Trent Richardson (1 Viewer)

[meyerj31]

Hey I'd say if you own Richardso trade him for someone more valuable but less notable right now, I'm not sure this gets any better and if you wait to long to find out then everyone else will too.

I traded him for Gio in a PPR league yesterday

Gio has gotten more PPR points on half as many touches, looks explosive/has big play ability, and is taking more snaps by the game. I probably wouldn't make that trade in a non-PPR.

If TRich goes off I'm fine with that because I own him in multiple other leagues. I was all-in on him this year. Super disappointing. Felt like I had to make a move, though.

 

[meyerj31]

There's talk of Bradshaw possibly needing season-ending surgery. I know Trent hasn't looked good and is probably very overrated as a runner, but I could certainly warm up to the idea of him in that offense with only Brown behind him instead of the possibility of a RBBC of some sort with Bradshaw.

He was the only guy in Cleveland, too. Didn't do much there. And they had a better run blocking o-line.

 

[Phenix]

A source tells the Indianapolis Star that the Colts are concerned Ahmad Bradshaw might need neck surgery.

Related: Donald Brown, Trent Richardson

Source: Indianapolis Star
Oct 3 - 11:04 AM

 

[FootballGuy22]

On his goal line carries he seems decisive and hits the whole hard, on almost all other carries he tends to dance too much. Sometimes trying a stepback to make defenders miss which is almost useless and where he could use some sort of jump cut. If he ran like he does at the goal line I think he'd be more effective.

 

[DoubleG]

There's talk of Bradshaw possibly needing season-ending surgery. I know Trent hasn't looked good and is probably very overrated as a runner, but I could certainly warm up to the idea of him in that offense with only Brown behind him instead of the possibility of a RBBC of some sort with Bradshaw.

He was the only guy in Cleveland, too. Didn't do much there. And they had a better run blocking o-line.

In one league I'm in, he ended up as RB10 last season - tied with Frank Gore. I'll take low-end RB1 from him...and that presumes some of his lack of production isn't due to being on a new team for only a week and a half.

 

[Zaphod]

There's talk of Bradshaw possibly needing season-ending surgery. I know Trent hasn't looked good and is probably very overrated as a runner, but I could certainly warm up to the idea of him in that offense with only Brown behind him instead of the possibility of a RBBC of some sort with Bradshaw.

He was the only guy in Cleveland, too. Didn't do much there. And they had a better run blocking o-line.

In one league I'm in, he ended up as RB10 last season - tied with Frank Gore. I'll take low-end RB1 from him...and that presumes some of his lack of production isn't due to being on a new team for only a week and a half.

Let's not forget that he was on a plane to Indy and then to SF just a few days before the SF game, so he has had a little over a week of practice for those two games. I agree that there are concerns, but to think that he won't get any better as the season moves on is taking a narrow view of the situation, IMO.

 

[Phenix]

There's talk of Bradshaw possibly needing season-ending surgery. I know Trent hasn't looked good and is probably very overrated as a runner, but I could certainly warm up to the idea of him in that offense with only Brown behind him instead of the possibility of a RBBC of some sort with Bradshaw.

He was the only guy in Cleveland, too. Didn't do much there. And they had a better run blocking o-line.

Good OLine doesn't matter when 9 are in the box.

 

[FootballGuy22]

There's talk of Bradshaw possibly needing season-ending surgery. I know Trent hasn't looked good and is probably very overrated as a runner, but I could certainly warm up to the idea of him in that offense with only Brown behind him instead of the possibility of a RBBC of some sort with Bradshaw.

He was the only guy in Cleveland, too. Didn't do much there. And they had a better run blocking o-line.

In one league I'm in, he ended up as RB10 last season - tied with Frank Gore. I'll take low-end RB1 from him...and that presumes some of his lack of production isn't due to being on a new team for only a week and a half.

Let's not forget that he was on a plane to Indy and then to SF just a few days before the SF game, so he has had a little over a week of practice for those two games. I agree that there are concerns, but to think that he won't get any better as the season moves on is taking a narrow view of the situation, IMO.

After watching him for most the past two seasons my opinion lies in the middle. I think he will get more pass catching opportunities and a bit more of the playbook but he should be able to come in after one week and find some of the holes that are there. I don't see his performance being significantly better on a play by play basis but his production with a slight uptick due to usage (volume and type)

 

[Kwai Chang Caine]

Of what it's worth guys, I drafted him round one in my two home leagues. I was very bullish on him. I've since traded him away in both leagues which are non-ppr. The first trade I gave Richardson and James jones and Pierce (the other guy has Rice) for Julio Jones, Lamar Miller and Hillman. He's 0-4 and I'm 3-1. I love the upgrade at WR for me and he really needed a RB. I don't think Trent is going to go nuts for yardage which is heavy in my league although he will get lots of short TDs. I myself prefer upside over steady. Just my philosophy.

In the second league, I traded away Richardson and Ryan for Rodgers and Mendnhall. The other owner is 3-1 but has a need for a RB. I'm 1-3 (second most scored against) and I loved the upgrade at QB even if is seems negligible. I plan to use Bell at the RB position vacated by Richardson.

I feel these were overall balanced trades. So at least anybody planning to buy or sell, this was what I went through and the thought process behind.

 

[jacobo_moses]

Thought you guys should read this:

http://www.footballperspective.com/why-trent-richardsons-3-6-ypc-average-does-not-matter/

I'm sure some of you will nitpick and say it doesn't have merit. But I think its worth considering and entertaining the idea in T.Rich's value.

 

[DoubleG]

Thought you guys should read this:

http://www.footballperspective.com/why-trent-richardsons-3-6-ypc-average-does-not-matter/

I'm sure some of you will nitpick and say it doesn't have merit. But I think its worth considering and entertaining the idea in T.Rich's value.

*big hug*

Thanks bro. Feel much better now. BRING IT!

 

[meyerj31]

Thought you guys should read this:

http://www.footballperspective.com/why-trent-richardsons-3-6-ypc-average-does-not-matter/

I'm sure some of you will nitpick and say it doesn't have merit. But I think its worth considering and entertaining the idea in T.Rich's value.

