The Trent Richardson Thread (8 Viewers)

[Yitbos69]

I sold him for the 1.8 earlier in the offseason. However, I am seriously considering buying back if the price is right. I do not want to pay 1.8 back as I would rather take a chance on Freeman or Mason if they are there. I would buy back if I could get away with a early 2nd, but doubt I would pay a first rounder.

of course you would buy back at a 2nd after trading him for a 1st....but why would the guy that traded the 1st....now trade him back to you for a 2nd?

 

[Winning IS Everything]

I sold him for the 1.8 earlier in the offseason. However, I am seriously considering buying back if the price is right. I do not want to pay 1.8 back as I would rather take a chance on Freeman or Mason if they are there. I would buy back if I could get away with a early 2nd, but doubt I would pay a first rounder.

of course you would buy back at a 2nd after trading him for a 1st....but why would the guy that traded the 1st....now trade him back to you for a 2nd?

Not saying he would trade him for that, just what I would be willing to pay. I would like to get Trent for a 2nd, but you are right I doubt it would happen.

 

[cstu]

There are more than 12 players in this draft I would rather have over Richardson. All I can say to someone who can get a 1st this year or a future 1st for him is "well done".

 

[cstu]

Here's what Jim Brown had to say about him before his rookie season:

"People took that as a negative, but that isn't a negative. You have Heisman Trophy winners that leave the college ranks coming to the pro arena that are total busts," said Brown. "When I think of greatness, I think of guys like Earl Campbell and Gale Sayers and Walter Payton and these individuals who it's unanimous that they're gonna make a difference. And when they were coming out of college, it was no doubt.

"So at least we have to discuss Richardson from the standpoint of giving him an 'ordinary' kind of label and then letting him prove to us that he's not. If he does that, then I will apologize. But I'm gonna look at things, and I'm gonna stand by the things that I see. And I think he is an ordinary individual that has great work ethics, he has an all-around ability. But that special ability that I look for when I say Gale Sayers? I don't see that."

And after the trade to the Colts:

"I was surprised," Brown said per CBSSports.com. "But then I thought it was a brilliant move ... Because first of all, Trent couldn't have carried the kind of load that Cleveland needed."

 

[Yitbos69]

There are more than 12 players in this draft I would rather have over Richardson. All I can say to someone who can get a 1st this year or a future 1st for him is "well done".

I think its fair value....the guy that owns Trent in this league thinks Trent is worth more...his counter offer was Trent for Foster/A.Brown/2015 1st......I think that is high for Trent and I like Trent more than most....he also rejected Foster/ABrown/2015 2nd for Trent....again I thought I was overpaying based on his value but I like trent.....Now I would not make that Foster offer again

 

[Coeur de Lion]

There are more than 12 players in this draft I would rather have over Richardson. All I can say to someone who can get a 1st this year or a future 1st for him is "well done".

I'm not surprised -- EBF just talked about taking him at 4.05, which is probably ahead of every rookie except Watkins, Evans, and maybe Sankey. And EBF's Richardson-love appears to be significantly milder than that of quite a few folks in this thread who are defending Richardson to the hilt. It depends on if you're lucky enough to have a true believer or two in a particular league, but a single 1st isn't an unreasonable starting point at all IMO, and I wouldn't bat an eye if more was added to the pick side. I wouldn't even consider paying that, but the market as a whole likely will.

 

[EBF]

I took him 41st overall in my draft. His June ADP on DLF is 47th overall. The only rookies with a higher ADP are Watkins, Evans, Cooks, and Sankey. That would put his "market value" at the 1.05 rookie pick. If you're offering a 2nd round rookie pick or even a late 1st, I don't think you can expect to land him. That's almost certainly not going to tempt anyone who's high enough on him to actually own him.

 

[EBF]

Some more food for thought on Trent. There were 14 RBs picked in the top 10 of the NFL draft between 1998-2014.

