James Walker (ESPN) thinks Miami has a QB controversy

[Wildbill3]

I look at a guy like Mark Ingram and I see another Cedric Benson. Same athletic ability, same one cut style, same power... nothing really elite, but great vision and incredible strength from their legs.

Honestly, they are all from the same mold. No real "freaks" like AdP or DMac, just good solid runners. Trent Richardson is a great runner, I absolutely love watching him play. His game speed is much faster than his 4.48 time would have you think, but I think running back is a position that you plug and play every couple of years from round 3-4, to be honest. I just don't see the value from getting a guy in the high 2nd, or even a 1st round pick (minus the aforementioned AdP or DMac)

My point kinda ran away from me, I think. I'm looking at Daniel Thomas, and I think he absolutely has what it takes to be a 700-800 yard complimentary back in this league, but what is so special about that? They moved up and went after him, but why? I've never understood the move, to be blunt, but I was a huge fan of DeMarco Murray and was furious we didn't grab him in the 3rd rather than move for DThomas in the 2nd.

Maybe when he was drafted the wildcat wasnt completely dead

 

[CANDolphan]

He WAS an option quarterback in high school, so that makes some sense... regardless, I still say Thomas has a future with Miami. Honestly, I've always been a Lamar Miller fan. I watched that Miami vs. VT game where he just took over. Ripped through arm tackles, showed elite burst, and ran with real solid ball control when he was cutting through the tackles.

Lamar Miller saved the draft for me after we drafted Michael Egnew.

 

[ckparrothead]

The thing that needs to be taken into consideration when looking at the YPC of those rookie backs is the context of the game itself, and the conditions of those carries in essence of what the offense was trying to accomplish.

In Mark Ingram's case, he had 13 carries inside the opponents 10 yard line in goalline situations, and another 14 carries inside the opponents 20 (red zone). Basically 27 of his 122 (nearly 25%) carries were inside the redzone. That doesn't necessarily lend itself to opportunities for a high YPC average. The point is more along the lines of whether or not he was effective at what the offense was trying to accomplish in the red zone. As already mentioned, his touchdowns support the idea that he was.

Secondly, he had another almost 20 carries in the final 3 minutes or so of games against Detroit, Houston, Jacksonville, Chicago, and the N.Y. Giants where the offense's goal was to keep the clock moving until time expired to secure the win. Add in another few carries against Atlanta in overtime inside the 15 where the offense's only goal was to set up in the middle of the field for the game winning field goal.

Essentially what you have is almost 40% of his 122 carries that were intent on accomplishing more vital aspects than racking up a high YPC average. Ingram has a terrific nose for the endzone, where as Daniel Thomas was given the opportunity to be that and failed miserably due to his ineffective pad level.

Daniel Thomas has significant improvements to make just to maintain status as a rosterable player, whereas some of these other young backs are striving to be the featured back on their teams. All they need is the opportunity to prove it.

I agree with you. Going off ESPN's splits, Ingram got about 4.3 yards per carry in non special situations when you exclude the 19-Goal and 4th Quarter +/- 7 Point carries. That was about the same as Cedric Benson and Michael Bush in 2011. LeGarrette Blount was only at 4.2 yards per carry. Chris Johnson really struggled this year at 4.1 yards per carry, along with Mike Tolbert, Marion Barber, Peyton Hillis and Brandon Jacobs.

The best in those non-special situations amongst guys with 750+ rushing yards Fred Jackson at an impressive 6.6 yards per carry. DeMarco Murray was real high as well at 6.1 yards per carry. Ben Tate gained 5.9 yards per carry. Jonathan Stewart was at 5.8 yards per carry while his teammate DeAngelo Williams was at 5.7 yards per carry. C.J. Spiller was at 5.4 yards per carry. Guys like Reggie Bush, Maurice Jones-Drew, Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson, Michael Turner, LeSean McCoy, Arian Foster, Frank Gore, Reggie Bush, Willis McGahee, Ryan Matthews and Matt Forte all hover around the 5.0 to 5.3 yards per carry area in non-special situations. Rashard Mendenhall was at 4.9 yards per carry. A step below would be Steven Jackson, Marshawn Lynch, Beanie Wells and Shonn Greene at about 4.6 or 4.5 yards per carry excluding those non-specialty situations.

Pulling up the rear of course would be Daniel Thomas at 4.0 yards per carry excluding the specialty situations. The only backs with significant yardage (400-500+) that I saw worse were Ahmad Bradshaw (4.0 ypc), Jackie Battle, BenJarvus Green-Ellis (3.9), Joseph Addai (3.6) and Thomas Jones (3.5).

Well, anyway...that about sums up the ranges.

 

[juniorseau55]

I agree with you. Going off ESPN's splits, Ingram got about 4.3 yards per carry in non special situations when you exclude the 19-Goal and 4th Quarter +/- 7 Point carries. That was about the same as Cedric Benson and Michael Bush in 2011. LeGarrette Blount was only at 4.2 yards per carry. Chris Johnson really struggled this year at 4.1 yards per carry, along with Mike Tolbert, Marion Barber, Peyton Hillis and Brandon Jacobs.

The best in those non-special situations amongst guys with 750+ rushing yards Fred Jackson at an impressive 6.6 yards per carry. DeMarco Murray was real high as well at 6.1 yards per carry. Ben Tate gained 5.9 yards per carry. Jonathan Stewart was at 5.8 yards per carry while his teammate DeAngelo Williams was at 5.7 yards per carry. C.J. Spiller was at 5.4 yards per carry. Guys like Reggie Bush, Maurice Jones-Drew, Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson, Michael Turner, LeSean McCoy, Arian Foster, Frank Gore, Reggie Bush, Willis McGahee, Ryan Matthews and Matt Forte all hover around the 5.0 to 5.3 yards per carry area in non-special situations. Rashard Mendenhall was at 4.9 yards per carry. A step below would be Steven Jackson, Marshawn Lynch, Beanie Wells and Shonn Greene at about 4.6 or 4.5 yards per carry excluding those non-specialty situations.

Pulling up the rear of course would be Daniel Thomas at 4.0 yards per carry excluding the specialty situations. The only backs with significant yardage (400-500+) that I saw worse were Ahmad Bradshaw (4.0 ypc), Jackie Battle, BenJarvus Green-Ellis (3.9), Joseph Addai (3.6) and Thomas Jones (3.5).

Well, anyway...that about sums up the ranges.

Daniel Thomas injuries are starting to be somewhat of a trend, and I somehow see that trend continuing next season. I know this may sound crazy but I see him as a Lamar Smith type of running back.

 

[ckparrothead]

Daniel Thomas injuries are starting to be somewhat of a trend, and I somehow see that trend continuing next season. I know this may sound crazy but I see him as a Lamar Smith type of running back.

The thing about Daniel Thomas' hamstring injuries is to me they sound like an excuse. I can literally sit here and list for you about 200+ different players who appeared on the NFL injury list in 2011 as having missed practice time because an injury described as a 'hamistring'. And that's just a fraction of the overall list. Players in this league play hurt. Everyone's dealing with something. You have to produce anyway. How many times have we heard veterans across the sport say that? How many times have we heard veterans across multiple sports say that? It's not like I'm sitting here on my high horse having never played NFL football and telling some guy with a painful hamstring injury he should suck it up. I'm merely repeating the words of the men who have defined the sport.

That's just my two cents. I think that if Daniel is waiting for that perfect season where he's never dealing with injuries so that he can go out there and run decently, he's going to be disappointed, because it's always going to be something. And a few times I heard hints and whispers from people on the team that they didn't like how serious Daniel seemed about taking care of his body and rehabbing correctly.

 

[abNORMal]

I hate to say it but Walker's analysis is spot on...and the point(s) CK made about DT and our running back situation reinforces what I have seen of DT. I am not as knowledgeable about football as some of you guys, like CK and SlimmJr, but I can ususally tell if a tailback has the IT factor, and DT does not have it. He looks like he could be a solid back, like Crazy685 pointed out, nothing more. Running Back is not ususally a position that needs time to develop, like a QB. Most times you can see what you have realtively quickly.

 

[CANDolphan]

Haha you can tell when I've been posting late at night on zero sleep. My sentence structure was awful and my thought process was just all over the map.

 

[phintim]

The thing that needs to be taken into consideration when looking at the YPC of those rookie backs is the context of the game itself, and the conditions of those carries in essence of what the offense was trying to accomplish.

In Mark Ingram's case, he had 13 carries inside the opponents 10 yard line in goalline situations, and another 14 carries inside the opponents 20 (red zone). Basically 27 of his 122 (nearly 25%) carries were inside the redzone. That doesn't necessarily lend itself to opportunities for a high YPC average. The point is more along the lines of whether or not he was effective at what the offense was trying to accomplish in the red zone. As already mentioned, his touchdowns support the idea that he was.

Secondly, he had another almost 20 carries in the final 3 minutes or so of games against Detroit, Houston, Jacksonville, Chicago, and the N.Y. Giants where the offense's goal was to keep the clock moving until time expired to secure the win. Add in another few carries against Atlanta in overtime inside the 15 where the offense's only goal was to set up in the middle of the field for the game winning field goal.

Essentially what you have is almost 40% of his 122 carries that were intent on accomplishing more vital aspects than racking up a high YPC average. Ingram has a terrific nose for the endzone, where as Daniel Thomas was given the opportunity to be that and failed miserably due to his ineffective pad level.

Daniel Thomas has significant improvements to make just to maintain status as a rosterable player, whereas some of these other young backs are striving to be the featured back on their teams. All they need is the opportunity to prove it.

In my mind there are 2 things to consider DT is still playing with the same style he did in college which was he was not overall fast and went down easily there for a big back. (IMO Ireland and Tony S I expect felt like some good coaching could improve these issues stay tuned.) One of DT's strenghts was playing through injuries and staying healthy in college compared to those other big backs including Ingram playing in front of him. This is issue #1

Issue #2 I still go back to early in the season last year when DT ripped off those 2 good games back to back and then had the injury bug. Was that an abnomality. How bad was the ham string issue those injuries can vary by degress and I have had them before so I know.

The only thing else I am going to throw in is that I expect to see improvement from the kid this year because they drafted a runner last year from college that played in a WCO offense that was productive and expected him to carry the load on an NFL team as a between the tackles runner. Anytime you draft a player and expect them to easliy adapt to a different style of play you are gambleing. IMO

 

[TGall13]

It's a matter of opinion, really. To me, when you've got a returning starter but also a new guy(s) who doesn't have the resume to be handed the job outright, but is instead competing, you've got a QB controversy. As I said, there are already sides setting up on either side of this. You've got Hartline in the bag for Moore and others (count OchoCinco among them) rooting for Garrard. I think that qualifies. If it doesn't qualify, I'm not sure what does. Or rather, I'm not sure how many situations there have really been in NFL history that do qualify.

Fair enough. In that case, an internal controversy between players could be much worse than a media portrayed controversy. It's certainly going to be interesting to see who ends up winning the spot. The last thing we need is for Moore to win the spot and have a butt hurt Ocho lobbying for Garrard after every int.

 

[Fin Thirteen]

Totally agree with Slimm and ck about Thomas. Very underwhelming guy at the time and has lived up to the billing so far.

I will say that both I and ck were very high on Delone Carter, taken in the 4th. If anything he's been even more disappointing, but at least he didn't cost the Colts a second like Thomas cost us.

Think we've done DT to death at this point. What about the so-called QB controversy? Personally, can't see it myself, as per my past email, in the midst of the RB chat. Thoughts?

I don't see the slightest bit of QB controversy.

Moore is not a WCO QB. Devlin probably won't make it. So they got Garrard in for just a year to bed the WCO in and give Moore plus whoever they draft (lo and behold Shermans WCO QB) a while to adapt to an NFL WCO.

If Garrard starts, it means Moore and RT need more time to get in the flow. Plus there's everyone else in the system to bed in. As soon as either Moore or RT are ready, which could be Game 1, Garrard will step aside and - barring a failure by either of the other 2 to get it - he's gone in the spring.

If it clicks for Moore, he's in. Garrard will go straight to QB3 slot, IMO. His job as insurance policy and mentor is done.

I don't see a controversy, or a mess, or a straight 3-way battle. I see a plan. Would take a lot to convince me otherwise.

 

[hoops]

I. A total of 9 rookie tailbacks took 50+ carries this season (Daniel Thomas, DeMarco Murray, Roy Helu, Mark Ingram, Kendall Hunter, Delone Carter, Stevan Ridley, Jacquizz Rodgers and Evan Royster, in order of most carries to least). The least of the group was Evan Royster who took 56 carries. The most carries taken by any rookie tailback not included in the group of 9 was Dion Lewis' 23 carries, so consider that before anyone accuses me of gerrymandering the group selection in order to make Daniel Thomas look worse. The break between Dion Lewis' 23 carries and Evan Royster's 56 carries seems a pretty natural one.

1. Of the group of 9, Daniel Thomas' per carry average at 3.5 yards per carry was the worst.
2. Daniel Thomas' 0 rushing touchdowns ties with Evan Royster, though it should be noted Thomas had the highest number of carries amongst all tailbacks included in the group of 9, whilst Royster had the fewest.


II. Let me go one step further, for you. I tallied the rushing totals of the teams that those 9 tailbacks played for and subtracted the rookie production so that we can compare how well those rookies did compared with the other backs on their own team.

1. Five of the tailbacks did better than the rest of their team (Evan Royster, DeMarco Murray, Stevan Ridley, Roy Helu and Kendall Hunter, in order), and four of them did worse.
2. The very worst was Mark Ingram whose 3.9 yards per carry on 122 carries does not stand up very well to the 5.35 yards per carry of the likes of Pierre Thomas (110 carries), Darren Sproles (87 carries) and Chris Ivory (79 carries).
3. The second-worst, and only other rookie tailback who rusher who had more than 1.0 yard discrepancy between his running and the running of the rest of his teammates, was Daniel Thomas.
4. Between the two, Mark Ingram did have 5 rushing touchdowns though, while Thomas had zero.


III. Let's look at it from a different angle, using Overall ratings from Pro Football Focus.

1. Amongst the 9 of those tailbacks, Pro Football Focus rated only two of them with negative Overall ratings.
2. The worst was Delone Carter a -4.9 but the second-worst was Daniel Thomas at -3.1.
3. The next worst was Stevan Ridley at a +1.4 rating.


IV. Ok, so you know the Overall ratings, which includes things like pass protection, penalties and pass catching, but what about the Run ratings?

1. Well, out of the 9 tailbacks only three received negative ratings.
2. They ranged from +9.7 (DeMarco Murray) to -7.7 (Daniel Thomas).
3. Only three received negative Run grades, and as alluded to, Daniel Thomas was by a WIDE margin the worst.
4. The next-worst was Delone Carter's -2.4 Run rating.


V. Not a fan of Pro Football Focus' subjective ratings system? That's fine. I can take them or leave them myself, to be honest with you. Let's go with some other raw, OBJECTIVE stats rather than subjective ratings.

1. Let's look at fumbles.
a. Delone Carter had the most fumbles of the group at 3, followed by Daniel Thomas at 2 fumbles.
b. No other back had more than 1 fumble, and two didn't have any.

2. Let's look at missed tackles created (which is to say, how many defenders made physical contact with the ball carrier but missed the tackle as the ball carrier got away clean).
a. The most of the group was by a margin DeMarco Murray at 21 missed tackles created.
b. The next best had 15 missed tackles (Kendall Hunter).
c. The worst was Evan Royster at 8 missed tackles, followed by Daniel Thomas, Mark Ingram and Stevan Ridley all tied at 11 missed tackles.

3. That seems a little unfair to Evan Royster though, as he only had 56 carries to make those 8 tacklers miss. So, you look at Runs-per-Miss. The higher the stat, the worse you are, etc.
a. By a good margin, Daniel Thomas came in highest at 15.0 carries per missed tackle.
b. Next came Roy Helu at 12.6 and Mark Ingram at 11.1.
c. Then you get a nice break until Delone Carter's 8.3 carries per missed tackle created.

