CJ Anderson (2 Viewers)

[bombjack]

Anyone have insight / thoughts into when a release by DEN would actually occur? (full disclosure, thinking of this in the context of FFPC roster cutdowns at 3/31). 

I was thinking of it like this, but I am not an expert in the offseason:

When FA opens up - if DEN gets a "big name" QB they will have to release CJA for cap room and he would sign somewhere before the draft. If not, we could be pretty confident he stays in DEN (outside of a trade of course).

Again, could be totally missing something

 

[-CE-]

Anyone have insight / thoughts into when a release by DEN would actually occur? (full disclosure, thinking of this in the context of FFPC roster cutdowns at 3/31). 

I was thinking of it like this, but I am not an expert in the offseason:

When FA opens up - if DEN gets a "big name" QB they will have to release CJA for cap room and he would sign somewhere before the draft. If not, we could be pretty confident he stays in DEN (outside of a trade of course).

Again, could be totally missing something

March 14th?  No dead money/cap hit if they release him this year.  They'd save $4.5MM.

 

[travdogg]

Anyone have insight / thoughts into when a release by DEN would actually occur? (full disclosure, thinking of this in the context of FFPC roster cutdowns at 3/31). 

I was thinking of it like this, but I am not an expert in the offseason:

When FA opens up - if DEN gets a "big name" QB they will have to release CJA for cap room and he would sign somewhere before the draft. If not, we could be pretty confident he stays in DEN (outside of a trade of course).

Again, could be totally missing something

What I don't understand is why Anderson? There are plenty of other players they could cut to create cap room. Why cut the best player on the offense from 2017?

 

[Alex P Keaton]

What I don't understand is why Anderson? There are plenty of other players they could cut to create cap room. Why cut the best player on the offense from 2017?

Because most RBs are easily replaceable?

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

What I don't understand is why Anderson? There are plenty of other players they could cut to create cap room. Why cut the best player on the offense from 2017?

He getting older and they really like what they have in Booker. Plus they over paid him to begin with and they aren't cutting Dthomas or Sanders. 

Oh and RBs are replacable. 

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

IMO, CJA<<Drake

FYP

 

[travdogg]

He getting older and they really like what they have in Booker. Plus they over paid him to begin with and they aren't cutting Dthomas or Sanders. 

Oh and RBs are replacable. 

Everyone knows RBs are replaceable, its not 1998.  That said, Anderson isn't paid all that much, and he's not much older than Booker.

Clearly I'm higher on Anderson than you are, based on the Drake>>Anderson post. 

I don't know what they could see in Booker. Anderson is a far better runner and a better pass blocker. Booker is a better pass catcher, but even then, Booker isn't good at it.

 

[Bronco Billy]

Everyone knows RBs are replaceable, its not 1998.  That said, Anderson isn't paid all that much, and he's not much older than Booker.

Clearly I'm higher on Anderson than you are, based on the Drake>>Anderson post. 

I don't know what they could see in Booker. Anderson is a far better runner and a better pass blocker. Booker is a better pass catcher, but even then, Booker isn't good at it.

Ego.  Booker is a mistake that DEN just refuses to admit it made.

 

[FF Ninja]

He getting older and they really like what they have in Booker. Plus they over paid him to begin with and they aren't cutting Dthomas or Sanders. 

Oh and RBs are replacable. 

Find me one guy not on a rookie contract who should be getting paid more than CJA:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/positional/running-back/

I'll wait.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

What I don't understand is why Anderson? There are plenty of other players they could cut to create cap room. Why cut the best player on the offense from 2017?

He was the best player on the offense because their QB was terrible. Do you really think he's a better player than Demaryius Thomas or even Emmanuel Sanders. I think CJ is very solid and probably a bit under-rated but they can replace his production at a cheaper contract.  I'm in the minority but I still believe in Booker and they can add a cheap veteran or draft a mid-round RB for depth.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Find me one guy not on a rookie contract who should be getting paid more than CJA:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/positional/running-back/

I'll wait.

Youll wait for what?  Its the turning of the new year. List is incomplete. Rbs get phased out fast.. its happening to cja in denver.   Lets see if miami brings him in? Then we will see who performs better drake vs cja.

 

[FF Ninja]

Youll wait for what? Rbs get phased out fast its happening to cja in denver. Its the turning of the new.  Lets see if miami brings him in? Then we will see who performs better drake vs cja

I'll wait while you fail to find one.

Don't get me wrong, I mostly agree with what Dr.O said. I think it is likely that they will find it easier to replace CJA than DT or Sanders. As CJA is a good player, I don't think they will be able to totally replace him, but they should be able to get maybe a 90% return by using a committee of cheaper backs. So I don't think it's a bad choice to cut him if they desperately need that cap space. But your statement that he's overpaid is just foolish if you compare his salary to other RBs. Chris Ivory was overpaid. CJA was fairly paid. If they weren't up against the cap, it would be smart to keep him and his production at that price.

One thing worth pointing out is that if they cut CJA, they have $0 dead cap and save $4.5M. If they cut DT, they have $2M dead cap, but he will count $17.53M against the cap this year.    So it's not like they just have to cut one or the other to make room for Cousins. They will need to cut CJA and several other important role players to make up the cap room they'd have made up by cutting DT. (FWIW, Sanders is in the middle between DT and CJA). Also, they'll still have to bring in someone because they're not going into the year with just Booker and Henderson, making the cap savings from CJA even less.

Denver needs to determine how big of a drop off there would be from a 30-31 year old DT to a 23 year old Carlos Henderson, who was drafted to eventually be a starter. I know DT's got a lot of name recognition, but he's actually got a limited route tree. The routes he's good at, he's VERY good at, so he's got value. $15.5M worth of cap value? TBD

 

[Boston]

I'll wait while you fail to find one.

Don't get me wrong, I mostly agree with what Dr.O said. I think it is likely that they will find it easier to replace CJA than DT or Sanders. As CJA is a good player, I don't think they will be able to totally replace him, but they should be able to get maybe a 90% return by using a committee of cheaper backs. So I don't think it's a bad choice to cut him if they desperately need that cap space. But your statement that he's overpaid is just foolish if you compare his salary to other RBs. Chris Ivory was overpaid. CJA was fairly paid. If they weren't up against the cap, it would be smart to keep him and his production at that price.

One thing worth pointing out is that if they cut CJA, they have $0 dead cap and save $4.5M. If they cut DT, they have $2M dead cap, but he will count $17.53M against the cap this year.    So it's not like they just have to cut one or the other to make room for Cousins. They will need to cut CJA and several other important role players to make up the cap room they'd have made up by cutting DT. (FWIW, Sanders is in the middle between DT and CJA). Also, they'll still have to bring in someone because they're not going into the year with just Booker and Henderson, making the cap savings from CJA even less.

Denver needs to determine how big of a drop off there would be from a 30-31 year old DT to a 23 year old Carlos Henderson, who was drafted to eventually be a starter. I know DT's got a lot of name recognition, but he's actually got a limited route tree. The routes he's good at, he's VERY good at, so he's got value. $15.5M worth of cap value? TBD

There is another issue here and it is problematic for the Broncos...if they cut Thomas and/or Sanders it becomes a less attractive spot for a player like Cousins who is 30 years old (if he is in-fact their main target this offseason)...Denver is coming off a 5 win season so they already have plenty of holes with Thomas and Sanders...it will be much easier to replace CJA and than the 2 WRs...this is a tough spot for Denver to be in...Lynch busting has really set this franchise back...

 

[FF Ninja]

There is another issue here and it is problematic for the Broncos...if they cut Thomas and/or Sanders it becomes a less attractive spot for a player like Cousins who is 30 years old (if he is in-fact their main target this offseason)...Denver is coming off a 5 win season so they already have plenty of holes with Thomas and Sanders...it will be much easier to replace CJA and than the 2 WRs...this is a tough spot for Denver to be in...Lynch busting has really set this franchise back...

For sure, but if Carlos Henderson is the real deal then it wouldn't be that bad. Maybe they bring Cousins in for a workout and let him throw to all those guys and see who he likes. And again, "it will be much easier to replace CJA than the 2 WRs" makes no sense at all. Cutting CJA saves $4.5M in cap space. Cutting the two WRs would have over $25M. It's not a "one or the other" type of deal. But I'm not advocating for them to keep CJA. Just saying the numbers aren't what everyone makes them out to be. They might have to cut CJA and DT to sign Cousins. Or they might be able to keep them both and make room elsewhere. And as you hint, Denver wanting Cousins might be a false rumor to begin with.

 

[Boston]

For sure, but if Carlos Henderson is the real deal then it wouldn't be that bad. Maybe they bring Cousins in for a workout and let him throw to all those guys and see who he likes. And again, "it will be much easier to replace CJA then the 2 WRs" makes no sense at all. Cutting CJA saves $4.5M in cap space. Cutting the two WRs would have over $25M. It's not a "one or the other" type of deal. But I'm not advocating for them to keep CJA. Just saying the numbers aren't what everyone makes them out to be. They might have to cut CJA and DT to sign Cousins. Or they might be able to keep them both and make room elsewhere. And as you hint, Denver wanting Cousins might be a false rumor to begin with.

