Demarco Murray (1 Viewer)

[3quinox]

We all know DeMarco Murray exploded onto the scene when Felix went down and took off. Throw out his breaking of records or his broken ankle, where do you see him next year? What makes him a good runner if you think he is? Or, was he only successful because of being fresh and comming off the bench? How do you compare him to other backs? As of right now it looks like his recovery is as they hoped it would be so barring injury what do you think he will bring to the Dallas organization in 2012?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

We all know DeMarco Murray exploded onto the scene when Felix went down and took off. Throw out his breaking of records or his broken ankle, where do you see him next year? What makes him a good runner if you think he is? Or, was he only successful because of being fresh and comming off the bench? How do you compare him to other backs? As of right now it looks like his recovery is as they hoped it would be so barring injury what do you think he will bring to the Dallas organization in 2012?

He combines near elite level speed with being built like a brickhouse. He doesn't have great wiggle or lateral movement but he hits the holes hard and defenders harder. Perhaps his agressive style will take its toll and he'll be banged up often and have a shorter shelf life, but right now it would be hard to list 10 RBs that I like better.The Dallas offense is built around the pass and while Jones may end up being the third down back, so that he has a role, Murray is a very compentant pass catcher. The fact that teams have to respect the Dallas passing attack will only create more running lanes for Murray.

 

[Shutout]

I don't share nearly the enthusiasm as doc. Thinking of ten guys I would rather have, I can easily pop up 12-15 names I would rather have without looking at a list.

I agree that he appeared to have some enticing traits to him but overall I think it was really very situaitonal. He came in fresh when others had been playing a while. He got a dream schedule at first and then he seemed to be slowing down in production quite a bit after he, himself, had played 4 full games.

Then when you look at his situation, it seems that all the things that people laud about him and criticise Felix about are actually very similar. People say Demarco will run with this job because Felix can't stay healthy, but Demarco never could either in college and didn't this year either. And just things like that.

I think I have had the same opinion (unchanged) every time I have seen these discussions in the forums: That this is a situation where you either want Felix AND Demarco or you want neither because I don't see either of these guys being able to just go "start to finish" with this job and just be the guy. I think injuries or personnel decisions during the course of the year will put each of them in positions to be good FF backs, but I just don't see it opening up for Demarco, and Demarco ONLY, to where people who rave about this guy as a top 10 Ff back will get the return on him if they invest that much in him.

 

[Sienna2012]

I don't share nearly the enthusiasm as doc. Thinking of ten guys I would rather have, I can easily pop up 12-15 names I would rather have without looking at a list. I agree that he appeared to have some enticing traits to him but overall I think it was really very situaitonal. He came in fresh when others had been playing a while. He got a dream schedule at first and then he seemed to be slowing down in production quite a bit after he, himself, had played 4 full games.Then when you look at his situation, it seems that all the things that people laud about him and criticise Felix about are actually very similar. People say Demarco will run with this job because Felix can't stay healthy, but Demarco never could either in college and didn't this year either. And just things like that.I think I have had the same opinion (unchanged) every time I have seen these discussions in the forums: That this is a situation where you either want Felix AND Demarco or you want neither because I don't see either of these guys being able to just go "start to finish" with this job and just be the guy. I think injuries or personnel decisions during the course of the year will put each of them in positions to be good FF backs, but I just don't see it opening up for Demarco, and Demarco ONLY, to where people who rave about this guy as a top 10 Ff back will get the return on him if they invest that much in him.

Not that I disagree with you, but what are the 12-15 running backs you would take before him? Just curious

 

[Tackling Dummies]

We all know DeMarco Murray exploded onto the scene when Felix went down and took off. Throw out his breaking of records or his broken ankle, where do you see him next year? What makes him a good runner if you think he is? Or, was he only successful because of being fresh and comming off the bench? How do you compare him to other backs? As of right now it looks like his recovery is as they hoped it would be so barring injury what do you think he will bring to the Dallas organization in 2012?

He combines near elite level speed with being built like a brickhouse. He doesn't have great wiggle or lateral movement but he hits the holes hard and defenders harder. Perhaps his agressive style will take its toll and he'll be banged up often and have a shorter shelf life, but right now it would be hard to list 10 RBs that I like better.The Dallas offense is built around the pass and while Jones may end up being the third down back, so that he has a role, Murray is a very compentant pass catcher. The fact that teams have to respect the Dallas passing attack will only create more running lanes for Murray.

