EBF said:
Michael Fox said:
EBF said:
He didn't break a single 36+ yard play.
Why is 35 yards the magic cutoff for explosive RB plays? What % of other top RBs had multiple long runs (>35 yds) in their rookie year? Just trying to understand why this comment is central to your view of Moreno.
It's not. It's just the longest run he had last season. I don't have the stats handy, but my sense is that Moreno had VERY few big plays last season. I would venture to guess that his touches per 20+ yard play numbers put him in some pretty ugly company. Then there's the YPC.
22 RBs had 200+ carries last season. Here they are sorted by YPC average:
Chris Johnson - 5.6
Ray Rice - 5.3
DeAngelo Williams - 5.2
Jonathan Stewart - 5.1
Frank Gore - 4.9
Ricky Williams - 4.7
Rashard Mendenhall - 4.6
Fred Jackson - 4.5
Maurice Jones-Drew - 4.5
Ryan Grant - 4.4
Steven Jackson - 4.4
Marion Barber - 4.4
Adrian Peterson - 4.4
Cedric Benson - 4.2
Thomas Jones - 4.2
Carnell Williams - 3.9
Joseph Addai - 3.8
Knowshon Moreno - 3.8
Brandon Jacobs - 3.7
Matt Forte - 3.6
Kevin Smith - 3.4
LaDainian Tomlinson - 3.3
Out of 22 backs who had 200+ carries last season, Moreno ranked 18th in yards per carry. What does this mean? He was very ineffective running the football.
He doesn't break big plays. He doesn't have a high yards per carry. So what value does he bring to his NFL team? None. You could sign two free agents off the street, split his 247 carries between them, and get the exact same production (maybe better).
The reason guys like Frank Gore and Steven Jackson continue to receive 250+ carries every season is because they do great things with those opportunities. They can shoulder a heavy workload and they routinely finish well above average in YPC. That's why they keep their jobs and that's why they're dynasty gold.
On the flipside, there's virtually no dynasty value in a player who's completely ordinary. By all appearances, Moreno is completely ordinary. He does nothing exceptionally well and his production is imminently replaceable.
I see no reason to be optimistic about a pedestrian runner with no special qualities.
You can bring up the examples that suit your argument like LaDainian Tomlinson and Emmitt Smith. That proves nothing. For every player who started his career with a poor YPC and became a star, there are countless guys who faded into total obscurity. If you're going to bring up LT and Emmitt, you might as well mention Laurence Maroney, Michael Bennett, Julius Jones, Kevin Jones, Antowain Smith, Anthony Thomas, William Green, JJ Arrington, Tatum Bell, Chris Perry, Kevin Jones, Musa Smith, Ron Dayne, TJ Duckett, Deshaun Foster, and James Jackson.
It's really simple for me:
- Moreno has mediocre physical gifts compared to the average NFL RB.
- Moreno looked mediocre last year.
- Moreno had mediocre stats last year.
All signs point to mediocre. Tell me why I'm supposed to think he's anything but mediocre. I don't see any reason.
The only reason to think he's undervalued is if you think his 2009 performance wasn't an accurate reflection of his ability. Maybe...
He was hurt? Doubtful. He was healthy enough to play in 16 games.
His supporting cast doomed him to failure? Doubtful. Correll Buckhalter averaged
5.4 YPC on the same team.
He will naturally improve? Possible. Sometimes RBs spontaneously "get it" like Benson or T. Jones, but you can't assume that it will happen.
I have no reason to want this guy to fail. I had him ranked as the top rookie RB last year and I drafted him in several leagues. I just call it like I see it. He showed me nothing last season and his production was poor. IMO everything points towards a Maroney/Lynch/Julius/Foster type of career trajectory. He's an adequate back who lacks the special qualities to be a desirable option in dynasty leagues.
you did say that you watched him a few times as a rookie, & otherwise "kept tabs on him"... i assume this means looking at the box scores...that kind of a cursory, summary review can miss things like scheme & usage... which some DEN observers have confirmed was an issue... if in fact mcdaniels misused him, and routinely/predictably slammed him into the middle, with the interior OL struggling, do you think that would have been conducive to a high yards per carry as a rookie?
