Wood's Thoughts:

There are a lot of reasons be cautious about Marshall Faulk this year:

• Has missed time each of the last three seasons
• Is on the wrong side of 30
• Failed to break 1,000 yards rushing last season
• Is on a 3 year downtrend in yards per rush, yards per reception and total touchdowns
• Hasn't had 300 carries in five seasons
• Orlando Pace appears prepared for an extended holdout if necessary

Normally, all those things would warrant an AVOID label, especially when talking about someone you have to take in the first round if you want him. But despite all of that, Faulk is universally considered a top five selection again this year. Have we all sipped the proverbial "blue kool aid" or is there a reason to believe that Faulk warrants the benefit of the doubt where few other players would?

He's the best player in the league when healthy, and he could've played hurt last year. While some may focus on Marshall's two missed games late in the year, remember that he could've (and wanted to have) played but the team felt it best to rest him as the Rams were playing for next year anyway. When it comes to work ethic, I haven't seen many players match his intensity. As importantly, Faulk has the best field vision in the league, and the patience to let plays develop in front of him. Combine that with the softest hands in the backfield and you've got someone that not only can, but HAS done things that no other player in the league is capable of.

The Rams look primed for another run. It seems like ages ago, but the Rams are only a year removed (2001) from being a dominant team on both sides of the ball. Kurt Warner, a key to the team's cohesiveness and consistency, is back and looks healthy in camp. Remember that his injuries have not been career-threatening like a torn ACL, for example, but they've been lingering and with rest they should be a distant memory. The holdout of Orlando Pace not withstanding, the Rams acquired Kyle Turley who can play either right or left tackle, a huge upgrade from John St. Clair last year. The team also added veteran C Dave Wohlabaugh. The Rams also locked up Torry Holt this off season, and drafted two impressive rookies (McDonald and Curtis) so now the receiving corps looks to run five deep, something few teams can claim.

Positives

• Even in an 'off year' he was good for 1,500 yards and 10 TDs to go along with 80 catches
• Has a drive and work ethic like few in the history of the game, vows to be dominant again this year
• Best open field runner in the league, able to make plays that no other back can on any given Sunday
  

Negatives

• On the wrong side of 30 years old, missed time for the 3rd straight season, can he bounce back?
• Three year downtrend in yards per rush, yards per catch and touchdowns
• Uncertainty at the QB and left tackle positions, both key for Faulk and the rest of the STL offense to rebound

Final Thoughts

Marshall Faulk has a lot going against him. The 'smart play' would be to target another back if you're drafting in the top five. Yet, I didn't hesitate to grab him in our recent Footballguys Staff league. Yes, he's on the wrong side of the age spectrum. Yes, he misses time with injuries seemingly every season. Yes, Orlando Pace has yet to budge on his contract demands. And yes, we don't really know if Kurt Warner can right the St. Louis offensive machine.

But Marshall Faulk is a one-of-a-kind player. There's no better all around player in the game. His rushing numbers alone warrant top-10 consideration. His receiving stats make him a bona fide fantasy WR. Yet you get both with one roster spot when you start him. If you look back at the history of the game, it's rare for a player to maintain a high level of execution over a multi year period. Yet, the few that have are all considered some of the best to ever play the game. Faulk is CLEARLY in that mix, and I believe that he's simply that much better than most, which is why I'd happily ignore the risks and take him with my first pick in any league this year. Tomlinson, Williams, Portis and Priest are all worthy of consideration ahead of Marshall, but he should be the 5th player off the board, at the latest.

Stuart's Thoughts:

For a three-year span with the Rams, there wasn't a better player in fantasy football than Marshall Faulk. He made sportswriters search for new superlatives, defenders spend countless hours watching tape, and even some FF leagues question the fairness of the serpentine system-after all, how fair is it if the owner who lucks into the first pick is almost guaranteed a trip to the playoffs? That is how good Marshall Faulk was, entering the 2002 season.

While Faulk was the consensus top RB in the preseason, he disappointed; only showing flashes of his ability in 2002. Injuries to both himself and Kurt Warner made the Rams the least effective they've been since the two joined the club. Faulk had a three week stretch with Mark Bulger at the helm, where he totaled 651 yards and 6 TDs! That's the kind of big play ability fantasy owners had grown to expect from Faulk, but he failed to total 100 yards in any game the rest of the year.

What can we expect from Faulk in 2003? It's not difficult to ballpark him, as he should be better than 2002 (209 FPs) and worse than 2001 (341 FPs). Have age and injury taken a toll on the two Rams superstars? There's no doubt Faulk and Warner are inextricably tied to each other, and the Rams offense. Will we see the team that scored over 500 points for the third straight year, while averaging over 7,000 total yards for a two-year period? Or, the nightmare that scored just 316 points, and totaled less than 6,000 yards? My guess is this Rams team will resemble the old Rams, making Faulk more than worthy of a top five RB.