Agree

 

[todisco1]

He looked amazing at first but then did seem to slow. His production took a dip after a few games.

He has had injury issues and his style of play may lend him to more of the same.

He's a very good talent but there are some red flags IMO.

 

[Bronx Bomber]

He looked amazing at first but then did seem to slow. His production took a dip after a few games. He has had injury issues and his style of play may lend him to more of the same. He's a very good talent but there are some red flags IMO.

Not that this is a good excuse, but the running game in Dallas 'took a dip' when their FB Fiametta was out. I don't think it was Murray slowing down.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

I think he's overrated and will always be brittle. He had trouble staying healthy in college and has already been injured in the NFL.

 

[horn2001]

He looked amazing at first but then did seem to slow. His production took a dip after a few games. He has had injury issues and his style of play may lend him to more of the same. He's a very good talent but there are some red flags IMO.

Not that this is a good excuse, but the running game in Dallas 'took a dip' when their FB Fiametta was out. I don't think it was Murray slowing down.

I believe that it was Adam Caplan that mentioned that he felt that Murray was a guy that needed a fullback, which lends cred to your point.Also, the whole "he can't stay healthy" thing is a little overblown. OU played in 55 games during his four years there. He missed a total of five games, and three of those were in his freshman year. While he might have been dinged a bit, he generally played through his issues. A broken ankle qualifies as more of a fluke than an something that causes me concern long term. On the whole, I like Murray quite a bit going forward, and feel that he has the ability to be a top 10 guy for a few years.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

He looked amazing at first but then did seem to slow. His production took a dip after a few games. He has had injury issues and his style of play may lend him to more of the same. He's a very good talent but there are some red flags IMO.

Not that this is a good excuse, but the running game in Dallas 'took a dip' when their FB Fiametta was out. I don't think it was Murray slowing down.

I believe that it was Adam Caplan that mentioned that he felt that Murray was a guy that needed a fullback, which lends cred to your point.Also, the whole "he can't stay healthy" thing is a little overblown. OU played in 55 games during his four years there. He missed a total of five games, and three of those were in his freshman year. While he might have been dinged a bit, he generally played through his issues. A broken ankle qualifies as more of a fluke than an something that causes me concern long term. On the whole, I like Murray quite a bit going forward, and feel that he has the ability to be a top 10 guy for a few years.

You make light of the "always dinged in college" angle. I don't. He was always having to come out of games at OU.

 

[Invictus~Bronte]

He hit the proverbial rookie wall. He's not built physically to withstand the position, his limbs are too long, he runs to upright. He looked better then expected on fresh legs against a couple sub par defenses. He'll be good in doses like all the Dallas RB's have been, they also don't incorporate the RB in the RZ enough to have a good touchdown total. They are very yard and reception dependent and Felix will cut into those receptions when he manages to be on the field.

 

[Shutout]

He looked amazing at first but then did seem to slow. His production took a dip after a few games. He has had injury issues and his style of play may lend him to more of the same. He's a very good talent but there are some red flags IMO.

Not that this is a good excuse, but the running game in Dallas 'took a dip' when their FB Fiametta was out. I don't think it was Murray slowing down.

I believe that it was Adam Caplan that mentioned that he felt that Murray was a guy that needed a fullback, which lends cred to your point.Also, the whole "he can't stay healthy" thing is a little overblown. OU played in 55 games during his four years there. He missed a total of five games, and three of those were in his freshman year. While he might have been dinged a bit, he generally played through his issues. A broken ankle qualifies as more of a fluke than an something that causes me concern long term. On the whole, I like Murray quite a bit going forward, and feel that he has the ability to be a top 10 guy for a few years.

You make light of the "always dinged in college" angle. I don't. He was always having to come out of games at OU.

