|
|
#51
11-28-2005, 04:03 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: NFL running backs
[ QUOTE ]
Priest Holmes was one of the best in the league, but the chiefs dont seem to miss him much right now. So just how valuable was he in the first place? [/ QUOTE ] There are things that the Chiefs could have done with the Holmes of a couple years ago that they can't do with the Larry Johnson of today. 
|
|
#52
11-28-2005, 04:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NFL running backs
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] No, it's far less important. Being able to run 5 yards on first and ten is much harder than running 1 yard at the goal line. [/ QUOTE ] IIRC, according to Hidden Game of Football, the last yard is equivalent(in terms of the percentage change in your probability of winning the game) to about 10 yards in the middle of the field. [/ QUOTE ] In terms of absolute value, yes. In terms of relative value, no. Most any back can get get you in from the 1-yard line given 3 tries. What separates the great backs from the mediocre ones is the ability to get you consistent yardage to get to that point. Stephen Davis as 12 TDs this year; he sure as hell hasn't been a good back this year.
|
|
#53
11-28-2005, 04:05 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NFL running backs
Could you imagine what a top flight back could do for the Steelers?
What about Oakland getting someone who could average more than 3.5 yds per carry? Then check out the Miami Dolphins offensive collapse from '03 to '04, with basically the same, if not improved offensive roster. And ask yourself this. What is the Chargers record if they have [insert back] instead of LaDanian? I mean, he makes that offense go. I'd say Reggie Bush is closer to LaDanian than to a quality NFL starter. So that's how important he is.
|
|
#54
11-28-2005, 04:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NFL running backs
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Priest Holmes was one of the best in the league, but the chiefs dont seem to miss him much right now. So just how valuable was he in the first place? [/ QUOTE ] There are things that the Chiefs could have done with the Holmes of a couple years ago that they can't do with the Holmes of today (before he was hurt). [/ QUOTE ] fyp.
|
|
#55
11-28-2005, 04:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NFL running backs
[ QUOTE ]
What about Oakland getting someone who could average more than 3.5 yds per carry? [/ QUOTE ] Lamont and his partner Curtis were two of the most valuable backs last year. Maybe Oakland should get an O-Line who could block? [ QUOTE ] And ask yourself this. What is the Chargers record if they have [insert back] instead of LaDanian? I mean, he makes that offense go. [/ QUOTE ] Your first point is Oakland is hurt by a back with 3.5 ypc. What was LT's ypc last year? A whopping 3.9. Their offense seemed to do pretty okay.
|
|
#56
11-28-2005, 04:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NFL running backs
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Priest Holmes was one of the best in the league, but the chiefs dont seem to miss him much right now. So just how valuable was he in the first place? [/ QUOTE ] There are things that the Chiefs could have done with the Holmes of a couple years ago that they can't do with the Holmes of today (before he was hurt). [/ QUOTE ] fyp. [/ QUOTE ] Running backs get hurt. That's their decline phase: injury. Curtis Martin peaked so late because he managed to stay healthy. That and an amazing O-Line last year. Priest of 2003 was one of the best backs of all time. Priest of 2004 was the third most valuable RB on his roster (in terms of actual production; in terms of offensive importance he was obviously higher...).
|
|
#57
11-28-2005, 04:32 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NFL running backs
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Priest Holmes was one of the best in the league, but the chiefs dont seem to miss him much right now. So just how valuable was he in the first place? [/ QUOTE ] There are things that the Chiefs could have done with the Holmes of a couple years ago that they can't do with the Holmes of today (before he was hurt). [/ QUOTE ] fyp. [/ QUOTE ] Running backs get hurt. That's their decline phase: injury. Curtis Martin peaked so late because he managed to stay healthy. That and an amazing O-Line last year. Priest of 2003 was one of the best backs of all time. Priest of 2004 was the third most valuable RB on his roster (in terms of actual production; in terms of offensive importance he was obviously higher...). [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, I agree with all of this. My point was that Johnson is better than Holmes now and to compare Johnson with Holmes circa a few years ago isn't relevant to the Chiefs because Holmes isn't very good anymore.
|
|
#58
11-28-2005, 04:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NFL running backs
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] What about Oakland getting someone who could average more than 3.5 yds per carry? [/ QUOTE ] Lamont and his partner Curtis were two of the most valuable backs last year. Maybe Oakland should get an O-Line who could block? [ QUOTE ] And ask yourself this. What is the Chargers record if they have [insert back] instead of LaDanian? I mean, he makes that offense go. [/ QUOTE ] Your first point is Oakland is hurt by a back with 3.5 ypc. What was LT's ypc last year? A whopping 3.9. Their offense seemed to do pretty okay. [/ QUOTE ] Jordan: 3.5 per carry with defenses hardly paying attention. Ladanian: 3.9 with defenses loaded up to stop one player and one player only. Of course an O-line will help, but the fact of the matter is, Lamont Jordan is not an exceptional running back. He is probably your quintessential average NFL running back. Maybe even slightly below average.
|
|
#59
11-28-2005, 04:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NFL running backs
Last year, Lamont Jordan ran for 5.2 ypc. This year he's running for 3.5. What's the difference between these two years?
How well do you think LT would run for Oakland? Shaun Alexander?
|
|
#60
11-28-2005, 05:45 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: NFL running backs
[ QUOTE ]
Last year, Lamont Jordan ran for 5.2 ypc. This year he's running for 3.5. What's the difference between these two years? How well do you think LT would run for Oakland? Shaun Alexander? [/ QUOTE ] YPC from a backup with less than 100 carries is irrelavent, so the main difference is, now he's a starter. I doubt Jordan would have averaged 4.6 YPC on 371 carries (Martin's numbers) even behind the Jets line last year. LT in Oakland would certianly be north of 4, and possibly as high as his SD average of 4.6. He would also help take pressure off of Kerry Collins, which would give Moss and Porter and Gabrial more of an opportunity to show thier stuff. The bottom line is, with LT in the backfield, Oakland's offense would be significantly better. Alexander's numbers would be better than Jordan, and the Oakland offense would be better. Just not to the degree of LT.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
