The Trent Richardson Thread (3 Viewers)

This year Trent reminds me a lot of Chris Johnson in 2011. As a result, I think I fall on both sides of this debate.

We were all a bit over-reactionary in the Shark Pool regarding Johnson 2-years ago. Yes, he was a re-draft bust that year, but if you sold him low in dynasty you are (likely) regretting it. Similar to Trent, in 2011 Johnson switched offensive systems (Palmer), had a pretty brutal run blocking O-Line, he was not getting the yardage they were blocking for him and Javon Ringer looked much better (i.e., Donald Brown). As a result, while Trent is a re-draft bust, he is (at worst) a dynasty hold.

Now, before I get the inevitable "Trent has never run for 2000 yds" (ugh). Yes, I get that. Johnson and Trent are two completely different backs. The point is we have seen this before, and have seen the lemming type mentality on this board. The truth of the matter is Johnson had his "re-draft" bust year under circumstances very similar to Trent's. I believe this is minimal proof of my humble belief that it generally takes offenses a bit longer to meld together than defensive units. And also, demonstrates that the repetitive opinion of "if it is blocked, good/great backs always get the yardage (or else they stink)" is somewhat flawed ... It is not always the case - see Chris Johnson then, and now.

Let's remember Trent is in his third offensive system in just 23 TOTAL career games. He looked pretty good in his first system with his type of running style (950 rush, 367 pass, 12 overall TD's). I think, in dynasty, the verdict is still out.

Papa John said:

This year Trent reminds me a lot of Chris Johnson in 2011. As a result, I think I fall on both sides of this debate.

We were all a bit over-reactionary in the Shark Pool regarding Johnson 2-years ago. Yes, he was a re-draft bust that year, but if you sold him low in dynasty you are (likely) regretting it. Similar to Trent, in 2011 Johnson switched offensive systems (Palmer), had a pretty brutal run blocking O-Line, he was not getting the yardage they were blocking for him and Javon Ringer looked much better (i.e., Donald Brown). As a result, while Trent is a re-draft bust, he is (at worst) a dynasty hold.

Now, before I get the inevitable "Trent has never run for 2000 yds" (ugh). Yes, I get that. Johnson and Trent are two completely different backs. The point is we have seen this before, and have seen the lemming type mentality on this board. The truth of the matter is Johnson had his "re-draft" bust year under circumstances very similar to Trent's. I believe this is minimal proof of my humble belief that it generally takes offenses a bit longer to meld together than defensive units. And also, demonstrates that the repetitive opinion of "if it is blocked, good/great backs always get the yardage (or else they stink)" is somewhat flawed ... It is not always the case - see Chris Johnson then, and now.

Let's remember Trent is in his third offensive system in just 23 TOTAL career games. He looked pretty good in his first system with his type of running style (950 rush, 367 pass, 12 overall TD's). I think, in dynasty, the verdict is still out.

Click to expand...

For whatever reason, I keep thinking of Thomas Jones. Sure hope it doesn't take 5 years for Trent to catch on, but he's already shown more than Jones had.

I saw a power back running the ball decently on the first drive or two. After they fell behind and inserted brown, it appeared that luck had no time to through as the offensive line was out matched despite brown looking decent on a few draw plays. 2nd half (hell, just the 4th quarter), they committed to protecting Luck. Richardson was in the game at this point and saw the majority of the snaps down the stretch, but obviously not many carries.

When they were in the obvious running situation (killing clock at the end), Richardson was tasked with running into a wall of defenders.

I think workload will be TRich's issue. For a powerback to have fantasy relevance, he needs to carry the ball 20+ times per game or fall into the endzone. We're not seeing that, so he should be on your bench, but i do not believe this is an indictment of his ability/career.

ConnSKINS26 said:

humpback said:

ConnSKINS26 said:

humpback said:

ConnSKINS26 said:

You guys have a reading comprehension problem? He looked good on the play and flashed. That's all I said. It's an accurate description of the play, and I commented on it in a thread full of doom and gloom. My mistake, apparently.

Because it gets interpreted as something to "hang my hat on". As if I said "HEY GUYS THAT SCREEN PASS TOTALLY REDEEMED THE TOP 10 PICK EVERYONE SPENT ON TRENT".

Jesus Christ.

Click to expand...

You're FOS. You said he looked "really good on these screens", plural. I admittedly didn't see the 1st one, but unless it was the best 9 yard gain on a screen pass in history, he had another ####ty game. His second screen pass was as ho-hum as it gets.

Click to expand...

You didn't even see the damn play I'm talking about, and you're telling me I'm full of ####? Come on. That's exactly what I'm talking about. It's okay that he did something good. He caught the ball, sidestepped a guy quickly, got up to speed and plowed a couple guys along the sideline. It was not an amazing display of athleticism. He didn't run a 4.1 with the ball in his hands. He didn't front flip over the defenders. It was just a good looking catch and run. As I said. He looked really good, and then looked as good as you could expect on the second one.I didn't say he didn't have a ####ty game. I said he looked really good when used in the screen game.

Stop trying to exaggerate what I'm saying into some grand stand defense of Trent. I salvaged a relevant positive that I saw. That's all. Get over it.

Click to expand...

And you're the guy blasting others for reading comprehension? Why didn't you just say he looked really good on that one screen play? I said that I was talking about the 2nd one he caught, and if you think he looked as good as you could expect, well I guess that would be true if you don't have high expectations for him. That play was a complete yawner.

I think most people would consider tonight to be another negative for him overall, regardless of his one "good looking catch and run".

Click to expand...

It was absolutely another negative outing for him overall. Which has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that he looked good on the screen plays, which was the only thing I posted. You seemingly can't resist trying to make that observation something more than it was, which I should have seen coming. I'll leave you to it, I was just trying to note the small positive that I observed amongst another crappy game--because some people are still stuck with this guy, especially dynasty owners.

Click to expand...

The irony is thick here. Go read what I wrote again- I completely disagree that he looked "really good" on that 2nd screen play. There was absolutely nothing special, or even above average, about it. That's what I've been talking about the entire time.

I don't really understand the point in singling out one (or two, if you want to stretch it) plays to begin with. I don't think anyone is saying he's the worst RB to ever play in the NFL or would be shocked that he could mix in a good play once in a while. Having possibly looked "really good" on a screen pass doesn't change the fact that he didn't look good overall.

Having already admitted defeat here....

Colts are not going anywhere in playoffs without decent running game....

Will they try to establish some volume of carries for Richardson and/or Brown against the Rams at home who were just gashed on the ground by the Titans...

Papa John said:

This year Trent reminds me a lot of Chris Johnson in 2011. As a result, I think I fall on both sides of this debate.

We were all a bit over-reactionary in the Shark Pool regarding Johnson 2-years ago. Yes, he was a re-draft bust that year, but if you sold him low in dynasty you are (likely) regretting it. Similar to Trent, in 2011 Johnson switched offensive systems (Palmer), had a pretty brutal run blocking O-Line, he was not getting the yardage they were blocking for him and Javon Ringer looked much better (i.e., Donald Brown). As a result, while Trent is a re-draft bust, he is (at worst) a dynasty hold.

Now, before I get the inevitable "Trent has never run for 2000 yds" (ugh). Yes, I get that. Johnson and Trent are two completely different backs. The point is we have seen this before, and have seen the lemming type mentality on this board. The truth of the matter is Johnson had his "re-draft" bust year under circumstances very similar to Trent's. I believe this is minimal proof of my humble belief that it generally takes offenses a bit longer to meld together than defensive units. And also, demonstrates that the repetitive opinion of "if it is blocked, good/great backs always get the yardage (or else they stink)" is somewhat flawed ... It is not always the case - see Chris Johnson then, and now.

Let's remember Trent is in his third offensive system in just 23 TOTAL career games. He looked pretty good in his first system with his type of running style (950 rush, 367 pass, 12 overall TD's). I think, in dynasty, the verdict is still out.

Click to expand...

I agree with this line of thinking.

He is a monster redraft bust this year of epic proporations. But....I own him in one dynasty league and am willing to hang in there for one more season (2014). Makes no sense to trade him right now....I will get nothing.

But.....after watching last night....he is just not reading the holes well at all when they are there. He is running without authority. He did look fine on the screens and that is something I think the Colts will do more and more going forward.

There are those that still feel he is a bust period.....but i still see some tremendous physical talent that can be unleashed in the future. he is very young....on his thrid playbook in under 2 seasons.....I am willing to have patience with a young Rb like Richardson with his draft pedigree.

Will I be wrong.....at this point it looks like yes....dead wrong.

We all miss on players. And apparently so do the high paid so called genius' in the front offices of all 32 NFL teams.

I'm done with Richardson. An offer out of nowhere came in late Sunday Morning, for Denarius Moore. Glad that I didn't have to suffer the indignity of shopping him anymore. It's over. Shut it down. This thing is Kaput.

EBF said:

Jewell said:

Alfred Morris was in the same rookie class as Richardson, has shown infinitely more than Richardson on the NFL level, and is in an offense that preferably wants to run. Granted, Richardson caught more balls than Morris last year, but it doesn't look like the Colts are going to use Ricrdson as a pass catcher (only 1 reception with the Colts.) So ranking Richardson above Morris suggests that greater weight is being given to their respective reputations entering the NFL than what they've done in the NFL.

Click to expand...

Morris has clearly been a better rusher up to this point, but that's not guaranteed to continue and he doesn't have the same potential as a receiver, which is a huge variable in PPR. I don't think Trent's limited use as a receiver in three games as a Colt proves that they're not going to use him in that facet. More than anything, it's probably a consequence of him learning the offense on the fly. I would expect him to eventually get a lot of opportunities on dump-offs and screens.

He caught 51 passes last year. Morris caught 16. This year Morris is on pace with 12 catches. That's the big problem with Morris. His value stems entirely from his rushing yards. Last year he ran for 1500+ yards and Trent still outscored him in PPR despite having a pretty bad season running the ball. Now imagine what their numbers will look like if Trent becomes a more effective runner. They won't even be close. I think Trent is going to be like Rice, Foster, and Forte in the sense that he's always going to get 40-60 catches per year to prop up his numbers. That's a huge component of his FF value.

Click to expand...

Just checking to see if you'd still go with Richardson over Alfred Morris in dynasty?

Jewell said:

EBF said:

Jewell said:

Alfred Morris was in the same rookie class as Richardson, has shown infinitely more than Richardson on the NFL level, and is in an offense that preferably wants to run. Granted, Richardson caught more balls than Morris last year, but it doesn't look like the Colts are going to use Ricrdson as a pass catcher (only 1 reception with the Colts.) So ranking Richardson above Morris suggests that greater weight is being given to their respective reputations entering the NFL than what they've done in the NFL.