Agree. I think the difference in the opinions of you guys is one is looking at stats and the other may have been watching the games. That's how I remember him as well; it wasn't that he didn't technically start a game or play a game, it was all the times that he was limping here, getting something checked there, etc. The various opinions may be fine combing to some, but to me there is a big difference. It is just hard for me to see him being that guy that is playing all season, and playing well enough to be a top 10 RB.Someone above said they can see how he can be a top 10 RB for a few years. Above that someone asked me who is on that list of guys I would take ahead of him. So, taking a minute to think of it for the short run (couple of years), I still have a very hard time saying as easily as a few have here: "Yeah, I am completely comfy passing these guys and putting him as a top 10." When I look at it, I just can't seee it in any way.How can I say, if drafting today and thinking of a few seasons that I think Demarco outperforms these guys on a regular basis (and for him to be top 10, a handful of these guys ALL have to be lower than him). Hard to see.RiceFosterPetersonMJDMcCoyForteMatthewsDMAC (if healthy), Bush if not (or Bush if he goes somewhere this spring)Chris JohnsonJamal CharlesOk, so there 10-11 (including Bush) guys that can easily be the best of the best every single week.Then if you think short term (again, couple of seasons), I think its highly likely that a whole slew of guys could still be right there as they have been-SJAX-Gore-Bradshaw-Beanie-Mendenhall-Benson and Turner (possibly)And then there are the guys that are wild cards but have produced, to a degree, short term and could easily do it again:-FJAX-Spiller-Sproles-Lynch-Dwil-JstewThat's A LOT of guys and that is even leaving off ALL of last year's rookies and the guys that will be rookies this year, and the next year, and then the next year. So even if I completely remove the guys on the last two lists who were producing very highly, but let's just say for the sake of argument they all fall off/back completely, that is still a solid dozen that are consensus top of the league guys plus another dozen young backs to be named. So its at least likely that 2-4 of the guys coming in will impress (Ingram? Richardson? etc).So, I just can't look at 3-4 top 10 weeks and 2-3 average weeks and say "This guy will be top 10 overall for a few years".

 

[32 Counter Pass]

Whether the injury prone tag is valid or not remains to be seen. Although I wonder where the injury-probe tag came from if the previous poster is correct about the number of games he played in college. That is a significant amount of playing time against top level competition, and IIRC Murray was the primary RB while at OU.

Dinged and playing through it is a hell of a lot different than dinged and sitting.

I also find the "running style" argument somewhat amusing. Being an old timer, I can recall people constantly had the same criticism about Eric Dickerson being a too upright runner. (BTW, I am not saying that Murray is the next Eric Dickerson, only that running style can be overblown.)

Personally, I am on the fence about Murray's potential, but I was very impressed by his production when he got the opportunity to be the lead back. I too am waiting to see the list of RBs people rank above him.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Whether the injury prone tag is valid or not remains to be seen. Although I wonder where the injury-probe tag came from if the previous poster is correct about the number of games he played in college. That is a significant amount of playing time against top level competition, and IIRC Murray was the primary RB while at OU.

Dinged and playing through it is a hell of a lot different than dinged and sitting.

I also find the "running style" argument somewhat amusing. Being an old timer, I can recall people constantly had the same criticism about Eric Dickerson being a too upright runner. (BTW, I am not saying that Murray is the next Eric Dickerson, only that running style can be overblown.)

Personally, I am on the fence about Murray's potential, but I was very impressed by his production when he got the opportunity to be the lead back. I too am waiting to see the list of RBs people rank above him.

There is the part you're not getting. He did sit a lot in games where he would limp to the sidelines. He may come in later, but he would sit several series in what seemed like a lot of games throughout his college career. In the end it would show that he played the game, but how much? I would love to know the minutes he missed during games.

 

[Shutout]

Whether the injury prone tag is valid or not remains to be seen. Although I wonder where the injury-probe tag came from if the previous poster is correct about the number of games he played in college. That is a significant amount of playing time against top level competition, and IIRC Murray was the primary RB while at OU. Dinged and playing through it is a hell of a lot different than dinged and sitting. I also find the "running style" argument somewhat amusing. Being an old timer, I can recall people constantly had the same criticism about Eric Dickerson being a too upright runner. (BTW, I am not saying that Murray is the next Eric Dickerson, only that running style can be overblown.)Personally, I am on the fence about Murray's potential, but I was very impressed by his production when he got the opportunity to be the lead back. I too am waiting to see the list of RBs people rank above him.

List is above your post.And, while i agree with the overall sentiment of "running upright" being a bad "reason", it also DOES go the other way. While we can say Eric Dickerson ran too upright and excelled, we could also look at a guy like, say, chris Brown, who had the same tag and IT DID go a long way in his being a flash in the pan.Remember Chris Brown? Came out for the Titans and looked like the next all-world guy. He was setting records for best performances to start a career. He was lighting it up. But he also came with the exact same criticisms that we are talking about here. Dynamic but gets hurt at the drop of a hat. Tore it up early and in the blink of an eye, was gone. I'm not trying to say chris Brown is anymore comparable to Demarco as you said Demarco is to Dickerson, but for the same reason you can't completely dismmis it; you also can't completely ignore it.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Whether the injury prone tag is valid or not remains to be seen. Although I wonder where the injury-probe tag came from if the previous poster is correct about the number of games he played in college. That is a significant amount of playing time against top level competition, and IIRC Murray was the primary RB while at OU. Dinged and playing through it is a hell of a lot different than dinged and sitting. I also find the "running style" argument somewhat amusing. Being an old timer, I can recall people constantly had the same criticism about Eric Dickerson being a too upright runner. (BTW, I am not saying that Murray is the next Eric Dickerson, only that running style can be overblown.)Personally, I am on the fence about Murray's potential, but I was very impressed by his production when he got the opportunity to be the lead back. I too am waiting to see the list of RBs people rank above him.

List is above your post.And, while i agree with the overall sentiment of "running upright" being a bad "reason", it also DOES go the other way. While we can say Eric Dickerson ran too upright and excelled, we could also look at a guy like, say, chris Brown, who had the same tag and IT DID go a long way in his being a flash in the pan.Remember Chris Brown? Came out for the Titans and looked like the next all-world guy. He was setting records for best performances to start a career. He was lighting it up. But he also came with the exact same criticisms that we are talking about here. Dynamic but gets hurt at the drop of a hat. Tore it up early and in the blink of an eye, was gone. I'm not trying to say chris Brown is anymore comparable to Demarco as you said Demarco is to Dickerson, but for the same reason you can't completely dismmis it; you also can't completely ignore it.

Murray is more physical than Brown, but I like the comparison otherwise.

 

[Kenny Powers]

He looked amazing at first but then did seem to slow. His production took a dip after a few games. He has had injury issues and his style of play may lend him to more of the same. He's a very good talent but there are some red flags IMO.

Not that this is a good excuse, but the running game in Dallas 'took a dip' when their FB Fiametta was out. I don't think it was Murray slowing down.

I believe that it was Adam Caplan that mentioned that he felt that Murray was a guy that needed a fullback, which lends cred to your point.Also, the whole "he can't stay healthy" thing is a little overblown. OU played in 55 games during his four years there. He missed a total of five games, and three of those were in his freshman year. While he might have been dinged a bit, he generally played through his issues. A broken ankle qualifies as more of a fluke than an something that causes me concern long term. On the whole, I like Murray quite a bit going forward, and feel that he has the ability to be a top 10 guy for a few years.

You make light of the "always dinged in college" angle. I don't. He was always having to come out of games at OU.

Agree. I think the difference in the opinions of you guys is one is looking at stats and the other may have been watching the games. That's how I remember him as well; it wasn't that he didn't technically start a game or play a game, it was all the times that he was limping here, getting something checked there, etc. The various opinions may be fine combing to some, but to me there is a big difference. It is just hard for me to see him being that guy that is playing all season, and playing well enough to be a top 10 RB.Someone above said they can see how he can be a top 10 RB for a few years. Above that someone asked me who is on that list of guys I would take ahead of him. So, taking a minute to think of it for the short run (couple of years), I still have a very hard time saying as easily as a few have here: "Yeah, I am completely comfy passing these guys and putting him as a top 10." When I look at it, I just can't seee it in any way.How can I say, if drafting today and thinking of a few seasons that I think Demarco outperforms these guys on a regular basis (and for him to be top 10, a handful of these guys ALL have to be lower than him). Hard to see.RiceFosterPetersonMJDMcCoyForteMatthewsDMAC (if healthy), Bush if not (or Bush if he goes somewhere this spring)Chris JohnsonJamal CharlesOk, so there 10-11 (including Bush) guys that can easily be the best of the best every single week.Then if you think short term (again, couple of seasons), I think its highly likely that a whole slew of guys could still be right there as they have been-SJAX-Gore-Bradshaw-Sproles

Agree with most of this, although Im not touching DMC until all of the guys still listed are gone, and if Bush is still the backup he certainly is much lower. Id need to see Charles in the preseason as well before taking him that high. I think Murray belongs in that next tier with Sproles, SJax, Gore, and Bradshaw or right below them, and the latter 3 all have their own injury and/or age concerns as well if anyone is going to downgrade Murray for that.