[EDIT/ADD - could variations in usage help partially explain his puzzling, bipolar game log history (good stretches in games 2-5 & 9-12, brutal in games 6-8 & 13-16)... he WASN'T bad overall... he was good for about half the season, and bad for about half the season... that screams out for an explanation... tarring his whole season with the "bad" brush is antithetical to this kind of exploration, and precludes a more balanced & thorough appraisal of ALL the factors that went into his WHOLE season, not just the bad part you currently choose to emphasize. moleculo addressed varying level of competition/strength of schedule, with SD, BAL & PIT coming in the week 6-8 stretch... perhaps the horrific week 13-16 did have something to so with hitting the proverbial "rookie wall"... if so, are rookies that hit the wall, some harder than others, doomed to failure... OK, that time i expressed a counter argument in extreme terms - my bad
]...
your tone has been generally dismissive and expressed in extremes & absolutes, without much nuance (his value is none... no special qualities... completely ordinary... the fact that he had 25 BP reps means nothing... the fact that some great RBs have gotten off to slow starts proves nothing etc, etc, etc)... so it is impossible to tell if you have even considered this angle... by all appearances, you haven't. you are just rehashing the reasons why you already made up your mind you don't like him.
so if you think moreno will always be misused, and the broncos will always struggle in the interior OL, than i think it makes a lot of sense to give up on him after one year...
you say he does nothing well, but he was lauded by scouts for his receiving ability, and potential as a blocker (which could translate to increased time)...
you also said he has no speed or power (and highlighted his lack of a 35+ yard play, though wells and stewart as a rookie did about the same?)... the most obvious hole in his game IS a lack of breakaway speed... but other RBs have succeeded without it (westbrook was "slow" but quick)... conflating speed with rare and special RB ability leads to the mistakes such as drafting michael bennett and darren mcfaden so high...
you say moreno is pedestrian, so why do you think he was the consensus top RB on most boards (perhaps wells was on some, but i think he had more injury, and complete game questions?)...
clearly it wasn't because of his speed.
i realize scouts make mistakes all the time (that includes amateurs like us)... and these guys actually watch game film, and are aware of and factoring in things like scheme/usage. but in most cases, we can remember what scouts liked about the prospects AT THAT TIME. like in the case of bennett & mcfadden, speed.
you obviously saw some things in him last year, to draft him in three dynasty leagues. unless you were drafting before the combine and pro days, the fact that he didn't have blinding speed fell into the category of information you ALREADY POSSESSED. it must have been other things that appealed to you... you don't have to remember... here is a post from 11-28-2008 (BEFORE 2009 draft - being drafted where he was, could only have bolstered your high opinion of him?)... and BTW, i didn't do a write up for the class at the time, so i commend you for having material to look back on to shed light on the current dilemma... for me, that dilemma comes in the form of... even if i respect your opinion (i do, in open minded, non-intransient mode), which EBF are we going to believe... the 2008 or the 2010 iteration?
http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=443539
2. RB Knowshon Moreno, Georgia
"Positives: Quick feet, good burst, and good power. Gets to top speed in a hurry and is a tenacious competitor. Consistently productive against tough competition. Sturdy frame with a low center of gravity.
Negatives: Might be a little undersized and seeks contact too often, which results in a lot of big collisions. Not a home run hitter at the next level.
Overall: Moreno looks like a safe bet to become a productive starter in the NFL. He might not be a major big play threat and he might struggle with injuries, but he looks like a very low bust risk overall.
NFL Comparison: Marshawn Lynch"
interestingly, at this time, lynch was thought be you to be a positive comp... 2008, when you wrote the above, he was in the midst of his best season so far (RB15 in FBG scoring - about where moreno was in 2009)... now he is listed as a negative comp (citing also career trajectories of maroney, julius & foster)...
you liked the same guys before (moreno AND lynch) BASED ON PHYSICAL TRAITS & SCOUTING ATTRIBUTES...
[EDIT/ADD/DIGRESSION - this reminds me in some ways of your EXTREMELY low ranking of golden tate in the dynasty thread... you stated he didn't look explosive on film... you did acknowlege that you would move him up if he ran a good 40 and had good drills at the combine, and this happened... the good 40... but why would a good 40 change what you saw on film? i would just expect you say, so what, he runs fast in track shorts, but imo he doesn't LOOK fast or explosive on film... i don't get how something as seemingly abstract as a fast 40... and of course too slow a 40 can be a big problem, you need minimum speed to succeed... i don't see how a fast 40 changes what you SAW... with your own eyes?]...
clearly lynch's situation has changed (jackson looked better), but that would have been hard to predict based on his scouting profile, and the first two years of his career (lynch also hasn't been the beneficiary of a very good OL in BUF)... i didn't see too many scouts predicting lynch was doomed to a maroney/jones/foster-type career trajectory, BEFORE last season... that sounds a bit like revisionist history, and switchey/changey to like him on scouting-based attributes before, and not like him now, when only his situation has changed.
in your list below...
