Around the NFL
The Raiders cut Justin Fargas yesterday, which will no doubt result in Darren McFadden being overdrafted in many fantasy leagues for the third straight year. Judging by each player's NFL career thus far, Michael Bush should be the more valuable runner.
This story notes how the former No. 4 overall pick should take on a significant role next season, "assuming he gets the nod ahead of Michael Bush." Why, though, would anyone assume that?
The rushing numbers for each player in their first two seasons on the active roster (Bush didn't play as a rookie) are presented below. Not a lot of reason to believe McFadden is the better runner.
Michael Bush
Year Yds YPC TDs
2009 589 4.8 3
2008 421 4.4 3
Darren McFadden
Year Yds YPC TDs
2009 357 3.4 1
2008 499 4.4 4
--Andy Richardson
- Comments [4]
Readers' Comments
Add a Comment
Already a registered user? Please sign in to add comments.
To add comments, you must become a registered user of our site. To register, please click here.
Posted by Moishe Steigmann | Mar. 07 at 06:20 AM
Hi Andy, You have to help me figure out this one. In 2008, the stats were nearly identical based on what you provided (in fact, it was McFadden who had the better year). 2009 goes to Bush. I think it is a surprising oversimplification (surprising because FFI is not prone to it) that Bush is therefore better. There are multiple factors that go into determining a player's worth. Injury (i.e., McFadden in 2009), system, opportunity, coach's whim, years in the league, etc. You might be correct that Bush is better (I'm not debating the conclusion), but I would expect much more explanation and analysis than what you have presented (I am questioning the reasoning given here). So, convince me... All in all, though, thank you for your wonderful insights and comments throughout the year. Moishe
Posted by ANDY RICHARDSON | Mar. 07 at 08:58 AM
Moishe - It should be noted that Ian Allan, who compiles the player rankings for Index, may feel differently than I do. (Or he may not.) And although I do indicate I think Bush is better (more valuable), the gist of my post is to contend what I think will be the general reaction in most fantasy leagues, which was the observation by the first linked story, that McFadden would necessarily get the nod over Bush. You're right McFadden had a slightly better year in '08, although only slightly; whenever Bush got a shot, he played very well. Huge games against KC, Buffalo, and Tampa Bay that year. McFadden also had a huge game against KC, but was ordinary otherwise; better receiving numbers, just the one good rushing game. He just hasn't looked like a special player in the pros. So Bush was comparable as a runner despite being third on the depth chart in '08 and almost a yard and a half better last year. Bottom line, I'm arguing against what I think most will assume, and the article did: that McFadden is better and will be the featured guy, presumably just because he was more heralded coming out of college. At the NFL level, I don't think there's much there to base that assumption on. I imagine Ian will give his own take in the magazine, of course. I know he's never been overly impressed with McFadden; granted, he may not think much of Michael Bush, either. Anyway, thanks for reading.
Posted by Moishe Steigmann | Mar. 07 at 12:00 PM
Thanks for the clarification, Andy. And, not to take anything away from Ian, but I appreciate your unique insights and perspectives, too.
Posted by IAN ALLAN | Mar. 07 at 12:54 PM
I'm nervous about McFadden. I wonder if he'll ever be even an average NFL running back. He hasn't shown much so far. Maybe he's too tall and lanky. He might be able to crank out a great 40 time, but at 6-foot-2, he doesn't seem to have the quick feet and cutting ability that you need -- the side-to-side speed that's so important. And he doesn't seem to break many tackles. I am also curious why they haven't used him more as a Wildcat quarterback. They used him extensively in those formations at Arkansas. Seems like that might be a way to find some successful plays for him.