It has merit, but you can't ignore his utter lack of big-play ability, and those plays/games are what wins in fantasy.

Sure, TRich can only get better, and he's in a great situation.... so, still a top 5/10 dynasty RB. But for this year? I'm not seeing it.

 

[FootballGuy22]

Thought you guys should read this:

http://www.footballperspective.com/why-trent-richardsons-3-6-ypc-average-does-not-matter/

I'm sure some of you will nitpick and say it doesn't have merit. But I think its worth considering and entertaining the idea in T.Rich's value.

It has merit, but you can't ignore his utter lack of big-play ability, and those plays/games are what wins in fantasy.

Sure, TRich can only get better, and he's in a great situation.... so, still a top 5/10 dynasty RB. But for this year? I'm not seeing it.

I checked out the article but most of the players he is compared to are from over 10 years ago and offenses have changed quite a bit. I think in today's NFL that argument doesn't hold up.

 

[jacobo_moses]

Thought you guys should read this:

http://www.footballperspective.com/why-trent-richardsons-3-6-ypc-average-does-not-matter/

I'm sure some of you will nitpick and say it doesn't have merit. But I think its worth considering and entertaining the idea in T.Rich's value.

It has merit, but you can't ignore his utter lack of big-play ability, and those plays/games are what wins in fantasy.

Sure, TRich can only get better, and he's in a great situation.... so, still a top 5/10 dynasty RB. But for this year? I'm not seeing it.

I checked out the article but most of the players he is compared to are from over 10 years ago and offenses have changed quite a bit. I think in today's NFL that argument doesn't hold up.

Oh your right T. Rich is garbage. Not worth much at all. That article is just a bunch of BS I guess. Did the Ravens or 49ers have good running games last yr? Yeah Running games don't mean much.

 

[FootballGuy22]

Thought you guys should read this:

http://www.footballperspective.com/why-trent-richardsons-3-6-ypc-average-does-not-matter/

I'm sure some of you will nitpick and say it doesn't have merit. But I think its worth considering and entertaining the idea in T.Rich's value.

It has merit, but you can't ignore his utter lack of big-play ability, and those plays/games are what wins in fantasy.

Sure, TRich can only get better, and he's in a great situation.... so, still a top 5/10 dynasty RB. But for this year? I'm not seeing it.

I checked out the article but most of the players he is compared to are from over 10 years ago and offenses have changed quite a bit. I think in today's NFL that argument doesn't hold up.

Oh your right T. Rich is garbage. Not worth much at all. That article is just a bunch of BS I guess. Did the Ravens or 49ers have good running games last yr? Yeah Running games don't mean much.

My point is that you can find stats to show all kinds of things, I'd prefer to see something more recently. I don't recall saying he was garbage or not worth much, my comments were related to the article.

Why do you think 20 of 22 RB's on that list are from 92-03 and only 2 from 04 to now?

 

[Coeur de Lion]

If Bradshaw ends up being done for the year, that's probably a pretty big boost for Richardson's value IMO, which hinges largely on his use in the passing game, particularly in PPR.

We know what he is (a near lock for double digit TDs) and what he's not (a guy who's going to rip off big plays to pile up a ton of yardage). So he's a fantasy RB2 at his floor (stronger in standard obviously) this year. If he gets 50 or so catches and the associated yardage / TDs, he can be a lower end fantasy RB1, albeit probably not the elite RB1 that he was drafted as.

Bradshaw is a much more viable threat to take the passing down work away than is "dammit Donald," so potentially a bump from RB2 to RB1 status for Richardson.

Of course, if Trent doesn't improve at all over what he's shown thus far even Donald Brown might be good enough to take some snaps from him, as absurd as that sounds.

 

[jacobo_moses]

Thought you guys should read this:

http://www.footballperspective.com/why-trent-richardsons-3-6-ypc-average-does-not-matter/

I'm sure some of you will nitpick and say it doesn't have merit. But I think its worth considering and entertaining the idea in T.Rich's value.

It has merit, but you can't ignore his utter lack of big-play ability, and those plays/games are what wins in fantasy.

Sure, TRich can only get better, and he's in a great situation.... so, still a top 5/10 dynasty RB. But for this year? I'm not seeing it.

I checked out the article but most of the players he is compared to are from over 10 years ago and offenses have changed quite a bit. I think in today's NFL that argument doesn't hold up.

Oh your right T. Rich is garbage. Not worth much at all. That article is just a bunch of BS I guess. Did the Ravens or 49ers have good running games last yr? Yeah Running games don't mean much.

My point is that you can find stats to show all kinds of things, I'd prefer to see something more recently. I don't recall saying he was garbage or not worth much, my comments were related to the article.

Why do you think 20 of 22 RB's on that list are from 92-03 and only 2 from 04 to now?

Probably cause they are the only ones that met the metrics he was analyzing.

 

[C-Bound]

"Of course, if Trent doesn't improve at all over what he's shown thus far even Donald Brown might be good enough to take some snaps from him, as absurd as that sounds."
OC Pep Hamilton said Donald Brown has been "spectacular" and will continue to play a "major role" in the offense.

Source: Kevin Bowen on Twitter

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Thought you guys should read this:

http://www.footballperspective.com/why-trent-richardsons-3-6-ypc-average-does-not-matter/

I'm sure some of you will nitpick and say it doesn't have merit. But I think its worth considering and entertaining the idea in T.Rich's value.

Adam September 24, 2013 at 12:35 pm

It isn’t about numbers. It’s about gamefilm. If you watch Trent Richardson run, he doesn’t hit the holes. Sure there may not have been very many holes in 2012 Cleveland, but there were some monster holes that Trent didn’t hit hard enough and got stopped for little or no gain. There were other times where he would have a hole, not recognize it and bounce to the outside, losing 2 yards in the process. He has no vision for a RB and you can’t coach that.

this last comment reflects something I saw linked in another richardson thread, where a guy did a film study and posted some screencaps of richardson ignoring holes that the cle o-line had opened for him.

it was pretty interesting, but it was also a few cherry picked plays, which I suppose you could maybe find for any back.

