Crazy idea but ... | Page 3 | FinHeaven - Miami Dolphins Forums

Crazy idea but ...

ChrisJNelson said:
If you're judging a running back on total yards, you're doing it wrong.
Click to expand...

Im judging him by the fact that he was the only productive player on that entire offense and was their only threat. Teams knew that and knew they had no passing game but he was still efficient despite that. Look at how our backs struggled when we couldnt pass. Under those conditions I say he is hardly open to ridicule at this time.
 
it was only a terrible pick by new orleans if they planned to use him as sparingly as they have...if he was getting 15 carries per game somewhere else i think it would be a lot different...i don't think that team would be saying i need to get better at rb right now
 
uk_dolfan said:
Im judging him by the fact that he was the only productive player on that entire offense and was their only threat. Teams knew that and knew they had no passing game but he was still efficient despite that. Look at how our backs struggled when we couldnt pass. Under those conditions I say he is hardly open to ridicule at this time.
Click to expand...

Like I said, you're doing it wrong. Greene was hardly productive. 3.9 a carry is terrible, but it's par for the course with Greene.

---------- Post added at 08:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:48 PM ----------
hooshoops said:
it was only a terrible pick by new orleans if they planned to use him as sparingly as they have...if he was getting 15 carries per game somewhere else i think it would be a lot different...i don't think that team would be saying i need to get better at rb right now
Click to expand...

He wouldn't be worth a first-round pick even if a team had only you and me at running back.
 
I think our runningbacks are actually pretty good. If we resign Bush and use him more in passing, and use Lamar Miller and DT more, we could have a solid RB by commission. The commission part will help offset the fact that DT and Bush tend to get injured. But giving up a first for another RB would be silly since it's not a HUGE need for us. Maybe next year, if they've fixed all the other glaring needs we have
 
Ingram would do fine here...back on grass. Another running back wasted in New Orleans, and therefore undervalued. They have quite a knack.

Ingram turned 23 a couple of weeks ago.

Regarding Richardson, I have no idea why Chip Kelly would get rid of the highest drafted running back in years when his system relies so heavily on the run...more than 52 rushes per game this year.

Granted, it's hard to project how much of his system would transfer to the NFL and what the changes would look like. An Oregon coach in the same division as the Steelers and Ravens is hilarious at first thought.
 
i'd take Ingram over Daniel Thomas. I dont really trust Thomas to hammer it home from inside the 5.

I'd take Chris Ivory over both of them.

I feel stupid for posting in such a ridiculous thread anyway.
 
We have enough RB's.

We need another legit pass rushing DE to pair with Cameron Wake.
 
As hoops said, Ingram has great feet, vision, balance. And I think he also hit on a very key point. He's a rhythm runner. He'd be an ideal compliment for L. Miller. Each excels in area where the other struggles. Ingram doesn't have elite game-breaker speed; Miller does. Miller struggles with his assignments and is a liability as a pass protector; Ingram is very sharp and a very good pass blocker. It'd just depend on the asking price. In most drafts, I wouldn't have a problem sinking a 3rd into a player of Ingram's caliber. But we have such glaring holes to fill, and the prospects in that range happen to look like very good answers.
 
no thanks.

If we were to add a runningback, we'll have our pick of montee ball, le'veon bell, or eddy lacy this year.... and they wont' cost a first rounder.. personally I like eddy lacy in round three or so, get me inside the five yard line with that guy and I won't mind all the A gap runs sherman calls, cuz I think lacy can get it done. If we don't have lacy... I'd just soon sherman sticks to the pitches and sweeps and makes it a race to the pylon with miller.

either way, I'll go ballistic if we trade our #1 pick for a runningback named trent richardson.
 
hooshoops said:
if you're gonna pimp yourself as a evaluator and analysts of pro football the nfl draft and the miami dolphins you can at least drop something with some meat to it every once in a while...not to much to ask...

there's no meat in that mark ingram "analysis"
Click to expand...

He seems to be serving the white castles of player analysis.
 
ChrisJNelson said:
Ingram isn't a great prospect and never should have been taken in the first round. I'd trade the Saints two bottles of purple Gatorade for him.
Click to expand...

Hey man, hold off on trading that purple drank ... at least until after the weekend, OK?

I wouldn't trade a 1st for a quality RB like Richardson, because in our offense that's a waste and we have a lot of guys who we could get with that pick who would be impact players in our offense.

As for Chris' comment on Ingram, let's first agree that the Saints have a history of not featuring backs in the Payton/Brees era. Reggie Bush was a 3rd down back, but Sproles was even better for the New Orleans offense, while Bush certainly has shown he is worthy of more than being a 3rd down back since he joined Miami under multiple staffs. So, we don't really know what Ingram would be if featured. It's all projections, and those often wildly differ from good evaluators.

Also, many RB's have excelled outside of the top two rounds, so while Daniel Thomas may not be the poster-child for that theory, I'd say Alfred Morris is, and Lamar Miller wasn't a bad pick either. So, there is definitely a large body of evidence supporting NOT spending a 1st rounder on a RB, even if it means you don't get Adrian Peterson, because there's quality to be had later as well.

In our fathers' NFL, it was extremely hard to win without a running game. Today's NFL it's not so hard. The Packers, Patriots, and the Peytons (errrr I mean the Broncos) have all shown that the running game and the RB position has changed. Even the teams with strong RB's mostly do it by committee to reduce the wear and tear on a position that has a very short NFL lifespan. Twenty years ago Frank Gore, Arian Foster and Jamaal Charles would be feature backs, not splitting carriers with change of pace teammates.

Chris provides lots of analysis, and I think it's going overboard expecting that level of analysis in every post. IMHO, he routinely provides sound analysis and over time I think most of us will agree.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I do not understand this boards fascination with Ingram and Richardson.

Neither back was worth a first round pick. Just because they went to Alabama Fin fans think these guys are Walter Paytons. No back is worth a first round pick in today's NFL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom