Fantasy News
Below are the top running backs from the averaged listings in the Fantasy Index Open. I’ve put the most surprising listings (to me) in bold.
Foster, Rice, McCoy and Jones-Drew are the first four. That’s pretty standard. But Chris Johnson and Ryan Mathews aren’t far behind them.
It’s after those six that there’s a considerable dropoff in value (or perceived value) down to McFadden, Forte and Lynch.
I’m surprised to see Matt Forte at 8th. He’s got the contract mess he’s trying to work through, and he won’t carry at the goal line. He could lose additional work to Michael Bush as well. I am shocked that anybody would put Forte in their top 10.
I like the rookie running backs, Trent Richardson and Doug Martin, but they didn’t fare well. Richardson comes in 11th. I think he’ll be one of the first 6-8 running backs selected in most drafts. And the Muscle Hamster is way down at 21st, which just seems crazy to me.
Also note that BenJarvus Green-Ellis isn’t even in the top 25.
The Fantasy Index Open is like the Experts Poll in the magazine, but it’s open to everyone. The basic rules call for each person to submit a top 20 at each position, with players counting for more points the higher they appear on a list.
The winner will hoist a massive trophy donated by Affordable Trophies. The winner will also compete in the regular Experts Poll in the 2013 edition of Fantasy Football Index magazine, competing against the regular industry pros.
FANTASY INDEX OPEN -- RBs
98.2% HOU Arian Foster
94.7% BAL Ray Rice
93.5% PHI LeSean McCoy
82.2% JAC Maurice Jones-Drew
81.6% TEN Chris Johnson
80.8% SD Ryan Mathews
68.6% OAK Darren McFadden
66.6% CHI Matt Forte
65.6% SEA Marshawn Lynch
63.4% DAL DeMarco Murray
61.3% CLE Trent Richardson
55.3% MIN Adrian Peterson
53.0% STL Steven Jackson
45.5% BUF Fred Jackson
44.8% ATL Michael Turner
44.2% KC Jamaal Charles
42.0% NYG Ahmad Bradshaw
39.1% SF Frank Gore
29.0% NO Darren Sproles
25.0% NYJ Shonn Greene
18.5% TB Doug Martin
13.9% PIT Isaac Redman
13.2% MIA Reggie Bush
11.4% ARI Beanie Wells
10.3% WAS Roy Helu
—Ian Allan
- Comments [5]
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 ROBERT BUCKMANN | Jun. 28 at 06:39 PM
I think there are 10 backs and the rest are weak. I agree with you on Forte and I won't be drafting Peterson either. No one comes back that quick from an ACL/MCL injury...not even Superman.
Posted by Travis Billman | Jun. 28 at 07:26 PM
Considering this is based on total points, I'm surprised injury-prone guys like McFadden and Peterson would rank so high, and consistent guys like Sproles and Richardson would rank so low. I would think that the higher percentage chance of playing 16 games would push them up the board. In this scoring system, guys who steadily pile up numbers outweigh high talent guys that play 10 games.
Posted by BILL REHOR | Jun. 28 at 08:34 PM
We're designating Richardson as "consistent" now? Before he's played a single down? I don't understand the confidence in the rookie backs this season. All evidence indicates that a high pick on a rookie back is a recipe for disaster, but everyone's falling over themselves for these guys anyway. If only they could all read this article I saw about first-year running backs... it was in a fantasy magazine somewhere... I forget the name...
Posted by Travis Billman | Jun. 29 at 07:39 PM
I would consider Richardson consistent as it pertains to his ability to be a workhorse back and be more likely to play 16 games than Forte and McFadden. I didn't say I would spend a high pick on him; only that in this particular scoring system, I think he'll end up with more total points at the end of the year. Perhaps not better per-game averages, but better totals; and that's all that matters in this scoring system. That context matters in these rankings.
Posted by Rob Dammers | Jul. 03 at 08:25 AM
ESPNs' John Clayton has an interesting theory on the cumulative age of an NFL line..basically, anything over 150 years , is bad.. http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/42763/john-claytons-theory-of-150-for-o-lines Cleveland's o-line is one of , if not the youngest, o-lines in the NFL..no one older than 27. they'll be around for a long time..Richardson should be one of the best RB's over the next 5-7 yrs, worth a lot in dynasty formats..he might not have the Clinton Portis-esque rookie season ( 1500 yards) but he should easily surpass 1100 yards rushing..