I guess I'll basically take teh guy's word that it was a common problem.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Why do you think 20 of 22 RB's on that list are from 92-03 and only 2 from 04 to now?

Probably cause they are the only ones that met the metrics he was analyzing.

Yeah, I'm not sure what the confusion was.

However, since that article was written, we have two new pieces of data. Obviously the new Cleveland regime is not very high on Richardson's ability, which stands in stark contrast to the point of the article. On the other hand, we now know that the Colts are really high on Richardson, so that mitigates it a bit. Had Richardson been traded for a 2nd round pick, I'd feel differently, but we know Indianapolis thinks he's a very talented player.

 

[Swing 51]

Why do you think 20 of 22 RB's on that list are from 92-03 and only 2 from 04 to now?

Probably cause they are the only ones that met the metrics he was analyzing.

Obviously the new Cleveland regime is not very high on Richardson's ability

I believe the safest pick in the draft -- beyond Andrew Luck and Robert Griffin III -- is Alabama running back Trent Richardson. He's a blue-chip player and has all the skills to quickly establish himself as a top-five player at his position. Forget the nonsense about not taking backs early -- everyone would love the chance to get this guy.

 

[FootballGuy22]

Thought you guys should read this:

http://www.footballperspective.com/why-trent-richardsons-3-6-ypc-average-does-not-matter/

I'm sure some of you will nitpick and say it doesn't have merit. But I think its worth considering and entertaining the idea in T.Rich's value.

It has merit, but you can't ignore his utter lack of big-play ability, and those plays/games are what wins in fantasy.

Sure, TRich can only get better, and he's in a great situation.... so, still a top 5/10 dynasty RB. But for this year? I'm not seeing it.

I checked out the article but most of the players he is compared to are from over 10 years ago and offenses have changed quite a bit. I think in today's NFL that argument doesn't hold up.

Oh your right T. Rich is garbage. Not worth much at all. That article is just a bunch of BS I guess. Did the Ravens or 49ers have good running games last yr? Yeah Running games don't mean much.

My point is that you can find stats to show all kinds of things, I'd prefer to see something more recently. I don't recall saying he was garbage or not worth much, my comments were related to the article.

Why do you think 20 of 22 RB's on that list are from 92-03 and only 2 from 04 to now?

Probably cause they are the only ones that met the metrics he was analyzing.

Comparing rookie QB's from that timeframe to current rookie QB's would not be a fair analysis, I think things have changed for RB's also.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Why do you think 20 of 22 RB's on that list are from 92-03 and only 2 from 04 to now?

Probably cause they are the only ones that met the metrics he was analyzing.

Yeah, I'm not sure what the confusion was.

However, since that article was written, we have two new pieces of data. Obviously the new Cleveland regime is not very high on Richardson's ability, which stands in stark contrast to the point of the article. On the other hand, we now know that the Colts are really high on Richardson, so that mitigates it a bit. Had Richardson been traded for a 2nd round pick, I'd feel differently, but we know Indianapolis thinks he's a very talented player.

hey -- don't you work on profootballreference.com?

you got a couple game statlines flipflopped on the 2013 titans page -- hou/sd, I think it was

 

[FreeBaGeL]

However, since that article was written, we have two new pieces of data. Obviously the new Cleveland regime is not very high on Richardson's ability, which stands in stark contrast to the point of the article. On the other hand, we now know that the Colts are really high on Richardson, so that mitigates it a bit. Had Richardson been traded for a 2nd round pick, I'd feel differently, but we know Indianapolis thinks he's a very talented player.

We also have another quarter season of rushing data.

If the premise is that struggling as a workhorse in year 1 is no big deal because LT/Emmitt had the same issue, that premise has less merit now that Trent has struggled beyond just year 1. By this point into their second season, LT was averaging 5.05ypc and Emmitt was ripping off 5.7ypc. Trent is currently plodding along at 3.1ypc.

The 3.6ypc didn't bother me at all this offseason, as I was just as happy to cite LT/Emmitt's starts. Still sitting at 3.1 a quarter of the way into year 2 though is uncharted territory. Sure, maybe Cleveland was just an impossible place to gain yards and maybe he's being hurt in Indy by not knowing the whole playbook yet, but every bust had a laundry list of excuses for the reasons they weren't performing until we finally just had to admit they were a bust. Trent isn't in (or near) that territory yet, but the risk of that becoming the reality of the situation seems a whole lot higher right now then when we could blame everything on him being a banged-up rookie on a bad team.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Thought you guys should read this:

http://www.footballperspective.com/why-trent-richardsons-3-6-ypc-average-does-not-matter/

I'm sure some of you will nitpick and say it doesn't have merit. But I think its worth considering and entertaining the idea in T.Rich's value.

It has merit, but you can't ignore his utter lack of big-play ability, and those plays/games are what wins in fantasy.

Sure, TRich can only get better, and he's in a great situation.... so, still a top 5/10 dynasty RB. But for this year? I'm not seeing it.

I checked out the article but most of the players he is compared to are from over 10 years ago and offenses have changed quite a bit. I think in today's NFL that argument doesn't hold up.

Oh your right T. Rich is garbage. Not worth much at all. That article is just a bunch of BS I guess. Did the Ravens or 49ers have good running games last yr? Yeah Running games don't mean much.

My point is that you can find stats to show all kinds of things, I'd prefer to see something more recently. I don't recall saying he was garbage or not worth much, my comments were related to the article.

Why do you think 20 of 22 RB's on that list are from 92-03 and only 2 from 04 to now?

Probably cause they are the only ones that met the metrics he was analyzing.

Comparing rookie QB's from that timeframe to current rookie QB's would not be a fair analysis, I think things have changed for RB's also.

Why?

 

[Chase Stuart]

Why do you think 20 of 22 RB's on that list are from 92-03 and only 2 from 04 to now?

Probably cause they are the only ones that met the metrics he was analyzing.

Yeah, I'm not sure what the confusion was.

