Trent Richardson's ADP (1 Viewer)

[gump]

I know...I know...the preseason is meaningless.

But my league drafts in late Aug....if TRich comes out looking good in preseason, he'll go late top 10.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Im not a big TRich fan. Nor am I a hater. Im neutral.

But I'll be popping on him pretty early (top 20) if he shows something/anything in camps and preseason.

Why?

1654 yards 13 TDs (270 carries and 61 receptions in fourteen starts).

That's Peyton Hillis 2 years ago for the 5-11 Browns who were 29th in offense and 28th in Rush offense.

Excellent point.

Many overlooked any Browns skill players and specifically dogged the RBs, using the poor QB and WR excuse to say that no Browns RB could ever do anything as the defense would be geared to stop them.

Peyton Hillis proved otherwise and he did so in an Eric Mangini offense without the benefit of adding solid young prospects to the O-Line and going into a season with Jake Dellholme as the starting QB with a rookie third round weak armed guy named Colt McCoy who didn't take first string snaps in camp as the coaches openly confessed that the plan was to sit him for his rookie season. When Colt got his chance, the week of his first start it was the first time he ever worked with the first stringers. So if Weeden can do ANYTHING he should add to the QB situation.

Here is what Hillis did with Dellholme and Colt McCoy as his starting QBs and in only 14 games.

Team Cleveland Browns

Player RB Peyton Hillis

2010 season

- games 14

- carries 270

- yards 1177

- avg per carry 4.4

- Rush TDs 11

- receptions 61

- rec yards 477

- avg per rec 7.8

- rec TDs 2

I don't feel my projections are out of the realm of possibility.

I think it is really close to what we can expect from Trent Richardson.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Im not a big TRich fan. Nor am I a hater. Im neutral.

But I'll be popping on him pretty early (top 20) if he shows something/anything in camps and preseason.

Why?

1654 yards 13 TDs (270 carries and 61 receptions in fourteen starts).

That's Peyton Hillis 2 years ago for the 5-11 Browns who were 29th in offense and 28th in Rush offense.

Excellent point.

Many overlooked any Browns skill players and specifically dogged the RBs, using the poor QB and WR excuse to say that no Browns RB could ever do anything as the defense would be geared to stop them.

Peyton Hillis proved otherwise and he did so in an Eric Mangini offense without the benefit of adding solid young prospects to the O-Line and going into a season with Jake Dellholme as the starting QB with a rookie third round weak armed guy named Colt McCoy who didn't take first string snaps in camp as the coaches openly confessed that the plan was to sit him for his rookie season. When Colt got his chance, the week of his first start it was the first time he ever worked with the first stringers. So if Weeden can do ANYTHING he should add to the QB situation.

Here is what Hillis did with Dellholme and Colt McCoy as his starting QBs and in only 14 games.

Team Cleveland Browns

Player RB Peyton Hillis

2010 season

- games 14

- carries 270

- yards 1177

- avg per carry 4.4

- Rush TDs 11

- receptions 61

- rec yards 477

- avg per rec 7.8

- rec TDs 2

I don't feel my projections are out of the realm of possibility.

I think it is really close to what we can expect from Trent Richardson.

Hi Bracie, I took him pretty early but to project and use Hillis as the measuring stick on a team with a different HC etc...you just can't have Richardson automatic to equal or surpass those stats. In fact even if he does equal or leap over them, it really has nothing to do with 2010 and more to do with Richardson and the team in 2012 IMO. I posted early in the thread, he stuck out to me once the first 5-6 RBs came off the board and I am left to sift thru some big names who had bi injuries last year. We saw Edge back many years ago come back mild from his ACL, it's not a given some of these big names like ADP and McFadden just come back 100% ready to rock n roll.

 

[cvnpoka]

td projections seem pretty high. im thinking 10 is a lot more likely than 12+.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Hi Bracie, I took him pretty early but to project and use Hillis as the measuring stick on a team with a different HC etc...you just can't have Richardson automatic to equal or surpass those stats. In fact even if he does equal or leap over them, it really has nothing to do with 2010 and more to do with Richardson and the team in 2012 IMO.

I posted early in the thread, he stuck out to me once the first 5-6 RBs came off the board and I am left to sift thru some big names who had bi injuries last year. We saw Edge back many years ago come back mild from his ACL, it's not a given some of these big names like ADP and McFadden just come back 100% ready to rock n roll.

Hey MOP,Fair enougH. If you feel that comparing Hillis to Richardson is not applicable then we can show that the arguments used against Peyton Hillis proved to be false. The argument about poor QB and WR talent was used ad naseum against Hillis and those arguments proved to be false.

Those arguments were used when the talent on the, O-Line wasn't as good, the QBs had less potential, and the WRs hadn't been addressed at all.

Since Peyton Hillis had less raw talent than Trent Richardson and the Browns at the time Peyton Hillis had a big season lacked as solid of an offensive line and had less talent at QB and WR it stands to reason that he would have a leg-up on potential compared to Hillis.

So we can compare the supporting cast and also we can discount arugments used against Hillis which were proven to not effect his production.

And I will go back a point I've been making on the version WCO that I feel the Browns will run this year. I think they will go old-school WCO and use a split-back set that Bill Walsh used. Why? The WR talent on the Browns is still suspect and Cleveland has drafted TWO FULLBACKS over the last two years. I feel this is signficant.

The original split-back WCO formation has been widely reported and explained by numerous sources.

My link ... Common Formations

Very common in the Walsh offense, and much less common in today's NFL was the split back set with a quarterback under center. Today multiple WR sets are much more prevalent, and when two backs are on the field they are usually in some sort of I formation or split with the QB in shotgun.

Splitting backs to either side of the QB vs. lining them in an I formation makes it easier for them to pass protect and to get out in to their routes, but also weakens the downhill running game. NFL teams have used more shotgun in the recent past to add to these advantages in the passing game.

It would seem that the Browns will use a split-back set since the Browns lack the WRs to run an effective multiple WR style of WCO that Holmgren is known for.

Here is the version of the WCO I'm talking about from WIKI:

Beyond the basic principle of passing to set up the run, there are few rules that govern Walsh's West Coast Offense. Originally the offense used two split backs, giving it an uneven alignment in which five players aligned to one side of the ball and four players aligned on the other side (with the quarterback and center directly behind the ball). This imbalance forced defenses to abandon their own favored, conventional formations.

Here is a copy of the 1982 San Francisco 49er playbook where you can see the two split backs aligned to either side of the QB:

1982 49er playbook

I am positive that we will see other formations but I think the base-set will be a split-back old school WCO used by Bill Walsh in San Fran. The evidence is that WCO afficianado Holmgren hand selected WCO practitioner Pat Shumur as his head coach and Shumur hand picking a run heavy WCO compadre in Brad Childress as his OC.

Add the Browns lack the WRs to run a Holmgren WCO and they have just drafted a multi-talented three-down feature back and have added two fullbacks over the last two years to run a split-back WCO base set:

2012 NFL draft

7th round

Brad Smelley

TE/FB/HB Alabama

2011 NFL draft

4th round

Owen Marecic

RB/FB Stanford

I think that since they will run this set that he will get more receptions than many are projecting for him.

Add the arguments used against Hillis were disproved and now the supporting cast is better.

I think my projections for Richardson are reasonable and attainable.

 

[nxmehta]

Basically I think the key is ORT Mitchell Schwartz and the improved play of OG Jason Pinkston at the end of last season. That is two significant upgrades on what was an average O-Line for the most of last year but now looks like a top-ten line at worst but I think will soon be viewed as one of the very best in the league.

This is it right here. If Schwartz and Pinkston play well, Richardson will be a top 5 back EASY. Otherwise, you're looking at top 15.With all that considered I'd say he's well worth a 2nd round pick. I wouldn't take him in the 1st, and I'm a diehard Browns homer.