Finally, reports out of St. Louis have been overwhelmingly positive on Faulk. For the first time, he spent the offseason at the Rams facilities, and was a workout warrior. Always in prime physical condition, Faulk has more upper body strength and hopes to handle the heavy workload better in 2003.

Positives

• Faulk's brilliant combination of speed and power make him one of the most talented backs in the league.
• Faulk is the ultimate triple threat: He can: lead the league in yards per carry (as he did in 1999, 2000 AND 2001, with an average yards per carry of 5.4); be the best receiving RB in the league (as he did during those same years, averaging 881 yards per season); or be the ultimate scoring back (as he did with a record tying 47 touchdowns in a two year period).
• If things go well, he will be the best RB in the league, on the best offense in the league.
• Finished first or second in total yards from scrimmage for four straight years, 1998-2001.
• One of the smartest players in the league, Faulk knows every trick to maximize his abilities on the field.

Negatives

• Durability: Faulk has missed two games in each of the past three seasons, and was banged up and ineffective last year.
• Can the Rams rebound? Faulk will have a hard time justifying his draft status, if Torry Holt, Isaac Bruce and Kurt Warner have back to back down seasons.
• Age: Even if perfectly healthy, Faulk won't likely approach the great numbers of 2000. He's not the same back, and he's a 30/10 guy (30 years old, ten years in the league).
• High ankle sprains tend to linger, and it's very plausible that Faulk will either miss time or have diminished play if the ankle is aggravated.

Final Thoughts

How about Orlando Pace? Without the mammoth left tackle signed, the Rams offense faces another roadblock in their quest to return to greatness. How much would it affect Marshall? Let's look of how Faulk got his fantasy points:

• Rushing/Receiving to the left: 486 FPs (422 FPs from '99-'01)
• Rushing/Receiving to the right: 481 FPs (414 FPs from '99-'01)
• Rushing/Receiving up the middle: 271 FPs (195 FPs from '99-'01)

Faulk's rushing numbers and averages were better to the left, but he made his living as a receiver on the right side of the football field. Does this mean Faulk is the same with and without Orlando Pace? Our instinct tells us that's not true, but at the least I think this shifts the burden of proof. Pace was the number one draft pick, and has been hyped and touted as a HOF LT for many years. Any Faulk owner would rather see Pace in there, but I'd have a hard time justifying a big downgrade of Faulk due to a Pace holdout. I do feel this is moot, as Pace will likely start the first game of the season.

Quotes from the P.O.D. Message Thread:

To view the entire P.O.D. thread (there's a ton of fantastic commentary in there), click here:

Goat Herders:
"While I would not be at all surprised for Marshall to return to the top spot among FF producers, and I think he has the greatest chance of exceeding even the loftiest expectations, I have him ranked 4th overall in my RB rankings. I think of the top 4 backs, he, more then LT2, Ricky, or Portis, needs to have the rest of the offense (line, QB, receivers) "clicking" to maximize his stats. With Pace holding out, the QB situation slightly unsettled, and a less talented WR corps then years past, there are too many compounding factors for my taste."

CMU37484:
"People drafting end of August and Labor Day Weekend have a major advantage with guys like Holmes and Faulk. Questions about health and offensive linemen should be answered by then. Do not let Faulk slip past you anywhere after the 3rd pick this year. You'll regret it."

DarkManX:
"With Warner coming back from injury and from what I hear he has completely recovered from his finger problems (though fingers can easily get broken again). Addition of Kyle Turley at T will help them IMMENSELY, adding him to the line with Pace (barring he signs) and the likes of Timmerman and with the weapon of Torry Holt and the aging Isaac Bruce Faulk again should see a HUGE number of carries again.

If Faulk can stay healthy, which I think he can, I predict him to re-capture, well not the top spot but at least a top 2-3 spot in FF this year."

smlevin:
"The team will probably be fighting for a playoff spot, or at least for playoff positioning, until late in the year, which means you will get a full year of heavy use of Marshall Faulk. Expect quite a few 100 yard rec and rush games and quite a few multiple TD games, esp. during your playoff run as Marshall plays @Chi @Ari Min @Cle Sea Cin @Det in the second half of the year.

Obviously, take him anywhere from 1-5 overall, and if you are sitting lower than that and he drops into your lap, giggle like a school girl at the prom."

DuffMan:
"Around the age of 29-30, even the best RBs start to trend downward -- quickly. Often it seems, aging RBs have a "trouble" year where injuries and general team problems signal the beginning of the end. The Rams' 2002 season has that smell to me. Faulk is 30 years old. He gets 300-350 touches per year. Even if he is injury-free, that means something.

No one is saying Curtis Martin is back. Why is Faulk immune to the aging process that ruins so many other stud RBs?

Right now, I'm juggling Faulk around #7 to #9, along with Travis Henry and Ahman Green."

Projections: