What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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

TRich: you need 1, he will get you 3, you need 7, he will get you 3 (1 Viewer)

JohnnyU

Footballguy
Browns probably won this trade. Here is an interesting article. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9906866/the-browns-had-good-sense-trade-rb-trent-richardson-making-indy-problem

Just over a month ago, the sky was supposedly falling in Cleveland.

That's because the Browns had traded running back Trent Richardson, the third overall selection in the 2012 NFL draft, to the Indianapolis Colts in a move that many deemed sheer lunacy. The belief at the time was that Cleveland was giving up its best offensive weapon, a player who should be the bedrock of the franchise.

Now the only criticisms that can be heard are coming from Indianapolis, where Richardson remains the disappointing talent the Browns had the good sense to deal.

It's not that Richardson is a bad player. It's just that he's not an exceptional one.

He has yet to gain more than 60 yards in any of his five games with the Colts. He's had 75 carries during that time and produced all of 228 yards, which is a worse yards-per-attempt average than he generated in his first two games with Cleveland this season (3.04 compared to 3.39). Richardson scored the first two touchdowns of his season while in Indianapolis, but more people likely recall his critical fumble late in the Colts' upset win over Denver on Oct. 20.

As much as optimists in Indianapolis preach the importance of patience when faced with these facts, it's becoming hard to see the upside in a player who was supposed to be special and cost the Colts a first-round pick.

"We were getting killed when we made that deal, but now people are seeing the same things we saw in him," one Browns source said. "There is a lot to like about Trent. He's solid, dependable, hard-working. The problem is that he's not explosive."

That final indictment is the biggest reason Colts fans should be concerned about their new franchise running back moving forward. Richardson has logged 373 carries in his two-year career. Only 20 of those rushing attempts have ended in a run longer than 10 yards, which ranks him 32nd among all running backs since the start of the 2012 season. Richardson also has failed to be the perfect counterpart to quarterback Andrew Luck on a team that was hoping to balance its offense with a dominant power-running component.

The Colts had the idealistic notion that Luck -- who threw 627 passes last season as a rookie -- would make life easier for Richardson. All of those Browns fans who balked at the trade believed that Richardson wasn't becoming a star in Cleveland because the team had nothing else around him. They didn't see a running back who rushed for 950 yards last season because that was the best he could do. They viewed Richardson as a promising talent who had the misfortune of facing eight- and nine-man fronts every time he lined up for the Browns.

Well, Richardson isn't seeing too many stacked boxes in Indianapolis these days. He's also not the only player in this league who has to deal with defenses designed to stop him. Minnesota's Adrian Peterson has seen that throughout his seven-year career, and he ran for 2,097 yards in 2012, less than a year after he underwent reconstructive surgery for a torn ACL. Jacksonville'sMaurice Jones-Drew hasn't had much of a supporting cast around him, either. He wound up leading the league in rushing in 2011 with a career-high 1,606 yards.

The issue with Richardson is that he's mostly effective in situations where his team needs tough yards. As the Browns source said: "I saw him score on a 1-yard touchdown in his first game there (a 27-7 win over San Francisco) and the announcer said that was why the Colts traded for him. And all I could think was that play was right in Trent's wheelhouse. He'll make those plays for you all day. But when you need seven yards, he'll still get you three."

There already have been several theories offered as to why Richardson has continued to struggle on a better team. Some have suggested that he's trying too hard to make something happen. Others suspect he's overthinking things or simply struggling to fit in with a new offensive line. Those people still think of Richardson as the same talent he was touted to be after leaving Alabama. They don't want to believe they possibly could be wrong.

In reality, it's hard to think Alabama didn't make Richardson look better than he really was. He played with three offensive linemen in college who were selected in this year's draft – including first-round picks D.J. Fluker and Chance Warmack – and it's not like he's the first Crimson Tide runner to disappoint in the NFL. Richardson split time with Heisman Trophy winner Mark Ingram at Alabama. That would be the same Mark Ingram who has 1,107 career rushing yards since the New Orleans Saints selected him with the 28th overall pick in the 2011 draft.

