Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

What is Watson's value in a trade?

steelbtexan said:
Duke would still get 10-15 touches per game.
Click to expand...
We can only wish for that.
steelbtexan said:
I'm pretty sure Duke would be happy getting 10-15 touches per game.
Click to expand...
Johnson averaged 8 (7.9) touches per game this past season. Averaged 6.5 yds per touch. I'll sign up for 6.5 yards per play.
8 touches per game I guess is not all that bad. But for a RB that was traded for in order to enhance the passing game, that's not enough, imo. He averaged just over 9 yards per catch.

OB has to get him more involved.
 
Last edited:
austins23 said:
We can only wish for that.

Johnson averaged 8 (7.9) touches per game this past season. Averaged 6.5 yds per touch. I'll sign up for 6.5 yards per play.
8 touches per game I guess is not all that bad. But for a RB that was drafted to enhance the passing game, that's not enough, imo. He averaged just over 9 yards per catch.

OB has to get him more involved.
Click to expand...

I would have used Duke in the slot over Carter/Coutee to get him more touches as well as let him KR to get even more touches.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: JB
steelbtexan said:
Agreed it would be a waste of cap space that needs to be used on the defense.

Would you be against drafting a 3 down RB like Akers in the 3rd/4th Rd. Duke being on the roster wouldn't stop me from drafting a stud like Akers.
Click to expand...
I’d totally buy that. My only view is if we invest in a guy like Drake, we have no use for Duke. If we keep Duke, then re-signing Hyde or a draft pick would be sufficient.
 
RGV82 said:
I’d totally buy that. My only view is if we invest in a guy like Drake, we have no use for Duke. If we keep Duke, then re-signing Hyde or a draft pick would be sufficient.
Click to expand...

I would not let what I invested in Duke keep me from upgrading the position.
 
steelbtexan said:
I would not let what I invested in Duke keep me from upgrading the position.
Click to expand...
That is not really what I am saying. I am just saying IF we decided to upgrade at the position, Duke would be almost useless. Duke was underutilized last year with Hyde, so if we invested in a better option than Hyde, Duke would be used even less. There would be no point in keeping both.
 
steelbtexan said:
I would have used Duke in the slot over Carter/Course to get him more touches as well as let him KR to get even more touches.
Click to expand...
Look at what happened in Tennessee. Remember when Henry was mediocre and he split carries with Dion Lewis? Henry busted out and became a stud, and Dion Lewis became useless. The 3rd down back becomes useless when you invest in a valued RB.
 
RGV82 said:
Look at what happened in Tennessee. Remember when Henry was mediocre and he split carries with Dion Lewis? Henry busted out and became a stud, and Dion Lewis became useless. The 3rd down back becomes useless when you invest in a valued RB.
Click to expand...

Which I'm fine with.
 
RGV82 said:
Youre fine with keeping Duke and virtually having no role like Dion Lewis in Tennessee??
Click to expand...

If I can get a 3 down RB then yes.

The offense can be more diversified with a 3 down RB. Duke would be great depth. I would be very happy with Akers and Duke in a reserve role. With Duke being used like I described.
 
JB said:
Give the Texans a back like Henry was last year and I'm fine with keeping Duke even he only gets 50 carries a year
Click to expand...
Yeah. My point is that I doubt Duke would want to hang around with that kind of role.
 
steelbtexan said:
If I can get a 3 down RB then yes.

The offense can be more diversified with a 3 down RB. Duke would be great depth. I would be very happy with Akers and Duke in a reserve role. With Duke being used like I described.
Click to expand...
Sometimes ideas here are a little too idealistic and not realistic.
 
RGV82 said:
Exactly. You want a RB making 4.1 and 5.1 million this and next year sitting on the bench?
Click to expand...

For a back having a couple years like Henry had in 2019, I would make that sacrifice, plus I'd make sure he got 75 receptions each year
 
JB said:
For a back having a couple years like Henry had in 2019, I would make that sacrifice, plus I'd make sure he got 75 receptions each year
Click to expand...
No way that would happen. When Henry was average and split carries with Lewis in 2018, Lewis had 155 carries and 59 receptions. When Henry was dominating in 2019, Lewis only had 25 receptions all year. No way we could get Duke 75 receptions with Derrick Henry version 2019.
 
RGV82 said:
No way that would happen. When Henry was average and split carries with Lewis in 2018, Lewis had 155 carries and 59 receptions. When Henry was dominating in 2019, Lewis only had 25 receptions all year. No way we could get Duke 75 receptions with Derrick Henry version 2019.
Click to expand...