However, since that article was written, we have two new pieces of data. Obviously the new Cleveland regime is not very high on Richardson's ability, which stands in stark contrast to the point of the article. On the other hand, we now know that the Colts are really high on Richardson, so that mitigates it a bit. Had Richardson been traded for a 2nd round pick, I'd feel differently, but we know Indianapolis thinks he's a very talented player.

hey -- don't you work on profootballreference.com?

you got a couple game statlines flipflopped on the 2013 titans page -- hou/sd, I think it was

That page looks fine to me, but you can send any issues like that to bugs@sports-reference.com.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Why do you think 20 of 22 RB's on that list are from 92-03 and only 2 from 04 to now?

Probably cause they are the only ones that met the metrics he was analyzing.

Yeah, I'm not sure what the confusion was.

However, since that article was written, we have two new pieces of data. Obviously the new Cleveland regime is not very high on Richardson's ability, which stands in stark contrast to the point of the article. On the other hand, we now know that the Colts are really high on Richardson, so that mitigates it a bit. Had Richardson been traded for a 2nd round pick, I'd feel differently, but we know Indianapolis thinks he's a very talented player.

I think there's always some marginal merit to handicapping the handicappers, but at the end of the day are you just going to take every player on faith based on where he was drafted, or do we all make our own evaluations of these rookies?

because these guys you're talking about are the same ones drafting them.

 

[cstu]

He breaks a lot of tackles, just doesn't seem to do much after that.

I was impressed his first few games last year, but he doesn't look the same since the rib injury.

It was actually week 2 against Cincy where he broke his ribs. He was 19 for 109 (5.7 YPC) 1 TD with 4 catches for 36 yards and a TD in that game. Since then he's only broken 4 YPC in a game four times.

 

[Bayhawks]

He breaks a lot of tackles, just doesn't seem to do much after that.

I was impressed his first few games last year, but he doesn't look the same since the rib injury.

It was actually week 2 against Cincy where he broke his ribs. He was 19 for 109 (5.7 YPC) 1 TD with 4 catches for 36 yards and a TD in that game. Since then he's only broken 4 YPC in a game four times.

It was actually the 2nd game against Cincy (week 6), when he hurt his ribs.

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/12/cleveland_browns_trent_richard_23.html

He averaged 3.55 YPC after the injury, and 3.58 YPC prior to the injury.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

and 2.87 ypc after being traded away from the team that was holding him back

 

[Chase Stuart]

I think there's always some marginal merit to handicapping the handicappers, but at the end of the day are you just going to take every player on faith based on where he was drafted, or do we all make our own evaluations of these rookies?

because these guys you're talking about are the same ones drafting them.

The issue isn't that we shouldn't make our own evaluations; it's that YPC is not a good way to make those evaluations (in my opinion). If you have watched Richardson and think he stinks, then by all means you should consider him a bust. That's the point of doing evaluations.

 

[jacobo_moses]

I think there's always some marginal merit to handicapping the handicappers, but at the end of the day are you just going to take every player on faith based on where he was drafted, or do we all make our own evaluations of these rookies?

because these guys you're talking about are the same ones drafting them.

The issue isn't that we shouldn't make our own evaluations; it's that YPC is not a good way to make those evaluations (in my opinion). If you have watched Richardson and think he stinks, then by all means you should consider him a bust. That's the point of doing evaluations.

Yes and another thing with all this. We live in a world where we want instant results/gratification right away. You have to be patient sometimes. I think it is flawed thinking to think that because Trent Richardson was drafted so high in the 1st rnd that he doesn't have anything to learn. And that he should produce 4.5 yards per carry right away. That is just a fallacy. Let's keep in mind that Richardson is only 22yrs old and 1 1/4 of the way through NFL seasons. To say he is a bust at this point is simply crazy talk. Now if by the end of this year and all of next year he doesn't show more or do more then he has. Then we can have that conversation. Until then we need to be patient.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Yes and another thing with all this. We live in a world where we want instant results/gratification right away. You have to be patient sometimes. I think it is flawed thinking to think that because Trent Richardson was drafted so high in the 1st rnd that he doesn't have anything to learn. And that he should produce 4.5 yards per carry right away. That is just a fallacy. Let's keep in mind that Richardson is only 22yrs old and 1 1/4 of the way through NFL seasons. To say he is a bust at this point is simply crazy talk. Now if by the end of this year and all of next year he doesn't show more or do more then he has. Then we can have that conversation. Until then we need to be patient.

so, you think people should sit on him for 2 years until he's universally declared a bust then try to trade him?

 

[jacobo_moses]

Yes and another thing with all this. We live in a world where we want instant results/gratification right away. You have to be patient sometimes. I think it is flawed thinking to think that because Trent Richardson was drafted so high in the 1st rnd that he doesn't have anything to learn. And that he should produce 4.5 yards per carry right away. That is just a fallacy. Let's keep in mind that Richardson is only 22yrs old and 1 1/4 of the way through NFL seasons. To say he is a bust at this point is simply crazy talk. Now if by the end of this year and all of next year he doesn't show more or do more then he has. Then we can have that conversation. Until then we need to be patient.

so, you think people should sit on him for 2 years until he's universally declared a bust then try to trade him?

Of course not. But I think an RB who played with broken ribs half of his rookie year. And then was traded to a new team in his second year (learning his new teams' schemes and O-line tendencies) to write him off as a bust this early is completely asinine. Give him this year and some of next year to make a decision on him. But if you think watching him in film so far YOU KNOW WHO HE IS AND HE CAN NEVER BE ANYTHING MORE THEN THAT. Then by all means go ahead and trade him on name value and his situation. I've been burned too many times by writing a player off before he has time to develop and I'm not going to make that mistake with T.Rich now.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

I think there's always some marginal merit to handicapping the handicappers, but at the end of the day are you just going to take every player

on faith based on where he was drafted, or do we all make our own evaluations of these rookies?

because these guys you're talking about are the same ones drafting them.

The issue isn't that we shouldn't make our own evaluations; it's that YPC is not a good way to make those evaluations (in my opinion). If you

have watched Richardson and think he stinks, then by all means you should consider him a bust. That's the point of doing evaluations.