"...Laurence Maroney, Michael Bennett, Julius Jones, Kevin Jones, Antowain Smith, Anthony Thomas, William Green, JJ Arrington, Tatum Bell, Chris Perry, Kevin Jones, Musa Smith, Ron Dayne, TJ Duckett, Deshaun Foster, and James Jackson."
how many of those had 1.12 pedigree? how many of them would you have graded as #2 overall in their rookie class (fantasy/dynasty)?
lynch was drafted about there, and he didn't get off to a bad start in his first two years, given circumstance of going to a rebuilding team with an unsettled QB situation. stewart was taken there recently... mcfadden has been a failure so far, but he was controversial BEFORE the draft, with warning by some that he succeeded in a gimmick offense, had chicken legs and would be a one-dimensional, situational RB incapable of running inside (generally not thought to be an issue with moreno)... there have been other collossal busts further back (lawrence phillips & kijana carter - but those could have been for legal and injury reasons, respectively)... benson, brown & cadillac were taken very high (for a RB) a few years ago... cadillac can't really be evaluated due to injury reasons, brown has emerged, so did benson eventually, though maybe too late for some that gave up on him... also from above list, green may have been close in pedigree, and a contra-indicator of the poor starts can be overcome school of thought... perry was another injury casualty...
benson and thomas jones (in your list above of "good" RBs with better per carry averages - both in top 15 at 4.2) would be good examples of high pedigree RBs that were misjudged due to slow starts.
on your point that citing LT, smith and payton doesn't PROVE* anything, and being able to list a much longer list of bad backs... this is a given... by definition, great RBs are rare, and there will be a much smaller list of them... it is always easier to create a list of average players (there are a lot more of them)... the whole point/purpose of this exercise (like it always is in fantasy/dynasty) is to hunt down and run to ground exceptions that might beat the odds... a laundry list of players that DIDN'T beat the odds isn't that useful or even relevant (again, we already knew that most RBs don't become top 3-5-10)...
issues of scheme & usage could shed light on the LIKLIHOOD of beating the odds... to me, it is issues like that which are precisely what is being investigated... in stating that buckhalter had a higher per carry average, this seems to completely blow by and not even look at the witness and testimony of some locals (who DID watch the games, and may have been more familiar with scheme usage questions & implications) who mentioned that buckhalter was allowed more sweeps, and didn't run up the gut as much... obviously, slamming it up the gut for a team with a poor interior OL is not a recipe for busting lots of long runs... the RB with the consensus best hands for his position in the class of '09 among the top prospects (ie - moreno) got less than 2 receptions a game... i'd be surprised if this is always the case... perhaps if he gets the ball in space more, he will have more opportunity to be creative (than slamming it up the gut with a poor interior OL)...
what if DEN rebuilds the OL (especially interior) and makes it better... his value can only go UP in the short term if that happens (it already is what it is without those potential/likely improvements - mcdnaiels has already gone on the record stating he thought moreno's lack of greater success was more on the OL than a lack of intrinsic ability).
you doubt he was hurt... now if you are determined to think his issues are talent (despite thinking he was talented before the draft), that could cause you to downgrade the evidence that he was hurt... we KNOW he was hurt with a sprained MCL before the season, this is pretty indisputable... this could lead to the counterintuitive position that not missing any games equates to no injury? again, this isn't a very nuanced position... this leads to binary... injured or uninjured categories, extreme, black & white positions (which is characteristic of the tenor of your position here as a whole)... of course there are gradations and levels of injury... health is relative and a continuum... lande's scouting report above specifically mentions he is tough and plays through pain... if he hadn't been as tough, and had missed a game or two, than presumably you would have admitted he was "hurt"?
could this be a case of effectively punishing a player (in your hasty eval) for being tougher than others in some instances... if somebody kicked you in the knee right before the season, would you expect it to get BETTER by playing instead of resting? but again, if you are determined to blame talent (despite praising his talent BEFORE draft), it would be consistent to be dismissive about the injury question... it doesn't really fit in too well with your current belief system regarding moreno.