Click to expand...

Morris has clearly been a better rusher up to this point, but that's not guaranteed to continue and he doesn't have the same potential as a receiver, which is a huge variable in PPR. I don't think Trent's limited use as a receiver in three games as a Colt proves that they're not going to use him in that facet. More than anything, it's probably a consequence of him learning the offense on the fly. I would expect him to eventually get a lot of opportunities on dump-offs and screens.

He caught 51 passes last year. Morris caught 16. This year Morris is on pace with 12 catches. That's the big problem with Morris. His value stems entirely from his rushing yards. Last year he ran for 1500+ yards and Trent still outscored him in PPR despite having a pretty bad season running the ball. Now imagine what their numbers will look like if Trent becomes a more effective runner. They won't even be close. I think Trent is going to be like Rice, Foster, and Forte in the sense that he's always going to get 40-60 catches per year to prop up his numbers. That's a huge component of his FF value.

Click to expand...

Just checking to see if you'd still go with Richardson over Alfred Morris in dynasty?

Click to expand...

Yeah, most likely. Morris is what he is. A good rusher who never catches the ball. Most of my leagues are PPR and he simply isn't that great in those formats.

I still think Trent will be fine long term. Sometimes in dynasty you have to ride out the valleys to get the peaks. This is definitely a valley and there are a lot of scorned T-Rich owners and "I told you so" wannabes looking to take advantage of this opportunity to kick him when he's down. I think we'll look back in a few years and see that maybe Richardson wasn't as good as touted, but at the same time the backlash was overboard.

Last night was a great example. He got 5-6 carries when the game was in question and had a respectable YPC (around 3.8). The Colts mostly had to abandon the run after that because they fell behind huge. Then Richardson came in with the game all but over and ran into a brick wall in a couple obvious running situations to totally kill his YPC for the night. Now everyone can say this game is yet another example of how much he sucks when in reality he barely touched the ball.

This year is going to be a waste. The Colts sucked at running the ball in the first place and now with Wayne and Allen out of the picture they have a pretty limited passing attack as well. Stack up against the run, take away Hilton, and they aren't going to beat you. Even though they scraped out a win last night (against a 2-5 team) I think they're going to struggle for the remainder of the season. We may see Richardson get more opportunities in the passing game, but I don't think there's going to be much cause for optimism until next season. My hope is that they shuffle the deck at OL and bring in some new faces at OL and WR in the draft/free agency.

EBF said:

He got 5-6 carries when the game was in question and had a respectable YPC (around 3.8).

Click to expand...

Really?

He will continue to be highly owned.

This is where emotionalism of where a FF owner drafted him at or what he paid for him takes precedence over reason.

I turned the game on periodically last night, every time it seemed like Brown was on the field, including one time near the goal line.

Let it go, let him go. (Well, redraft; Dynasty, well... one day, one day, when... how much time do you have?).

Dr. Octopus said:

EBF said:

He got 5-6 carries when the game was in question and had a respectable YPC (around 3.8).

Click to expand...

Really?

Click to expand...

It is a respectable for any RB he likes not named Forte.

squistion said:

Dr. Octopus said:

EBF said:

He got 5-6 carries when the game was in question and had a respectable YPC (around 3.8).

Click to expand...

Really?

Click to expand...

It is a respectable for any RB he likes not named Forte.

Click to expand...

Not to mention his ypc peak last night was 3.67.

T Rich apologists latest (cliff notes):

- Blame the defense for having to abandon the run.

- Predictable playcalling led to running into a brick wall

- 3.8 ypc is good, really guys it's not too shabby!

- a few years from now, we'll look back and laugh at ourselves for going too far in our criticism of Richardson.

He looks like a full back. Maybe he could develop into a lead blocker and be used in space like Kuhn in GB out of the backfield? Kuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhn!!!!!!

Raiderfan32904 said:

T Rich apologists latest (cliff notes):

- Blame the defense for having to abandon the run.

- Predictable playcalling led to running into a brick wall

- 3.8 ypc is good, really guys it's not too shabby!

- a few years from now, we'll look back and laugh at ourselves for going too far in our criticism of Richardson.

Click to expand...

I was a huge believer in Richardson, although I don't own him anywhere, and like EBF I'm still going to hold out some hope that he can turn it back around (in fact I may try and buy very low if possible), but right now anyone trying to "spin" his performance is looking a little silly.

Dr. Octopus said:

EBF said:

He got 5-6 carries when the game was in question and had a respectable YPC (around 3.8).

Click to expand...

Really?

Click to expand...

It's right inline with his career average.

I agree he's a bust in redraft this year. But to call him an bust in the NFL when his career is just beginning seems a bit ridiculous to me. IMO, his NFL career is far from over. He's still only 22 years old.

Yeah guys. Remember the 3 year rule with RBs. It takes them a while to get acclimated to the NFL.

For what it's worth I just traded Jordy Nelson for T Rich and a pair of 1st round rookie picks (one in 2014, one in 2016) in a 10 team dynasty. You can't say he's not a "buy low" right now.

SaintsInDome2006 said:

He will continue to be highly owned.

This is where emotionalism of where a FF owner drafted him at or what he paid for him takes precedence over reason.

I turned the game on periodically last night, every time it seemed like Brown was on the field, including one time near the goal line.