It is far easier to finding a solid RB than it is two quality WRs...not even close...I like CJA but he is very replaceable...now the $ factor is a totally different story...if they are gonna rebuild than moving on from the WRs and saving the $ is the way to go but I don't see Cousins looking to be in that situation (which is my point)...

 

[FF Ninja]

It is far easier to finding a solid RB than it is two quality WRs...not even close...I like CJA but he is very replaceable...now the $ factor is a totally different story...if they are gonna rebuild than moving on from the WRs and saving the $ is the way to go but I don't see Cousins looking to be in that situation (which is my point)...

I agree, but the money factor has always been the #1 factor. Denver is 18th in cap space, so if they don't have any other needs, they might be able to make a deal happen without too many cuts. But people keep insinuating it's a CJA or DT type of choice, but the truth is CJA accounts for less than a third of the cap hit DT does. 

Part of me really wants CJA cut. I'd like to see him in Miami (who now has negative cap space unless they trade Landry) but I'd also like to see what Henderson and Booker could do. If Denver signs Cousins, their job will be 5 times easier than CJA's job last year, so just maybe one of them could be decent. I don't think either could've done what CJA did last year, but with a decent QB, they wouldn't have to.

 

[travdogg]

I'll wait while you fail to find one.

Don't get me wrong, I mostly agree with what Dr.O said. I think it is likely that they will find it easier to replace CJA than DT or Sanders. As CJA is a good player, I don't think they will be able to totally replace him, but they should be able to get maybe a 90% return by using a committee of cheaper backs. So I don't think it's a bad choice to cut him if they desperately need that cap space. But your statement that he's overpaid is just foolish if you compare his salary to other RBs. Chris Ivory was overpaid. CJA was fairly paid. If they weren't up against the cap, it would be smart to keep him and his production at that price.

One thing worth pointing out is that if they cut CJA, they have $0 dead cap and save $4.5M. If they cut DT, they have $2M dead cap, but he will count $17.53M against the cap this year.    So it's not like they just have to cut one or the other to make room for Cousins. They will need to cut CJA and several other important role players to make up the cap room they'd have made up by cutting DT. (FWIW, Sanders is in the middle between DT and CJA). Also, they'll still have to bring in someone because they're not going into the year with just Booker and Henderson, making the cap savings from CJA even less.

Denver needs to determine how big of a drop off there would be from a 30-31 year old DT to a 23 year old Carlos Henderson, who was drafted to eventually be a starter. I know DT's got a lot of name recognition, but he's actually got a limited route tree. The routes he's good at, he's VERY good at, so he's got value. $15.5M worth of cap value? TBD

I for one, am really concerned about Demaryius Thomas. He looks quite a bit slower than he did even 3 years ago. Maybe its injuries, or maybe its teams taking away those routes he's great at, but he seems like a very overpaid player right now, much more than Anderson, when CJ makes 10 million less. When they have both been on the field, it certainly looks like Sanders>Thomas.

If Carlos Henderson hadn't gotten hurt, we might not even be having this conversation, but he's a complete unknown. I do recall a lot of scouts comparing him to Golden Tate when he came out. 

 

[Hankmoody]

Find me one guy not on a rookie contract who should be getting paid more than CJA:

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/positional/running-back/

I'll wait.

Le'Veon Bell
LeSean McCoy
Mark Ingram
Devonte Freeman

More you'll probably whine about but it's true:
Rex Burkhead
Marshawn Lynch
Carlos Hyde
 

 

[travdogg]

Le'Veon Bell
LeSean McCoy
Mark Ingram
Devonte Freeman

More you'll probably whine about but it's true:
Rex Burkhead
Marshawn Lynch
Carlos Hyde
 

I'd agree with Bell, McCoy, Freeman and Lynch.

I'd take Anderson over Ingram and Hyde. Burkhead isn't even close. 

 

[FF Ninja]

Le'Veon Bell
LeSean McCoy
Mark Ingram
Devonte Freeman

More you'll probably whine about but it's true:
Rex Burkhead
Marshawn Lynch
Carlos Hyde
 

:whoosh:

You have clearly missed the point of the exercise. Did you look at the list? All those guys do make more than him and rightly so. Why would I whine about Lynch and Hyde? Hyde was on a rookie contract, so he doesn't count but I do think his next contract should be more than CJA's and I do think Lynch's current contract is fair. I'll go ahead and laugh at the Burkhead mention, but I won't whine about it. CJA earned his salary in 2017. I can't say the same about Burkhead.