Okay?
 
RGV82 said:
Yeah. Okay. You said you’d get Duke Johnson 75 receptions with Derrick Henry on the Texans. Impossible.
Click to expand...

Johnson had 44 last year plus Hyde had 10, Coutee 22, Taiwan Jones 1, Carter 11, Steven Mitchell 2... Not impossible
 
JB said:
Johnson had 44 last year plus Hyde had 10, Coutee 22, Taiwan Jones 1, Carter 11, Steven Mitchell 2... Not impossible
Click to expand...
Show me the last RB who had 300+ carries in a season (like Henry did last year) who played with a 3rd down running back who had 75+ receptions in the same year.
 
RGV82 said:
Exactly. Cuz it doesn’t happen. And won’t happen like you suggested.
Click to expand...

1. I didn't suggest it, just stated what I, me, myself would do. Don't ask for hypotheticals and then expect realism to YOUR standards and historicals
 
RGV82 said:
No way that would happen. When Henry was average and split carries with Lewis in 2018, Lewis had 155 carries and 59 receptions. When Henry was dominating in 2019, Lewis only had 25 receptions all year. No way we could get Duke 75 receptions with Derrick Henry version 2019.
Click to expand...

If you played Duke primarily in the slot when he wasn't spelling the 3 down RB you could get him 75 receptions.
 
RGV82 said:
Exactly. Cuz it doesn’t happen. And won’t happen like you suggested.
Click to expand...

Not impossible but not likely.

Frankly, we dont have a back talented enough to warrant that many touches. If Marshall Faulk was on this team then by all means.

I'd rather see us attack a defense on every level of the field utilizing te's more along with fuller along with a passing game to RBS.
 
So here's my wild input to this thread. Let's say you can trade Watson to the Panthers or the Dolphins for two 1st round draft picks AND sign Teddy Bridgewater to a 3 or 4 year deal. Of course this is hypothetical, I don't want Watson to be traded but for the sake of conversation...
 
KoolAid Sipper said:
So here's my wild input to this thread. Let's say you can trade Watson to the Panthers or the Dolphins for two 1st round draft picks AND sign Teddy Bridgewater to a 3 or 4 year deal. Of course this is hypothetical, I don't want Watson to be traded but for the sake of conversation...
Click to expand...

I still wouldn't do it. Maybe tempted if they're both top ten / five picks.

I think Watson is special. I think ob does a lot to f that up.
 
JB said:
1. I didn't suggest it, just stated what I, me, myself would do. Don't ask for hypotheticals and then expect realism to YOUR standards and historicals
Click to expand...
You’re saying you would get a RB to get 300 carries and a 3rd down RB to get 75 receptions in the same year. I’m simply asking you to show me how you’re so brilliant to achieve this when it NEVER happens in the NFL. You should be hired as our new HC. Maybe GM too.
 
powda said:
Not impossible but not likely.

Frankly, we dont have a back talented enough to warrant that many touches. If Marshall Faulk was on this team then by all means.

I'd rather see us attack a defense on every level of the field utilizing te's more along with fuller along with a passing game to RBS.
Click to expand...
Marshall Faulk is one player. He was saying he would get one RB 300 carries and another separate RB 75 receptions.
 
How about we get on the Tom Brady sweepstakes. He’s worked with O’Brien before, knows his system and has all the measurable. We trade Watson a top 10 draft pick this year and a 2nd rounder next year and a couple fill ins. You draft a QB and groom for Brady’s departure in 2 years.
Hypothetically speaking of course
 
RGV82 said:
You’re saying you would get a RB to get 300 carries and a 3rd down RB to get 75 receptions in the same year. I’m simply asking you to show me how you’re so brilliant to achieve this when it NEVER happens in the NFL. You should be hired as our new HC. Maybe GM too.
Click to expand...

Prove that it can't happen

The Titans had 60 receptions fewer than the Texans last year... it could happen even with DHops getting 100+
 
RGV82 said:
Show me the last RB who had 300+ carries in a season (like Henry did last year) who played with a 3rd down running back who had 75+ receptions in the same year.
Click to expand...
The Redskins had a similar scenario in 2000 with Stephen Davis, the primary RB, with over 300 carries and Larry Centers as the receiving threat (81 receptions) as a FB/RB. So while its not probable, it is possible. Me personally, I want a good rookie RB to go along with Duke. That way there isn't a lot of $$$ tied up in that position.
 
KoolAid Sipper said:
The Redskins had a similar scenario in 2000 with Stephen Davis, the primary RB, with over 300 carries and Larry Centers as the receiving threat (81 receptions) as a FB/RB. So while its not probable, it is possible. Me personally, I want a good rookie RB to go along with Duke. That way there isn't a lot of $$$ tied up in that position.
Click to expand...

It wasn't about particular players, just hypotheticals.
 
JB said:
Prove that it can't happen

The Titans had 60 receptions fewer than the Texans last year... it could happen even with DHops getting 100+
Click to expand...
How would you like me to prove it can’t happen? Anything can happen in theory. I’m just being realistic. It’s never happened in recent memory, so history is usually a pretty good gauge on the reality of a situation.
 
RGV82 said:
How would you like me to prove it can’t happen? Anything can happen in theory. I’m just being realistic. It’s never happened in recent memory, so history is usually a pretty good gauge on the reality of a situation.
Click to expand...

I refer you to
KoolAid Sipper said:
The Redskins had a similar scenario in 2000 with Stephen Davis, the primary RB, with over 300 carries and Larry Centers as the receiving threat (81 receptions) as a FB/RB. So while its not probable, it is possible. Me personally, I want a good rookie RB to go along with Duke. That way there isn't a lot of $$$ tied up in that position.
Click to expand...

You can't remember 2000?
 
KoolAid Sipper said:
The Redskins had a similar scenario in 2000 with Stephen Davis, the primary RB, with over 300 carries and Larry Centers as the receiving threat (81 receptions) as a FB/RB. So while its not probable, it is possible. Me personally, I want a good rookie RB to go along with Duke. That way there isn't a lot of $$$ tied up in that position.
Click to expand...
Yes and did they have a receiver with 100+ receptions as well like JB is saying Hopkins would get? Either way. Going back 20 years to find a comparable situation is a stretch.
 
RGV82 said:
Yes and did they have a receiver with 100+ receptions as well like JB is saying Hopkins would get? Either way. Going back 20 years to find a comparable situation is a stretch.
Click to expand...

The whole scenario is a stretch... I stated what I would like, but you can't accept that because it doesn't fit your idea of what's possible
 
JB said:
The whole scenario is a stretch... I stated what I would like, but you can't accept that because it doesn't fit your idea of what's possible
Click to expand...
Nah. Not to continue this debate. But you didn’t state what you would LIKE. You stated what you would DO. Liking something and doing something are 2 different things. I wouldn’t have questioned you if you just said you’d like it. You said you’d do it so I wanted proof of how.
 
RGV82 said:
Nah. Not to continue this debate. But you didn’t state what you would LIKE. You stated what you would DO. Liking something and doing something are 2 different things. I wouldn’t have questioned you if you just said you’d like it. You said you’d do it so I wanted proof of how.
Click to expand...

I see you love semantics. No surprise
 
JB said:
I see you love semantics. No surprise
Click to expand...
Not even close. You said you would “make sure he got 75 receptions”. That’s way different than hypothesizing something you’d like. It’s not semantics at all.
 
JB said:
I see you love semantics. No surprise
Click to expand...
You’d react the same if I said “I’d like to have the number 1 overall pick in 2020”. Vs. “I’d make sure we have the number 1 pick overall”. ??
 
RGV82 said:
Not even close. You said you would “make sure he got 75 receptions”. That’s way different than hypothesizing something you’d like. It’s not semantics at all.
Click to expand...

And? You said it was (paraphrasing) 'impossible'
 
RGV82 said:
Whatever that means.
Click to expand...

It means that your comedic value in that post is higher than Watson's trade value (what this thread is about) or Henry's running ability or any players pass catching ability
 
JB said:
It means that your comedic value in that post is higher than Watson's trade value (what this thread is about) or Henry's running ability or any players pass catching ability
Click to expand...
Nothing has more comedic value than how you constantly manipulate and alter things you say in order to benefit your argument. It’s literally pointless debating anything with you, outside of the comedic value. You smoothly change things you say and only acknowledge feedback when you think you’re still right, and refuse to admit that sometimes your comments are legitimately stupid.
 
RGV82 said:
Marshall Faulk is one player. He was saying he would get one RB 300 carries and another separate RB 75 receptions.
Click to expand...

Most offenses get 45-65 snaps per game. It is possible. It doesn't mean the offense is good but it is possible.

I think you two (including @JB ) are bickering over hyperbole and semantics at this point. If one rb get 283 carries and another rb gets 68 receptions is he wrong? It's a rough projection and ultimately wtf cares unless we get the wins?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top