Saints are just Stupid for trading up for Ingram (1 Viewer)

[rockaction]

Oh boy, it's that bureaucratic, top-down screening mindset rearing its ugly head again. Anyone born before 1980 just has to have some sort of seal of approval based upon group-think consensus and pedigreed backing before they draft a slow, plodding running back based upon intangible and immeasurable qualities like "vision."

Ridiculous.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YSHw1wUvlIThe words "slow" and "plodding" hardly seem to fit. The highlights show that he has plenty enough acceleration. He is a Mack truck, not a sports car. What will make him a good NFL back is his leg drive, balance and yes "vision" (which is obvious enough from watching him cut back and bounce things to the outside) which can all be seen in the above video.Not saying he will be the greatest ever or anything like that. But don't use words like "slow" or "plodding" when he is clearly not.

He's not "clearly not" anything for an NFL running back. His combine measurements that I have access to were slow (I mean, they were really, really bad) and his strength was lacking. He then performed that way in his first year. We can argue the finer points and nuances of all these objective tests and their relative importance when measured against sport-specific strength, immeasurables, intangibles etc., but he tested slow, and then followed it up by being the fourth-best back on his own team per any standard measurement. The nice thing about there being four Saints running backs for this argument is that they provide a nice control group against which his performance can be measured. Fallacy alert, but I'll go with it: Helu and Murray (same draft class) schooled him at the combine, and schooled him in performance this year. It shouldn't be that simple, but right now, there's no other evidence against it. Your YouTube video showed eight total runs, three of which were in pre-season, and three of which were of two yards or less. It then showed me four thirteen-yard runs up the middle, one of which he bounced to the outside after Meachem grabbed fistfuls of the Detroit player's jersey. I'll meet you halfway: as flawed as sending that along is, I'll be game and watch his burst, and it looks decent. But I can't tell if it's the spread offense and the delayed hand-offs, or what it is. His "vision" led him right into his own blocker on one of those. We'll just have to wait to see about Ingram, I guess.

 

[humpback]

add to this the number of contracts that need to be done Brees, Colston, Nicks etc and not having to pay a first round draft pick this year.

The Saints have done very well for themselves in later rounds so a first round pick is not always needed

Ingram, out of the 28th slot, got a $3.89 million signing bonus. The 27th slot in 2012 is going to get around $4 million or so for a bonus. That's money that the 2012 Saints can use on bonuses for Brees and Nicks.

This is a pretty big stretch IMO. That $4M or so is peanuts when you're talking about contracts for Brees and Nicks, and they actually have slightly less cap space this year now because of Ingram. I'm not saying it was a terrible trade or anything, but let's not act like they're better off not having their #1 pick this year.

 

[EBF]

Other players who were "busts" after their rookie seasons:

Larry Johnson

Roddy White

Rashard Mendenhall

Darren McFadden

Plaxico Burress

Cedric Benson

Thomas Jones

The jury is still out on Ingram. I don't think he's ever going to be a superstar, but I don't see why he can't be a solid starter. He played okay as a rookie. 3.9 YPC isn't great, but then again 122 carries is a pretty small sample size. From the clips I've seen Ingram showed some promise. Had he landed somewhere like Dallas or Washington, where there was a much greater need for immediate RB production, he probably would've had a solid rookie year and we wouldn't be having this silly bust talk.

As for the combine numbers, there are plenty of successful backs in the NFL who bombed their workouts. Frank Gore, Cedric Benson, and LeSean McCoy come to mind immediately. You don't need great speed to be a solid NFL RB. Quickness, balance, and power are equally important. Ingram is never going to be a dynamic home run threat or an elite receiving back, but he's a pretty good runner.

 

[Pots]

Other players who were "busts" after their rookie seasons:Larry JohnsonRoddy WhiteRashard MendenhallDarren McFaddenPlaxico BurressCedric BensonThomas Jones

Now make a list of actual busts after their rookie seasons. I think that list will be a bit longer.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Other players who were "busts" after their rookie seasons:Larry JohnsonRoddy WhiteRashard MendenhallDarren McFaddenPlaxico BurressCedric BensonThomas Jones

Now make a list of actual busts after their rookie seasons. I think that list will be a bit longer.

ergo everybody is a bust after their first season!!

