltup15 said:

Floor of 5 points? Last week he had 35 total yards....

 

Whoops.  Knew he had 38 yards but figured he had a catch or two.  And that he did: for negative 3 yards.

 

Still, I'll take it and not consider it his floor since it was just a feeling-out game for the coaches.  

Edited by Lord_Varys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think fantasy owners over emphasize the "goal line carries." They put Washington in at at the 1 because they could risk Washington's health rather than risk Abdullah's health. I would do the same thing as a coach. And I wouldn't put Riddick on the 1 either because Riddick is such a huge part of this offense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, boltup15 said:

I think fantasy owners over emphasize the "goal line carries." They put Washington in at at the 1 because they could risk Washington's health rather than risk Abdullah's health. I would do the same thing as a coach. And I wouldn't put Riddick on the 1 either because Riddick is such a huge part of this offense. 

So there are more injuries associated with goal line carries rather than just regular carries? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, boltup15 said:

I think fantasy owners over emphasize the "goal line carries." They put Washington in at at the 1 because they could risk Washington's health rather than risk Abdullah's health. I would do the same thing as a coach. And I wouldn't put Riddick on the 1 either because Riddick is such a huge part of this offense. 

 

1 week sample size so it's hard to say he wasn't going to get goal line all year.

 

But whoever the coach puts in at the goal line -- for whatever reason -- is a critical factor in FF.  Maybe some do over emphasize it, but it at least deserves emphasis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, dakimbell said:

So there are more injuries associated with goal line carries rather than just regular carries? 

 

Yes.... more people jumping on top of you.  Body parts bend the wrong way.

 

Linemen get hurt all the time on the goal line because their leg twists the wrong way. 

 

2 minutes ago, Lord_Varys said:

 

1 week sample size so it's hard to say he wasn't going to get goal line all year.

 

But whoever the coach puts in at the goal line -- for whatever reason -- is a critical factor in FF.  Maybe some do over emphasize it, but it at least deserves emphasis.

 

And also, when Abdullah was playing 62% of the snaps he only got 12 carries. I don't really see Dwayne ending up being consistent on a carry basis and not getting the receptions to hold the floor. The goal line ops will help: but that's if they get to the goal line. I would expect Riddick in from the 4-5 yards out to keep defenses guessing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, boltup15 said:

 

Yes.... more people jumping on top of you.  Body parts bend the wrong way.

 

Linemen get hurt all the time on the goal line because their leg twists the wrong way. 

 

 

And also, when Abdullah was playing 62% of the snaps he only got 12 carries. I don't really see Dwayne ending up being consistent on a carry basis and not getting the receptions to hold the floor. The goal line ops will help: but that's if they get to the goal line. I would expect Riddick in from the 4-5 yards out to keep defenses guessing. 

I could see lineman getting hurt more on the goal line but kinda surprised that RB's do, but I will take your word for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Lord_Varys said:

 

You have 6,000+ posts on this forum but don't own Christine Michael? 

I'm speaking about players who really weren't on anyone's radar from the get go of the season.  Cmike was on plenty of teams going in.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now that I think about it, maybe I am putting my faith in this guy just because I can't cope with being wrong/losing Abdullah... AGAIN. 

 

Either way, hoping for at least 12 carries. Goal line chances are always gameflow dependent so it's hard to predict but I think his chances are good for a very productive week. Definitely worth the gamble starting him if your roster has been decimated or went zero RB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...