* proof is an odd choice of words - i am aware, as no doubt everybody in this thread is, they we are not attempting to PROVE things to level that might be required in the mathematical realm... mentioning this is, at best, superfluous and a given (less generously and sympathetically - patronizing and condescending).
i respect the fact that you are a contrarian... but i think sometimes you come off as dismissive, and speaking in extremes & absolutes (moreno is worthless, does nothing well, completely in contradiction to your approx year old scouting profile... examples of great backs with humble beginnings means NOTHING to you... a good BP means NOTHING, etc, etc, etc) is not representative of your best work.
a less extremist, more nuanced debate, could benefit the thread. even being as down on him as i have no doubt you are now, imo things are rarely as black and white as you seem to be portraying them... of course, if he is completely mediocre, he could lose his job, which would render him worthless... but i am referring to scouting attributes rarely being so black and white... how you could go from liking him so much to viewing him as useless in just one season (with possible cause for less rigid/simplistic interpretation than - ZERO talent, NO speed or power, etc) is unclear... i realize scouts make mistakes, and sometimes attributes and traits that looked good in college don't translate well to the NFL... MAYBE this is such a case, but i want to explore other possible causes/explanations first. refusing to consider scheme/usage possibilities (scheme/personnel could improve, maybe buckhalter had a high per carry average because he was USED differently, etc) doesn't help with this purpose in mind.
i'm not assuming anything as far as the liklihood of his replicating the arc and trajectory of benson & t. jones... but i'm also disinclined to assume he isn't capable of improving... if there might be mitigating factors potentially explaining his less than stellar debut (why conversely assume he is william green and not benson/jones?)... it is possible to finish out of the top 10 as a rookie and go on to have a good career.
RB17 isn't worthless... an alternative to falling on his face is that, while he may never be a top 3-5-10 RB (and you definitely don't have to pay him like that to get him in a draft or trade for him), what if he is a top 12-15? that is pretty close to where he was as a rookie... possibly injured (at least part of the season), with scheme/personnel/usage questions... not great, not terrible, debate on how good/bad, plenty of room for interpretation (which i think a rigid, dismissive stance is antithetical to).
its not like he needs huge improvement to get to top 12-15 RB? if so, is he really dooomed to failure, and imminent (eminent?) replacement? is there that much gap and separation from where he ended up (RB17), and where he would need to be to be more productive and with greater job security (RB12-15?)... yet you seem so sure he is doomed. will they always have a QB as ordinary as orton, and never get one that might put moreno around the goal line on a more regular basis? if they move marshall, might they run more? these are both reasonable possibilities, and imo, multiple reasons to NOT rush to judgement so quickly.
all that said, if all the evidence is actually considered (??), and moreno is STILL deemed doomed to failure, than his value in that analysis could be that it is as high as it is ever going to be, & you did the right thing by moving him... he could be a bad season away from having his value plummet (see lynch, mcfadden, other recent high pedigree RBs this happened to - also to forte & slaton, but they are not comps in terms of pedigree)...
)... he was probably around a 4.6 guy in his prime... but his quickness MORE than compensated... for those who saw moreno in DEN (and going further back, at georgia), is he a candidate to compensate for a lack of pure speed, with above average quickness, feet?i about his elusiveness above, but don't think got a response yet... to recap, how is his shiftiness and make-you-miss ability...he does have great pedigree... or course, the path to dynasty championships is littered with the wreckage and strewn with the corpses of dynasty teams that built around players that were "good in college" (ryan leaf was good in college, so was david terrell, darren mcfadden, etc)... be that as it may, moreno was one of the top 1-2 RBs in NJ state history as a prep, and one of the top 1-2 RBs in georgia history (with herschel walker, of course)...* a couple other "mission critical" traits/attributes for an NFL RB are vision and instincts... i thought moreno's looked good at georgia, but would appreciate feedback from the georgia/collegiate scouting cognoscenti ("in the know") in these areas as well...** if talent-wise, curtis martin and thomas jones are comps, that could end up being pretty good... moreno might be the kind of prospect that isn't great at anything, but good at everything (maybe that decribed tiki barber?)...
He was 16th in the league in yards after contact (
He was 16th in the league in yards after contact (
in google images, this picture doesn't reveal grotesquely huge, waist-size thighs like campbell, robert newhouse & theotis brown, but conversely they don't look unusually small/weak...