Just to reiterate, BSS said the Broncos overpaid for CJA. I posted that list of salaries to show that CJA's salary actually seems quite fair. All the RBs clearly better than him are either actually getting paid more or still on their rookie contract.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

:whoosh:

You have clearly missed the point of the exercise. Did you look at the list? All those guys do make more than him and rightly so. Why would I whine about Lynch and Hyde? Hyde was on a rookie contract, so he doesn't count but I do think his next contract should be more than CJA's and I do think Lynch's current contract is fair. I'll go ahead and laugh at the Burkhead mention, but I won't whine about it. CJA earned his salary in 2017. I can't say the same about Burkhead.

Just to reiterate, BSS said the Broncos overpaid for CJA. I posted that list of salaries to show that CJA's salary actually seems quite fair. All the RBs clearly better than him are either actually getting paid more or still on their rookie contract.

I took the point as ......all the good rbs are young and havent been paid yet.

 

[FF Ninja]

I took the point as ......all the good rbs are young and havent been paid yet.

When they do get paid, they'll make more than CJA. Still making his contract fair and not actually "overpaid".

 

[Dr. Octopus]

I'd take Anderson over Ingram and Hyde.

I know it seems like I'm picking on you because we've disagreed a lot today in two different topics already (but I actually appreciate your thoughtfulness and opposing viewpoints) but this is another really strange stance by you. Like I said I think Anderson is a solid back and likely under-rated but there's just no way he's better than Ingram or Hyde (Hyde is arguable at least I guess).

 

[jtd13]

When they do get paid, they'll make more than CJA. Still making his contract fair and not actually "overpaid".




 

Gio and Chris Thompson should be paid more than CJA IMO. Those guys aren't going to cut it as your only RB, whereas CJA could, but I think the value over baseline they offer an NFL team in the passing game is more of an advantage than what CJA offers over baseline anywhere else. 

That doesn't really make him overpaid, just easier to replace than other guys.

 

[FF Ninja]

Gio and Chris Thompson should be paid more than CJA IMO. Those guys aren't going to cut it as your only RB, whereas CJA could, but I think the value over baseline they offer an NFL team in the passing game is more of an advantage than what CJA offers over baseline anywhere else. 

That doesn't really make him overpaid, just easier to replace than other guys.

Well, you're in luck because Gio IS getting paid more than CJA. Not a lot more, but a little over half a million per year more. 

Chris Thompson is on his rookie contract, so he's unfortunately ineligible as a comparison right now. 

 

[jtd13]

Well, you're in luck because Gio IS getting paid more than CJA. Not a lot more, but a little over half a million per year more. 

Chris Thompson is on his rookie contract, so he's unfortunately ineligible as a comparison right now. 

They are almost dead even, but the spotrac link you posted had CJA  a hair higher. That might be missing bonus money or something, I honestly just looked at names below Anderson and thought about who I might prefer. 

I am fairly certain Thomspon signed a deal last year.

 

[nightmare]

C Thompson signed a 2 year extension

 

[FF Ninja]

They are almost dead even, but the spotrac link you posted had CJA  a hair higher. That might be missing bonus money or something, I honestly just looked at names below Anderson and thought about who I might prefer. 

I am fairly certain Thomspon signed a deal last year.

Yeah, Gio's contract was $15.5M/3years while CJA was $18M/4years.

You are spot on about Chris Thompson. I didn't realize he'd been around that long. I'm not sure he's got nearly the same value as CJA, though. I think people are underappreciating CJA's ability to run between the tackles and shed defenders while possibly overstating the importance of a scat back. CJA can pass block and run routes pretty well, but I don't think Thompson would be nearly as effective if forced into CJA's role. I don't even know if Thompson can pass block. But the main issue I see is that scat backs are not a scarce resource. They are pretty widely available and interchangeable. 

 

[jtd13]

Yeah, Gio's contract was $15.5M/3years while CJA was $18M/4years.

You are spot on about Chris Thompson. I didn't realize he'd been around that long. I'm not sure he's got nearly the same value as CJA, though. I think people are underappreciating CJA's ability to run between the tackles and shed defenders while possibly overstating the importance of a scat back. CJA can pass block and run routes pretty well, but I don't think Thompson would be nearly as effective if forced into CJA's role. I don't even know if Thompson can pass block. But the main issue I see is that scat backs are not a scarce resource. They are pretty widely available and interchangeable. 