 

[Fensalk]

So you see something like 1700-1800 total yards, 50 catches, and 12+ TDs as a realistic projection for Trent Richardson in 2012? In an offense that has finished in the 29-31 range the past four years? On a team that will very likely be starting a rookie at QB and is still going to field a bottom 5 receiving group?Maybe we do disagree quite a bit. Prime Jim Brown would have trouble hitting those numbers on this Cleveland team.

Let's be fair here, as this exact thing just happened this past year.The Jags were dead last in total offense (compared to the Browns 29th), also had a rookie QB (who was awful, there's no way that Wheedon could be worse), and had probably the worst receiving corps in the league.MJD finished with 2000 yards and 11 TDs.

The 2011 Jaguars called 469 pass plays to 489 run plays. They were a run-first team.The 2011 Browns called 570 pass plays to 415 run plays. They were very much a pass-first team, and Shurmur will continue to call the plays in 2012.Trent may post an impressive rookie year running the ball. But I think to do that, he will need the vast majority of the carries. Of course, he will be heavily involved in the passing game, so something like 1300 all purpose yards should be easily attainable.

 

[Sabertooth]

Richardson being the Browns' 3 down back means he'll be on the field for just that: 3 downs. Unless Weeden makes the passing attack at least somewhat respectable he'll be the primary back in a 3-and-out offense...

 

[Cookiemonster]

I was just discussing this on my dynasty site this morning. I'd like to compare him to a very similar RB IMO, Ronnie Brown. I think Trent may be slightly more talented coming out of college, but both are very big, strong, fast RBs that can catch and block well too. Both are coming to a very poor offense with little passing game to support them. Ronnie had to share carries with Ricky his 1st year in 2005. Brown had the gig to himself in 2006 and IMO looked as good as one can behind an offense that poor. "In 13 games played, Brown finished with 1,008 rushing yards, 276 receiving yards, five touchdowns and a solid 4.2 average." [/wiki] The 3 missed games were due to a broken hand on Thanksgiving. In 2007 he was the #1 FFB RB until he blew his knee halfway through the season. From there he went on to be the wildcat QB to try and help spice up an anemic offense and IIRC the Dolphins did lead the league in rushing, or were close to it. Injuries killed Brown's career for the most part and leave people thinking he was a bust, but for a short time Brown looked like a stud stuck in a bad situation. My point of this is that Ronnie still had some good stats a few times and I think Trent is a slightly better RB going to a slightly better offense. No reason he can't go for 1400 & 8 if he stays healthy. That would have made him the #9 scoring RB in my PPR league last year.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

I was just discussing this on my dynasty site this morning. I'd like to compare him to a very similar RB IMO, ...

I compare him to a more compact version of this guy:
Power, balance, vision, devastating stiff-arms, spin move, break-away speed.

Should be fun to watch this kid.

 

[Cookiemonster]

I was just discussing this on my dynasty site this morning. I'd like to compare him to a very similar RB IMO, ...

I compare him to a more compact version of this guy:

Absolutely has some similarities. I think Campbell was a lot bigger and stronger in relation to the defenders he was facing than Trent will be to todays NFL LBs. Trent also has more wiggle to him. A more compact Steven Jackson is also a good comparison since he had to carry a sub-standard offense for so long and has a similar skill set. I subscribe to EBF's BMI for the most part, and I think Trent may be less injury prone than Jackson or Brown. I think the real question for dynasty players is whether or not the Browns offense ever gets on track. For redraft, I'd expect Steven Jackson / Ronnie Brown type stats for 2012. Low end RB1, and project him to finish in the 6-12 range. I'd consider him a value at the 9th RB taken or later. I just have a hard time seeing him surpass 8-10 TDs on the season unless he also gets in 50+ catches. Rookie RBs usually do assimilate quickly, but the 2nd year seems to be when they hit their stride in the pros.

I would have to let Rice, Foster, McCoy, MJD, CJ1.5K, Ryan Mathews go before Richardson. You could also make a good argument for SJax, Lynch, Forte (if he signs soon) to go ahead of Trent. PPR you have to include Sproles in this conversation.

