What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Saints use of Mark Ingram borders on criminal (1 Viewer)

I got to this thread late and skimmed through it. I remembered an article that pretty much sums up what many of you on here have said regarding Ingram's substandard lack of productivity in the Saints offense:

http://www.4for4.com/fantasy-football/2013/preseason/sleeper-alert-saints-rb-pierre-thomas
Yeah, that article isn't very good analysis. The Saints run on 27% of Thomas' snaps vs. 59% for Ingram's. You really think they are facing the same defenses? Only if the defensive coordinator isn't doing his job.
By now, if Ingram were any good, any good at all, he would be able to do his job better than the defense does its job. At least some of the time. That hasn't happened and it's not going to happen because Ingram is just not a good RB at the pro level. He doesn't make enough people miss, he doesn't break enough tackles. This was an epic fail by the Saints, but it happens all the time. Player valuations in college often tend to over- and under-estimate translation to the pro level. In Ingram's case, it's a done deal. There was a vast over-estimation of his talent level. Some are slower than others to pick up on this, for sure.Can we move on from Mark Ingram now? He's irrelevant.
Right, because no NFL RB has ever taken more than 2 years to perform at the pro level (T Jones, C Benson, T Barber, R Bush). :sarcasm:
If you have to use the :sarcasm: emoticon, you're doing it wrong.

Way to basically plagiarize the post above. Nice re-ordering of the names to make it look like you had an original thought.

Exceptions exist amidst the massive sea of true busts. If you're clinging to the hope that he might turn into Garrison Hearst, by all means, don't let any of us interfere with the dream.

 
This is starting to remind me of the Tebow threads, a 50+ pager plus a growing 4+ pager all about a backup RB playing a defined role on a top-5 offense.

Set to snooze until something changes.

 
I got to this thread late and skimmed through it. I remembered an article that pretty much sums up what many of you on here have said regarding Ingram's substandard lack of productivity in the Saints offense:

http://www.4for4.com/fantasy-football/2013/preseason/sleeper-alert-saints-rb-pierre-thomas
Yeah, that article isn't very good analysis. The Saints run on 27% of Thomas' snaps vs. 59% for Ingram's. You really think they are facing the same defenses? Only if the defensive coordinator isn't doing his job.
By now, if Ingram were any good, any good at all, he would be able to do his job better than the defense does its job. At least some of the time. That hasn't happened and it's not going to happen because Ingram is just not a good RB at the pro level. He doesn't make enough people miss, he doesn't break enough tackles. This was an epic fail by the Saints, but it happens all the time. Player valuations in college often tend to over- and under-estimate translation to the pro level. In Ingram's case, it's a done deal. There was a vast over-estimation of his talent level. Some are slower than others to pick up on this, for sure.Can we move on from Mark Ingram now? He's irrelevant.
Right, because no NFL RB has ever taken more than 2 years to perform at the pro level (T Jones, C Benson, T Barber, R Bush). :sarcasm:
If you have to use the :sarcasm: emoticon, you're doing it wrong.

Way to basically plagiarize the post above. Nice re-ordering of the names to make it look like you had an original thought.

Exceptions exist amidst the massive sea of true busts. If you're clinging to the hope that he might turn into Garrison Hearst, by all means, don't let any of us interfere with the dream.
Nice response. You make a generic, wrong statement, then respond by saying "you're copying off someone else." You can't defend your position (Ingram would be able to do his job better than NFL defense by now, if he were any good), so you try to shift the focus of the conversation.

 
This is starting to remind me of the Tebow threads, a 50+ pager plus a growing 4+ pager all about a backup RB playing a defined role on a top-5 offense.

Set to snooze until something changes.
Is it plausible the Saints could be a #1 offense if they played superior talent over inferior, plodding scrubs? At least Tebow made good things happen frome time to time. I think that's what made him so hotly debated.

I don't think there's much of a debate anymore in regard to Ingram. Just some guys holding onto a fantasy that if the Saints could deviate from what works and construct an offense around Ingram over Brees, Ingram might get more than 3 ypc and vindicate his supporters. That's all this thread amounts to, anymore. Well, that, and the rest of us offering a reality check.