Yes and another thing with all this. We live in a world where we want instant results/gratification right away. You have to be patient sometimes. I think it is flawed thinking to think that because Trent Richardson was drafted so high in the 1st rnd that he doesn't have anything to learn. And that he should produce 4.5 yards per carry right away. That is just a fallacy. Let's keep in mind that Richardson is only 22yrs old and 1 1/4 of the way through NFL seasons. To say he is a bust at this point is simply crazy talk. Now if by the end of this year and all of next year he doesn't show more or do more then he has.

Then we can have that conversation. Until then we need to be patient.

I'd like a list of RBs that had the light suddenly click on post 2nd year then. Not guys who sat behind a veteran like Michael Turner, but guys who were featured from day one and saw a significant spike in efficiency after year two. Out of all of the skills relevant to fantasy football, running is by far the most instictive / least learned. It's pretty reasonable to give guys time to learn to pass block and run the pro route tree. If a player lacks vision and burst, glllllllllll waiting for any major improvement IMO.

 

[LittleLarry]

One of these days he's going to get lucky and bust a long TD run.

 

[FootballGuy22]

I think there's always some marginal merit to handicapping the handicappers, but at the end of the day are you just going to take every player

on faith based on where he was drafted, or do we all make our own evaluations of these rookies?

because these guys you're talking about are the same ones drafting them.

The issue isn't that we shouldn't make our own evaluations; it's that YPC is not a good way to make those evaluations (in my opinion). If you

have watched Richardson and think he stinks, then by all means you should consider him a bust. That's the point of doing evaluations.

Yes and another thing with all this. We live in a world where we want instant results/gratificationright away. You have to be patient sometimes. I think it is flawed thinking to think that because Trent Richardson was drafted so high in the 1st rnd that he doesn't have anything to learn. And that he should produce 4.5 yards per carry right away. That is just a fallacy. Let's keep in mind that Richardson is only 22yrs old and 1 1/4 of the way through NFL seasons. To say he is a bust at this point is simply crazy talk. Now if by the end of this year and all of next year he doesn't show more or do more then he has.

Then we can have that conversation. Until then we need to be patient.

I'd like a list of RBs that had the light suddenly click on post 2nd year then. Not guys who sat behind a veteran like Michael Turner, but guys who were featured from day one and saw a significant spike in efficiency after year two. Out of all of the skills relevant to fantasy football, running is by far the most instictive / least learned. It's pretty reasonable to give guys time to learn to pass block and run the pro route tree. If a player lacks vision and burst, glllllllllll waiting for any major improvement IMO.

Off the top of my head DeAngelo Williams, Garrison Hearst, Thomas Jones.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

I think there's always some marginal merit to handicapping the handicappers, but at the end of the day are you just going to take every player

on faith based on where he was drafted, or do we all make our own

evaluations of these rookies?

because these guys you're talking about are the same ones drafting them.

The issue isn't that we shouldn't make our own evaluations; it's that YPC is not a good way to make those evaluations (in my opinion). If you

have watched Richardson and think he stinks, then by all means you should consider him a bust. That's the point of doing evaluations.

Yes and another thing with all this. We live in a world where we want instant results/gratificationright away. You have to be patient sometimes. I think it is flawed thinking

to think that because Trent Richardson was drafted so high in the 1st rnd that he doesn't have anything to learn. And that he should produce 4.5 yards per carry right away. That is just a fallacy. Let's keep in mind that Richardson is only 22yrs old and 1 1/4 of the way through NFL seasons. To say he is a bust at this point is simply crazy talk. Now if by the end of this year and all of next year he doesn't show more or do more then he

has.

Then we can have that conversation. Until then we need to be patient.

I'd like a list of RBs that had the light suddenly click on post 2nd year then. Not guys who sat behind a veteran like Michael Turner, but guys who were featured from day one and saw a significant spike in efficiency after year two. Out of all of the skills relevant to fantasy football, running is by far the most instictive / least learned. It's pretty reasonable to give guys time to learn to pass block and run the pro route tree. If a player lacks vision and burst, glllllllllll waiting for any major improvement IMO.

Off the top of my head DeAngelo Williams, Garrison Hearst, Thomas Jones.

Wow, I must have missed those guys being featured right out of the gate.

 

[DoubleG]

However, since that article was written, we have two new pieces of data. Obviously the new Cleveland regime is not very high on Richardson's ability, which stands in stark contrast to the point of the article. On the other hand, we now know that the Colts are really high on Richardson, so that mitigates it a bit. Had Richardson been traded for a 2nd round pick, I'd feel differently, but we know Indianapolis thinks he's a very talented player.

We also have another quarter season of rushing data.

If the premise is that struggling as a workhorse in year 1 is no big deal because LT/Emmitt had the same issue, that premise has less merit now that Trent has struggled beyond just year 1. By this point into their second season, LT was averaging 5.05ypc and Emmitt was ripping off 5.7ypc. Trent is currently plodding along at 3.1ypc.

Exactly at what point did Emmitt and LT get traded to a new team 2 games into their 2nd season?

If at the week 8 or 9 mark, we're not seeing Trent's YPC climb fairly significantly, then yes, we clearly have a problem. But until then, I am willing to withhold some judgement.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

However, since that article was written, we have two new pieces of data. Obviously the new Cleveland regime is not very high on Richardson's ability, which stands in stark contrast to the point of the article. On the other hand, we now know that the Colts are really high on Richardson, so that mitigates it a bit. Had Richardson been traded for a 2nd round pick, I'd feel differently, but we know Indianapolis thinks he's a very talented player.

We also have another quarter season of rushing data.

If the premise is that struggling as a workhorse in year 1 is no big deal because LT/Emmitt had the same issue, that premise has less merit now that Trent has struggled beyond just year 1. By this point into their second season, LT was averaging 5.05ypc and Emmitt was ripping off 5.7ypc. Trent is currently plodding along at 3.1ypc.