 

[Pots]

Other players who were "busts" after their rookie seasons:

Larry Johnson

Roddy White

Rashard Mendenhall

Darren McFadden

Plaxico Burress

Cedric Benson

Thomas Jones

Now make a list of actual busts after their rookie seasons. I think that list will be a bit longer.

ergo everybody is a bust after their first season!!

Was thinking closer to...

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

Other players who were "busts" after their rookie seasons:

Larry Johnson

Roddy White

Rashard Mendenhall

Darren McFadden

Plaxico Burress

Cedric Benson

Thomas Jones

The jury is still out on Ingram. I don't think he's ever going to be a superstar, but I don't see why he can't be a solid starter. He played okay as a rookie. 3.9 YPC isn't great, but then again 122 carries is a pretty small sample size. From the clips I've seen Ingram showed some promise. Had he landed somewhere like Dallas or Washington, where there was a much greater need for immediate RB production, he probably would've had a solid rookie year and we wouldn't be having this silly bust talk.



As for the combine numbers, there are plenty of successful backs in the NFL who bombed their workouts. Frank Gore, Cedric Benson, and LeSean McCoy come to mind immediately. You don't need great speed to be a solid NFL RB. Quickness, balance, and power are equally important. Ingram is never going to be a dynamic home run threat or an elite receiving back, but he's a pretty good runner.

The combine doesn't matter because Ingram has never looked explosive. We can all agree he won't be an elite RB. But a non pass catching, between the tackles, non explosive runner, isn't going to be a RB1...maybe a RB2 if he gets consistent touches and GL. That doesn't equal a RB that many FF owners want...like Cedric Benson. Ingram will be lucky to have a career like him.

 

[EBF]

The combine doesn't matter because Ingram has never looked explosive. We can all agree he won't be an elite RB. But a non pass catching, between the tackles, non explosive runner, isn't going to be a RB1...

Arian Foster disagrees. Ingram isn't the sloth you make him out to be. He's pretty quick and shifty. I will agree that he's not a freak athlete or a player who can easily transcend situation, but he can have a productive career. Like with most players, his value will hinge on his usage. Right now he's not in situation that's taking full advantage of his skills. If you put him on the Texans and gave him 300+ carries, he'd be a unanimous top 5 dynasty RB. So it goes.I said when Ingram was coming out that his range was from Cedric Benson to Frank Gore. As of right now he's looking more like Benson. It took a change of scenery to get the best out of Cedric, but he's had three consecutive 1000+ yard rushing seasons. Not a bad career really. Better than Cadillac Williams and Ronnie Brown now that the dust has settled. I don't think anyone who acquires Ingram at his current price will have a right to complain if he ends up with Benson's career.

 

[destro]

I didn't like the move when they made it and I don't like it now. Generally speaking, I think it's pretty terrible to be drafting or trading up into the first round for a RB unless you feel extremely confident he is going to be a truly elite back for many years. How many are extremely confident he is going to be an elite, top 5ish RB in the NFL? I am certainly not.

It should be very obvious at this point that competent running backs are extremely easy to find beyond the first round, and often times even after the draft is over. More importantly, having a talented OL can allow even average talents to be extremely productive. Worse still, running backs take more abuse and break down faster than any other position in the game. Why in the world would you ever invest so heavily on one player at that position? The only reason you should do that is if you are convinced he is a rare world-beater capable of carrying a team for years to come.

Yes, Ingram was picked later in the first, but I still feel like this concept applies. If it's the early first you're talking, it's even more ridiculous unless you feel like there is a 95% chance you have an Adrian Peterson-type on your hands. I think it was just a bad move. The fact that New Orleans has made smart moves in the past does not change anything. NFL executives and head coaches routinely make terrible decisions, many of which are immediately obvious without having spent decades in an NFL front office. You don't even need to consider his underwhelming rookie season to determine that this was simply a misguided splurge. They should have instead invested more on defense or... anything else.

 

[destro]

The combine doesn't matter because Ingram has never looked explosive. We can all agree he won't be an elite RB. But a non pass catching, between the tackles, non explosive runner, isn't going to be a RB1...

Arian Foster disagrees.

Are you saying Arian Foster fits his description of Ingram as a "non pass catching, between the tackles, non explosive runner?" Because I... I really strongly do not agree if that is what you are saying. I don't think I would be alone on that one...

 

[Luke Skywalker]

The fact that New Orleans has made smart moves in the past does not change anything. NFL executives and head coaches routinely make terrible decisions, many of which are immediately obvious without having spent decades in an NFL front office. You don't even need to consider his underwhelming rookie season to determine that this was simply a misguided splurge. They should have instead invested more on defense or... anything else.

Again, please recall the Saints running back situation prior to the draft. In the previous season Thomas and Ivory had both shown themselves to be extremely injury prone. They knew Reggie Bush was on the way out. They didn't know they were going to get Sproles. Because of injuries at the running back position that season the offense had pretty much fallen apart and they were playing guys like Ladell Betts and Julius Jones. In fact you can make a strong argument that injuries at the RB position killed their season.Knowing they have a window of maybe 3 years to win another Super Bowl, they took the chance to get a guy who was generally considered the best back in the draft to fill a definite need at a position of weakness. You can't really take offense to that logic.If Ingram doesn't work out, so be it. But let's not pretend it was some undeniably stupid move. As a Saints fan, I am glad to see management being proactive and constantly seeking to fix their problems. Not every team's fans can say that.

 

[destro]

The fact that New Orleans has made smart moves in the past does not change anything. NFL executives and head coaches routinely make terrible decisions, many of which are immediately obvious without having spent decades in an NFL front office. You don't even need to consider his underwhelming rookie season to determine that this was simply a misguided splurge. They should have instead invested more on defense or... anything else.

Again, please recall the Saints running back situation prior to the draft. In the previous season Thomas and Ivory had both shown themselves to be extremely injury prone. They knew Reggie Bush was on the way out. They didn't know they were going to get Sproles. Because of injuries at the running back position that season the offense had pretty much fallen apart and they were playing guys like Ladell Betts and Julius Jones. In fact you can make a strong argument that injuries at the RB position killed their season.Knowing they have a window of maybe 3 years to win another Super Bowl, they took the chance to get a guy who was generally considered the best back in the draft to fill a definite need at a position of weakness. You can't really take offense to that logic.If Ingram doesn't work out, so be it. But let's not pretend it was some undeniably stupid move. As a Saints fan, I am glad to see management being proactive and constantly seeking to fix their problems. Not every team's fans can say that.

You're missing the point. I don't care what their running back situation was last year prior to the draft, and I don't care if they thought they were close a Super Bowl. The point is that it was a poor investment in an absolute sense, because running backs just aren't worth a 1st unless you are very sure you are getting an elite talent. So you tell me they needed a running back? That's fine, get one. Get one of a dozen available way later that would have been totally adequate (if not better), put next year's first round pick in your back pocket, and call it a day. It's just not a good use of resources to draft running backs in the first, especially if you're trading up to get there. Look at the running backs playing in Super Bowl next week. Any 1st round picks there? Nope, not even a 2nd rounder, unless you count Vereen, who probably won't be active. Look at the rest of running backs in New Orleans this year! Two of them were undrafted and the other was drafted in the fourth. They all looked better than Ingram, even when he was healthy - but, really, that's irrelevant. Even if Ingram bounces back and has a decent 3 or 4 years for New Orleans after this, he still will not have proved that move to be a good use of resources. The point is that solid running backs are readily available later in drafts, heavily dependent upon OL play, and quickly exhausted as resources. They are just not worth a significant investment.

 

[Luke Skywalker]

You're missing the point. I don't care what their running back situation was last year prior to the draft, and I don't care if they thought they were close a Super Bowl. The point is that it was a poor investment in an absolute sense, because running backs just aren't worth a 1st unless you are very sure you are getting an elite talent. So you tell me they needed a running back? That's fine, get one. Get one of a dozen available way later that would have been totally adequate (if not better), put next year's first round pick in your back pocket, and call it a day. It's just not a good use of resources to draft running backs in the first, especially if you're trading up to get there. Look at the running backs playing in Super Bowl next week. Any 1st round picks there? Nope, not even a 2nd rounder, unless you count Vereen, who probably won't be active. Look at the rest of running backs in New Orleans this year! Two of them were undrafted and the other was drafted in the fourth. They all looked better than Ingram, even when he was healthy - but, really, that's irrelevant. Even if Ingram bounces back and has a decent 3 or 4 years for New Orleans after this, he still will not have proved that move to be a good use of resources. The point is that solid running backs are readily available later in drafts, heavily dependent upon OL play, and quickly exhausted as resources. They are just not worth a significant investment.

No, I see your point. In fact I've said pretty much the same thing about the value of a running back. I just don't agree with you that it was a patently "stupid" move. If the Saints were in the Super Bowl next weekend and Ingram picked up 3 or 4 crucial first downs in short yardage situations and they won the game, you would be hard pressed to say it was a "stupid" move. The goal is to win a championship and any step you take towards getting there is justifiable.The value of a draft pick is totally subjective. A team like the Saints already has a strong roster and few needs. They can afford to waste a couple picks to get a player with a particularly skill set that they feel they need. A team like the Rams for instance does not have that luxury.To use a hockey analogy, teams in contention routinely give up blue-chip prospects at the trade deadline for established vets that can put them over the top. Are they sacrificing their future in some sense? Yes. Is it worth it to win a championship? I would say it is. But that's just my opinion.

 

[destro]

You're missing the point. I don't care what their running back situation was last year prior to the draft, and I don't care if they thought they were close a Super Bowl. The point is that it was a poor investment in an absolute sense, because running backs just aren't worth a 1st unless you are very sure you are getting an elite talent. So you tell me they needed a running back? That's fine, get one. Get one of a dozen available way later that would have been totally adequate (if not better), put next year's first round pick in your back pocket, and call it a day. It's just not a good use of resources to draft running backs in the first, especially if you're trading up to get there. Look at the running backs playing in Super Bowl next week. Any 1st round picks there? Nope, not even a 2nd rounder, unless you count Vereen, who probably won't be active. Look at the rest of running backs in New Orleans this year! Two of them were undrafted and the other was drafted in the fourth. They all looked better than Ingram, even when he was healthy - but, really, that's irrelevant. Even if Ingram bounces back and has a decent 3 or 4 years for New Orleans after this, he still will not have proved that move to be a good use of resources. The point is that solid running backs are readily available later in drafts, heavily dependent upon OL play, and quickly exhausted as resources. They are just not worth a significant investment.

No, I see your point. In fact I've said pretty much the same thing about the value of a running back. I just don't agree with you that it was a patently "stupid" move. If the Saints were in the Super Bowl next weekend and Ingram picked up 3 or 4 crucial first downs in short yardage situations and they won the game, you would be hard pressed to say it was a "stupid" move. The goal is to win a championship and any step you take towards getting there is justifiable.The value of a draft pick is totally subjective. A team like the Saints already has a strong roster and few needs. They can afford to waste a couple picks to get a player with a particularly skill set that they feel they need. A team like the Rams for instance does not have that luxury.To use a hockey analogy, teams in contention routinely give up blue-chip prospects at the trade deadline for established vets that can put them over the top. Are they sacrificing their future in some sense? Yes. Is it worth it to win a championship? I would say it is. But that's just my opinion.

Look, I'm really not trying to be offensive when I say this, but... you're being a bit of a homer here. If you agree with my point about RB value, then you really just need to shut down the argument. It was a poor investment. Making excuses for why its ok for them to "waste" a draft pick is not helping your case here.Also, I really disagree about the Saints having "few needs." They had more than a few on defense, wouldn't you say? Besides, making weird picks because you think your team is all set is a terrible strategy. It never ends. You're never too good. You never stop building through the draft. You never let up and make fancy moves because you think you can afford it. There are no teams that have "that luxury" in the NFL. None.The hockey trade analogy doesn't fly, either. This isn't trading prospects for a proven stud at a desperately needed position that can push you over the top half way through the season. This is trading picks for picks, poorly, so that you can draft an unproven player at a position that should never be invested heavily upon, and almost never is a position that puts you "over the top." When is the last time a RB put a team over the top? Can anyone clearly see examples of this? Conversely, can anyone find situations where teams who did win a Super Bowl recently invested very little in the position? I think you will find plenty of those.Sorry, it just wasn't a smart move. Don't allow yourself to be annoyed by that fact. New Orleans still has made a lot of good moves and is a strong organization overall. That move just happens to be a mistake, many examples of which can be found all over the league.

 

[Luke Skywalker]

Look, I'm really not trying to be offensive when I say this, but... you're being a bit of a homer here.

Ah, I see. So because I disagree with some (not all) of what you are saying, my take is automatically invalid. Call me whatever denigrating names you wish. The only thing I'm "annoyed" by is people who pronounce their opinions as fact.Now, if you go back and look, I have said in several different threads over the last few months that I personally didn't care for the trade itself. Contrary to what you say, I am capable of forming an objective opinion. However, I am also capable of conceding to the idea that a very successful NFL general manager knows a damn sight more about this stuff than anybody on some message board.Only time will tell.

 

[NorrisB]

I'm banking on Ingram owners giving up on him just like all the McFadden owners did. I'll be ready.

He is not on the same level as McFadden, not as a prospect or talent. I think Beanie Wells Knowshon Moreno is a better comparison.

Wells had a really good combine and fast 40 time unlike Ingram.

 

[Gandalf]

The problem with Ingram is the RBBC he is stuck in not his talent. Put him on the Texans in place of Foster and we would be posting in threads about how we all knew he was a top 10 talent. The bigger issue is that the RB situation does not appear to be changing anytime soon.

 

[KellysHeroes]

A little early for this topic but the move doesn't look good as of now. But Thomas and sporles aren't young chickens and Ingram will get his chance very soon, he should be on everyones buy low list. Yr 1 stung a lot for those that use #1 on him but it's a early to give up hope.

PS glad I pass him and drafted green and jones when given the chance

 

[benson_will_lead_the_way]

The combine doesn't matter because Ingram has never looked explosive. We can all agree he won't be an elite RB. But a non pass catching, between the tackles, non explosive runner, isn't going to be a RB1...

Arian Foster disagrees. Ingram isn't the sloth you make him out to be. He's pretty quick and shifty. I will agree that he's not a freak athlete or a player who can easily transcend situation, but he can have a productive career. Like with most players, his value will hinge on his usage. Right now he's not in situation that's taking full advantage of his skills. If you put him on the Texans and gave him 300+ carries, he'd be a unanimous top 5 dynasty RB. So it goes.

Foster is much more explosive and pass catching threat than Ingram, Apples to Oranges IMO.Ingram's 3.9 YPC was behind Sproles(6.9), Thomas(5.1), and Ivory(4.7). Same situation, worse results. He did have more carries than any other Saint. However, in your theory if you give him 300 carries in Houston he will be a top 5 dynasty RB? I think you put him in Houston and Ben Tate would wipe the floor with him.Ingram will not develop into a consistent RB1 in FF leagues.

 

[jacobo_moses]

I will say this. When Ingram got a lot of his carries. It was earlier in the year when the O-line was trying to gel better on run blocking, (and when Ingram wasn't hurt). And when I watched the Saints play Ingram got carries when they were obvious run plays and (there wasn't a lot you can do there when the Defense knows your going to run.)

So I think comparing his YPG to Sproles and Thomas without taking into consideration those factors is a little shortsighted.