Steve Slaton to Miami Dolphins: Is RB a Fantasy Threat to Reggie Bush?
The Miami Dolphins claimed former Houston Texans running back Steve Slaton off of waivers today, adding him to their three-man stable of backs that includes Reggie Bush, Daniel Thomas and Lex Hilliard.
While Slaton won't be much of a threat to unseat Bush's fantasy value right away, it doesn't matter—Bush and the Dolphins have already done enough to erode the back's worth to your fantasy team over the past three weeks.
Bush began his time in Miami as a featured back, but that failed, with Bush not having the skill set nor the speed to handle the role. He's not useful in goal-line situations, and while he was once thought to be of use to the Miami passing game, he did not line up as a receiver in the team's Week 3 loss to the Cleveland Browns.
Now, Bush's only use seems to be to spell surging running back Daniel Thomas when he needs to take a play off. Thomas is averaging 4.1 yards per carry and is far more versatile than Bush; he's shown he can produce in every situation and has become a fantasy football gem simply because Bush failed to deliver.
Slaton is apparently the team's No. 4 back upon being signed today, meaning that it will be at least a week or two before his fantasy value is determined. If he works out well for the team, he may supplant Bush as the No. 2 back, making Bush's fantasy value far closer to zero than it is now (and it's pretty close already).
In this way, Slaton can demolish what little fantasy value Bush has remaining while not increasing his own. The Miami run game is quickly becoming Thomas' one-man show and the Slaton signing proves that the team is quickly running out of both patience with and confidence in Bush.
Fantasy owners with Bush on their rosters are best served either dropping or attempting to trade him in a package deal; while Slaton might not be the ideal replacement for him, his mere presence with the Dolphins means that the Reggie Bush Experiment is close to failure.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?