Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Anybody buying on Demarco Murray?


Recommended Posts

Murray was actually really durable in college. Only missing very few games in 4 years. Somehow, somewhere, somebody thought he was injury-prone & the masses bought in, LOL. RBs are going to get dinged in the pros. What you don't want to see are the serious injuries.

Murray is simply one of the better all-around RBs in the game. Bright, bright future at 24 years of age.

Edited by Football Jones
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Man you flame me every time I post. If you don't know who I am or what team I have written about for years...I'm not posting a resume to satisfy your curiosities. If you don't like the info then don't

I doubt Murray plays. Mularkey said he's giving him a couple days to show he's ready, decide if he's ready, so we will know. Today I think it's unlikely. David Fluellen is a fine backup. He's no

the Curse of 370 claims another victim... EDIT: to add something a bit more substantial, i never felt like murray was a pro bowl talent to begin with. i think of him as this generation's shaun alexan

This is reminding me a lot of the Tate/Foster thread fiasco. And the Bradshaw/Brown thread. I think we know what Felix is and what his role is on this team. He came in last year for an injured Murray and did well, as I recall. Next season he has barely touched the ball until this injury. Why do you think it will be different now?

It wont be
Link to post
Share on other sites

Murray was actually really durable in college. Only missing very few games in 4 years. Somehow, somewhere, somebody thought he was injury prone & the masses bought in, LOL. RBs are going to get dinged in the pros. What you don't want to se are the serious injuries.Murray is simply one of the better all-around RBs in the game. Bright, bright future at 24 years of age.

Just got done looking it up, and you beat me to it. He missed 4 games in 4 years, despite a very high number of touches. He missed 1 game over his final 2 seasons. I will forgive a 19/20 year old for being a little "banged" up getting 200+ touches right off the bat.And he had 352 touches as a senior, and played in every game. The sky's not falling, he was hit awkwarly twice. Step away from the ledge!
Link to post
Share on other sites

Beanie has bad knees. Murray does not.

Did Beanie suffer any serious knee injuries in college? I don't remember, but I'm not sure that was the case. I think he was more like Murray in the sense that he was just generally injured all the time. At any rate, Murray actually does have some knee issues sprinkled in with his other ailments. http://www.soonersports.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/murray_demarco00.html

2007Suffered a dislocated knee cap in game No. 11 at Texas Tech, then missed the remainder of the season and the subsequent spring workouts ...

http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/OU/article.aspx?subjectid=92&articleid=20101202_92_0_Univer330112&rss_lnk=231]

University of Oklahoma running back DeMarco Murray is expected to play in the Big 12 championship game Saturday against Nebraska, OU coach Bob Stoops announced today.Murray was hurt -- an apparent knee injury -- during the Sooners' win Saturday over Oklahoma State.

I also feel like there's an ACL injury somewhere on his extensive rap sheet, though I can't find anything about it online.

Lastly, Murray's injuries were not a result of his body - he was landed on and/or rolled up on, both times. Please enlighten me - how did his running style or body type have ANYTHING to do with it? If it happened to any other RB, they would have missed time too.

Function follows form. It is no coincidence that most of the top RBs in recent history were squatty types. Barry Sanders, Emmitt, Edge, Ricky, LT, Faulk, Westbrook, and Portis all had similar builds. The reason Ray Rice and Maurice Drew never suffer serious injuries is not because they're lucky, but rather because their stocky frames and low center of gravity make it nigh impossible to hurt them. The more stretched out a back is, the more exposed he is to "unlucky" hits and awkward twists in the pile. There have been good tall backs like Adrian Peterson and Steven Jackson who have been durable in the NFL, but they are both a bit more muscular throughout the lower body than Murray. They are also better at avoiding contact, which is key.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Beanie has bad knees. Murray does not.

Did Beanie suffer any serious knee injuries in college? I don't remember, but I'm not sure that was the case. I think he was more like Murray in the sense that he was just generally injured all the time. At any rate, Murray actually does have some knee issues sprinkled in with his other ailments. http://www.soonersports.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/murray_demarco00.html

2007Suffered a dislocated knee cap in game No. 11 at Texas Tech, then missed the remainder of the season and the subsequent spring workouts ...

http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/OU/article.aspx?subjectid=92&articleid=20101202_92_0_Univer330112&rss_lnk=231]

University of Oklahoma running back DeMarco Murray is expected to play in the Big 12 championship game Saturday against Nebraska, OU coach Bob Stoops announced today.Murray was hurt -- an apparent knee injury -- during the Sooners' win Saturday over Oklahoma State.

I also feel like there's an ACL injury somewhere on his extensive rap sheet, though I can't find anything about it online.

Lastly, Murray's injuries were not a result of his body - he was landed on and/or rolled up on, both times. Please enlighten me - how did his running style or body type have ANYTHING to do with it? If it happened to any other RB, they would have missed time too.

Function follows form. It is no coincidence that most of the top RBs in recent history were squatty types. Barry Sanders, Emmitt, Edge, Ricky, LT, Faulk, Westbrook, and Portis all had similar builds. The reason Ray Rice and Maurice Drew never suffer serious injuries is not because they're lucky, but rather because their stocky frames and low center of gravity make it nigh impossible to hurt them. The more stretched out a back is, the more exposed he is to "unlucky" hits and awkward twists in the pile. There have been good tall backs like Adrian Peterson and Steven Jackson who have been durable in the NFL, but they are both a bit more muscular throughout the lower body than Murray. They are also better at avoiding contact, which is key.
I hardly consider a dislocated knee cap to be knee issues. He is shorter than Foster, Peterson, Dickerson, Eddie George, Jacobs, Forte, S.Jax, F.Jax, Fred taylor, Marcus Allen...This is silly, and I'll stop. I think it is pretty clear that you are reaching here. He didn't miss an alarming number of games, his only two injuries in the NFL were flukes due to people falling on him, or rolling up on him, and there are plenty of healthy, productive 6' running backs in NFL history.If I changed the list to those AS tall, or ONLY an inch shorter, the list would be much longer. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is silly

Well, you're right about one thing.

Call it luck or whatever you want. The guy has had trouble staying healthy for his entire career. It's something that all of the scouting reports mention and it's something that has proven true in the NFL. We're two seasons into his career and he's already suffered two lower body injuries that have caused him to miss time.

If you are a fanatical true believer then I'm sure it's easy to ignore these things, but if you're an objective observer trying to gauge his long term prospects then it's probably troubling when a guy who's billed as injury prone entering the league justifies that label by going down twice in barely a full season's worth of work.

Murray has his believers. I get that. So did Beanie Wells and Darren McFadden. People were always quick to defend those guys too. I'll say the same thing to the Murray fans that I would've said to the McFadden and Beanie fans. "If you like him so much, by all means, take him." Because I sure don't want him. His history of injuries is longer than Kenny Britt's rap sheet. And if that weren't enough, I don't even think he's that great of a RB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is silly

Well, you're right about one thing.

Call it luck or whatever you want. The guy has had trouble staying healthy for his entire career. It's something that all of the scouting reports mention and it's something that has proven true in the NFL. We're two seasons into his career and he's already suffered two lower body injuries that have caused him to miss time.

If you are a fanatical true believer then I'm sure it's easy to ignore these things, but if you're an objective observer trying to gauge his long term prospects then it's probably troubling when a guy who's billed as injury prone entering the league justifies that label by going down twice in barely a full season's worth of work.

Murray has his believers. I get that. So did Beanie Wells and Darren McFadden. People were always quick to defend those guys too. I'll say the same thing to the Murray fans that I would've said to the McFadden and Beanie fans. "If you like him so much, by all means, take him." Because I sure don't want him. His history of injuries is longer than Kenny Britt's rap sheet. And if that weren't enough, I don't even think he's that great of a RB.

You give me the criteria, here.

He missed one game a season in college, despite a very heavy workload. He has had two collision caused injuries, which were not related, reoccurring, or chronic. So, it's just going to keep happening, just because?

RBs get hurt.

And just so we can be consistant: Richardson missed 2 fewer games in college, despite playing in 17 fewer, and getting fewer per game, and already has 1 lower body injury. Mr. Glass? He missed more games per touch than Murray, FYI. Or do we wait until he is hurt next year - then, he's Mr. Glass?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Trent Richardson is obviously made of glass, just like Arian Foster was last year. MJD is no good because of his bone on bone knee. Brian Westbrook was so injury prone he was worthless. Jamaal Charles can't keep his shoulders or knees healthy. Adrian Peterson always has a torn up knee or a sprained ankle. All Redskins rb's are injury risks. No Giants rb can stay healthy. Marshawn Lynch has a chronic back. Stephen Jackson can't stay on the field. Le Shaun McCoy's is always nursing an ankle. No GB running back stays healthy for long. Frank Gore gets hurt every year. So did LT, whenever there was a playoff run they needed him for. Donald Brown is hurt. Matt Forte is injury prone. Don't get me started on Ryan Matthews. Or the Lions backfield. Felix, Murray, or any Cowboy running back. Pittsburgh backfield is a triage unit. Jets backfield mostly gone. Only Sproles can stay healthy in NO. Buffalo has an injury prone backfield.

I could go on. Are we seeing a trend here? How can I decifer the injury prone rb's from the ones who get hurt but aren't injury prone?

Edited by jackdubl
Link to post
Share on other sites

Does he? He's at 4.4 this year.

As does Adrian Peterson. Higher than Arian Foster. Higher than Rice. Higher than MJD. Higher than McFadden. Higher than McCoy.

We will find any number of reasons to explain why those guys are averaging less than Murray, but we completely ignore the situation that Murray is in, with a makeshift offensive line, whose only returning starters changed positions.

Why? Agenda, maybe?

What agenda? I don't have him or Felix. I just think the Cowboys should get a real running back on their roster next year and let Murray and Jones fight it out for third down duties.

Also, I wasn't saying 4.4 ypc is horrible, but mainly pointing out that your statement that he's getting 5 yards per carry behind a horrible offensive line was actually quite a fib.

Just got done looking it up, and you beat me to it. He missed 4 games in 4 years, despite a very high number of touches. He missed 1 game over his final 2 seasons. I will forgive a 19/20 year old for being a little "banged" up getting 200+ touches right off the bat.

And he had 352 touches as a senior, and played in every game.

Oh fun, we're looking at college stats. How did he do those final 2 seasons? 4.2 ypc? That might be good for a Vanderbilt RB playing in the SEC, but 4.2 ypc in the Big 12 playing for OU... 4.2 ypc is not impressive. He caught a lot of passes and racked up some return yards, though. Just the things I'd expect an NFL 3rd down back to do in college.

Look, there's no agenda. Just don't see how you Murray lovers can be so selectively blind. He's not a scrub, but he's not an NFL starter, either. Much less a top 10-15 talent!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does he? He's at 4.4 this year.

As does Adrian Peterson. Higher than Arian Foster. Higher than Rice. Higher than MJD. Higher than McFadden. Higher than McCoy.

We will find any number of reasons to explain why those guys are averaging less than Murray, but we completely ignore the situation that Murray is in, with a makeshift offensive line, whose only returning starters changed positions.

Why? Agenda, maybe?

What agenda? I don't have him or Felix. I just think the Cowboys should get a real running back on their roster next year and let Murray and Jones fight it out for third down duties.

Also, I wasn't saying 4.4 ypc is horrible, but mainly pointing out that your statement that he's getting 5 yards per carry behind a horrible offensive line was actually quite a fib.

Just got done looking it up, and you beat me to it. He missed 4 games in 4 years, despite a very high number of touches. He missed 1 game over his final 2 seasons. I will forgive a 19/20 year old for being a little "banged" up getting 200+ touches right off the bat.

And he had 352 touches as a senior, and played in every game.

Oh fun, we're looking at college stats. How did he do those final 2 seasons? 4.2 ypc? That might be good for a Vanderbilt RB playing in the SEC, but 4.2 ypc in the Big 12 playing for OU... 4.2 ypc is not impressive. He caught a lot of passes and racked up some return yards, though. Just the things I'd expect an NFL 3rd down back to do in college.

Look, there's no agenda. Just don't see how you Murray lovers can be so selectively blind. He's not a scrub, but he's not an NFL starter, either. Much less a top 10-15 talent!

Nobody is telling a fib. This year is 4.4, last year was 5.5, total is 5.1. His line has been awful both seasons. The only reason it is lower this year, is because of the defenses he's faced. It will rise, if he can return in good healhty.

And please - I am not using or talking college stats. We are talking about his injury history, that some seem to build up to be more than it is.

He is clearly a starter, and clearly top 10-15. Still waiting for those better than him. And if he is not a starter, we are not talking about 32 better than him.

Again, give me the names and lets look at the production.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody is telling a fib. This year is 4.4, last year was 5.5, total is 5.1. His line has been awful both seasons. The only reason it is lower this year, is because of the defenses he's faced. It will rise, if he can return in good healhty.And please - I am not using or talking college stats. We are talking about his injury history, that some seem to build up to be more than it is. He is clearly a starter, and clearly top 10-15. Still waiting for those better than him. And if he is not a starter, we are not talking about 32 better than him. Again, give me the names and lets look at the production.

Sure, we could look at the production of other RBs, but what will we compare it against? Murray's body of work does not span enough to make a fair comparison. You can't act like he's an established talent in this league when he's only had 5 games with 10 carries or more in which he has broken a 4.0 ypc average.I know you only referenced college to talk about injury but why ignore those stats? They represent a pretty large sample size. The Big 12 was a decent conference and Murray was on one of the best teams in the conference. It was, however, an offensive conference. To be the starting RB as a JR and SR on a team that was favored heavily most weeks against soft defenses designed to defend the pass and to end up with 4.2 ypc can't be ignored. That's much more of a body of work than his 5 good NFL games. We can gloss over this fact, but it should at least give an objective observer some pause.How you can see a guy with only 12 games with 10 carries or more and only 5 of them being good games and say he's clearly a top 10-15 talent is just crazy. I mean, maybe if he tore it up in college and won a Heisman or something, but how do you justify such a bold statement in this case?And to write me off as having an agenda is pretty funny, too. What agenda could I possibly have? Am an embittered manager who just couldn't quite land him on my squad and now I want him to suck? I really don't know where you were going with that angle. I'm just a guy with no dog in this race trying to bring an objective opinion here.
Link to post
Share on other sites

How you can see a guy with only 12 games with 10 carries or more and only 5 of them being good games and say he's clearly a top 10-15 talent is just crazy. I