ETA - I would have a hard time passing on him after the top 5 or 6 RBs just because he is exciting and the shiny new toy, and rookie fever is in full effect for us dynasty leaguers right now. I don't play redraft anymore.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Absolutely has some similarities. I think Campbell was a lot bigger and stronger in relation to the defenders he was facing than Trent will be to todays NFL LBs. Trent also has more wiggle to him. A more compact Steven Jackson is also a good comparison since he had to carry a sub-standard offense for so long and has a similar skill set. I subscribe to EBF's BMI for the most part, and I think Trent may be less injury prone than Jackson or Brown.

I think the real question for dynasty players is whether or not the Browns offense ever gets on track. For redraft, I'd expect Steven Jackson / Ronnie Brown type stats for 2012. Low end RB1, and project him to finish in the 6-12 range. I'd consider him a value at the 9th RB taken or later. I just have a hard time seeing him surpass 8-10 TDs on the season unless he also gets in 50+ catches. Rookie RBs usually do assimilate quickly, but the 2nd year seems to be when they hit their stride in the pros.

I would have to let Rice, Foster, McCoy, MJD, CJ1.5K, Ryan Mathews go before Richardson. You could also make a good argument for SJax, Lynch, Forte (if he signs soon) to go ahead of Trent. PPR you have to include Sproles in this conversation.

ETA - I would have a hard time passing on him after the top 5 or 6 RBs just because he is exciting and the shiny new toy, and rookie fever is in full effect for us dynasty leaguers right now. I don't play redraft anymore.

Trent is 5'9 and 228 lbsCambel was 5'11 and 232

Ronnie Brown is 6' and 230

Steve-Jax is 6'2 and 240

You are right in that the era of Earl the Pearl had much smaller LBs and DBs so he physically dominated in a way that Richardson will not be able to do but I think T-Rich brings a physical style and has a much more effective compact physicality to fit today's game.

Trent Richardson looks like no ordinary back

Trent Richardson looks like no ordinary back

May 12, 2012 -- 2:50pm

THE man: Trent Richardson is an amazing physical specimen. Only 5-9 ¼, his 228 pounds are distributed high and low. His upper body is thick and wide, his shoulders and neck layered in muscle. His arms are pythons. His lower body is rooted in a pair of calves the size of cantaloupes. The biggest calves I’ve seen on a Cleveland Brown belonged to Frank Minnifield. Richardson’s are larger.

“He might be the strongest human being on the planet,” ESPN’s Jon Gruden said before the draft.

This is a man who has got to be hard to tackle.

“Wow!” coach Pat Shurmur said when asked to comment on Richardson’s physique. “He’s a very powerful man. He’s powerfully built. Don’t let the 5-9 fool you. He’s almost 230 pounds. That’s a lot of muscle packed into that body. I just think he’s got a very powerful build, much like we thought, and it shows up on the field.”

“I think everybody is amazed (by Richardson’s physique),” said running back coach Gary Brown.

Brown, of course, felt the brunt of the compact, explosive power of Richardson’s frame when he was knocked off his feet at the Alabama pro day. The 21-second video of Richardson’s two-handed push of Brown holding a blocking bag is approaching 327,000 hits on YouTube.

“He lifted me off my feet. I just knew at that point that kid is a powerful, powerful young man,” Brown said.

“All my brothers are over six feet tall,” Richardson said after his third rookie camp practice. “I have one who’s 6-6.We were all strong. I’m the runt of the litter.”

The gift of shortness: As coordinator with the St. Louis Rams, Shurmur’s feature back Steven Jackson stood 6-2 and weighed 240 pounds. Mike Holmgren’s MVP workhorse in Seattle, Shaun Alexander, was 5-11 and 225. Adrian Peterson, whom Browns offensive coordinator Brad Childress had when Vikings head coach, is 6-1 and 217.

Richardson’s unique dimensions enable him to take advantage of scatback height and fullback power.