The only defense Ingram has at this stage of his career is opportunity. The Saints have enough talent in their backfield -- with Pierre Thomas and Darren Sproles in the mix -- one could argue that a crowded depth chart has factored into Ingram's lack of production. On the other hand, another former Alabama runner, Green Bay rookie Eddie Lacy, has gained 446 yards this season and launched himself into the early conversation for offensive rookie of the year honors. He's already proven what some scouts thought about him when he entered the draft -- that he could be better than both Ingram and Richardson in the long run.

The big question the Colts now face is whether Richardson can elevate his game in the second half of this season. Indianapolis already lost one huge offensive weapon when Pro Bowl wide receiver Reggie Wayne tore his ACL against Denver, so it's fair to assume the Colts will need more from their running game. If Richardson really does have star potential, this is the time to start showing it. But if what we've seen so far is any indication, nobody in Indianapolis should be raising their hopes too high.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ConnSKINS26

Footballguy
Was this really necessary? There are threads dedicated to Trent, and even the trade specifically, all over the front page. This article doesn't need it's own thread.

 

JohnnyU

Footballguy
Was this really necessary? There are threads dedicated to Trent, and even the trade specifically, all over the front page. This article doesn't need it's own thread.
I knew that was coming next. I didn't want to post in the 20 page thread.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bud

Footballguy
He'd look a lot better if they were throwing him some short dump off passes.

 

kencav

Footballguy
Was this really necessary? There are threads dedicated to Trent, and even the trade specifically, all over the front page. This article doesn't need it's own thread.
Those threads are mucked up by the true believers.
Or by idiots who constantly bash Richardson and his ability.....it's the American way everyone likes a train wreck

I hope he comes out of the bye and starts tearing it up so I don't have to hear guys like you anymore.

 

MoveToSkypager

Footballguy
Was this really necessary? There are threads dedicated to Trent, and even the trade specifically, all over the front page. This article doesn't need it's own thread.
Those threads are mucked up by the true believers.
Or by idiots who constantly bash Richardson and his ability.....it's the American way everyone likes a train wreck

I hope he comes out of the bye and starts tearing it up so I don't have to hear guys like you anymore.
Don't call people names. That's unacceptable.

 

kencav

Footballguy
Was this really necessary? There are threads dedicated to Trent, and even the trade specifically, all over the front page. This article doesn't need it's own thread.
Those threads are mucked up by the true believers.
Or by idiots who constantly bash Richardson and his ability.....it's the American way everyone likes a train wreck

I hope he comes out of the bye and starts tearing it up so I don't have to hear guys like you anymore.
Don't call people names. That's unacceptable.
In you case.......very acceptable!

 

werdnoynek

Footballguy
Much of the same stuff already discussed in the other two Trich threads... a whole lot of subjective analysis without anything much objective.

And how on earth can you say Cleveland won the trade when you don't even know who they're going to get with the pick? That doesn't seem fair to Trich.

 

Leroy Hoard

Footballguy
Much of the same stuff already discussed in the other two Trich threads... a whole lot of subjective analysis without anything much objective.

And how on earth can you say Cleveland won the trade when you don't even know who they're going to get with the pick? That doesn't seem fair to Trich.
True, Cleveland was the team that drafted Trich in the first place.

 

Johnny Blood

Footballguy
Much of the same stuff already discussed in the other two Trich threads... a whole lot of subjective analysis without anything much objective.

And how on earth can you say Cleveland won the trade when you don't even know who they're going to get with the pick? That doesn't seem fair to Trich.
Well because that's a completely useless way to evaluate trades. Strategy and outcome are different things. You don't wait for things to turn out and then look backwards at history. You judge trades based on the evaluation of the players and picks at the time of the trade. One side of the trade can be vindicated (say here, which side is "right" about Richardson), but using hindsight with the crapshoot that is the draft isn't very illuminating.

1999 Marshall Faulk for a 7th rounder is a stupid trade worthy of criticism, even if you luck into Brady with your 7th round pick.

1999 Edgerrin James for three first rounders is an awesome trade even if you draft two busts and the other player gets run over by a turnip truck on the way to rookie orientation.