I saw him say top 10-15 RB, not top 10-15 talent. There is a big difference. McCoyFosterPetersonRiceLynchMcfaddenMJDRichardsonForteCharlesMorrisSpillerSproles? (PPR)Bradshaw?Turner?Bush?Mcgahee?That's the only 17 guys I see as even being in the discussion, and I'd take Murray (in a redraft) over all of the ones with question marks. Puts him at 13 on my list.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, we could look at the production of other RBs, but what will we compare it against? Murray's body of work does not span enough to make a fair comparison. You can't act like he's an established talent in this league when he's only had 5 games with 10 carries or more in which he has broken a 4.0 ypc average.I know you only referenced college to talk about injury but why ignore those stats? They represent a pretty large sample size. The Big 12 was a decent conference and Murray was on one of the best teams in the conference. It was, however, an offensive conference. To be the starting RB as a JR and SR on a team that was favored heavily most weeks against soft defenses designed to defend the pass and to end up with 4.2 ypc can't be ignored. That's much more of a body of work than his 5 good NFL games. We can gloss over this fact, but it should at least give an objective observer some pause.How you can see a guy with only 12 games with 10 carries or more and only 5 of them being good games and say he's clearly a top 10-15 talent is just crazy. I mean, maybe if he tore it up in college and won a Heisman or something, but how do you justify such a bold statement in this case?And to write me off as having an agenda is pretty funny, too. What agenda could I possibly have? Am an embittered manager who just couldn't quite land him on my squad and now I want him to suck? I really don't know where you were going with that angle. I'm just a guy with no dog in this race trying to bring an objective opinion here.

Let's not be petty and do away with the trigger words. My apologies for using agenda improperly. Let's keep it to a productive conversation about Murray's value. If we don't change our opinions, maybe we can help someone else develop theirs. Again, my apologies for my contribution, I just don't like the tone of the last few posts (mine included) and don't want to derail a potentially productive conversation. His freshman years his YPC (which is flawed) was 6 and 5.6. Why did it drop? Why do we value his last two years, more than his first?And if we can't use his sample size to suggest he is a good RB - why do you get to use it to suggest he is not? Just to be clear, and to clarify if I am missing something: His Jr and Sr YPC aren't enough for you - so he is not starting material? That's all there is to it?As a fan of the team, I have watched every snap of Murray's NFL career, and am very confident in his abilities. He passes the eye test, and his production matches it. He is well rounded, powerful, and hits homeruns. That is a nice mix, and what more can you ask for from a starting RB?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Of the 8 staff members to provider their dynasty rankings in the last 35 days, only one of them has him outside of the top 15 (16). On average, they rank him 10th.

F&L ranked him 11th in his most recent free update (mock draft).

Dynastyrankings.net has him at 12th.

It seems a lot of people agree with me.

And all of these rankings are standard formats, not PPR, where Murray is more valuable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of the 8 staff members to provider their dynasty rankings in the last 35 days, only one of them has him outside of the top 15 (16). On average, they rank him 10th.F&L ranked him 11th in his most recent free update (mock draft).Dynastyrankings.net has him at 12th.It seems a lot of people agree with me. And all of these rankings are standard formats, not PPR, where Murray is more valuable.

I thought the discussion was real NFL ability, not fantasy value.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Of the 8 staff members to provider their dynasty rankings in the last 35 days, only one of them has him outside of the top 15 (16). On average, they rank him 10th.F&L ranked him 11th in his most recent free update (mock draft).Dynastyrankings.net has him at 12th.It seems a lot of people agree with me. And all of these rankings are standard formats, not PPR, where Murray is more valuable.

I thought the discussion was real NFL ability, not fantasy value.
Correct. Is not ability a very strong staple in dynasty value? If he doesn't have ability, he will be replaced, or won't produce. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has this thread really devolved into Murray vs. Felix? ####, what a joke.

Anyway, short term I'll be looking towards Felix but if this injury proves to be of the lingering type, I'll be gunning for Tanner.

If Felix sees 15+ touches for more than a couple weeks he'll be joining Murray on the bench. The dude just cannot hold up. He's a stopgap and a handcuff, nothing more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has this thread really devolved into Murray vs. Felix? ####, what a joke.Anyway, short term I'll be looking towards Felix but if this injury proves to be of the lingering type, I'll be gunning for Tanner.If Felix sees 15+ touches for more than a couple weeks he'll be joining Murray on the bench. The dude just cannot hold up. He's a stopgap and a handcuff, nothing more.

This injury is giving me Darren McFlashbacks.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has this thread really devolved into Murray vs. Felix? ####, what a joke.Anyway, short term I'll be looking towards Felix but if this injury proves to be of the lingering type, I'll be gunning for Tanner.If Felix sees 15+ touches for more than a couple weeks he'll be joining Murray on the bench. The dude just cannot hold up. He's a stopgap and a handcuff, nothing more.

This injury is giving me Darren McFlashbacks.
I've read a few quotes that are comparing it to the early season injury that Fred Jackson had. Hopefully it's more along those lines.The good news is that Mcfadden has a lis franc and the Cowboys have announced already that it's not a lis franc injury.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has this thread really devolved into Murray vs. Felix? ####, what a joke.Anyway, short term I'll be looking towards Felix but if this injury proves to be of the lingering type, I'll be gunning for Tanner.If Felix sees 15+ touches for more than a couple weeks he'll be joining Murray on the bench. The dude just cannot hold up. He's a stopgap and a handcuff, nothing more.

This injury is giving me Darren McFlashbacks.
I've read a few quotes that are comparing it to the early season injury that Fred Jackson had. Hopefully it's more along those lines.The good news is that Mcfadden has a lis franc and the Cowboys have announced already that it's not a lis franc injury.
I believe McFadden's coach denied it was a Lis Franc as well, just saying. Could be my memory playing tricks on me though.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Has this thread really devolved into Murray vs. Felix? ####, what a joke.Anyway, short term I'll be looking towards Felix but if this injury proves to be of the lingering type, I'll be gunning for Tanner.If Felix sees 15+ touches for more than a couple weeks he'll be joining Murray on the bench. The dude just cannot hold up. He's a stopgap and a handcuff, nothing more.

This injury is giving me Darren McFlashbacks.
I've read a few quotes that are comparing it to the early season injury that Fred Jackson had. Hopefully it's more along those lines.The good news is that Mcfadden has a lis franc and the Cowboys have announced already that it's not a lis franc injury.
I believe McFadden's coach denied it was a Lis Franc as well, just saying. Could be my memory playing tricks on me though.
I might be wrong, but I don't think he ever said it wasn't, they were just really vague about it and never released real information. It's definitely a concern of mine, but I don't think Jerry Jones would be saying that he thinks it's not serious if it was actually a lis franc.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Murray says he will play week 8. Course it's not his decision, but take it FWIW, which is not much...

link!

I'll take it as a positive sign. I think it's likely that he misses one more week, but if he's confident he'll play next week, I'll assume that means that he's feeling good about the injury and they are confident in the quick recovery.

I would say he'll practice some next week, but probably won't be back until week 9. Here's to hoping that Felix sucks this week against Carolina (they are coming off a bye, so hopefully they will focus on stopping someone).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, we could look at the production of other RBs, but what will we compare it against? Murray's body of work does not span enough to make a fair comparison. You can't act like he's an established talent in this league when he's only had 5 games with 10 carries or more in which he has broken a 4.0 ypc average.

I know you only referenced college to talk about injury but why ignore those stats? They represent a pretty large sample size. The Big 12 was a decent conference and Murray was on one of the best teams in the conference. It was, however, an offensive conference. To be the starting RB as a JR and SR on a team that was favored heavily most weeks against soft defenses designed to defend the pass and to end up with 4.2 ypc can't be ignored. That's much more of a body of work than his 5 good NFL games. We can gloss over this fact, but it should at least give an objective observer some pause.

How you can see a guy with only 12 games with 10 carries or more and only 5 of them being good games and say he's clearly a top 10-15 talent is just crazy. I mean, maybe if he tore it up in college and won a Heisman or something, but how do you justify such a bold statement in this case?

And to write me off as having an agenda is pretty funny, too. What agenda could I possibly have? Am an embittered manager who just couldn't quite land him on my squad and now I want him to suck? I really don't know where you were going with that angle. I'm just a guy with no dog in this race trying to bring an objective opinion here.

Let's not be petty and do away with the trigger words. My apologies for using agenda improperly. Let's keep it to a productive conversation about Murray's value. If we don't change our opinions, maybe we can help someone else develop theirs. Again, my apologies for my contribution, I just don't like the tone of the last few posts (mine included) and don't want to derail a potentially productive conversation.

His freshman years his YPC (which is flawed) was 6 and 5.6. Why did it drop? Why do we value his last two years, more than his first?

And if we can't use his sample size to suggest he is a good RB - why do you get to use it to suggest he is not?

Just to be clear, and to clarify if I am missing something: His Jr and Sr YPC aren't enough for you - so he is not starting material? That's all there is to it?

As a fan of the team, I have watched every snap of Murray's NFL career, and am very confident in his abilities. He passes the eye test, and his production matches it. He is well rounded, powerful, and hits homeruns. That is a nice mix, and what more can you ask for from a starting RB?

Did I use a trigger word? I certainly did not intend to and if so then I, too, apologize. I agree this is a worthwhile discussion and don't want it to get petty. Your avatar stands out for some reason so I've noticed I actually agree with most of your posts in other threads. It just seems like you've got some blinders on here with Murray. A little bit like Doug Martin owners.

As for Murray's ypc during his first two years vs. his last two years, I think you know why we value his last two years more than his first two. After all, doesn't everyone? If those numbers were reversed, it would seem to clearly indicate that something clicked, he learned the game, etc. When numbers dip, it gets more complicated (did situation change? did other teams start focusing on him after realizing he was a threat?) but the one thing that is clear is that it is a red flag. If it wasn't, then why would draft stock fall when a guy who blows up his soph year and isn't draft eligible so he returns for his junior year with more pedestrian numbers? In this case, Murray had a down year his junior year and came back and had another pedestrian year. Hard for me to get behind that. I mean, if he played for Colorado then maybe, but he was playing for the top dog in that conference.

And no, those last two years in college aren't definitive evidence that he's not an NFL starter, but at the time they indicated to me that he was likely going to be a third down guy in the NFL at best. Now that he's been in the NFL, he had a few big games early - against bad defenses and before anyone bothered to game plan against him - and he really hasn't done much since then.

That kind of leads to your question about sample size. Those big games were really big, which significantly skews his NFL career averages. That's why I found it useful to break the games down into games with 10+ carries above the 4.0 mason dixon line and games with 10+ carries below that line. This eliminates the StL game averaging out 4 dud games to still equal 5 ypc and it eliminates game in which he was playing in a situational role rather than starter role. The fact he's had less boom games than bust games suggests that he's not really getting 5 yards a pop. He's either breaking a few long runs or getting stuffed. That's not what you want out of your starter. But it sounds like what you'd expect out of a 3rd down/change of pace back.

You ask what more you could want out of a starting RB... I'd say more consistency. Think Marshawn Lynch. You scoffed at Michael Bush, but I consider him to be somewhat of a poor man's Lynch. I really think Blount would be a good fit for this team next year. Not sure this team would be a good fit for Blount (seems like he needs more structure and discipline to keep him in line than the Cowboys tend to offer) but I like the idea of Blount + Murray.

But again, this is all just food for thought. The book is not written on this guy. The first few chapters just strongly suggest that you might want to weigh the eye test a little less and reconsider what his production really has been. I don't know that you are, but if you are a Cowboys fan first and Murray fantasy owner second, would you really rather have Murray + Felix over Blount + Murray next year?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any thoughts on fantasy value ROS? Roto still has him ranked 22nd overall which seems really high to me. Any trades that anyone has seem would be helpful to gauge value.

That seems about right to me. If the injury is just a week or two, he'll still come back and be the bellcow running back for the Cowboys. Outside of the top 10-15 backs in the league, it's just a bunch of RBBC situations and weak options.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any thoughts on fantasy value ROS? Roto still has him ranked 22nd overall which seems really high to me. Any trades that anyone has seem would be helpful to gauge value.

That seems about right to me. If the injury is just a week or two, he'll still come back and be the bellcow running back for the Cowboys. Outside of the top 10-15 backs in the league, it's just a bunch of RBBC situations and weak options.
Assuming he's healthy, with his schedule I'm thinking 22 sounds kinda low.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone have any thoughts on fantasy value ROS? Roto still has him ranked 22nd overall which seems really high to me. Any trades that anyone has seem would be helpful to gauge value.

That seems about right to me. If the injury is just a week or two, he'll still come back and be the bellcow running back for the Cowboys. Outside of the top 10-15 backs in the league, it's just a bunch of RBBC situations and weak options.
Assuming he's healthy, with his schedule I'm thinking 22 sounds kinda low.
22 is clearly taking into account the fact that he'll miss out on points while he's out, but assuming he only misses Week 7, I don't see how that would place him 22nd in points scored rest of the season. No way he's a low RB2/high RB3. I think he's a low RB1/high RB2 moving forward. Edited by UFGator0587
Link to post
Share on other sites

That kind of leads to your question about sample size. Those big games were really big, which significantly skews his NFL career averages. That's why I found it useful to break the games down into games with 10+ carries above the 4.0 mason dixon line and games with 10+ carries below that line. This eliminates the StL game averaging out 4 dud games to still equal 5 ypc and it eliminates game in which he was playing in a situational role rather than starter role. The fact he's had less boom games than bust games suggests that he's not really getting 5 yards a pop. He's either breaking a few long runs or getting stuffed. That's not what you want out of your starter. But it sounds like what you'd expect out of a 3rd down/change of pace back.

Arian Foster a change of pace back? Over the last two seasons, he has 11 games under and 8 games over.

You mention Lynch - last year, he was 50/50, over/under. Murray had a better ratio.

The whole college YPC (but exclude the better years) + over/under 4.0 games formula doesn't add up to me. It sure as hell doesn't take offensive line into the equation, and that needs to be accounted for.

I'll stop after this, I think we have both laid our cards on the table, and won't be changing the others mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That kind of leads to your question about sample size. Those big games were really big, which significantly skews his NFL career averages. That's why I found it useful to break the games down into games with 10+ carries above the 4.0 mason dixon line and games with 10+ carries below that line. This eliminates the StL game averaging out 4 dud games to still equal 5 ypc and it eliminates game in which he was playing in a situational role rather than starter role. The fact he's had less boom games than bust games suggests that he's not really getting 5 yards a pop. He's either breaking a few long runs or getting stuffed. That's not what you want out of your starter. But it sounds like what you'd expect out of a 3rd down/change of pace back.

Arian Foster a change of pace back? Over the last two seasons, he has 11 games under and 8 games over.

You mention Lynch - last year, he was 50/50, over/under. Murray had a better ratio.

The whole college YPC (but exclude the better years) + over/under 4.0 games formula doesn't add up to me. It sure as hell doesn't take offensive line into the equation, and that needs to be accounted for.

I'll stop after this, I think we have both laid our cards on the table, and won't be changing the others mind.

Murray is 5/7 over/under, so no, his ratio is worse than Lynch's last year. I'd also argue that the total lack of a passing threat worked strongly against Lynch while the lack of fear of the running game works in Murray's favor.

Foster tried to come back early from a preseason hamstring injury in week 2 and had to leave that game and miss the next so I think we can throw out that 10 for 33. When he came back in week 4 through the playoffs, he had an 8/6 ratio. As a Texans fan, I've seen his average getting hurt in several games this year by them leaving him in the 4th quarter of victories when the defense is selling out to stop the run but Houston keeps running it to run out the clock. Forsett or Tate should be in the game for that, but that's another story.

Not sure why you don't understand how the last two years of a college player's career are more important than the first two. If you don't weigh the back end more then you are the only person in the world. If a guy is coming off of a major injury, then sure. But otherwise, the last season or two is almost all that matters.

If you want to ride the tide of the StL game last year then sure, just use his career averages. But if you want an indicator of future production, it would be wise to reduce the weight of such a bizarre game when analyzing the career of a player with less than 250 carries. That one crazy game accounts for more than 10% of his career carries and 20% of his yards! (and 33% of his touchdowns, but he's only got 3 so that's a bit silly). But that was why I was looking at games over/under 4ypc. Thought it would be a nice alternate way of looking at his production when given a moderate workload.

In the end, those who are Pro-Murray only have a couple of good games to fall back on and the offensive line excuse. Obviously offensive line is important, but this is NOT a run first team. Murray is not rushing the ball 25 times a game, mostly up the gut on 1st and 10. He has the advantage of rushing against nickel and dime defenses rather than facing 8 in the box like players such as Lynch and Foster often do on 1st down.

On that note, I'll probably bow out of this discussion as well. But I thought it was important to touch on the defenses Murray is facing since I hadn't talked about the offensive line much. I totally agree with you that the line is lackluster, but I think it is offset a bit by the fact that defenses are not keying on the running game like they would against run first teams.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why you don't understand how the last two years of a college player's career are more important than the first two. If you don't weigh the back end more then you are the only person in the world. If a guy is coming off of a major injury, then sure. But otherwise, the last season or two is almost all that matters.

Because he is the same guy. So if he was able to come out as a Sophmore - say he red-shirted - he would be a full-time back; but because he went back, and his YPC dropped, he's not?Again, nothing about your formula or reasoning adds up to me. You have justifications when your fomrula doesn't support your stance, and use it as a golden rule when it does. YPC is a flawed tool - I understand that. But you have found a way to take a favorable stat, and manipulate it to suggest Murray is inconsistant. Why throw out a 7.1 YPC against Philly last year? If you watched the game - you know the Eagles jumped on the Cowboys and Garrett went away from the run, but most of those carries came early. Why do those carries not count? Why is a guy who averages 5.5,3,5.5,3,5.5,3 (4.25) less valuable than a guy that gets you 3.8,3.8,3.8,3.8,3.8 (3.8)?Watch the guy play. I have. All of his carries. He's good. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a pretty solid team except for my RB2 spot where Steve Jackson, Daryl Richardson, Leshoure, and Alex Green all mediocrely compete for the same spot. Very deep bench league where you can't even get a handcuff off the waiver.

Offered SJax+Richardson+Green for Murray... seemed like I was pretty close.

He countered Leshoure+Alex Green for Murray. THOUGHTS? Instinct seems risky given my best option if RB1 or Murray went down was a timeshared Steve Jackson, ugh. My other thought was to throw in Andrew Hawkins into the SJax+Richardson+Green deal (league w/ return points). What do you guys think?

PS any insight into why Murray doesn't score TD's??? a bit concerning but he is a big back

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've got a pretty solid team except for my RB2 spot where Steve Jackson, Daryl Richardson, Leshoure, and Alex Green all mediocrely compete for the same spot. Very deep bench league where you can't even get a handcuff off the waiver. Offered SJax+Richardson+Green for Murray... seemed like I was pretty close.He countered Leshoure+Alex Green for Murray. THOUGHTS? Instinct seems risky given my best option if RB1 or Murray went down was a timeshared Steve Jackson, ugh. My other thought was to throw in Andrew Hawkins into the SJax+Richardson+Green deal (league w/ return points). What do you guys think?PS any insight into why Murray doesn't score TD's??? a bit concerning but he is a big back

Homo audibles out of rushing plays whenever he can near the goal line because he likes seeing himself on highlight reels.
Link to post
Share on other sites

PS any insight into why Murray doesn't score TD's??? a bit concerning but he is a big back

He has only had 5 carries inside the opponents 5 in his career (none this year). He has only scored once, which is a poor % - but it is the highest of the Cowboys RBs.The offensive line doesn't get push, and Garrett passes too much in the redzone, due to the failures last year.Something to worry about, for sure. But, like Forte, he can counter it in other areas of production. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure why you don't understand how the last two years of a college player's career are more important than the first two. If you don't weigh the back end more then you are the only person in the world. If a guy is coming off of a major injury, then sure. But otherwise, the last season or two is almost all that matters.