Let it go, let him go. (Well, redraft; Dynasty, well... one day, one day, when... how much time do you have?).

Click to expand...

I don't think it's the bolded. In redraft, he is almost a must-cut (unless you have very deep benches), but for dynasty owners it's not emotion - it's value. At this point, his value is so low, it makes no sense to trade him. Unless you have very shallow benches, in dyno, he's almost a must keep, simply because the only way you get any return is if he improves.

Is it physical? Mental? Schematic? No idea. But I do know that there is only one way to get any kind of value for T. Richardson moving forward. Hold and hope. It's not emotionalism, it's simple economics. You can't trade him, as his value is virtually nil - and cutting him you lose all value for him. The only chance dynasty owners have to recoup any value at all is hold and wait until his value goes up...even a little. What if Brown gets hurt? What is somehow, there is a lightbulb? What if they start throwing to him 5-6 times a game and he becomes (as sad as this is to say) a poor-mans D. Woodhead?

He stinks right now - but everybody knows it.

Glass is half full evaluation from last night at least finds it encouraging that he caught two passes for 30 yards. The more he is involved in the passing game, the more he'll contribute to the Colts and to fantasy football.

Dr. Octopus said:

Raiderfan32904 said:

T Rich apologists latest (cliff notes):

- Blame the defense for having to abandon the run.

- Predictable playcalling led to running into a brick wall

- 3.8 ypc is good, really guys it's not too shabby!

- a few years from now, we'll look back and laugh at ourselves for going too far in our criticism of Richardson.

Click to expand...

I was a huge believer in Richardson, although I don't own him anywhere, and like EBF I'm still going to hold out some hope that he can turn it back around (in fact I may try and buy very low if possible), but right now anyone trying to "spin" his performance is looking a little silly.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't say his performance was positive in any way, but I wouldn't say it was some huge disaster. It's pretty hard to draw meaningful conclusions from 8 carries. Yet people were already in here ripping him after his first 5-6 touches last night. That shows you what the climate is like. The lynch mob has their pitchforks sharpened and they're looking for any reason to pile it on. Anything less than a great game and people will be on here bashing Richardson immediately.

Bernard Pierce and Ray Rice are averaging 2.7 YPC this season, but you don't see nearly the same level of venom and hate directed towards them. With players who have had some success in the past people seem to understand that a toxic situation can cripple their output, but with Richardson his struggles are 100% attributed to the fact that he sucks. I could see this coming a mile away yesterday even before kickoff. With horrible run blocking and only one truly viable weapon at WR/TE, every game is going to be a grind for the Colts offense from here on out. Yet you won't hear much about that in this thread. The same crew of jesters will pop up every Sunday for the rest of the season to dance on Richardson's grave.

I'm fine with that. At this point I actually hope the negativity keeps building so I might be able to snipe him a couple places this offseason. I think it's pretty clear that circumstance has been stacked against him all season, but that's going to get lost in the box scores every week.

EBF said:

Dr. Octopus said:

Raiderfan32904 said:

T Rich apologists latest (cliff notes):

- Blame the defense for having to abandon the run.

- Predictable playcalling led to running into a brick wall

- 3.8 ypc is good, really guys it's not too shabby!

- a few years from now, we'll look back and laugh at ourselves for going too far in our criticism of Richardson.

Click to expand...

I was a huge believer in Richardson, although I don't own him anywhere, and like EBF I'm still going to hold out some hope that he can turn it back around (in fact I may try and buy very low if possible), but right now anyone trying to "spin" his performance is looking a little silly.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't say his performance was positive in any way, but I wouldn't say it was some huge disaster. It's pretty hard to draw meaningful conclusions from 8 carries. Yet people were already in here ripping him after his first 5-6 touches last night. That shows you what the climate is like. The lynch mob has their pitchforks sharpened and they're looking for any reason to pile it on. Anything less than a great game and people will be on here bashing Richardson immediately.

Bernard Pierce and Ray Rice are averaging 2.7 YPC this season, but you don't see nearly the same level of venom and hate directed towards them. With players who have had some success in the past people seem to understand that a toxic situation can cripple their output, but with Richardson his struggles are 100% attributed to the fact that he sucks. I could see this coming a mile away yesterday even before kickoff. With horrible run blocking and only one truly viable weapon at WR/TE, every game is going to be a grind for the Colts offense from here on out. Yet you won't hear much about that in this thread. The same crew of jesters will pop up every Sunday for the rest of the season to dance on Richardson's grave.

I'm fine with that. At this point I actually hope the negativity keeps building so I might be able to snipe him a couple places this offseason. I think it's pretty clear that circumstance has been stacked against him all season, but that's going to get lost in the box scores every week.

Click to expand...

So why derail those efforts by bringing the 'positivity' in this thread?....... Or let your potential victims know this was your scheme all along?

Doctor Detroit said:

Glass is half full evaluation from last night at least finds it encouraging that he caught two passes for 30 yards. The more he is involved in the passing game, the more he'll contribute to the Colts and to fantasy football.

Click to expand...

This. He never looked phenomenal running the ball last year, but did enough on the ground to stay in the game and catch some passes out of the backfield. That was his strong suit, along with scoring TDs.

He's not the dynamic stud runner most thought he would be. I don't know if he'll ever be that. But why can't he replicate what he did last year? Obviously that won't happen this year but perhaps next. If he can, he'll have plenty of value in PPR, at least.

This is from week 7 Beyond the Stats article, but I noticed:

Indy was the 4th worst (29th/32) in targets to RB's per game.

I don't know if that's changed, or if it will with this coaching staff or OC, but obviously that contributes to the problem FF-wise.

cstu said:

Sabertooth said:

Yeah not sure what the hell happened here. I don't ever recall a player so universally lauded as a stud that failed so quickly and miserably. That being sad, have the Colts lost a game since he's been there?

Click to expand...

5-1 with Richardson. The fact that they desperately needed a RB is why I'm not ready to call this a bad trade by them. However, they probably could have got somebody just as effective for less (Leshoure?).

Click to expand...

In all reality, they could have picked up Michael Turner or Beanie Wells off the street and had this impact. None of us knew that at the time, of course. Even those of us that weren't all-in on Richardson to begin with had to be at least thinking that this was going to be a terrific marriage.§

MoveToSkypager said:

Yeah guys. Remember the 3 year rule with RBs. It takes them a while to get acclimated to the NFL.

Click to expand...

Wait, is this serious?

Would anyone blame a PPR dynasty owner for trading away Richardson and a 2nd for L. Bell? I hate to give up on him, but I am growing increasing frustrated if not heart broken by what I've seen since he became a Colt....

Has Trent Richardson become a guy that you need to qualify discussion about him with the designatinor ****DYNASTY***** yet? Seems like the only interesting discussion about him anymore is what his future value will be. Any redraft defenders left?

Next year, he is going to make an awesome 8th - 10th round pick in redraft. No way he stays this bad, once the coaches have some time to design packages that meld his skills with Luck he will probably be a pretty good rb #2.

Raiderfan32904 said:

Has Trent Richardson become a guy that you need to qualify discussion about him with the designatinor ****DYNASTY***** yet? Seems like the only interesting discussion about him anymore is what his future value will be. Any redraft defenders left?

Click to expand...

In redraft this year, I am pretty sure he was a team killer. He was in our league. You draft him so high and isn't injured....its tough to bite the bullet and sit him or replace him.

It would have been way better had he just blown out his acl because that would have made owners get a real player in his place. The Indy trade was a killer because it created so much false hope.

On the bright side, this was TRich's highest point total (7.30) since his 13 point outburst against the Jags in week 4.

EBF said:

I wouldn't say his performance was positive in any way, but I wouldn't say it was some huge disaster. It's pretty hard to draw meaningful conclusions from 8 carries. Yet people were already in here ripping him after his first 5-6 touches last night. That shows you what the climate is like. The lynch mob has their pitchforks sharpened and they're looking for any reason to pile it on. Anything less than a great game and people will be on here bashing Richardson immediately.

Bernard Pierce and Ray Rice are averaging 2.7 YPC this season, but you don't see nearly the same level of venom and hate directed towards them. With players who have had some success in the past people seem to understand that a toxic situation can cripple their output, but with Richardson his struggles are 100% attributed to the fact that he sucks. I could see this coming a mile away yesterday even before kickoff. With horrible run blocking and only one truly viable weapon at WR/TE, every game is going to be a grind for the Colts offense from here on out. Yet you won't hear much about that in this thread. The same crew of jesters will pop up every Sunday for the rest of the season to dance on Richardson's grave.

I'm fine with that. At this point I actually hope the negativity keeps building so I might be able to snipe him a couple places this offseason. I think it's pretty clear that circumstance has been stacked against him all season, but that's going to get lost in the box scores every week.

Click to expand...

Sure there are people making silly arguments and looking for any reason to pile on, but what you fail to see is that you (and others) are doing the same thing on the positive side. I mean seriously- a "respectable" 3.8 ypc (when it was actually lower than that)? Likewise, you keep leaving out how Brown has looked much better than he has despite all of the "negatives" you like to point out about the Colts offense (which you greatly overstate as well).

It seems your "standards" change quite a bit depending on how you feel about a guy.

Second Sight said:

cstu said:

Sabertooth said:

Yeah not sure what the hell happened here. I don't ever recall a player so universally lauded as a stud that failed so quickly and miserably. That being sad, have the Colts lost a game since he's been there?

Click to expand...

5-1 with Richardson. The fact that they desperately needed a RB is why I'm not ready to call this a bad trade by them. However, they probably could have got somebody just as effective for less (Leshoure?).

Click to expand...

In all reality, they could have picked up Michael Turner or Beanie Wells off the street and had this impact. None of us knew that at the time, of course. Even those of us that weren't all-in on Richardson to begin with had to be at least thinking that this was going to be a terrific marriage.§

Click to expand...

Even though he hasn't played well at all, the Colts have a chance to see if they can fix his problems and make him a respectable (i.e. 4 YPC) back. They only owe him $2.2M next year and if he doesn't work out they can probably get a pick for him from another team desperate for a RB who thinks they can fix him.

Why is this still being discussed other than for redraft purposes?

People love beating a dead horse, I know, but good grief give it a rest already!

werdnoynek said:

I agree he's a bust in redraft this year. But to call him an bust in the NFL when his career is just beginning seems a bit ridiculous to me. IMO, his NFL career is far from over. He's still only 22 years old.

Click to expand...