The question here is which side was right about Richardson's value relative to a first round pick, not relative to the player who actually gets taken with that pick.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

3nOut

Footballguy
Was this really necessary? There are threads dedicated to Trent, and even the trade specifically, all over the front page. This article doesn't need it's own thread.
Those threads are mucked up by the true believers.
Well isn't that he point? Debate? Might as well add 'No TRich supporters allowed' in the title of the thread. I'd think that the conversation would become quite boring since the haters would have no one to argue with.
 

werdnoynek

Footballguy
Much of the same stuff already discussed in the other two Trich threads... a whole lot of subjective analysis without anything much objective.

And how on earth can you say Cleveland won the trade when you don't even know who they're going to get with the pick? That doesn't seem fair to Trich.
Well because that's a completely useless way to evaluate trades. You don't wait for things to turn out and then look backwards at history. You judge trades based on the evaluation of the players and picks at the time of the trade.

1999 Marshall Faulk for a 7th rounder is a stupid trade worthy of criticism, even if you luck into Brady with your 7th round pick.
Alright that makes sense. In the context that OP uses though, it's hindsight... I'm just saying, while we're at it, let's get a look at the big picture.

 

MoveToSkypager

Footballguy
Was this really necessary? There are threads dedicated to Trent, and even the trade specifically, all over the front page. This article doesn't need it's own thread.
Those threads are mucked up by the true believers.
Well isn't that he point? Debate? Might as well add 'No TRich supporters allowed' in the title of the thread. I'd think that the conversation would become quite boring since the haters would have no one to argue with.
I don't want to argue :shrug: I just want to read a good article, like the one posted.

 

werdnoynek

Footballguy
Was this really necessary? There are threads dedicated to Trent, and even the trade specifically, all over the front page. This article doesn't need it's own thread.
Those threads are mucked up by the true believers.
Well isn't that he point? Debate? Might as well add 'No TRich supporters allowed' in the title of the thread. I'd think that the conversation would become quite boring since the haters would have no one to argue with.
Man if you weren't a Bears fan I may call you friend!!! My tailgate offer still stands... I'll bump it up to 3 beers too.

 

JohnnyU

Footballguy
Was this really necessary? There are threads dedicated to Trent, and even the trade specifically, all over the front page. This article doesn't need it's own thread.
Those threads are mucked up by the true believers.
Or by idiots who constantly bash Richardson and his ability.....it's the American way everyone likes a train wreck

I hope he comes out of the bye and starts tearing it up so I don't have to hear guys like you anymore.
I do too since the Colts are my team and have been for 48 years, but I'm not going to hold my breath. This is one time I hope that article is nothing but BS.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Craig_MiamiFL

Footballguy
"We were getting killed when we made that deal, but now people are seeing the same things we saw in him," one Browns source said. "There is a lot to like about Trent. He's solid, dependable, hard-working. The problem is that he's not explosive."
I think at some point Trent will have a 'break out' moment of sorts. In time, I still think he can develop into a Marshawn Lynch. (who was left for dead in Buffalo) as Trent's power is unquestionable.

I've went back and watch all 106 of his carries this year -- it is eye opening the lack of explosion he's shown for someone drafted that high & only 2nd year in the league. It does appear he's a bit over his listed weight. Probably wouldn't hurt him to lose 10 pounds. Donald Brown isn't known to be the most explosive RB around, but he looks like Darren Sproles compared to Richardson right now. Lackluster overall blocking by line/WRs and Trentativeness when the holes are there = no results so far.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

PatsWillWin

Footballguy
Where does he rank in dynasty at this point (and please try to be realistic, unlike FBGs).
Top of my head, all being equal (i.e. I'm not a "rebuilding" team or anything that would make me put a special emphasis on youth), I'd rather have these guys:

RB LeSean McCoy PHI

RB Doug Martin TB

RB Jamaal Charles, KC

RB Adrian Peterson, MIN

RB Matt Forte, CHI

RB Ray Rice, BAL

RB Marshawn Lynch, SEA

RB Arian Foster, HOU

RB Giovani Bernard, CIN

RB C.J. Spiller, BUF

RB Alfred Morris, WAS

RB Eddie Lacy, GB

RB DeMarco Murray, DAL

RB LeVeon Bell, PIT

RB David Wilson, NYG

RB Reggie Bush, DET

RB Stevan Ridley, NE

RB Lamar Miller, MIA

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Skeletore Eh

Footballguy
PatsWillWin said:
dickey moe said:
Where does he rank in dynasty at this point (and please try to be realistic, unlike FBGs).
Top of my head, all being equal (i.e. I'm not a "rebuilding" team or anything that would make me put a special emphasis on youth), I'd rather have these guys:

RB LeSean McCoy PHI

RB Doug Martin TB

RB Jamaal Charles, KC

RB Adrian Peterson, MIN

RB Matt Forte, CHI

RB Ray Rice, BAL

RB Marshawn Lynch, SEA

RB Arian Foster, HOU

RB Giovani Bernard, CIN

RB C.J. Spiller, BUF

RB Alfred Morris, WAS

RB Eddie Lacy, GB

RB DeMarco Murray, DAL

RB LeVeon Bell, PIT

RB David Wilson, NYG

RB Reggie Bush, DET

RB Stevan Ridley, NE

RB Lamar Miller, MIA
Crazy. Not your list but the fact that I agree. I could argue a few guys, but I'd understand the other side.

 

gandalas

Footballguy
PatsWillWin said:
dickey moe said:
Where does he rank in dynasty at this point (and please try to be realistic, unlike FBGs).
Top of my head, all being equal (i.e. I'm not a "rebuilding" team or anything that would make me put a special emphasis on youth), I'd rather have these guys:

RB LeSean McCoy PHI

RB Doug Martin TB

RB Jamaal Charles, KC

RB Adrian Peterson, MIN

RB Matt Forte, CHI

RB Ray Rice, BAL

RB Marshawn Lynch, SEA

RB Arian Foster, HOU

RB Giovani Bernard, CIN

RB C.J. Spiller, BUF

RB Alfred Morris, WAS

RB Eddie Lacy, GB

RB DeMarco Murray, DAL

RB LeVeon Bell, PIT

RB David Wilson, NYG

RB Reggie Bush, DET

RB Stevan Ridley, NE

RB Lamar Miller, MIA
Crazy. Not your list but the fact that I agree. I could argue a few guys, but I'd understand the other side.
Ugh. In a dynasty startup this offseason, my first 2 picks were Trent Richardson at 1.5 and David Wilson at 2.8. How I am leading my division after 9 games astounds me (Moreno helps...)

 

pollardsvision

Footballguy
belljr said:
i thought i patented that title :unsure:
It's an ancient quote, but since they used it in the article, I thought it should be the title.
It's also quite misleading.

T-Rich isn't a great bet to get you "3".

106 carries this season. 50 have gone for 2 or fewer yards.

But if you just need 2 yards, he'll get you that almost 70% of the time. Almost.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

DAMAC3

Footballguy
The last two or three years Edge was in Indy, I said the exact same thing about him except he got four instead of three. He would turn a one yard run into four and a seven yard run into four.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

DAMAC3

Footballguy
As others said, this didn't need it's own thread.

I've watched every Colts offensive snap this year. The blame is more than just TRich's. Pep hasn't used him well. The O-line hasn't blocked well up the middle. TRich has not made good cuts. Donald Brown has been used more like how Richardson should be, and ironically, Brown has shown better vision and made better cuts. I'm hoping Richardson is thinking too much because he isn't completely comfortable in the Colts system. There have been some flashes of his talent, but they haven't been often enough. I expect improvement.

 

Das Boot

Footballguy
The title makes me grit my teeth a little each time I read it... 7 yards?

From wikipedia: Noted for both his sense of humor and bruising, powerful rushing style, Hoard was primarily a "goal-line" running back who excelled at breaking through an opposing defense's goal line run-stopping formations. Regarding his skills, Hoard reportedly once said to his coach, "Coach, if you need one yard, I'll get you three yards. If you need five yards, I'll get you three yards."

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top