Because he is the same guy. So if he was able to come out as a Sophmore - say he red-shirted - he would be a full-time back; but because he went back, and his YPC dropped, he's not?
So two years of low production should be ignored because 3 years ago he had better numbers? Hey, maybe Dallas should trade for Steve Slaton. He had a good season a few years back. I'm not trying to be rude, but I hope that illustrates my point.
Link to post
Share on other sites

PS any insight into why Murray doesn't score TD's??? a bit concerning but he is a big back

He has only had 5 carries inside the opponents 5 in his career (none this year). He has only scored once, which is a poor % - but it is the highest of the Cowboys RBs.The offensive line doesn't get push, and Garrett passes too much in the redzone, due to the failures last year.Something to worry about, for sure. But, like Forte, he can counter it in other areas of production.
Yeah after watching some tape last night it looks like the guy can't bulldoze through a crowd when it matters a la Emmitt Smith or Steven Jackson or even Adrian Peterson. But he does look good in open field
Link to post
Share on other sites

PS any insight into why Murray doesn't score TD's??? a bit concerning but he is a big back

He has only had 5 carries inside the opponents 5 in his career (none this year). He has only scored once, which is a poor % - but it is the highest of the Cowboys RBs.The offensive line doesn't get push, and Garrett passes too much in the redzone, due to the failures last year.Something to worry about, for sure. But, like Forte, he can counter it in other areas of production.
Yeah after watching some tape last night it looks like the guy can't bulldoze through a crowd when it matters a la Emmitt Smith or Steven Jackson or even Adrian Peterson. But he does look good in open field
:goodposting: I think this is spot on. Murray is a guy, imo, that you can count on to make good reads and take full advantage of what's blocked for him. But when the blocking isn't there or the hole closes before he can hit it, he's just not going to create much on his own. He's a servicable NFL back that could thrive on a good or great blocking team, but will put up pedestrian numbers on a poor blocking team.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently he had some more tests today, but no one has actually reported any results yet. The delay in getting the info out if starting to scare me.

KFFL is reporting that he's "doubtful" for this Sunday's game, but they provide no source for it...so I'm guessing it's just a report from a beat writers expectation.

I don't mind if he's out this week, and frankly I expected it, but the extra tests are a little scary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Appearing on Sports Center, ESPN's Ed Werder said he's been told it's "doubtful" that DeMarco Murray (foot) will play versus the Giants in Week 8.

Werder is the one national writer with the most access to Cowboys sources, so he's a trustworthy voice. The results of Murray's Monday tests have yet to be revealed, but it seems the ligament damage still needs time to heal. "Fragile" Felix Jones suffered a bruised knee last week, though we've yet to see concern that the injury will keep him out versus the Giants. Phillip Tanner would be the next man up if Jones does miss time.

Has this thread really devolved into Murray vs. Felix? ####, what a joke.

Anyway, short term I'll be looking towards Felix but if this injury proves to be of the lingering type, I'll be gunning for Tanner.

If Felix sees 15+ touches for more than a couple weeks he'll be joining Murray on the bench. The dude just cannot hold up. He's a stopgap and a handcuff, nothing more.

I still stand by my statements on Tanner. All Murray owners need to make sure they have him stashed IMO. No way Felix hold up for another game.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Man, this Murray situation is getting really frustrating.

At the end of every week, they claim that he'll almost definitely be back the following week. Then, every Tuesday or Wednesday, we find out that he's doubtful to play.

At this point, I'm concerned we're seeing a replay of last year's Darren Mcfadden situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, this Murray situation is getting really frustrating.At the end of every week, they claim that he'll almost definitely be back the following week. Then, every Tuesday or Wednesday, we find out that he's doubtful to play.At this point, I'm concerned we're seeing a replay of last year's Darren Mcfadden situation.

I just traded him. Once the Cowboys are out of contention, they will sit him even if he is "back". That's not that far off.
Link to post
Share on other sites

PS any insight into why Murray doesn't score TD's??? a bit concerning but he is a big back

He has only had 5 carries inside the opponents 5 in his career (none this year). He has only scored once, which is a poor % - but it is the highest of the Cowboys RBs.The offensive line doesn't get push, and Garrett passes too much in the redzone, due to the failures last year.Something to worry about, for sure. But, like Forte, he can counter it in other areas of production.
Yeah after watching some tape last night it looks like the guy can't bulldoze through a crowd when it matters a la Emmitt Smith or Steven Jackson or even Adrian Peterson. But he does look good in open field
:goodposting: I think this is spot on. Murray is a guy, imo, that you can count on to make good reads and take full advantage of what's blocked for him. But when the blocking isn't there or the hole closes before he can hit it, he's just not going to create much on his own. He's a servicable NFL back that could thrive on a good or great blocking team, but will put up pedestrian numbers on a poor blocking team.
the first thing I thought of after reading this was Murray's run vs. the Giants. I have to respectfully disagree with you.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just traded him. Once the Cowboys are out of contention, they will sit him even if he is "back". That's not that far off.

Garrett is going to be coaching for his job. When he's healthy, he'll play.
Speaking of...is he playing this week?
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...