I don't disagree that scat backs are easy to find, but not all scat backs are the receiver that Thompson is. Guys like him and Gio are fairly scarce, I think.

I think RBs that can run between the tackles are pretty widely available and mostly interchangeable. Do I think CJA is better than Blount, Hill, Lacy, Morris, Darkwa, etc.? Yes. Do I think he is better than those guys plus $3m extra dollars (what I am guessing those guys will command on the open market this season)? It would depend on my team makeup. 

 

[FF Ninja]

I don't disagree that scat backs are easy to find, but not all scat backs are the receiver that Thompson is. Guys like him and Gio are fairly scarce, I think.

I think RBs that can run between the tackles are pretty widely available and mostly interchangeable. Do I think CJA is better than Blount, Hill, Lacy, Morris, Darkwa, etc.? Yes. Do I think he is better than those guys plus $3m extra dollars (what I am guessing those guys will command on the open market this season)? It would depend on my team makeup. 

Well, I think Gio is actually pretty good between the tackles which separates him from Chris Thompson, IMO. If Mixon were to go down, I think Cincy would feel pretty good with Gio as their primary. I think teams would feel pretty good with CJA as their primary. However, I don't think teams would feel so good about playing Chris Thompson on 3 downs. And FWIW, Thompson signed a 2-year $7M deal, so he's getting a decent chunk consider the snaps he plays.

I think part of what separates CJA from the guys you mentioned is that even if he was used as a 2-down back after Gase left Denver, he's got 3-down ability.

 

[travdogg]

I know it seems like I'm picking on you because we've disagreed a lot today in two different topics already (but I actually appreciate your thoughtfulness and opposing viewpoints) but this is another really strange stance by you. Like I said I think Anderson is a solid back and likely under-rated but there's just no way he's better than Ingram or Hyde (Hyde is arguable at least I guess).

Glad you appreciate it, because I'm not trying to be someone who just disagrees with the everyone no matter what.

I think Anderson is clearly better than Hyde. Its really not even close. Anderson is a much better runner,a slightly better receiver(Hyde had more catches but led the position in drops and does nothing after the catch) and an infinitely better blocker(Hyde might be the worst blocking RB in the NFL, its like he doesn't even try) 

I think Ingram is nothing special. He's a cog in an elite offense. He's a much better receiver than Anderson, but CJ is a better runner and blocker. I think the Saints could dump Ingram and find and equal quality player very easily. Ingram is a very much a jack of all trades, master of none type. 

I didn't realize I thought so much higher of Anderson than the consensus seems to be. I mean, on an A-F scale, I look at Anderson as a B-.

 

[DocHolliday]

Glad you appreciate it, because I'm not trying to be someone who just disagrees with the everyone no matter what.

I think Anderson is clearly better than Hyde. Its really not even close. Anderson is a much better runner,a slightly better receiver(Hyde had more catches but led the position in drops and does nothing after the catch) and an infinitely better blocker(Hyde might be the worst blocking RB in the NFL, its like he doesn't even try) 

I think Ingram is nothing special. He's a cog in an elite offense. He's a much better receiver than Anderson, but CJ is a better runner and blocker. I think the Saints could dump Ingram and find and equal quality player very easily. Ingram is a very much a jack of all trades, master of none type. 

I didn't realize I thought so much higher of Anderson than the consensus seems to be. I mean, on an A-F scale, I look at Anderson as a B-.

Hyde is a better RB than Anderson to me.  Anderson is good but nothing special.   

The biggest problem for Anderson is that Denver can make a wise financial move by cutting him and drafting his replacement with a mid-round rookie at a lot less money.   

 

[Bronco Billy]

If DEN wants to move Anderson for the little bit of cap space they would recapture, they already have his replacement on the roster - and it ain’t Booker.

 

[FF Ninja]

The biggest problem for Anderson is that Denver can make a wise financial move by cutting him and drafting his replacement with a mid-round rookie at a lot less money.   

This is always the assumption, but how did that work with Booker? If we're being honest with ourselves, we know the bust rate is probably at least 50% with a mid-round rookie RB.

So it's true they could replace him with a mid-round rookie, but they could also very easily swing and miss and have a huge hole in their lineup at an important position, all because they were trying to save $4.5M.