“Depending on how they’re built, runners get used to their size and it drives their running style,” Shurmur said. “Trent can get his foot down and slash it up in the line of scrimmage. By the nature of his build, it’s hard to get your arms around him and tackle. That natural leverage that he has also gives him great balance.”

Brown said, “If you’re going to be 5-9, you have to be stacked up pretty good, you have to be able to take the pounding. I think this kid, he is that guy. They did a great job with him at Alabama. He’s put together real well. He works hard in the weight room. He takes pride in being a strong player.”

Brown had similar height when he was a running back in the 1990s primarily with the Houston Oilers.

He said there are “absolutely” advantages to the position being so low to the ground.

“It’s a smaller target,” he said. “Guys lose you behind the big O-line. What happens, guys can stay low, find creases and make big runs. You look at guys like Ray Rice, (Maurice) Jones-Drew, those guys take advantage of that. And when they get loose, they have enough power and enough speed where they’re hard to tackle. You do finally catch up to them.

“What happens, when you’re not a tall back and you’re strongly built, your balance is better. That’s a tremendous advantage when guys try to arm tackle you. You bounce off and keep going.”

Richardson said he loved hiding behind his linemen at Alabama, then bursting through a crease.

“We saw that at times at Alabama,” Shurmur said. “I think he’s a very patient runner. I think he’s got excellent vision, so when he sees daylight he can get his foot down and get up into it.”

Hardly ordinary: Jones-Drew, who led the NFL with 1,606 rushing yards and is a three-time Pro Bowler, is 5-7 and 208 – 20 pounds lighter than Richardson.

Baltimore’s Rice, who was second with 1,364, including 204 in one game against the Browns, is 5-8 and 212 – 16 pounds lighter than Richardson.

In truth, there is no current back in the NFL with the dimensions and strength of Richardson. With all due respect to Jim Brown, this is no ordinary back the Browns drafted with the third overall pick.

 

[Fensalk]

The Browns from office has said it is committed to building through the draft, which implies not making big free agent signings. They've held true to that by not getting QB Matt Flynn or signing any impact WRs. This also makes me think they will not sign any impact WRs between now and opening day, so factor that into your Trent projections.

 

[Buck Stop]

He just went 1.6 in a $250 start up PPR dynasty I'm in.

 

[Multiple Scores]

He just went 1.6 in a $250 start up PPR dynasty I'm in.

That is value. Who went before him?

 

[PhantomJB]

have there been any coaching changes on the cleveland browns staff? if so was it an upgrade or downgrade?

Added Childress, upgrade or downgrade is debatable.I'm planning to take him with my round 1 pick unless I'm in the top 5. My only concern about him is the rookie wall.

Good comment. Anyone else concerned about rookie wall being a real issue (beyond the standard risks of being a bell-cow RB in the AFCNorth)?The comparisons to ADP may be apt but recall in his rookie year he was out for a month after being injured in like week 12 or something.

 

[pwakefield77]

good point phantom. anyone have a good link to a "rookie wall" article. i'd be interested in seeing the stats on rookie rbs

 

[Buck Stop]

He just went 1.6 in a $250 start up PPR dynasty I'm in.

That is value. Who went before him?

 

[MAC_32]

He just went 1.6 in a $250 start up PPR dynasty I'm in.

That is value. Who went before him?

I'd take him #1 in a startup dyno.

 

[Buck Stop]

anyone that takes Richardson over Calvin needs serious help.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Kool Aid is flowin'. It's gonna be ridiculous by the time August rolls around.

 

[MAC_32]

anyone that takes Richardson over Calvin needs serious help.

Opportunity cost.Give up a stud RB, good luck finding anything close to it later.While an elite WR is nice, a solid WR corps can be built for cheap.Calvin's a great target for a well built team in an already established league. Use pieces you developed and go get him.Obviously depends on the league and format, but most dynasty's do straight drafts based on prior season records. Unless you suck or trade your way to a top pick it's a lot tougher to build a quality RB corps than WR's. These are the guys that I've gotten in mine over the last 5 years on waivers or after round 1.Welker, Austin, Jordy, Wallace, Cruz, A Brown, S Johnson, and Collie. Absolutely had some swings and misses along the way too, but my point is if you're going to throw darts in a startup do it at WR.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

The consensus top 3 dynasty RBs are a UDFA and a couple of 2nd rounders that were likely avaiable for late 1sts after "disappointing" rookie years.

The point is that Richardson is still just a prospect. A great prospect to be sure, but there are guys who we KNOW are great players that are also in great situations. Foster, Rice, McCoy, Calvin (Rodgers and Cam in 2 QB) are sure things. We don't yet know what Richardson will do, and the situation is a major negative compared to Houston, Baltimore, etc.

 

[MAC_32]

The consensus top 3 dynasty RBs are a UDFA and a couple of 2nd rounders that were likely avaiable for late 1sts after "disappointing" rookie years.

Arian Foster? Extreme exception to the rule. Shady and Rice were not available for late 1st's in my leagues, I have to question their owners if they were selling that low after their rookie years. Both were snatched up with #1's (I took Chris Johnson either right before or after Rice) and their owners didn't budge after one year, nor should they. If your leagues are like that then take advantage of the ones with itchy trigger fingers, but my leagues aren't like that. Since drafting Johnson I have been stock piling picks because I haven't liked the RB crops coming out but I also knew I would need those picks if I ever stumbled upon a RB I really wanted and didn't suck enough to get them. Finally happened with Richardson.My point is, at least in my leagues, if you want a top RB you need to get them in round 1, and if you want them later you will have to severely over pay, wait 3 years and hope for a late career resurgence a la Marshawn/Benson, or buy them at an injury discount and hope for the best. That's why in a start up if I have an opportunity to take a horse RB I'm taking him.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Valid points on both sides re: building around RBs vs WRs - longer shelf life vs. higher top end value in a given year. It's still, IMO, easier, to find short term situation-based value at RB, but that's irrelevant to the main issue here, which is taking any rookie over proven stud talent in a startup. If you want a RB, great, take Foster, Rice, or Shady. Not Richardson.

 

[MAC_32]

Valid points on both sides re: building around RBs vs WRs - longer shelf life vs. higher top end value in a given year. It's still, IMO, easier, to find short term situation-based value at RB, but that's irrelevant to the main issue here, which is taking any rookie over proven stud talent in a startup. If you want a RB, great, take Foster, Rice, or Shady. Not Richardson.

Should probably add that I have thought Richardson is the best RB I have seen since I started doing this stuff almost 10 years ago. Thought it in 2009, still in 2010, and 2011 confirmed it. There is not a hole in his game and I have zero doubt that it will not translate to the NFL field. RB's usually provide the most value at the beginning of their useful life so I'd rather get in a little early and incur some year 1 bumps than hop on in year 3 or 4.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

I generally agree that Richardson looks about as bulletproof as any rookie can be, although I personally had Peterson slightly higher. For fantasy purposes, though, a very good player in a spectacular situation (Shaun Alexander, or Foster, or Ray Rice, etc.) will often outperform a greater talent in a crap situation (Peterson currently, Faulk on the Colts, prime Steven Jackson, etc). Barring injury, I think we can say Rice and Foster absolutely will get 1800 - 2000 yards and 10+ scores for the next few years. I personally am not willing to say that about Richardson yet.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

When making a decision on one player over another I look at what I call points over competition.

For RBs, you can get lucky and unearth an Arian Foster or a Demarco Murray but if you own a top pick and can get a rare RB talent who should be the primary back and get the bulk of the work for years then you have to consider how much wasted picks and effort is sapped trying to find a Foster or Murray.

Its nice to have a sure point advantage in your back pocket while your competition seems to be endlessly scrambling.

The same argument can be applied to WRs but their are more WRs on the field at any time and the production tends to vary, sometimes vary greatly, for WRs over a bell-weather RB.

I consider the type of RB that I feel Richardson will be provides a built-in consitency which I value. Having a consistent point advantage allows you to use more strategy rather than guesswork.

The lack of consistent bell weather RBs drives their value.