Do you have a moment to point out all of the significant changes the Colts made over the bye week?

humpback said:

Sure there are people making silly arguments and looking for any reason to pile on, but what you fail to see is that you (and others) are doing the same thing on the positive side. I mean seriously- a "respectable" 3.8 ypc (when it was actually lower than that)? Likewise, you keep leaving out how Brown has looked much better than he has despite all of the "negatives" you like to point out about the Colts offense (which you greatly overstate as well).

It seems your "standards" change quite a bit depending on how you feel about a guy.

Click to expand...

Brown is averaging just over 5 carries per game since Richardson joined the team. He seems to be the preferred back in passing situations at the moment and that gives him the opportunity to run against weaker fronts. The fact that a scrub like him is putting up flashy numbers in limited duty just goes to show how much context can affect production. He's got a little bit of burst and that's about where the positives begin and end with him. He isn't and never will be a good back. Hence why the Colts have been trying to replace him for years.

3.8 YPC is fine, but that's really beside the point. People were already firing up this thread and piling on the negative comments after Richardson's first 5-6 carries. Name another back in the NFL who gets tarred and feathered on here after his first 5-6 carries in a game. There's nobody else. If Eddie Lacy or Gio Bernard averages 3.8 YPC on his first few carries, nobody bumps his thread saying how much he sucks. Yet when Richardson has the same kind of outing it's taken as further proof that he's garbage. That just shows you how toxic the atmosphere has become wrt to this player.

I think a lot of FF owners are basically reactive. They don't have real opinions on players, so they just react based on whatever's happening at any given moment in time. These are the same people who said Ridley was garbage earlier in the season and who said Doug Martin sucked after the first few weeks of last season. Since they don't have opinions and just sway with the latest news, they can't fathom when someone sticks with a firm stance that contradicts current events.

I'm not really familiar with your style or your posting history, but you were one of the guys making garbage posts in the offseason Jonathan Stewart thread and laughing at the prospect of him still having FF value. Just seems that maybe you are one of those reactive guys who has no imagination beyond whatever happened yesterday. With that being the case, I'm not surprised by your take on Richardson. I would expect a guy like you to look at the stat sheet for his first 20+ games and draw a pretty simple conclusion that he sucks.

Sometimes that reactive style can help owners avoid a genuine dud (i.e. William Green or Mark Ingram). The downside of that approach is that you're extremely likely to miss out on players like Lynch, Crabtree, and Moreno who overcame adversity because you don't have any opinion to anchor to other than the immediate box score. So once those turn south, you're liable to jump ship.

I have a pretty concrete opinion of Richardson and despite his struggles I still feel pretty good about his long term outlook. I think there are enough circumstantial negatives to explain away a lot of his struggles. He has fallen somewhat in my estimation. At the same time, I think it's highly unlikely that his 2013 season is an accurate reflection of his skill level. I'd say the same for Ray Rice, Bernard Pierce, Bryce Brown, and some of the other backs whose situation and/or utilization is restricting their production.

EBF said:

I think a lot of FF owners are basically reactive. They don't have real opinions on players, so they just react based on whatever's happening at any given moment in time. These are the same people who said Ridley was garbage earlier in the season and who said Doug Martin sucked after the first few weeks of last season. Since they don't have opinions and just sway with the latest news, they can't fathom when someone sticks with a firm stance that contradicts current events.

Click to expand...

This is the issue: when it's someone you like (TRich/Martin), it's reaction; when it's someone you don't (Ingram/Moreno/Tavon), it's foresight. It comes off as inconsistent when you're blasting Forte for his YPC and making excuses for Trent's.

It's fine to write off your 2011 top rookie, and not your 2012 version. But it's hard to take your "reaction, no opinions, latest moves" comments seriously when you do.

Concept Coop said:

EBF said:

I think a lot of FF owners are basically reactive. They don't have real opinions on players, so they just react based on whatever's happening at any given moment in time. These are the same people who said Ridley was garbage earlier in the season and who said Doug Martin sucked after the first few weeks of last season. Since they don't have opinions and just sway with the latest news, they can't fathom when someone sticks with a firm stance that contradicts current events.

Click to expand...

This is the issue: when it's someone you like (TRich/Martin), it's reaction; when it's someone you don't (Ingram/Moreno/Tavon), it's foresight. It comes off as inconsistent when you're blasting Forte for his YPC and making excuses for Trent's.

It's fine to write off your 2011 top rookie, and not your 2012 version. But it's hard to take your "reaction, no opinions, latest moves" comments seriously when you do.

Click to expand...

Did you miss the part where these threads all help his grand scheme of getting TRichardson on the cheap?

Concept Coop said:

EBF said:

I think a lot of FF owners are basically reactive. They don't have real opinions on players, so they just react based on whatever's happening at any given moment in time. These are the same people who said Ridley was garbage earlier in the season and who said Doug Martin sucked after the first few weeks of last season. Since they don't have opinions and just sway with the latest news, they can't fathom when someone sticks with a firm stance that contradicts current events.

Click to expand...

This is the issue: when it's someone you like (TRich/Martin), it's reaction; when it's someone you don't (Ingram/Moreno/Tavon), it's foresight. It comes off as inconsistent when you're blasting Forte for his YPC and making excuses for Trent's.

It's fine to write off your 2011 top rookie, and not your 2012 version. But it's hard to take your "reaction, no opinions, latest moves" comments seriously when you do.

Click to expand...

I don't think there's any great hypocrisy in being rigid in certain cases and flexible in others.