As Bronco Billy alludes, I'm also curious to see how Henderson does if given a chance. He flashed in preseason but as an old rookie, I was discouraged that he never really got on the field (7 rushes in 5 games). 

 

[Dr. Octopus]

This is always the assumption, but how did that work with Booker? If we're being honest with ourselves, we know the bust rate is probably at least 50% with a mid-round rookie RB.

It's much higher - people love to act like teams can find RBs later in the draft (and sometimes they can) but the truth the better RBs in the league have generally been drafted in the first two rounds.

 

[Hankmoody]

If DEN wants to move Anderson for the little bit of cap space they would recapture, they already have his replacement on the roster - and it ain’t Booker.

$4.5M is pretty substantial, and I think Henderson is a big part of the reason they'll let him go.

 

[BoltBacker]

If DEN wants to move Anderson for the little bit of cap space they would recapture, they already have his replacement on the roster - and it ain’t Booker.

I think it depends on what you are trying to replace.

If you are trying to replace Anderson's '17 production then you probably need to invest a day 2 pick.

If you are trying to replace Anderson's average production per season since he's been a bronco, then you can absolutely replace that with Booker/Henderson/day 3 pick.

 

[FF Ninja]

I think it depends on what you are trying to replace.

If you are trying to replace Anderson's '17 production then you probably need to invest a day 2 pick.

If you are trying to replace Anderson's average production per season since he's been a bronco, then you can absolutely replace that with Booker/Henderson/day 3 pick.

You think his play last year was substantially better than his play, when healthy, in the previous 3 years? I'd say it was right on par.

 

[BoltBacker]

You think his play last year was substantially better than his play, when healthy, in the previous 3 years? I'd say it was right on par.

No, I said his "production per season since he's been a bronco".

 

[FF Ninja]

No, I said his "production".

What does that even mean? Season totals? Or productivity per touch?

I'm not saying you're wrong. It was just an ambiguous statement. 

 

[BoltBacker]

What does that even mean? Season totals? Or productivity per touch?

I'm not saying you're wrong. It was just an ambiguous statement. 

I meant the amount he contributed in games that counted in the standings for his team, whether he was able to be on the field or not. I don't give bonus points for time missed.

 

[FF Ninja]

I meant the amount he contributed in games that counted in the standings for his team, whether he was able to be on the field or not. I don't give bonus points for time missed.

When healthy he was a plus contributor (could help you win a game). The best you can reasonably expect from Booker/Henderson/3rd day pick would be average contributor (won't explicitly cost you a game). But a typical 3rd day pick would be below average and from what we've seen of Booker, I think below average is likely what you're going to get. However, there is a chance (30%?) he turns it around and there is a chance the Broncos draft the next 5th round Jordan Howard. I just think the odds are against it.

 

[BoltBacker]

When healthy he was a plus contributor (could help you win a game). The best you can reasonably expect from Booker/Henderson/3rd day pick would be average contributor (won't explicitly cost you a game). But a typical 3rd day pick would be below average and from what we've seen of Booker, I think below average is likely what you're going to get. However, there is a chance (30%?) he turns it around and there is a chance the Broncos draft the next 5th round Jordan Howard. I just think the odds are against it.

That's a big part of it. Last season was the first year Anderson has ever started half the games in his five season career. Now that could be because he is usually hurt, or he gets hurt because he isn't in shape, or he couldn't get in shape because he is hurt, or however you want to frame that chicken-or-the-egg argument.

The bottom line is Anderson has averaged 782 total yards from scrimmage, and under 5 TD per season. In my opinion if you give Booker/Henderson/Day3_Rookie an increased workload it wouldn't be all that difficult to make up for 782/5. I don't think you really need to catch lightning in a bottle to draft a guy that is part of a three headed backfield and produce a third of that(261 total yards from scrimmage/1.6 TD). 

Last season alone you had several rookies drafted on the third day of the draft that came very close or exceeded that....

267yards/1TD Chris Carson(7th Round)

492/2 Elijah McGuire(7th)

 470/4 Aaron Jones(5th)

583/4 Marlon Mack(4th)

669/1 Wayne Gallman(4th)

818/6 Jamaal Williams(4th)

723/3 Tarik Cohen(4th)

785/2 Samaje Perine(4th)

Several of those guys came pretty close in their rookie campaign to Anderson's average production/season on their own. That's why I think a day 3 pick could replace his production pretty well. Others have suggested a "mid-round" pick to replace Anderson and I assume that would include the third round of the draft. If you include the third round of the draft.....

1782/11 Kareem Hunt(3rd)

1554/13 Alvin Kamara(3rd)

... which are guys that obviously had better rookie years than Anderson has ever had. 

But maybe 2017 was a bad example, so let's look at the 2016 draft instead....

327/1 Dwayne Washington(7th)

209/1 Alex Collins(5th)

367/1 Wendell Smallwood(5th)

1611/7 Jordan Howard(5th)

618/0 Paul Perkins(5th)

582/2 DeAndre Washington(5th)

877/5 Devontae Booker(4th)

544/3 Kenneth Dixon(4th)

So, yeah, there's a chance that you'll find a Jordan Howard on day 3 that will play better as a rookie than Anderson has played at any point in his career. But more importantly it looks like you can find a RBBC guy on the third day of the draft. In particular there was a fella named Devontae Booker who was more productive as a rookie than Anderson has averaged over his career.

 

[jeaton6]

That's a big part of it. Last season was the first year Anderson has ever started half the games in his five season career. Now that could be because he is usually hurt, or he gets hurt because he isn't in shape, or he couldn't get in shape because he is hurt, or however you want to frame that chicken-or-the-egg argument.

The bottom line is Anderson has averaged 782 total yards from scrimmage, and under 5 TD per season. In my opinion if you give Booker/Henderson/Day3_Rookie an increased workload it wouldn't be all that difficult to make up for 782/5. I don't think you really need to catch lightning in a bottle to draft a guy that is part of a three headed backfield and produce a third of that(261 total yards from scrimmage/1.6 TD). 

Last season alone you had several rookies drafted on the third day of the draft that came very close or exceeded that....

267yards/1TD Chris Carson(7th Round)

492/2 Elijah McGuire(7th)

 470/4 Aaron Jones(5th)

583/4 Marlon Mack(4th)

669/1 Wayne Gallman(4th)

818/6 Jamaal Williams(4th)

723/3 Tarik Cohen(4th)

785/2 Samaje Perine(4th)

Several of those guys came pretty close in their rookie campaign to Anderson's average production/season on their own. That's why I think a day 3 pick could replace his production pretty well. Others have suggested a "mid-round" pick to replace Anderson and I assume that would include the third round of the draft. If you include the third round of the draft.....

1782/11 Kareem Hunt(3rd)

1554/13 Alvin Kamara(3rd)

... which are guys that obviously had better rookie years than Anderson has ever had. 

But maybe 2017 was a bad example, so let's look at the 2016 draft instead....

327/1 Dwayne Washington(7th)

209/1 Alex Collins(5th)

367/1 Wendell Smallwood(5th)

1611/7 Jordan Howard(5th)

618/0 Paul Perkins(5th)

582/2 DeAndre Washington(5th)

877/5 Devontae Booker(4th)

544/3 Kenneth Dixon(4th)

So, yeah, there's a chance that you'll find a Jordan Howard on day 3 that will play better as a rookie than Anderson has played at any point in his career. But more importantly it looks like you can find a RBBC guy on the third day of the draft. In particular there was a fella named Devontae Booker who was more productive as a rookie than Anderson has averaged over his career.

I think it it too simplistic to look at average annual production and state that he is not productive or is easily replaceable. What are CJA’s averages per touch and per game? That is a better indicator of his productivity.

YPC - 4.7,4.8,4.0,4.1 From 2014-2017, with 4.4 career avg. He quietly is coming off 1k yards rushing and 1,200  yfs. He seems to be pretty efficient with the touches he does get. Career 8.5 ypr as well. 

Booker at 3.5 and 3.8 YPC from 2016-2017 and very similar YPR (8.9). Wouldn’t say booker as a rookie was more productive at all. At least not how I define it.

 

[FF Ninja]

That's a big part of it. Last season was the first year Anderson has ever started half the games in his five season career. Now that could be because he is usually hurt, or he gets hurt because he isn't in shape, or he couldn't get in shape because he is hurt, or however you want to frame that chicken-or-the-egg argument.

The bottom line is Anderson has averaged 782 total yards from scrimmage, and under 5 TD per season. In my opinion if you give Booker/Henderson/Day3_Rookie an increased workload it wouldn't be all that difficult to make up for 782/5. I don't think you really need to catch lightning in a bottle to draft a guy that is part of a three headed backfield and produce a third of that(261 total yards from scrimmage/1.6 TD). 