 
Bay hawks and FF Ninja = dudes who took this turd over AJ Green and just can't admit defeat.

Funny, yet sad at the same time. Keep it up as you're amusement for the Shark Pool. Kinda like watching chimps play with their poo.

 
This is starting to remind me of the Tebow threads, a 50+ pager plus a growing 4+ pager all about a backup RB playing a defined role on a top-5 offense.

Set to snooze until something changes.
Is it plausible the Saints could be a #1 offense if they played superior talent over inferior, plodding scrubs? At least Tebow made good things happen frome time to time. I think that's what made him so hotly debated.

I don't think there's much of a debate anymore in regard to Ingram. Just some guys holding onto a fantasy that if the Saints could deviate from what works and construct an offense around Ingram over Brees, Ingram might get more than 3 ypc and vindicate his supporters. That's all this thread amounts to, anymore. Well, that, and the rest of us offering a reality check.
A couple years back when Buffalo was shopping Marshawn Lynch the Saints had an offer on the table, I can't remember what it was now, maybe a 3rd and a 5th or something like that, and Buffalo wanted a 2nd, or similar, and the Saints wouldn't budge. It's amazing to think what a guy like that could do in an offense like this (not to mention the playoff loss).

Before there was Chris Ivory there was Joique Bell, and he's just been good at Detroit. A lot of people here thought Bell was more deserving than Ingram. The Lions may be proving them right.

That might be the only thing that bothers me, that and the 1st's they spent on Ingram in the end.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bay hawks and FF Ninja = dudes who took this turd over AJ Green and just can't admit defeat.

Funny, yet sad at the same time. Keep it up as you're amusement for the Shark Pool. Kinda like watching chimps play with their poo.
Keith Lewis-juvenile poster who can't have a logical argument/discussion/debate, so he resorts to name calling. Have fun with that.

This is a FF message board. Discussing fantasy football is THE purpose of this board. If everyone agreed, there wouldn't be much discussion, would there?

For the record, I don't own Ingram, because I know how the Saints use him, and nowhere in this thread did I suggest that they should/would use him differently. That doesn't change the fact that if he were used differently, either in NO or elsewhere, he would likely fare better.

 
It is what it is - the believers will say he needs a bigger workload, that he's a sustainer who gets better with carries. The non-believers will say he doesn't get carries because he doesn't produce with the ones he does get.

Until we see Mark Ingram get a heavy workload over a consistent stretch -- 15-20 carries for 2-3 games in a row on a power offense -- and still suck, I'm going to withhold judgement.

IMO you can't completely indict the player when the situation fit is so off. If he was playing for a power blocking, run-first team who had given him chance after chance to produce, then I'd buy he's a complete bust. But given his usage, it's going to be a second contract elsewhere (or injury forcing NO to use him) before I believe you can completely dismiss the guy.

 
This is starting to remind me of the Tebow threads, a 50+ pager plus a growing 4+ pager all about a backup RB playing a defined role on a top-5 offense.

Set to snooze until something changes.
Is it plausible the Saints could be a #1 offense if they played superior talent over inferior, plodding scrubs? At least Tebow made good things happen frome time to time. I think that's what made him so hotly debated.

I don't think there's much of a debate anymore in regard to Ingram. Just some guys holding onto a fantasy that if the Saints could deviate from what works and construct an offense around Ingram over Brees, Ingram might get more than 3 ypc and vindicate his supporters. That's all this thread amounts to, anymore. Well, that, and the rest of us offering a reality check.
A couple years back when Buffalo was shopping Marshawn Lynch the Saints had an offer on the table, I can't remember what it was now, maybe a 3rd and a 5th or something like that, and Buffalo wanted a 2nd, or similar, and the Saints wouldn't budge. It's amazing to think what a guy like that could do in an offense like this (not to mention the playoff loss).

Before there was Chris Ivory there was Joique Bell, and he's just been good at Detroit. A lot of people here thought Bell was more deserving than Ingram. The Lions may be proving them right.

That might be the only thing that bothers me, that and the 1st's they spent on Ingram in the end.
They have a 4th string RB Khiry Robinson that is better than Ingram but I guess they need to try to make Ingram work since they blew 2 #1 picks on him.

Ingram just hasnt displayed the moves and vision that Khiry has displayed even in limited snaps. Check the balance out on that spin move at the 2 minute mark. Ingram would be eating turf if he tried anything like that.

http://youtu.be/Dzvqj8ACwU8

 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is starting to remind me of the Tebow threads, a 50+ pager plus a growing 4+ pager all about a backup RB playing a defined role on a top-5 offense.

Set to snooze until something changes.
Is it plausible the Saints could be a #1 offense if they played superior talent over inferior, plodding scrubs? At least Tebow made good things happen frome time to time. I think that's what made him so hotly debated.

I don't think there's much of a debate anymore in regard to Ingram. Just some guys holding onto a fantasy that if the Saints could deviate from what works and construct an offense around Ingram over Brees, Ingram might get more than 3 ypc and vindicate his supporters. That's all this thread amounts to, anymore. Well, that, and the rest of us offering a reality check.
A couple years back when Buffalo was shopping Marshawn Lynch the Saints had an offer on the table, I can't remember what it was now, maybe a 3rd and a 5th or something like that, and Buffalo wanted a 2nd, or similar, and the Saints wouldn't budge. It's amazing to think what a guy like that could do in an offense like this (not to mention the playoff loss).

Before there was Chris Ivory there was Joique Bell, and he's just been good at Detroit. A lot of people here thought Bell was more deserving than Ingram. The Lions may be proving them right.

That might be the only thing that bothers me, that and the 1st's they spent on Ingram in the end.
They have a 4th string RB Khiry Robinson that is better than Ingram but I guess they need to try to make Ingram work since they blew 2 #1 picks on him.
Well of course, thought of mentioning him, but he's a bit of a state secret FF-wise these days. But again, another backup, looks great, we know the Saints have no problem finding awesome UDFA talent.

The main thing is the cutback ability.

Again, Ingram is indeed fitting what the Saints are doing if you look at the FootballOutsiders stats on run blocking - in 2012 61% of their runs down the middle and they're third best on converting power runs. Those are surprising stats to me, but that's Ingram's wheelhouse and I think it could improve even more this year. We saw the results vs ATL - 35:00+ TOP, which is awesome, incredible vs a team like the Falcons. So team-wise the goals are being met and Ingram's a part of that. FF-wise people are sick of it. For the fans, all they think about is what could be with a premium back.

 
I got to this thread late and skimmed through it. I remembered an article that pretty much sums up what many of you on here have said regarding Ingram's substandard lack of productivity in the Saints offense:

http://www.4for4.com/fantasy-football/2013/preseason/sleeper-alert-saints-rb-pierre-thomas
Yeah, that article isn't very good analysis. The Saints run on 27% of Thomas' snaps vs. 59% for Ingram's. You really think they are facing the same defenses? Only if the defensive coordinator isn't doing his job.
By now, if Ingram were any good, any good at all, he would be able to do his job better than the defense does its job. At least some of the time. That hasn't happened and it's not going to happen because Ingram is just not a good RB at the pro level. He doesn't make enough people miss, he doesn't break enough tackles. This was an epic fail by the Saints, but it happens all the time. Player valuations in college often tend to over- and under-estimate translation to the pro level. In Ingram's case, it's a done deal. There was a vast over-estimation of his talent level. Some are slower than others to pick up on this, for sure.Can we move on from Mark Ingram now? He's irrelevant.
Right, because no NFL RB has ever taken more than 2 years to perform at the pro level (T Jones, C Benson, T Barber, R Bush). :sarcasm:
If you have to use the :sarcasm: emoticon, you're doing it wrong.

Way to basically plagiarize the post above. Nice re-ordering of the names to make it look like you had an original thought.

Exceptions exist amidst the massive sea of true busts. If you're clinging to the hope that he might turn into Garrison Hearst, by all means, don't let any of us interfere with the dream.
If someone deems it necessary to use the sarcasm emoticon to avoid confusion, it says what they think of the person they are responding to.

 
Keith Lewis said:
Bay hawks and FF Ninja = dudes who took this turd over AJ Green and just can't admit defeat.

Funny, yet sad at the same time. Keep it up as you're amusement for the Shark Pool. Kinda like watching chimps play with their poo.
Keith Lewis = troll who can't guess right

I did no auction dynasty drafts that year, so you are incorrect. I just think this is a clear case of ypc not being an accurate indicator. If we're comparing guys who see just about every 1st and 2nd down snap to each other then sure, but Ingram's case is interesting. I've only got him in 1 league out of many. I had hoped he'd be used in a more versatile way, but after week 1 it's hard to get excited about him from a FF perspective, but pretty easy to make a case that his career 3.9 ypc does not mean that he's a plodder like so many foolishly assume.

Edit: correction noted above

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Comparing Ingram's YPC and DVOA compared to the other Saints backs has always been a joke.

Look, guy can't run fast. Can't play. Too bad.

eta* Look, let's bump this thread. Because there are about four of them that have happened in my time here. Let's end this. The proof is in the pudding, and this guy has no ####### pudding. He sucks. Sorry if you drafted him. Sorry if you're a Bama fan. Guy was never that good. Geno ####### Torretta of slow running backs with a con father for a story. Get over the ####.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ingram makes the Saints a worse team. A good RB would have scored on both of the goal line runs he got stuffed on before half today. The first one, he should have just kept going for the corner, the second one, he showed he has zero explosiveness.

 
What did you expect? Too many mouths to feed on a passing team. Sproles has always been the only RB with true value. Thomas was good for a year or two maybe.
You can't seriously mean this....Thomas has been a great RB for that team since he got there...."a year or two....maybe?" Thats crazy talk.

 
Thomas has always been rock solid but has always had durability issues. NO clearly is aware of this as it's the only logical reason they'd limit his touches/give Ingram any touches.

 
Can we put this thread to rest, already? Ingram is the modern day Curtis Enis. Let it go with the guy. He can't make plays. Simple as that.

 
Nobody needs a new home in the NFL more than Ingram. Every time he's in the game they hand it to him on a run...too obvious. He has NOT impressed, but the Saints use of him has absolutely been terrible.

He probably sucks, but I'll be a buyer if/when he moves on to another team.

 
Boy did I whiff on this guy. Got him in a long term dynasty contract and every redraft league I'm in this year lol.

 
Can we put this thread to rest, already? Ingram is the modern day Curtis Enis. Let it go with the guy. He can't make plays. Simple as that.
Huge insult to Enis, he actually showed a smidge of talent.

Ingram is the worst rb in the nfl and it's not close

 
Nobody needs a new home in the NFL more than Ingram. Every time he's in the game they hand it to him on a run...too obvious.
Why would this be different anyplace else?
Because no RB gets the ball on 70% of his snaps. Too easy to gameplan and key on him when he's on the field. I'm not saying he'd succeed elsewhere...I'm saying he's clearly not talented enough to do so with this kind of playcalling, but I suspect few RBs would.

 
Nobody needs a new home in the NFL more than Ingram. Every time he's in the game they hand it to him on a run...too obvious.
Why would this be different anyplace else?
Because no RB gets the ball on 70% of his snaps. Too easy to gameplan and key on him when he's on the field. I'm not saying he'd succeed elsewhere...I'm saying he's clearly not talented enough to do so with this kind of playcalling, but I suspect few RBs would.
I see what you're saying. I read it as you saying he'd be a good pass-catcher someplace else. Carry on.

 
The sweep play inside the 5 he ran was terrible. He looked like he had enough room to take it to the edge and score, but in true ingram fashion he hesitates instead of accelerates and gets no gain.

 
The sweep play inside the 5 he ran was terrible. He looked like he had enough room to take it to the edge and score, but in true ingram fashion he hesitates instead of accelerates and gets no gain.
I agree...but every defender knew he was getting the ball. I knew he was getting it. EVERYONE knew he was getting it....and that's a problem

 
Nobody needs a new home in the NFL more than Ingram. Every time he's in the game they hand it to him on a run...too obvious.
Why would this be different anyplace else?
Because no RB gets the ball on 70% of his snaps. Too easy to gameplan and key on him when he's on the field. I'm not saying he'd succeed elsewhere...I'm saying he's clearly not talented enough to do so with this kind of playcalling, but I suspect few RBs would.
I believe Mathews does and if I looked hard enough I could probably find some more. It's true though, you become far too predictable.

 
Nobody needs a new home in the NFL more than Ingram. Every time he's in the game they hand it to him on a run...too obvious.
Why would this be different anyplace else?
Because no RB gets the ball on 70% of his snaps. Too easy to gameplan and key on him when he's on the field. I'm not saying he'd succeed elsewhere...I'm saying he's clearly not talented enough to do so with this kind of playcalling, but I suspect few RBs would.
I see what you're saying. I read it as you saying he'd be a good pass-catcher someplace else. Carry on.
He's not a bad pass catcher at all, they just have better ones on their roster. Still insane how they don't mix it up more than they do.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
The sweep play inside the 5 he ran was terrible. He looked like he had enough room to take it to the edge and score, but in true ingram fashion he hesitates instead of accelerates and gets no gain.
I can't believe your audacity to use accelerate and Ingram within the same sentence.

 
The sweep play inside the 5 he ran was terrible. He looked like he had enough room to take it to the edge and score, but in true ingram fashion he hesitates instead of accelerates and gets no gain.
I couldn't believe that play. Not sure I've ever seen a running back decline the opportunity to go to the edge and instead just run directly into the defender like that. I've definitely seen enough now.

 
The sweep play inside the 5 he ran was terrible. He looked like he had enough room to take it to the edge and score, but in true ingram fashion he hesitates instead of accelerates and gets no gain.
I'd like to see the goalline cam on that run. It looked like he had a ton of room, but I wonder what a better angle would show us.

Bottom line, the Saints are not doing well figuring out their RB situation. They are mis-handling the situation as I said in the OP. If they determine that Ingram stinks, which is looks like he does, then they need to trade him or bench him. I'm of the opinion that their offense is suffering as a direct result of the ridiculous way they use their rb's.

 
Nobody needs a new home in the NFL more than Ingram. Every time he's in the game they hand it to him on a run...too obvious.
Why would this be different anyplace else?
Because no RB gets the ball on 70% of his snaps.
Ingram only carried the ball on 50% of his snaps in Week 1.
we are using last year's stats to make excuses for this year's performance, and ignoring any past stats of other players with similar run/pass ratios

please, try and keep up

 
The sweep play inside the 5 he ran was terrible. He looked like he had enough room to take it to the edge and score, but in true ingram fashion he hesitates instead of accelerates and gets no gain.
I'd like to see the goalline cam on that run. It looked like he had a ton of room, but I wonder what a better angle would show us.

Bottom line, the Saints are not doing well figuring out their RB situation. They are mis-handling the situation as I said in the OP. If they determine that Ingram stinks, which is looks like he does, then they need to trade him or bench him. I'm of the opinion that their offense is suffering as a direct result of the ridiculous way they use their rb's.
I think they know what they have with Ingram but continue to run him anyway. NO is purposely limiting PT's workload and probably don't want Sproles to touch the rock 15+ times either. It would make complete sense to distribute Ingram's carries between the two, bumping Sproles up to 20ish touches and PT to 15ish touches a game but I don't see that happening.

Nobody needs a new home in the NFL more than Ingram. Every time he's in the game they hand it to him on a run...too obvious.
Why would this be different anyplace else?
Because no RB gets the ball on 70% of his snaps.
Ingram only carried the ball on 50% of his snaps in Week 1.
we are using last year's stats to make excuses for this year's performance, and ignoring any past stats of other players with similar run/pass ratios

please, try and keep up
Unless I'm mistaken, Ingram was in for 266 offensive snaps last year and touched the ball 145 times which would mean he touched the ball on 55% of his snaps, not 70%.

I wrote about this in the snaps and utilization thread but after week 1 they were essentially emulating last year snap/touch wise.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top