Sign in to follow this  

Saquon Barkley's fantasy projection

Recommended Posts

What do you guys see as his projection as a yearly fantasy player?


I ask because I have the #1 pick in my dynasty league rookie draft, and obviously if I don't trade the pick for a king's ransom I'm taking Barkley.


I just am curious to see what you all think he could be like. Could he be the next LaDanian Tomlinson, or with the way offenses are now today, could he have a lighter load than Tomlinson did which will limit his opportunities? 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

id say he'll be a 1300 yard 10 td average player

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a huge fantasy football guy but have almost no shot at Saquon in any of my leagues.


That being said, the Giants' top 4 RBs last year combined for 368 carries. I'd pencil in Barkley for about 75% of that and that is if they dont run more. So I'd say 275 carries.


If Darkwa and Gallman can average a combined 4.4 ypc last year, then Barkley should at least match that.


So that's 1200 yds on the ground


The Giants RBs totaled 97 catches last year. Let's say Barkley gets even 40% of that. That's 40 catches at a minimum of 6 yards per catch (that's what Darkwa, Gallman and Vereen averaged). So that's roughly another 250 yards.


And I agree that he is around a 10 or so total TD guy.


I think his floor (if healthy) is 1450 total yards, 40 receptions and 10 total scores.


If he did that he would be an immediate top-15 RB and he would be knocking on the door of top-10 if they ride him even harder or if he outperforms the averages of last year's Giants' RBs.


Since their line has improved, their offense will open up more w Beckham back, and the Giants did not take this man in the first round in the top 5 to sit him, I think he could approach 1750 total yards and 12 scores. That would make him around a top-8 or so RB based on last year.


Sky is the limit for this kid.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Thread of the Week

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • You're right,  he's not an all-star.    But Breeland is easily the best zone corner available.    Good enough to command a contract of 3/24 when he was thought to be healthy.     And he was ranked as a top-40 free agent on every reputable top-100 free agent list.,  PFF and        So,  he may be average, or slightly above average,  but no one here is sure that we have any one better.   Someone from our collection of unknowns may wind up being that,   but no one knows for sure.   We're all guessing.   I'd be very happy to have him signed,  especially since Wilson apparently didn't play much this spring due to some unknown minor injury.   I don't see a downside to signing Breeland with a decent chance for a good upside.    You don't often get a chance to sign someone of his ability to a bargain contract.     I'd take it.    
    • Thanks for the info! I liked the pick.
    • As time goes by and the more time he misses, we can forget just how good our QB can be when healthy.  If he really is better than he's ever been, I'm definitely excited to see what he can do.  Even if he's just "only" as good as he was before surgery I'm still pretty intrigued.  Here's a nice reminder.  
    • I'm glad they are doing their due diligence with him. I watched him a bit last season and I thought he was worth about a 5th-6th round pick without knowing he had issues with coachability(I heard about those from Matt Miller on his Stick to Football podcast when he declared for the supplemental draft). Now I'm wary giving up even a 5th... but that's why Ballard and his staff are paid millions - to do their research and see if there is fire where the smoke is.  
  • Members