Exactly at what point did Emmitt and LT get traded to a new team 2 games into their 2nd season?If at the week 8 or 9 mark, we're not seeing Trent's YPC climb fairly significantly, then yes, we clearly have a problem. But until then, I am willing to withhold some judgement.

Not sure that that's really a big point in Richardson's favor overall. If anyone had approached Dallas or SD about Emmett or LT two games into year two offering a late 1st you would have been able to hear the laughter in China.

 

[Routilla]

So T-Rich is officially a bust. Got it.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

So T-Rich is officially a bust. Got it.

Relative to the "next Peterson" hype he had coming out? Sure looks like it. Bust as in "worthless and out of the league in a few years a la Ryan Leaf?" Pretty sure no one is saying that in here.

 

[EBF]

I'd like a list of RBs that had the light suddenly click on post 2nd year then. Not guys who sat behind a veteran like Michael Turner, but guys who were featured from day one and saw a significant spike in efficiency after year two. Out of all of the skills relevant to fantasy football, running is by far the most instictive / least learned. It's pretty reasonable to give guys time to learn to pass block and run the pro route tree. If a player lacks vision and burst, glllllllllll waiting for any major improvement IMO.

I pointed out several big ones in the dynasty rankings thread.

Ricky Williams - 1999, 253 carries, 884 yards (3.5 YPC)

Thomas Jones - 2000-2002, 362 carries, 1264 yards (3.5 YPC)

LaDainian Tomlinson - 2001, 339 carries, 1236 yards (3.6 YPC)

Reggie Bush - 2006-2008, 418 carries, 1550 yards (3.7 YPC)

There are several others like Tiki Barber, Jerome Bettis, Emmitt Smith, Curtis Martin, Matt Forte, and Willis McGahee who had a sub 4.0 YPC season either as a rookie or second year player.

Part of the difficulty for a RB who gets picked in the top 5-10 of the NFL draft is that he usually goes to a very bad team. The Chargers sucked when they first got LT. The Cardinals sucked when they had Thomas Jones. The Saints were not quite an offensive powerhouse before they had Reggie Bush. Likewise, the Browns were a bottom feeder when they picked Richardson. It's tougher to thrive when you're the whole offense.

There is a lot of optimism about the Colts situation because of the opportunity to work with Andrew Luck, but let's bear in mind that this is not some established rushing powerhouse. The Colts ranked 27th out of 32 NFL teams last year with a 3.8 team YPC. Part of that is having crappy backs, but part of it is poor blocking and scheme. This is not Houston or Washington where you can plug in anyone and get 4+ YPC.

Richardson is never going to be a 60 yard home run threat like Chris Johnson or Adrian Peterson. That is not his game. However, he's more powerful than either of those guys and a much better receiver. I've always envisioned him as a bigger, stronger, and maybe slightly less explosive Ray Rice. I think that career outcome is definitely still in play. You are right that RB is a simple position with a relatively quick learning curve, but that doesn't mean we always see a player's best immediately. Quite a few of the top rushers in NFL history or NFL present had long dry periods where their YPC was ugly.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I'd like a list of RBs that had the light suddenly click on post 2nd year then. Not guys who sat behind a veteran like Michael Turner, but guys who were featured from day one and saw a significant spike in efficiency after year two. Out of all of the skills relevant to fantasy football, running is by far the most instictive / least learned. It's pretty reasonable to give guys time to learn to pass block and run the pro route tree. If a player lacks vision and burst, glllllllllll waiting for any major improvement IMO.

I pointed out several big ones in the dynasty rankings thread.

Ricky Williams - 1999, 253 carries, 884 yards (3.5 YPC)

Thomas Jones - 2000-2002, 362 carries, 1264 yards (3.5 YPC)

LaDainian Tomlinson - 2001, 339 carries, 1236 yards (3.6 YPC)

Reggie Bush - 2006-2008, 418 carries, 1550 yards (3.7 YPC)

There are several others like Tiki Barber, Jerome Bettis, Emmitt Smith, Curtis Martin, Matt Forte, and Willis McGahee who had a sub 4.0 YPC season either as a rookie or second year player.

Part of the difficulty for a RB who gets picked in the top 5-10 of the NFL draft is that he usually goes to a very bad team. The Chargers sucked when they first got LT. The Cardinals sucked when they had Thomas Jones. The Saints were not quite an offensive powerhouse before they had Reggie Bush. Likewise, the Browns were a bottom feeder when they picked Richardson. It's tougher to thrive when you're the whole offense.

There is a lot of optimism about the Colts situation because of the opportunity to work with Andrew Luck, but let's bear in mind that this is not some established rushing powerhouse. The Colts ranked 27th out of 32 NFL teams last year with a 3.8 team YPC. Part of that is having crappy backs, but part of it is poor blocking and scheme. This is not Houston or Washington where you can plug in anyone and get 4+ YPC.

Richardson is never going to be a 60 yard home run threat like Chris Johnson or Adrian Peterson. That is not his game. However, he's more powerful than either of those guys and a much better receiver. I've always envisioned him as a bigger, stronger, and maybe slightly less explosive Ray Rice. I think that career outcome is definitely still in play. You are right that RB is a simple position with a relatively quick learning curve, but that doesn't mean we always see a player's best immediately. Quite a few of the top rushers in NFL history or NFL present had long dry periods where their YPC was ugly.

To be fair, he did say post 2nd year so that eliminates Ricky/LT.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

And Thomas Jones never had much opportunity in AZ, and really only did anything after he moved on. If by the end of this year, Richardson is still hovering in the low 3.x YPC range I kind of doubt two separate situations are to blame.

Bush is valid, as he seemed to take a few years to finally figure out to stop using his wheels to try to hit the corner every friggin play. But he's also about as poor a comparison to Richardson as a player as you could possibly come up with.

What really stands out to me watching Trent is the startling lack of burst, minimal ability to make anyone miss, and the lack of vision to hit cutback lanes with consistency. I'm not sure that any of that can be corrected with experience.

 

[jacobo_moses]

Travelling to San Francisco to take on one of the league’s top run defenses just three days after being acquired,Trent Richardson was never expected to have a big first week as a Colt. He didn’t, rushing 13 times for 35 yards. But his second week? Against a Jaguars’ run defense that entered Week 4 allowing 167.7 yards per game and 5.2 yards per carry? He was expected to go off. To look like the player that two separate teams have now made a first-round investment in. But once again, he didn’t. It wasn’t for lack of opportunity. With no Ahmad Bradshaw (neck) around to siphon carries, T-Rich got the rock 20 times on the ground, but somehow managed only 60 yards against a Run D that made Darren McFadden look “back” in Week 2.

What gives?

Film review reveals it certainly isn’t a talent issue. T-Rich is built like a fullback, but still looks every bit his 4.48 40-yard dash time once he gets a head of steam. And when he gets a head of steam … man, he’s hard to bring down. Even Sunday he was ping-ponging off of defenders, and dragging them with him when he wasn’t running headlong into a 5-6 man pile. But here’s where we arrive at our problem: T-Rich was running into too many piles. There were many reasons why. Although not sub-par, the Colts’ run blocking was far from stellar. OC Pep Hamilton was also getting too cute. He seemingly wanted to get Richardson up to speed on every play in the playbook, while too many of his zone-blocking calls took too long to develop. At one point, CBS play-by-play man Kevin Harlan quipped that Richardson was “going to see every play in this playbook, isn’t he.”

But much like T-Rich’s talent, neither the Colts’ blocking nor play-calling were ultimately the issue: It was T-Rich’s head. In a nutshell, he was taking too many “thinking steps.” Too often, T-Rich took the rock and then stood around with it, letting the defense come to him instead of taking the fight to the defense. On one hand, it’s admirable that a runner so violent at heart could be so patient. But while T-Rich was thinking about where to take the rock, the defense was penetrating. More often than not, it resulted in 2-3 yard runs for a player who very much has the ability to average five yards per carry. T-Rich is simply giving the defense too much time to react. He needs to turn off his brain and just go. Occasionally, it’s going to result in some “brick wall” runs. But T-Rich is fast enough to hit the hole before the defense knows what hit them, and strong enough to drag them once he does.

No matter what Richardson does Sunday, it’s going to be tough sledding against the Seahawks’ run defense. Pete Carroll’s ground unit is tougher than the numbers (4.1 yards per carry, 109 yards per game) suggest. Richardson isn’t going to be a new runner overnight. But he could learn more on the sideline than he does on the field. All he needs to do is watch his Seattle counterpart Marshawn Lynch, who hits the hole first and asks questions later. Richardson has Beast Mode’s violence. He just needs to start using it as soon as he gets the rock, and not once he’s in the company of four defenders.


Patrick Dougherty RotoWorld

I do think studying game film this will get fixed. Is T.Rich elusive. No not so much. He isn't like Bush or Shady McCoy. But is he as powerful and strong as AP. Yes I'd say that is true. He can carry defenders for yards. Hell why do you think he had 46 yards after contact of his 60 on Sunday. The guy is very strong. He needs to hit the holes harder and work with his Oline better. If he does that no reason he can't be a RB similar to Marshawn that is even a little stronger.

 

[EBF]

I do think studying game film this will get fixed. Is T.Rich elusive. No not so much. He isn't like Bush or Shady McCoy. But is he as powerful and strong as AP. Yes I'd say that is true. He can carry defenders for yards. Hell why do you think he had 46 yards after contact of his 60 on Sunday. The guy is very strong. He needs to hit the holes harder and work with his Oline better. If he does that no reason he can't be a RB similar to Marshawn that is even a little stronger.

More powerful than Peterson. Peterson is strong, but not really a huge back. More of a speed/power hybrid who runs violent and always keeps his feet moving.

Trent is a real tank. In terms of weight per height, he is right up there with guys like Michael Turner, MJD, Jonathan Stewart, Jamal Lewis, and Ricky Williams as one of the biggest pure RBs to play in the NFL in recent years. He's just a shade over 5'9" and a few pounds shy of 230. If people were expecting a lot of flash, they were setting themselves up for disappointment. That's not his game. He's a power back. He's not going to run with the explosiveness of a 200 pounder, but he's going to bounce off a lot of hits. He's actually quite fast for his size and showed pretty good agility and elusiveness at Bama.

I think we'll look back at the early struggles as a combination of injuries, bad teams, and natural growing pains. My guess is that he'll end up being very good.

 

[Biabreakable]

I'd like a list of RBs that had the light suddenly click on post 2nd year then. Not guys who sat behind a veteran like Michael Turner, but guys who were featured from day one and saw a significant spike in efficiency after year two. Out of all of the skills relevant to fantasy football, running is by far the most instictive / least learned. It's pretty reasonable to give guys time to learn to pass block and run the pro route tree. If a player lacks vision and burst, glllllllllll waiting for any major improvement IMO.

I pointed out several big ones in the dynasty rankings thread.

Ricky Williams - 1999, 253 carries, 884 yards (3.5 YPC)

Thomas Jones - 2000-2002, 362 carries, 1264 yards (3.5 YPC)

LaDainian Tomlinson - 2001, 339 carries, 1236 yards (3.6 YPC)

Reggie Bush - 2006-2008, 418 carries, 1550 yards (3.7 YPC)

There are several others like Tiki Barber, Jerome Bettis, Emmitt Smith, Curtis Martin, Matt Forte, and Willis McGahee who had a sub 4.0 YPC season either as a rookie or second year player.

Part of the difficulty for a RB who gets picked in the top 5-10 of the NFL draft is that he usually goes to a very bad team. The Chargers sucked when they first got LT. The Cardinals sucked when they had Thomas Jones. The Saints were not quite an offensive powerhouse before they had Reggie Bush. Likewise, the Browns were a bottom feeder when they picked Richardson. It's tougher to thrive when you're the whole offense.

There is a lot of optimism about the Colts situation because of the opportunity to work with Andrew Luck, but let's bear in mind that this is not some established rushing powerhouse. The Colts ranked 27th out of 32 NFL teams last year with a 3.8 team YPC. Part of that is having crappy backs, but part of it is poor blocking and scheme. This is not Houston or Washington where you can plug in anyone and get 4+ YPC.