I appreciate the legwork you did on the draft picks, but as Jeaton said, looking at average yards from scrimmage per season is not very informative and borders on useless. A guy who averages 1000 yards rushing on 300 carries is not as productive as a guy who does it on 200 carries. Or a scat back who gets most of his yards from receptions isn't a guy you can just plug in effectively as your early down/between the tackles RB. Plus, by only looking at totals, you are also ignoring factors such as pass blocking and situation. I mean, the fact that you think Booker was more productive than CJA speaks volumes. As a rookie Booker came into the game as a change of pace back/3rd down back when CJA was healthy. It's always going to be easier to gain yards when you're facing 6 men in the box and/or playing on 3rd and long. While CJA earned 4.0 ypc behind that OL, Booker managed only 3.5 ypc as a rookie and, most importantly, looked terrible when taking on CJA's responsibilities - which is a great example of why you can't just plug a guy in and expect the same results. Booker looked good as a CoP back, but was garbage as an every down back. Yet you seem to think it will be simple/effective to just plug him in.

What you seem to be missing is that CJA did at least several things pretty damn well to earn the 6th best rating from PFF. I'm not here to say PFF is infallible. It's not. But it is a useful tool and if CJA managed to place 6th in their rating, you simply are not going to replace him with Booker, Henderson, and an average day 3 rookie pick. If you're only looking at total yards, then yes, you can probably replace those yards. It'll probably take you more carries and targets to get there... you'll probably miss out on some first downs... your QB will probably get sacked a few times... but if you stick with it, you might be able to match your aggregate totals. Unfortunately, aggregate totals don't win you games. Good play wins you games and you'll be taking a step back in terms of quality of play if you replace him with those guys.

But again, I'm not advocating for them to keep him. I'm just saying he's not that easily replaced. But if they can make a larger improvement in quality of play in another category than the decrease in quality of play at RB, then it is a net positive. Especially at QB. A rising tide lifts all boats as they say. They could easily net greater than 4.1 ypc from a lesser talent if the passing game is clicking.

 

[Bronco Billy]

In particular there was a fella named Devontae Booker who was more productive as a rookie than Anderson has averaged over his career.

Please provide some statistical support to this statement.

 

[FF Ninja]

Please provide some statistical support to this statement.

He's going to struggle to do that.

CJA:
Games 1-7: 110-437-4 rushing (4.1 ypc); 24-16-128-1 receiving

Booker:
Games 1-7: 51-244-1 rushing (4.8 ypc); 13-9-69-0 receiving
Games 8-17: 123-368-3 rushing (3.0 ypc :X ); 21-12-136-1 receiving

Booker was significantly worse in 9 games as the starter than CJA was in 7 games as the starter.

 

[Bronco Billy]

He's going to struggle to do that.

CJA:
Games 1-7: 110-437-4 rushing (4.1 ypc); 24-16-128-1 receiving

Booker:
Games 1-7: 51-244-1 rushing (4.8 ypc); 13-9-69-0 receiving
Games 8-17: 123-368-3 rushing (3.0 ypc :X ); 21-12-136-1 receiving

Booker was significantly worse in 9 games as the starter than CJA was in 7 games as the starter.

Booker has averaged 3.24 ypc when he gets double digit carries in a game.  Unless a RB is a hammer who consistently converts short yardage situations, that’s a special teamer end-of-the-bench type of number.  And this is the guy that the DEN coaching staff wants to be their bellcow?  He’s just got to be an awesome practice player, because he has shown little to nothing on game days that would justify this guy being anything more than depth.  You watch him play and there’s just not much to like there.

 

[FF Ninja]

Booker has averaged 3.24 ypc when he gets double digit carries in a game.  Unless a RB is a hammer who consistently converts short yardage situations, that’s a special teamer end-of-the-bench type of number.  And this is the guy that the DEN coaching staff wants to be their bellcow?  He’s just got to be an awesome practice player, because he has shown little to nothing on game days that would justify this guy being anything more than depth.  You watch him play and there’s just not much to like there.

I'm not 100% writing Booker off just yet, but yeah, the signs are not looking good. Add to that the fact he was an old rookie.. He's barely over a year younger than CJA.

 

[BoltBacker]

But again, I'm not advocating for them to keep him. I'm just saying he's not that easily replaced. But if they can make a larger improvement in quality of play in another category than the decrease in quality of play at RB, then it is a net positive. Especially at QB. A rising tide lifts all boats as they say. They could easily net greater than 4.1 ypc from a lesser talent if the passing game is clicking.

And I'll agree that if their ultimate goal is raising their QB play I doubt very much Anderson or the potential salary they would save by releasing will be likely to have much of an effect on that. Maybe the OL position, but probably not the QB position.