CJ Spiller
Darren McFadden
Adrian Peterson
Reggie Bush
Ronnie Brown
Cedric Benson
Cadillac Williams
LaDainian Tomlinson
Jamal Lewis
Thomas Jones
Edgerrin James
Ricky Williams
Curtis Enis
Fred Taylor

8 of 14 backs in this group had at least one sub 4.0 YPC season within their first two seasons in the league (Spiller, McFadden, Bush, Cadillac, Tomlinson, Jones, Ricky, Enis). Of that group, I would say only two were complete busts thereafter (Cadillac and Enis). Looking at some of the player progressions:

Tomlinson

2001 - 339 carries, 1236 yards (3.6 YPC)

2003 - 313 carries, 1645 yards (5.3 YPC)

Bush

2006 - 155 carries, 565 yards (3.6 YPC)

2011 - 216 carries, 1086 yards (5.0 YPC)

Jones

2000 - 112 carries, 373 yards (3.3 YPC)

2008 - 290 carries, 1312 yards (4.5 YPC)

Ricky

1999 - 253 carries, 884 yards (3.5 YPC)

2002 - 383 carries, 1853 yards (4.8 YPC)

The easy response here would be that none of these guys were as awful as Trent right away and that many of the ones who struggled either turned it around immediately (as opposed to having two consecutive awful seasons) or had a small sample size to use as an excuse. If you want to believe that Trent is destined to suck, you should look at Curtis Enis as your past parallel. 3.7 YPC in a committee as a rookie. 3.2 YPC as a starter in his 2nd season. Out of the league after his third year.

On the other hand, plenty of great backs have had at least one very underwhelming season (Ricky and LT were the consensus top 2 FF RBs in 2003 drafts and they had 3.5 and 3.6 YPC on a heavy workload as rookies). Others like Reggie Bush and Thomas Jones had protracted struggles running the ball early in their careers. Jones averaged 3.49 YPC on 362 carries during his time in Arizona. Bush was at 3.6, 3.7, and 3.8 YPC in his first three seasons as a Saint. Jones went on to have 5 consecutive 1000+ yard seasons including years of 4.2, 4.3, and 4.5 YPC. Bush went on to rush for 1086 yards at 5.0 YPC on a crappy Dolphins team. He also eclipsed the 1000+ yard barrier at 4.5 YPC last season as a Lion. Goes to show you that maturity and context can make a huge difference with the same player.

Jerome Bettis (another former top 10 pick) is a slightly different beat because he had a very good rookie year, but then he did 3.2 YPC on 319 carries as a second year player and 3.5 YPC on 183 carries as a third year player before washing out of St. Louis. I wasn't playing FF back then, but I'm going to guess that Jerome Bettis wasn't a very hot commodity after the 1995 season. He went on to have 6 straight 1000+ yard rushing seasons and while his YPC was generally underwhelming, he did have 1000+ yard seasons at 4.5, 4.4, and 4.8.

Overall, there's a pretty decent argument that elite RB prospects who struggle early in their careers are more likely to have at least one rebound season than not. So depending on how you choose to frame Trent's performance and what you want to believe, you can pretty easily flip the argument to say that he's likely to be successful despite what has happened so far.

Ultimately though, no two players are the same. If you want to believe he'll fail, you can latch onto his exceedingly low YPC (even by struggling elite prospect standards). You could just as easily turn around and say that his situation is unique because he was traded early in his sophomore season and therefore his performance is not comparable to someone who didn't have to deal with that.

Solving these puzzles as best as possible is what FF is all about. I'm not going to sit here and say he's a lock to become Thomas Jones or Marshawn Lynch, but you can acknowledge his struggles and still arrive at a perfectly reasonable conclusion that they're pretty meaningless depending on which points you choose to emphasize. I don't know if Trent is the next TJones/Reggie/Lynch, but I can say from having been here when those guys "sucked" that whenever the next TJones/Reggie/Lynch comes along, there will be a lynch mob of posters bashing that player when he's in the midst of his valley phase.

 

[cstu]

There are more than 12 players in this draft I would rather have over Richardson. All I can say to someone who can get a 1st this year or a future 1st for him is "well done".

I'm not surprised -- EBF just talked about taking him at 4.05, which is probably ahead of every rookie except Watkins, Evans, and maybe Sankey. And EBF's Richardson-love appears to be significantly milder than that of quite a few folks in this thread who are defending Richardson to the hilt. It depends on if you're lucky enough to have a true believer or two in a particular league, but a single 1st isn't an unreasonable starting point at all IMO, and I wouldn't bat an eye if more was added to the pick side. I wouldn't even consider paying that, but the market as a whole likely will.

Yep, all it takes is one guy who likes him and doesn't want to risk missing him by the next round.

I took him 41st overall in my draft. His June ADP on DLF is 47th overall. The only rookies with a higher ADP are Watkins, Evans, Cooks, and Sankey. That would put his "market value" at the 1.05 rookie pick. If you're offering a 2nd round rookie pick or even a late 1st, I don't think you can expect to land him. That's almost certainly not going to tempt anyone who's high enough on him to actually own him.

You're not alone - three staff members at DLF have him at 33, 49, 54 overall.

 

[jurb26]

Some of those rankings on DLF are just crazy. 3 members are ranking Richardson in the top 10 still. 4, 8 and 8 actually. How you can even begin to justify that is beyond me.

Edit, I'm referring to RB rankings not overall.

 

[cstu]

Others like Reggie Bush and Thomas Jones had protracted struggles running the ball early in their careers.

These are the two best case scenarios for you.

LT doesn't work for me as an example since he averaged 4.5 YPC his second year. Williams doesn't really either since he averaged 4.0 YPC.

 

[cstu]

Overall, there's a pretty decent argument that elite RB prospects who struggle early in their careers are more likely to have at least one rebound season than not. So depending on how you choose to frame Trent's performance and what you want to believe, you can pretty easily flip the argument to say that he's likely to be successful despite what has happened so far.

I'm not writing him off, I just feel he's still over-valued at current prices considering how bad he has looked on so many carries. In his last 22 games (excluding playoffs) he's had over 3.8 YPC in a game twice.

What I do like about him is his size and receiving ability. If he can learn to run at a consistent 4.0 YPC he's the elusive every down back.

 

[Bob Barker]

Trents first few games are huge for his value. If he is the workhorse and has 400 total yds 3 Tds with a 4+ YPC in the first 3 games he will be back ranked a top 5-10 dynasty RB. If he continues to suck and the team starts to lean on Bradshaw or Ballard then what is left of his value will be pretty much totally gone

 

[EBF]

Some of those rankings on DLF are just crazy. 3 members are ranking Richardson in the top 10 still. 4, 8 and 8 actually. How you can even begin to justify that is beyond me.

Edit, I'm referring to RB rankings not overall.

I'd probably have him in a similar spot. The way I see the dynasty RB landscape right now is that there are maybe 2-3 established elite guys with lots of tread on the tire. Beyond that you're either looking at aging veterans with limited shelf life (i.e. Peterson, Lynch, Forte, Foster) or relatively unproven young players (i.e. Michael, Hyde, Bell, Ball). I think a "bird in hand" type of owner is going to gravitate towards the known quantities. Someone such as myself who loathes drafting depreciating assets probably isn't interested in paying market price for a Charles, Peterson, Lynch, etc. So once you get past guys like McCoy and Martin, that leaves you to pick among the unproven young players. Some will say that a "fresh" prospect like Sankey or Hyde is a better proposition than a "proven suck" like Richardson, but that's all contingent on whether or not you believe he's really a "proven suck" just yet. Moreover, because we haven't had a 1st round RB in the last two drafts, almost all of the young RB prospects are non-premium guys with warts of their own.

Add it all up and I think that's how some people have him that high. In general, given what the landscape looks like right now, if there's a young and volatile RB that you're sold on (whether that's Ball, Richardson, Hyde, Michael, or whoever) it makes sense to be bullish with regards to his overall dynasty RB ranking because the competition for the top slots is so underwhelming.

 

[cstu]

Trents first few games are huge for his value. If he is the workhorse and has 400 total yds 3 Tds with a 4+ YPC in the first 3 games he will be back ranked a top 5-10 dynasty RB. If he continues to suck and the team starts to lean on Bradshaw or Ballard then what is left of his value will be pretty much totally gone

I don't even need the TD's or the receptions - I know he can do those things. Just give me 4 YPC on 15+ carries those first few games and I'll believe.

 

[EBF]

The Reddit guy just published his full article on Richardson:

http://www.battleredblog.com/2014/7/8/5879983/the-film-room-trent-richardson-is-a-beast

 

[Bronco Billy]

The Reddit guy just published his full article on Richardson:

http://www.battleredblog.com/2014/7/8/5879983/the-film-room-trent-richardson-is-a-beast

This is where I stopped reading, though I was tempted a couple times earlier:

In short, I would argue that Richardson got his 2.9 yards per carry in spite of the blocking in front of him. Had a lesser talent been behind that line, it could have been much, much worse.

Here's the problem: there were allegedly lesser talents placed behind that line in the same offense with the same blockers, and the results were much, much better. You just can't explain that away.

 

[Bandite]

Excellent Article

 

[Blackjacks]

How can anyone disagree with this article. By the time drafts are rolling I wouldn't be surprised if T Rich is being draft at the end of the 4th round and in everyone top 20 rbs if not in the top 15

 

[Bob Barker]

Where is Trent going now in PPR redrafts?

 

[Sweetness_34]

LOL - how can anyone disagree? When Donald Brown looks like a champ behind the same line and Mr plodder cannot even get 3 YPC and any TDs despite being on a team with that much passing offense, I believe it shows how much he stinks. Oh, and it is not like the Indy OL got any better in the off season. So the excuses will flow again this year

 

[Blackjacks]

LOL - how can anyone disagree? When Donald Brown looks like a champ behind the same line and Mr plodder cannot even get 3 YPC and any TDs despite being on a team with that much passing offense, I believe it shows how much he stinks. Oh, and it is not like the Indy OL got any better in the off season. So the excuses will flow again this year

I thought getting Dwayne Allen back would be considered an upgrade? I thought he was considered one of the better blocking te's in the league his rookie year????? I thought Fleener was considered one of the worst????? That's sounds like an upgrade, no?

A rookie guard, one would think he would be better in year 2.

Pep Hamiltons offense another year entrenched, advantage

and of course an offseason for Trent himself

Oh, don't forget getting Wayne and Nicks on the outside and facing dime and nickels all year...your right. Silly to expect any differences.

 

[cstu]

the crime in question was Indy’s maddeningly ineffective ground game.

Except when anyone else ran the ball - Brown, Bradshaw, Ballard and Choice were all able to average 4 YPC.

Even more surprising, out of 42 "bad runs" that went for three yards or less in those five games, only four of those bad results were directly the fault of Richardson himself. That means that a staggering 90% of Trent Richardson’s so-called bad plays were caused by the abysmal run blocking that Indianapolis and Cleveland put in front of him last season.

Funny how the OL only decides to suck when Richardson is in the game.

I would argue that Richardson got his 2.9 yards per carry in spite of the blocking in front of him. Had a lesser talent been behind that line, it could have been much, much worse.

In the five games in which Brown had ten or more carries, he had a YPC average below 4.0 in three of them.

Brown's YPC were 2.09, 5.71, 3.86, 7.90, 2.58 in those games.

Richardson in 7 games over 10 carries topped Brown's 3.86 just one time (10 for 40, 4.0 YPC). His highest besides that was 3.37.

Don't forget this is Donald Brown we're talking about.

 

[werdnoynek]

the crime in question was Indy’s maddeningly ineffective ground game.

Except when anyone else ran the ball - Brown, Bradshaw, Ballard and Choice were all able to average 4 YPC.

Even more surprising, out of 42 "bad runs" that went for three yards or less in those five games, only four of those bad results were directly the fault of Richardson himself. That means that a staggering 90% of Trent Richardson’s so-called bad plays were caused by the abysmal run blocking that Indianapolis and Cleveland put in front of him last season.

Funny how the OL only decides to suck when Richardson is in the game.

I would argue that Richardson got his 2.9 yards per carry in spite of the blocking in front of him. Had a lesser talent been behind that line, it could have been much, much worse.

In the five games in which Brown had ten or more carries, he had a YPC average below 4.0 in three of them.

Brown's YPC were 2.09, 5.71, 3.86, 7.90, 2.58 in those games.

Richardson in 7 games over 10 carries topped Brown's 3.86 just one time (10 for 40, 4.0 YPC). His highest besides that was 3.37.

Don't forget this is Donald Brown we're talking about.

That was some great cherry picking to make an "argument"... there's more about Brown's "success" you left out.

 

[stbugs]

the crime in question was Indy’s maddeningly ineffective ground game.

Except when anyone else ran the ball - Brown, Bradshaw, Ballard and Choice were all able to average 4 YPC.

Even more surprising, out of 42 "bad runs" that went for three yards or less in those five games, only four of those bad results were directly the fault of Richardson himself. That means that a staggering 90% of Trent Richardson’s so-called bad plays were caused by the abysmal run blocking that Indianapolis and Cleveland put in front of him last season.

Funny how the OL only decides to suck when Richardson is in the game.

I would argue that Richardson got his 2.9 yards per carry in spite of the blocking in front of him. Had a lesser talent been behind that line, it could have been much, much worse.

In the five games in which Brown had ten or more carries, he had a YPC average below 4.0 in three of them.

Brown's YPC were 2.09, 5.71, 3.86, 7.90, 2.58 in those games.

Richardson in 7 games over 10 carries topped Brown's 3.86 just one time (10 for 40, 4.0 YPC). His highest besides that was 3.37.

Don't forget this is Donald Brown we're talking about.

Wrong, all of the other RBs averaged 5.0ypc behind this atrocious OL on more carries than TRich had. Also, to put some perspective on the Other Colt's RBs 5.0 ypc on 170+ carries, only one team in the entire NFL did better, the Eagles at 5.1 ypc. So, as I said earlier in this thread, the Other Colt's RBs were the #2 rushing team in the NFL in 2013 based on ypc.

So, there is no reason to open and read that "excellent" article. It has been hashed over many times and the TRich owners can stop trying to put lipstick on the pig of TRich's 2013. It was abysmal, get over it, it happened. He sucked and the Other Colt's RBs did very well. TRich could improve in 2014, but it isn't going to be because he was really a stud held back by everything else.

 

[Blackjacks]

Donald Brown was a first round rb wasn't he? So obviously has some talent.

I think what the author of this article is saying that due to Browns low amount of touches and a few big runs the #'s look bad for T Rich

but the more Brown got the ball the more things looked a little more even.

One big run out of 7 attempts could be as lucky as good.

T Rich is getting the rock this year and in my opinion, you obviously don't agree nor should you by your thoughts, is going to be a great buy low candidate

 

[stbugs]

the crime in question was Indy’s maddeningly ineffective ground game.

Except when anyone else ran the ball - Brown, Bradshaw, Ballard and Choice were all able to average 4 YPC.

Even more surprising, out of 42 "bad runs" that went for three yards or less in those five games, only four of those bad results were directly the fault of Richardson himself. That means that a staggering 90% of Trent Richardson’s so-called bad plays were caused by the abysmal run blocking that Indianapolis and Cleveland put in front of him last season.

Funny how the OL only decides to suck when Richardson is in the game.

I would argue that Richardson got his 2.9 yards per carry in spite of the blocking in front of him. Had a lesser talent been behind that line, it could have been much, much worse.

In the five games in which Brown had ten or more carries, he had a YPC average below 4.0 in three of them.

Brown's YPC were 2.09, 5.71, 3.86, 7.90, 2.58 in those games.

Richardson in 7 games over 10 carries topped Brown's 3.86 just one time (10 for 40, 4.0 YPC). His highest besides that was 3.37.

Don't forget this is Donald Brown we're talking about.

That was some great cherry picking to make an "argument"... there's more about Brown's "success" you left out.

What did he leave out? Did he leave out the extra 2.4 ypc that Brown had on every carry? Did he leave out the fact that Bradshaw got 2 real starts (7 carries in his first game) after missing the entire pre-season on his NEW team as well and in those two games, he had more yards in both games than TRich was able to muster in 16 games with the Colts? Ballard play 1 game and got only 13 carries, yet his 63 yards were better than 15 of TRich's games and only 1 yard away from TRich's season high 64 yards.

Heck, if you want to cherry pick, Brown had 2 50+ yard carries and in those single carries, he bested 13 of 16 of TRich's games.

There is no cherry picking and nothing left out. Please stop trying to make up something good about TRich in 2013. He under-performed in every way the other Colts RBs (Brown, Bradshaw and Ballard), who had many games where they were the bell cow over TRich.

 

[stbugs]

Donald Brown was a first round rb wasn't he? So obviously has some talent.

I think what the author of this article is saying that due to Browns low amount of touches and a few big runs the #'s look bad for T Rich

but the more Brown got the ball the more things looked a little more even.

One big run out of 7 attempts could be as lucky as good.

T Rich is getting the rock this year and in my opinion, you obviously don't agree nor should you by your thoughts, is going to be a great buy low candidate

It's a bad argument. You have to look at Brown, Bradshaw and Ballard. Including the playoffs (Brown was the starting RB/bell cow in those games, trying to give a big enough sample), Ballard had one game of 13 carries, Brown had 7 games of 10-17 carries and Bradshaw had 2 games of 15-19 carries.

In those high carry games, those 3 were 136-608 or 4.5ypc. So, as the bell cows and in just about the same number of carries as TRich had all year, these guys had 1.6ypc more on every carry or 55% more yards on every rush.

So, in conclusion, I don't need to read that article to know that it is crap. By every single measure you can think of TRich was bad compared to the Other Colts RBs. 2013 is over, he sucked, let's see what happens in 2014.

 

[cstu]

the crime in question was Indy’s maddeningly ineffective ground game.

Except when anyone else ran the ball - Brown, Bradshaw, Ballard and Choice were all able to average 4 YPC.

Even more surprising, out of 42 "bad runs" that went for three yards or less in those five games, only four of those bad results were directly the fault of Richardson himself. That means that a staggering 90% of Trent Richardson’s so-called bad plays were caused by the abysmal run blocking that Indianapolis and Cleveland put in front of him last season.

Funny how the OL only decides to suck when Richardson is in the game.

I would argue that Richardson got his 2.9 yards per carry in spite of the blocking in front of him. Had a lesser talent been behind that line, it could have been much, much worse.

In the five games in which Brown had ten or more carries, he had a YPC average below 4.0 in three of them.

Brown's YPC were 2.09, 5.71, 3.86, 7.90, 2.58 in those games.

Richardson in 7 games over 10 carries topped Brown's 3.86 just one time (10 for 40, 4.0 YPC). His highest besides that was 3.37.

Don't forget this is Donald Brown we're talking about.

That was some great cherry picking to make an "argument"... there's more about Brown's "success" you left out.

What am I leaving out?

In the games where both Brown and Richardson had 8+ carries:

Broncos: Brown - 11/23/0 (2.09 YPC), Richardson - 14/37/0 (2.64 YPC)

Titans: Brown - 14/80/2 (5.71 YPC), Richardson - 8/22/0 (2.75 YPC)

Chiefs: Brown - 10/79/1 (7.9 YPC), Richardson - 16/43/0 (2.69 YPC)

Jaguars: Brown - 12/31/1 (2.58 YPC), Richardson - 8/25/1 (3.13 YPC)

 

[werdnoynek]

the crime in question was Indy’s maddeningly ineffective ground game.

Except when anyone else ran the ball - Brown, Bradshaw, Ballard and Choice were all able to average 4 YPC.

Even more surprising, out of 42 "bad runs" that went for three yards or less in those five games, only four of those bad results were directly the fault of Richardson himself. That means that a staggering 90% of Trent Richardson’s so-called bad plays were caused by the abysmal run blocking that Indianapolis and Cleveland put in front of him last season.

Funny how the OL only decides to suck when Richardson is in the game.

I would argue that Richardson got his 2.9 yards per carry in spite of the blocking in front of him. Had a lesser talent been behind that line, it could have been much, much worse.

In the five games in which Brown had ten or more carries, he had a YPC average below 4.0 in three of them.

Brown's YPC were 2.09, 5.71, 3.86, 7.90, 2.58 in those games.

Richardson in 7 games over 10 carries topped Brown's 3.86 just one time (10 for 40, 4.0 YPC). His highest besides that was 3.37.

Don't forget this is Donald Brown we're talking about.

That was some great cherry picking to make an "argument"... there's more about Brown's "success" you left out.

What am I leaving out?

In the games where both Brown and Richardson had 8+ carries:

Broncos: Brown - 11/23/0 (2.09 YPC), Richardson - 14/37/0 (2.64 YPC)

Titans: Brown - 14/80/2 (5.71 YPC), Richardson - 8/22/0 (2.75 YPC)

Chiefs: Brown - 10/79/1 (7.9 YPC), Richardson - 16/43/0 (2.69 YPC)

Jaguars: Brown - 12/31/1 (2.58 YPC), Richardson - 8/25/1 (3.13 YPC)

The rest of what was article said about Brown:

One of the most popular arguments against Richardson that gets perpetuated almost daily is Donald Brown’s seemingly successful year behind the exact same offensive line. Brown’s 5.3 yards per carry average gets thrown around a lot, but that stat never really addresses the fact that Brown was almost exclusively used as a change of pace back. Brown’s numbers are inflated by several games of five carries or less that had huge average yards per carry totals. 21.7 YPC on three carries against Jacksonville, 8.3 YPC on three carries against San Francisco, and 7.6 YPC on five carries against Houston certainly look nice on the stat sheets, but Brown’s games with heavier workloads look entirely different. In the five games in which Brown had ten or more carries, he had a YPC average below 4.0 in three of them. In his 7.9 YPC effort against Kansas City on ten carries, 51 of his 79 rushing yards came on one run out of the shotgun against a dime package with six defensive backs on the field. Brown’s other nine carries averaged 3.1 yards. Meanwhile, Richardson totaled over 50 more carries than Brown despite being on the team for two fewer games. Richardson was the workhorse, and Brown his complementary back. When Brown was asked to handle bigger loads, his raw numbers suffered just as much as Richardson due to Indy’s terrible offensive line. Nobody in that backfield was safe. Nobody.

 

[Touchdown There]

It is best if this thread is left to die until week 4 of the NFL season.

 

[Blackjacks]

agreed on the above

 

[cstu]

So no explanation then why Brown was able to average over 6 YPC against the Titans and Chiefs while Richardson couldn't break 3.0 in either one?

 

[werdnoynek]

So no explanation then why Brown was able to average over 6 YPC against the Titans and Chiefs while Richardson couldn't break 3.0 in either one?

The type of plays and type of fronts he was running against... as the article said. Did you read the article or just ignore the stuff that didn't fit your point of view?

 

[amnesiac]

what are you true believers spending to get Trent these days?

 

[OG_GF]

There are true believers?

 

[amnesiac]

seems like there are those that think he will bounce back next year.

just wondering what they're investing in this guy.

 

[Jrodicus]

Donald Brown was a first round rb wasn't he? So obviously has some talent.

I think what the author of this article is saying that due to Browns low amount of touches and a few big runs the #'s look bad for T Rich

but the more Brown got the ball the more things looked a little more even.

One big run out of 7 attempts could be as lucky as good.

T Rich is getting the rock this year and in my opinion, you obviously don't agree nor should you by your thoughts, is going to be a great buy low candidat

All of these points have been made numerous times before. Most of the people who talk about the YPC of the other RBs didn't watch much of the actual games - other than maybe the playoffs and a meme someone created about his alleged poor vision. If you try to give a reason WHY the other RBs had a higher YPC, then you obviously are a TRich-lover and are completely blind, because, y'know, YPC is the only thing that matters when evaluating a RB.

I was going to post a breakdown of RB usage based on formation and situation (1st down, yardage to go, etc.), but I decided against it after the backlash when I posted the breakdown of short-yardage situations. I analyzed the data first, and then posted the results. Since those results showed that TRich had a much higher usage in short-yardage situations, and that he was more effective at it than the other Indy RBs, it obviously meant I cooked the numbers, had an agenda, and changed bogey's to get a desired result. Apparently, if you post any information contrary to someone's beliefs, then you must an idiot, doctoring numbers, or just flat wrong.

Everyone's minds are already made up about last season. I don't think any reexamination of data will change that.

 

[Jrodicus]

Donald Brown was a first round rb wasn't he? So obviously has some talent.

I think what the author of this article is saying that due to Browns low amount of touches and a few big runs the #'s look bad for T Rich

but the more Brown got the ball the more things looked a little more even.

One big run out of 7 attempts could be as lucky as good.

T Rich is getting the rock this year and in my opinion, you obviously don't agree nor should you by your thoughts, is going to be a great buy low candidate

It's a bad argument. You have to look at Brown, Bradshaw and Ballard. Including the playoffs (Brown was the starting RB/bell cow in those games, trying to give a big enough sample), Ballard had one game of 13 carries, Brown had 7 games of 10-17 carries and Bradshaw had 2 games of 15-19 carries.

In those high carry games, those 3 were 136-608 or 4.5ypc. So, as the bell cows and in just about the same number of carries as TRich had all year, these guys had 1.6ypc more on every carry or 55% more yards on every rush.

So, in conclusion, I don't need to read that article to know that it is crap. By every single measure you can think of TRich was bad compared to the Other Colts RBs. 2013 is over, he sucked, let's see what happens in 2014.

The only measure you've addressed is YPC. That is not every single measure; it's one. How about as a receiver? Pass protection? Short-yardage?

I'll give you YPC. We can disagree on the reasons why, and that's fine. But you are making a huge claim here about him being worse by every measurable. Please, show me any data you have on this to back up your statement.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

LOL - how can anyone disagree? When Donald Brown looks like a champ behind the same line and Mr plodder cannot even get 3 YPC and any TDs despite being on a team with that much passing offense, I believe it shows how much he stinks. Oh, and it is not like the Indy OL got any better in the off season. So the excuses will flow again this year

I thought getting Dwayne Allen back would be considered an upgrade? I thought he was considered one of the better blocking te's in the league his rookie year????? I thought Fleener was considered one of the worst????? That's sounds like an upgrade, no?

A rookie guard, one would think he would be better in year 2.

Pep Hamiltons offense another year entrenched, advantage

and of course an offseason for Trent himself

Oh, don't forget getting Wayne and Nicks on the outside and facing dime and nickels all year...your right. Silly to expect any differences.

loooool

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Donald Brown was a first round rb wasn't he? So obviously has some talent.

yeah, so was richardson -- what's that worth?

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

The only measure you've addressed is YPC. That is not every single measure; it's one. How about as a receiver? Pass protection? Short-yardage?

receiver - he caught 35 balls in 16 games

pass pro -- give us your opinion

short yardage -- he was probably terrible, but I'll keep an open mind

 

[Jrodicus]

The only measure you've addressed is YPC. That is not every single measure; it's one. How about as a receiver? Pass protection? Short-yardage?

receiver - he caught 35 balls in 16 games

pass pro -- give us your opinion

short yardage -- he was probably terrible, but I'll keep an open mind

You've been following this thread for months. You've seen all the posts.

You're welcome to use the search function yourself to re-read the posts if you'd like.

 

[shader]

So no explanation then why Brown was able to average over 6 YPC against the Titans and Chiefs while Richardson couldn't break 3.0 in either one?

Dude. Who cares. Don't draft Trent if you think he sucks. Bump the thread if he continues to suck later. Blathering about it now isn't doing any good. Everyone knows he stunk last year.

 

[Bronco Billy]

So no explanation then why Brown was able to average over 6 YPC against the Titans and Chiefs while Richardson couldn't break 3.0 in either one?

Dude. Who cares. Don't draft Trent if you think he sucks. Bump the thread if he continues to suck later. Blathering about it now isn't doing any good. Everyone knows he stunk last year.

Apparently not everyone. More excuse making for his performance last season is why this thread reared it's ugly head after an 11 day hiatus.

 

[humpback]

Dude. Who cares. Don't draft Trent if you think he sucks. Bump the thread if he continues to suck later. Blathering about it now isn't doing any good. Everyone knows he stunk last year.

I guess you didn't read the article or the comments agreeing with it afterwards.

 

[jurb26]

Dude. Who cares. Don't draft Trent if you think he sucks. Bump the thread if he continues to suck later. Blathering about it now isn't doing any good. Everyone knows he stunk last year.

I guess you didn't read the article or the comments agreeing with it afterwards.

Yeah, most of this thread is people excusing, making excuses and denying that his performance last year was awful. I not sure if they are trying to convince everyone else or themselves to be honest.

 

[stbugs]

Donald Brown was a first round rb wasn't he? So obviously has some talent.

I think what the author of this article is saying that due to Browns low amount of touches and a few big runs the #'s look bad for T Rich

but the more Brown got the ball the more things looked a little more even.

One big run out of 7 attempts could be as lucky as good.

T Rich is getting the rock this year and in my opinion, you obviously don't agree nor should you by your thoughts, is going to be a great buy low candidate

It's a bad argument. You have to look at Brown, Bradshaw and Ballard. Including the playoffs (Brown was the starting RB/bell cow in those games, trying to give a big enough sample), Ballard had one game of 13 carries, Brown had 7 games of 10-17 carries and Bradshaw had 2 games of 15-19 carries.

In those high carry games, those 3 were 136-608 or 4.5ypc. So, as the bell cows and in just about the same number of carries as TRich had all year, these guys had 1.6ypc more on every carry or 55% more yards on every rush.

So, in conclusion, I don't need to read that article to know that it is crap. By every single measure you can think of TRich was bad compared to the Other Colts RBs. 2013 is over, he sucked, let's see what happens in 2014.

The only measure you've addressed is YPC. That is not every single measure; it's one. How about as a receiver? Pass protection? Short-yardage?

I'll give you YPC. We can disagree on the reasons why, and that's fine. But you are making a huge claim here about him being worse by every measurable. Please, show me any data you have on this to back up your statement.

All I have posted is data and YPC is pretty much the best stat when it comes to RBs. TRich isn't Sproles and they sure didn't trade a first round pick for him just to have him pass block.

People keep posting those lame articles trying to explain why TRich wasn't the problem when he was historically bad. Simply put he was the 2nd worst running back in the NFL last year (only ahead of street FA/out of the NFL now McGahee) based on having enough carries and the Other Colts RBs (who received almost as many bell cow carries) were the #2 running team in the NFL. There was a huge disparity and honestly, this is a situation where they were on the same team with the same OL and same QBs, etc., so it was an apples to apples comparison.

 

[stbugs]

Dude. Who cares. Don't draft Trent if you think he sucks. Bump the thread if he continues to suck later. Blathering about it now isn't doing any good. Everyone knows he stunk last year.

I guess you didn't read the article or the comments agreeing with it afterwards.

Yeah, most of this thread is people excusing, making excuses and denying that his performance last year was awful. I not sure if they are trying to convince everyone else or themselves to be honest.

It's incredible. 2013 is over. He was awful, no excuses or rationalizations can chase that away. Plenty of stats and pictures have shown that TRich was terrible compared to Bradshaw/Ballard/Brown. Move on folks, 2014 is here. Maybe he will improve, maybe he won't. I think there will be a believer in every league I am in, so I most likely won't be having him on my teams.

 

[Spin]

Meh I sent Nicks on a 1 year contract for Richardson who has a 3 year contract attached to him.

Like his odds to rebound, and if Nicks does as well, I can just bid on him in the offseason.