 

[32 Counter Pass]

[quote name='Shutout' timestamp='1328045092' post='14069719'

List is above your post.

So it is apparent you have completely written Murray as a fantasy factor based on some of the names on your list, like Spiller and Beanie (yea, he isn't injury prone). At minimum, I think your conclusion is a little premature. What speaks louder than any of the concerns expressed in this thread is that Murray produced when he got an opportunity. And I believe the Cowboys have already proclaimed he will be the lead back come next September.

I do not know if Murray will be a top 12 RB, but I believe he has that type of upside. As opposed to someone like Beanie, whose ceiling is just about where he finished this year at RB23. Or Stewy/DeWill who are mired in a time share.

 

[Knowlt]

This guy worth a top 10 rookie pick in 2012?

 

[Donsmith753]

This guy worth a top 10 rookie pick in 2012?

Top 5

 

[mbuehner]

This guy worth a top 10 rookie pick in 2012?

Any rookies in the pool that have set a rushing record for a storied NFL franchise?

 

[cstu]

I've seen people get a ridiculous amount for Murray. His value will never be higher than it is right now.

 

[az_prof]

I consider him an elite dynasty RB. I know I am in the minority but I just really was impressed by his running style. He looks like a featured back to me. Now, I don't know much about his injury and how likely it is to dog him long term, but assuming it is something he can recover from without any longterm effects, I really do like Murray as a top 10 dynasty RB.

 

[Ack88]

A classic high risk, high reward player. Based upon how most people within the fantasy football community value him, he'd be a second round draft choice despite playing only a handful of games. For me, that's a little risky, but he could deliver first round performance, as his skill set is impressive. The Cowboy offense looked markedly different with Murray toting the rock.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

I've seen people get a ridiculous amount for Murray. His value will never be higher than it is right now.

Absolutely agree. I see him as a likely RB2 type guy fantasy-wise, and quite a few people seem willing to pay top-10 (even top-5 ) prices for him. He seemed to wear down / slow down even before the big injury, and I also think that Felix Jones, if used correctly, is good enough to take a decent chunk of the pie. I'd be shopping him hard.

 

[jackdubl]

Vickers signing helps Murray.

 

[Shutout]

So it is apparent you have completely written Murray as a fantasy factor based on some of the names on your list, like Spiller and Beanie (yea, he isn't injury prone). At minimum, I think your conclusion is a little premature. What speaks louder than any of the concerns expressed in this thread is that Murray produced when he got an opportunity. And I believe the Cowboys have already proclaimed he will be the lead back come next September.

I do not know if Murray will be a top 12 RB, but I believe he has that type of upside. As opposed to someone like Beanie, whose ceiling is just about where he finished this year at RB23. Or Stewy/DeWill who are mired in a time share.

I really don't want to get away from the theme of the thread. Especially now because a lot of people are probably talking trades in their leagues right now. But, to respond to the highlight; I never said I had written him Off. I just said that, in the short run, I see a lot of guys that would push him out of the top ten and I have to imagine that there will be at least a couple of REALLY good RBs coming in soon (Richardson, someone next year and the next, maybe Ingram from last year) that will produce as well or better. Actually, I think the thing that is premature is the notion form some that are ready to crown him as a top 10 based off a month of play. Now that is premature. I'm just trying to be a realist. You can't really just throw out "top 10" talk out there and ignore all the really good backs already in the league as well as the ones likely to be added.

 

[MAC_32]

Vickers signing helps Murray.

Yes it does, he did a lot better with a FB leading the way. I still don't believe in him long term though. His punishing style only works in small doses. Kinda like Marion Barber before he broke down.