We're kind of going in circles at this point, but there are 3 really scary things about those "best case" scenarios where top 10 picks bounced back.
- Very few of them ever ended up actually becoming top 5 dynasty backs (where you currently have Richardson ranked)
- None of them were ever as bad as Richardson has been this year
- Most if not all of them were in worse spots than Richardson is in this year, and few of them were on a team where all the other RBs produced fine in the same situation they struggled in like Richardson is
McFadden and Bush have had some very productive PPR seasons when healthy. Thomas Jones had back-to-back top 10 seasons and is one of the top 25 rushers in NFL history. From a style standpoint, Richardson is most like Lynch and we've seen what he has become once removed from the pit that is Buffalo.
The Colts are terrible. A lot of people think because they have Luck and they made the playoffs last year that somehow the Colts are a good team. They aren't. This team is two years removed from finishing dead last. They lost their best blocking TE before the season started. They lost their best WR. Their OL can't block a soul and their defense is looking very suspect. Since Wayne went down they are falling behind very early in games and abandoning the run. The few times when they try to run the ball, they're getting dominated in the trenches. I have been watching some of the games since Trent went there. I don't know that there's a RB alive who would be excelling in the same situation. He's getting very few carries and when he's getting the ball there's usually instant pressure in the backfield. It's ugly to watch. I understand why people think he sucks. That's what the box scores suggest. I just don't buy that as the comprehensive explanation.
The saying that "those who don't learn from history are destined to repeat it" is very applicable in FF. The Richardson backlash feels eerily similar to the Lynch, Bush, and Jones backlash of years past. Basically people taking an accurate observation (Trent Richardson is having a bad season) and overgeneralizing its meaning (Trent Richardson sucks and is hopeless moving forward). It proved dead wrong on Reggie and Lynch. I think it's dead wrong on Richardson. I think I have a decent take on his abilities and I don't think his current statistical output reflects those abilities. If people disagree, that's fine. They can rank him wherever they want. I don't really care ultimately.
A few top 10 seasons are one thing, but a top 5 dynasty RB that does not make, which is where you have Richardson ranked. Correct me if I'm wrong, but after their initial struggles I don't think guys like Bush/Benson/Jones ever even approached the top 5 in any dynasty rankings. For a guy that preaches so much about exit value, that should mean something to you.
Spiller is the only one that ever really reached/maintained a top 5 dynasty ranking and he was never nearly as bad, and not for nearly as long as Richardson. By this point in CJ Spiller's career he was already ripping off 5+ ypc and everyone was excited to see what he could do as a feature back. Richardson has already had that opportunity, and failed, twice.
As to the situation, what concerns me about blaming everything on that is that the Indy situation only became "terrible" after Richardson started struggling in it. All we heard all offseason about Vick Ballard was how he was a nothing talent that benefitted from playing in Indy. All we heard when Richardson was traded to the Colts was about how much he was going to excel there. How mediocre guys like Ballard and Bradshaw were good fantasy assets there so we could only imagine what was going to happen now that they had a RB that was actually
good. The whole idea that Indy is an awful situation only popped up after Richardson failed to do what everyone else in Indy had done, and after the statute of limitations on "he's still learning the playbook!" ran out. I don't recall anyone saying "well hold on a minute, he might be better off staying in Cleveland" when the trade was announced.
Consider this. The Colts have played 10 games this year. Their 3 best games rushing are the 3 games where someone not named Trent Richardson received the majority of the carries. Even if we considered the idea that Richardson and the other RBs were all equal, what is the statistical probability that, based on random variance, the 3 best games Indy had rushing would be the exact 3 games where Richardson wasn't the lead back? Mathematically the chances of that happening are 0.0013875 or basically one tenth of one percent. Now if we operate under the assumption that Richardson is actually better than those guys, what is the statistical probability that, just through absurd luck, Indy had their 3 best games running with other guys? It is absurdly low. Almost unfathomable.
You have said before that you refuse to believe that Richardson is this bad, so something must be up. From a talent standpoint, I believe you. However, his vision is just awful. It really is this bad. I don't know if it's that he never learned it because he didn't need to at Alabama or if the massive holes at Bama just hid his lack of vision from us, but either way it's a huge problem.
I've been paying closer attention to this the last few weeks. Every game you watch you see running backs finding places to run that aren't necessarily where the play was designed to go. They get the ball, make a quick decision and quick burst into the proper hole. A 4th and 1 in a Dolphins' game really comes to mind. Daniel Thomas got the handoff on a play designed to run between the RG and RT. Instead he made an immediate cut away from the FB lead and between the C and LG and exploded through a small hole in the line for an 18 yard gain. This was Danield Thomas, so it's not like we're talking about a skill reserved for the Adrian Peterson's of the league here. There is almost no doubt in my mind that if Richardson had gotten that exact same carry he would have put his hand on his FB's back, lowered his head and picked up a half a yard. Then we would have come back here and the Richardson supporters would have told us how amazing it was that he picked up half a yard on a play where there was a brick wall in front of him.
Richardson can still be good, maybe even great. But to do so HE needs to improve, not just his situation. He needs to shed some weight to get that burst back that we haven't seen all season, and he needs to significantly improve his ability to find a hole and decisively burst through it. Blaming it all on a situation that's not nearly as bad as the one many other guys are playing well in is just another in a laundry list of excuses and free passes that FFers have given Richardson for his own deficiencies. At this point, I'm fairly certain that if Richardson had been traded to Denver instead of Indy in week 3 you'd be trying to convince me that Denver isn't nearly as good a situation for FF RB production as we were all lead to believe.