Some players who look good early in their careers are actually great. (i.e. AJ Green, Antonio Gates, Jimmy Graham)

Some players who look good early in their careers actually suck. (i.e. Steve Slaton, Julius Jones, Braylon Edwards, Roy Williams)

Some players who look bad early in their careers are actually great. (i.e. Roddy White, Reggie Bush, Marshawn Lynch, Aaron Rodgers)

Some players who look bad early in their careers actually suck. (i.e. AJ Jenkins, Jon Baldwin, Buster Davis, Donald Brown)

One of the absolute most daunting challenges for anyone who tries to navigate uncertainty is figuring out which pile to put a player in.

I was thinking last night about my rookie rankings for this current crop and how I've flip-flopped with players like Kenbrell Thompkins based on current news. In the preseason I thought he was a huge longshot with very little chance of becoming FF relevant. Then he kept gaining momentum and it started to look like he was a strong candidate for a top 10 rookie ranking in this draft class. At that point I moved him up considerably. Fast forward a few weeks and his stock is cooling off again. If I were making rookie rankings today, he would have dropped several spots from his early September ranking. Was my initial skepticism right? Was I wrong about him all along? I don't even think I know yet.

I've always said that it's really difficult to strike the right balance between being rigid and reactive. It's a case-by-case thing where you try to weigh the evidence and make the best decision possible. Sometimes you might look at a player who's achieving momentary success and determine that he's a fluke. Other times you might look at a player achieving early success and decide that he's legit. That doesn't make you a hypocrite.

One of the interesting things about FF and especially dynasty is how being "right" or "wrong" about a player can vary as a function of time. When Mendenhall was struggling in his rookie preseason and was lost for the season with an injury after just a few games, I was told that I was "wrong" about his talent. When he was ripping up the league the next season I was "right" about his talent. Fast forward a few years and suddenly I'm "wrong" again. Similar patterns have happened with guys like Lynch, Spiller, and Mathews. If you were high on those guys one year, you might have been "right" based on how they performed that season. Then the very next season you might have been "wrong" based on their performance. Mathews was very good in 2011 and very bad in 2012. Spiller was very quiet in 2010 and awesome in 2012. This season he's been more of a disappointment. So were the people who were high on Mathews as a rookie "right" about him? Were the people who were high on Spiller "right" about him?

What you'll probably realize pretty quickly asking yourself questions like these is that not every player comes into the league like AJ Green or AJ Jenkins and gives you a concrete and static yes/no answer that holds steady for the duration of his career. A lot of these players go through a constant rollercoaster of highs and lows where one season they're excellent and the next season they're extremely disappointing. When someone tries to make definitive statements about a player's long-term value when that player is either at an absolute peak or absolute valley in his performance, there's a big risk of watching him regress back to a more reasonable compromise between those two extremes. All of the people who wrote off Mendenhall as a bust after his rookie preseason were wrong just like all of the people who valued him as an elite asset after his breakout 2009 season were also wrong. The true story of his career was somewhere in the middle of those two extremes.

We've got a similar challenge right now with Trent Richardson. Is he the guy who dominated at Alabama, drew raves from every scout, went in the top 3 of the draft, and posted a top 10 FF season as a rookie? Or is he the guy who averaged 3.4 YPC through his first 20+ NFL games? Anyone who's trying to put a ballpark figure to his value has to try to make that assessment. Different people are going to look at the same data points and draw different conclusions. Someone who's more reactive is going to look at the most recent stuff (the NFL performance) and probably use that as the main guiding principle. Someone who had an independent evaluation that Richardson is a very good talent is far less likely to be swayed by his immediate results.

With some players the reactive approach ends up being correct. With others the rigid approach wins out in the end. I try to look at each case and make a call, which is why sometimes I might appear to be in denial over a guy who's performing while other times I might keep banging the drum for someone who isn't delivering results. There's actually nothing inconsistent or hypocritical about that since we know that all four groups of player listed above are recurrent phenomena. There will always be players who come out of the gates looking promising and then totally fall off a cliff (anyone seen Keary Colbert lately?). On the other hand, there will always be players who look like quite bad right off the bat only to become forces of nature in time (Drew Brees, Roddy White, Thomas Jones, Tiki Barber).

meatwad1 said:

Next year, he is going to make an awesome 8th - 10th round pick in redraft. No way he stays this bad, once the coaches have some time to design packages that meld his skills with Luck he will probably be a pretty good rb #2.

Click to expand...

Right. They haven't found the right package yet.

I just gave up on him and trade him away. It was too painful to even watch the guy suck on my bench.

EBF said:

I think a lot of FF owners are basically reactive. They don't have real opinions on players, so they just react based on whatever's happening at any given moment in time. These are the same people who said Ridley was garbage earlier in the season and who said Doug Martin sucked after the first few weeks of last season. Since they don't have opinions and just sway with the latest news, they can't fathom when someone sticks with a firm stance that contradicts current events.

Click to expand...

Yeah, you're the only smart one who watches football or anything. It's unfathomable.

It's not exactly complex to simply stand pat by your original position on a guy in contrast to a growing pile of evidence that you were wrong, turning up your nose at all of the common people that are reacting to, you know, how he actually plays in the NFL.

There's some talk in here about how he's a power back who needs volume and to be used int he right way, etc., etc. While much of this may be true, what's missed is that when you start saying those things, we've already moved the goal posts of the debate because you're now talking about Trent Richardson like he's Shonn Greene. If someone wants to say that Trent could go on to have a Shonn Greene type career, I would find that believable. But think a moment about what the expectations were when he came out of college.

PatsWillWin said:

There's some talk in here about how he's a power back who needs volume and to be used int he right way, etc., etc. While much of this may be true, what's missed is that when you start saying those things, we've already moved the goal posts of the debate because you're now talking about Trent Richardson like he's Shonn Greene. If someone wants to say that Trent could go on to have a Shonn Greene type career, I would find that believable. But think a moment about what the expectations were when he came out of college.

Click to expand...

I fail to see how saying a guy needs to be a volume back makes him Shonn Greene. That's an absurd point A to point B thought process.

Why can't it mean he's Marshawn Lynch? You know a highly drafted guy who showed promise, got traded, and barely broke 3 YPC his first 6 games with the Seattle.

I'm not saying his career is going to go exactly the way of Lynch's but just pointing out it's not the first time a RB got traded and struggled out of the gate with his new team either and it does not make you Shon Greene.

EBF said:

humpback said:

Sure there are people making silly arguments and looking for any reason to pile on, but what you fail to see is that you (and others) are doing the same thing on the positive side. I mean seriously- a "respectable" 3.8 ypc (when it was actually lower than that)? Likewise, you keep leaving out how Brown has looked much better than he has despite all of the "negatives" you like to point out about the Colts offense (which you greatly overstate as well).

It seems your "standards" change quite a bit depending on how you feel about a guy.

Click to expand...

Brown is averaging just over 5 carries per game since Richardson joined the team. He seems to be the preferred back in passing situations at the moment and that gives him the opportunity to run against weaker fronts. The fact that a scrub like him is putting up flashy numbers in limited duty just goes to show how much context can affect production. He's got a little bit of burst and that's about where the positives begin and end with him. He isn't and never will be a good back. Hence why the Colts have been trying to replace him for years.

3.8 YPC is fine, but that's really beside the point. People were already firing up this thread and piling on the negative comments after Richardson's first 5-6 carries. Name another back in the NFL who gets tarred and feathered on here after his first 5-6 carries in a game. There's nobody else. If Eddie Lacy or Gio Bernard averages 3.8 YPC on his first few carries, nobody bumps his thread saying how much he sucks. Yet when Richardson has the same kind of outing it's taken as further proof that he's garbage. That just shows you how toxic the atmosphere has become wrt to this player.

I think a lot of FF owners are basically reactive. They don't have real opinions on players, so they just react based on whatever's happening at any given moment in time. These are the same people who said Ridley was garbage earlier in the season and who said Doug Martin sucked after the first few weeks of last season. Since they don't have opinions and just sway with the latest news, they can't fathom when someone sticks with a firm stance that contradicts current events.

I'm not really familiar with your style or your posting history, but you were one of the guys making garbage posts in the offseason Jonathan Stewart thread and laughing at the prospect of him still having FF value. Just seems that maybe you are one of those reactive guys who has no imagination beyond whatever happened yesterday. With that being the case, I'm not surprised by your take on Richardson. I would expect a guy like you to look at the stat sheet for his first 20+ games and draw a pretty simple conclusion that he sucks.

Sometimes that reactive style can help owners avoid a genuine dud (i.e. William Green or Mark Ingram). The downside of that approach is that you're extremely likely to miss out on players like Lynch, Crabtree, and Moreno who overcame adversity because you don't have any opinion to anchor to other than the immediate box score. So once those turn south, you're liable to jump ship.

I have a pretty concrete opinion of Richardson and despite his struggles I still feel pretty good about his long term outlook. I think there are enough circumstantial negatives to explain away a lot of his struggles. He has fallen somewhat in my estimation. At the same time, I think it's highly unlikely that his 2013 season is an accurate reflection of his skill level. I'd say the same for Ray Rice, Bernard Pierce, Bryce Brown, and some of the other backs whose situation and/or utilization is restricting their production.

Click to expand...

Or, the fact that a "scrub" like Brown can put up much better statistics (while looking better doing it) just goes to show how putrid TRich has been. Same goes for Ballard and Bradshaw, but I'm sure you'll have excuses for that as well.

On what planet is 3.8 ypc "fine"? You're right, it is besides the point, considering he was below that arbitrary threshold for the entire game anyway. As for the other RBs, I don't know if people are more or less harsh on them, but guys like Lacy and Gio weren't 1st round start up picks, and they've both looked much better than he has. Besides, this thread wasn't bumped after his first few carries, but who cares about facts, right?

Sure, call me reactive if it makes you feel better. I actually refine my opinions based on what I see on the field, not some ingrained belief based seemingly on BMI, draft position, and workout numbers. Obviously many people overreact, but many also under-react. One isn't necessarily any better than the other, and judging from your posts, you haven't been very successful doing it your way.

at garbage posts in the Stewart thread, or looking at box scores. I will give you that you probably have a better imagination than I do- it must take one heck of an imagination to come up with some of the things you do. I know you like to just completely make stuff up, but link to where I was laughing at the prospect of him still having ff value? Likewise, I never said TRich is terrible, that he has no ff value, or that he won't improve. Heck, I was very high on both coming in, but unlike you, I'm not so pigheaded that I can't be honest about the situation.

humpback, you might be arguing with a bot. Just sayin

Trent is a stud....he is being misused....period

Yitbos69 said:

Trent is a stud....he is being misused....period

Click to expand...

agree with the bolded

should not be used at rb