Richardson is never going to be a 60 yard home run threat like Chris Johnson or Adrian Peterson. That is not his game. However, he's more powerful than either of those guys and a much better receiver. I've always envisioned him as a bigger, stronger, and maybe slightly less explosive Ray Rice. I think that career outcome is definitely still in play. You are right that RB is a simple position with a relatively quick learning curve, but that doesn't mean we always see a player's best immediately. Quite a few of the top rushers in NFL history or NFL present had long dry periods where their YPC was ugly.

Richardson is still young also having just turned 23 years old June 10th. IIRC peak performance for RB is between 24-28. I am sure some 22 year old RB have done well, but not as well or as frequently as a older, more seasoned RB, at least in terms of peak performance of their careers.

For the most part I agree with what you are saying (as usual) but I have some quibbles (as usual) about your post.

New Orleans did not become a offensive power house because of Reggie Bush. It is because of Brees.

Peterson is most certainly powerful. I really dislike how you do not recognize this. I pretty much hate just about every instance of you mentioning him. Because you do not seem like you know what you are talking about when you do. If you cannot respect Peterson then just stop using him as a comparison to other RB please.

Richardson has lacked the big play ability so far. He needs to be able to break off some long runs/receptions at times to become one of the elite RB. I think that could happen but we have not seen it yet. I like his toughness, I like his ability to break tackles, he certainly has enough speed to do so. But until we start seeing that I do not think it is reasonable to assume he is going to be an elite RB. He will still be a good RB. Above average RB. But without that big play ability added to the rest of his abilities he will always fall short of being an elite RB. Ray Rice without the big play ability does not sound like a player who should be ranked top 5 at the position. Possibly not even top 10. At least for FF.

I am certainly not giving up on him. I think the situation with the Colts is a improvement from the Browns. But as you noted they need Oline upgrades for Richardson to reach higher performance. That does not happen quickly. It takes time to develop cohesion with the Oline even if they make some big investments to upgrading there next offseason. If they do it will not be a 1st round pick which they traded away. Linemen usually take some seasoning as well. At least the coach seems very committed to the running game and building around Richardson/Luck.

I still think Richardson is more valuable than Martin. But not Peterson, who I did have him next to Peterson last season and all of this off season (which is in part based off of the 3 year projection I did for him as a rookie prospect). I expected to see more from Richardson at this point in his career than I have. So I do feel a downgrade is needed. How much of a downgrade I am not entirely sure. For the most part I just see it as dropping him a few slots down. But as I said I wouldn't rank him lower than Martin who should also be pretty high in RB rankings.

 

[Sabertooth]

Travelling to San Francisco to take on one of the league’s top run defenses just three days after being acquired,Trent Richardson was never expected to have a big first week as a Colt. He didn’t, rushing 13 times for 35 yards. But his second week? Against a Jaguars’ run defense that entered Week 4 allowing 167.7 yards per game and 5.2 yards per carry? He was expected to go off. To look like the player that two separate teams have now made a first-round investment in. But once again, he didn’t. It wasn’t for lack of opportunity. With no Ahmad Bradshaw (neck) around to siphon carries, T-Rich got the rock 20 times on the ground, but somehow managed only 60 yards against a Run D that made Darren McFadden look “back” in Week 2.

What gives?

Film review reveals it certainly isn’t a talent issue. T-Rich is built like a fullback, but still looks every bit his 4.48 40-yard dash time once he gets a head of steam. And when he gets a head of steam … man, he’s hard to bring down. Even Sunday he was ping-ponging off of defenders, and dragging them with him when he wasn’t running headlong into a 5-6 man pile. But here’s where we arrive at our problem: T-Rich was running into too many piles. There were many reasons why. Although not sub-par, the Colts’ run blocking was far from stellar. OC Pep Hamilton was also getting too cute. He seemingly wanted to get Richardson up to speed on every play in the playbook, while too many of his zone-blocking calls took too long to develop. At one point, CBS play-by-play man Kevin Harlan quipped that Richardson was “going to see every play in this playbook, isn’t he.”

But much like T-Rich’s talent, neither the Colts’ blocking nor play-calling were ultimately the issue: It was T-Rich’s head. In a nutshell, he was taking too many “thinking steps.” Too often, T-Rich took the rock and then stood around with it, letting the defense come to him instead of taking the fight to the defense. On one hand, it’s admirable that a runner so violent at heart could be so patient. But while T-Rich was thinking about where to take the rock, the defense was penetrating. More often than not, it resulted in 2-3 yard runs for a player who very much has the ability to average five yards per carry. T-Rich is simply giving the defense too much time to react. He needs to turn off his brain and just go. Occasionally, it’s going to result in some “brick wall” runs. But T-Rich is fast enough to hit the hole before the defense knows what hit them, and strong enough to drag them once he does.

No matter what Richardson does Sunday, it’s going to be tough sledding against the Seahawks’ run defense. Pete Carroll’s ground unit is tougher than the numbers (4.1 yards per carry, 109 yards per game) suggest. Richardson isn’t going to be a new runner overnight. But he could learn more on the sideline than he does on the field. All he needs to do is watch his Seattle counterpart Marshawn Lynch, who hits the hole first and asks questions later. Richardson has Beast Mode’s violence. He just needs to start using it as soon as he gets the rock, and not once he’s in the company of four defenders.


Patrick Dougherty RotoWorld

I do think studying game film this will get fixed. Is T.Rich elusive. No not so much. He isn't like Bush or Shady McCoy. But is he as powerful and strong as AP. Yes I'd say that is true. He can carry defenders for yards. Hell why do you think he had 46 yards after contact of his 60 on Sunday. The guy is very strong. He needs to hit the holes harder and work with his Oline better. If he does that no reason he can't be a RB similar to Marshawn that is even a little stronger.

This is what I am banking on. Traded to get TRich last week and I think he moves forward as high end RB2.

 

[jacobo_moses]

I think for now and for Dyn I'd view T-Rich as a low end RB1 for the most part until we see him gel with this offense and o-line.