4. What about the actual tally of yards after contact?
a. Evan Royster created the most yards after contact per carry, at a 3.4 average.
b. Daniel Thomas created the least yards after contact per carry, at a 1.9 average.
c. Amongst all tailbacks (rookie, non-rookie, etc) that took 25% of their teams offensive snaps, Thomas' 1.9 yard after contact average ranked #62 of 67.


Conclusion. Was the worst rookie? That's up to you to decide. But some folks might like to keep the above in mind before they start trying to make it look 'obvious' that Daniel Thomas was definitely not amongst the worst rookie tailbacks in the league last year, just because of his total rushing yards. He received the most carries of any rookie tailback in the league and amongst the ones given at least 50 carries, seemed the least-deserving of them. Does simply receiving a bunch of carries make him good? Not necessarily. It means the coaches counted on him, which is a good thing. But what he did with those carries is what should be used to determine whether he repaid that trust well or poorly. In this case, he repaid that trust poorly. That is not to say he will never get better. That isn't even to say he won't one day lead the NFL in rushing, even. This is purely about what he was in 2011, not what he will be in the future. I cannot predict the future with 100% accuracy nor can anyone else.

that's interesting but i think it's also a little bit overkill...

no doubt poor pad level was a major factor as to why daniel thomas failed around the goalline...i'm not even gonna try to deny that...but i see arian foster in daniel thomas...just a not as elusive fast or patient one...i wouldn't say fosters pad level is terrific but its better than thomas...hard to believe watching foster now that guy went undrafted

i definitely think this is a better scheme fit for thomas and not so much for reggie bush...

as for daniel thomas and the hammy thing last year i definitely think it carries weight and effected his season production wise...i mean good lord the guy missed the combine and couldn't work out with the injury til just predraft ran his 40 and did his workout at like 75 percent as i recall and then sat a lot in training camp and preseason nursing that same hammy issue...effected his game week prep also...

we'll see what happens but the kid needs to come to camp and stay healthy or he's gonna be labeled here pretty soon...

 

[hoops]

He WAS an option quarterback in high school, so that makes some sense... regardless, I still say Thomas has a future with Miami. Honestly, I've always been a Lamar Miller fan. I watched that Miami vs. VT game where he just took over. Ripped through arm tackles, showed elite burst, and ran with real solid ball control when he was cutting through the tackles.

Lamar Miller saved the draft for me after we drafted Michael Egnew.

i take it you're not a michael egnew guy...me either...

 

[phintim]

Daniel Thomas injuries are starting to be somewhat of a trend, and I somehow see that trend continuing next season. I know this may sound crazy but I see him as a Lamar Smith type of running back.

I just do not know how you can say that especially when he played with through the injury anyway. Also (I have not counted them) but DT from what I watched was not asked to get fluff yardage last year. When they wanted to run the clock out or punch the ball in they took Bush out especially early in the year and brought DT in. Granted he was poor at getting it done too but lots of his running he was asked to do was not the style he was used to in college. Regardless before we start seeing a trend give it some time to see if there is really a trend again one of his positive traits from college was not getting injured or playing injured which he did do last year escpecially compared to the 4 backs drafted in front of him except Ingram whose stregths coming out of college was running between the tackles. If I remember right also Ingram plaing time came more at the end of the season than at the beginning of the season like Thomas if that was the case Ingram had more time to prepare to play in the NFL where DT was asked to carry the load early got beat us and paid the price. Regardless that excuse will go out the window this year with a full training camp so we will see the full story on DT barring a MAJOR injury.

 

[Coach_Rob]

The thing about Daniel Thomas' hamstring injuries is to me they sound like an excuse. I can literally sit here and list for you about 200+ different players who appeared on the NFL injury list in 2011 as having missed practice time because an injury described as a 'hamistring'. And that's just a fraction of the overall list. Players in this league play hurt. Everyone's dealing with something. You have to produce anyway. How many times have we heard veterans across the sport say that? How many times have we heard veterans across multiple sports say that? It's not like I'm sitting here on my high horse having never played NFL football and telling some guy with a painful hamstring injury he should suck it up. I'm merely repeating the words of the men who have defined the sport.

That's just my two cents. I think that if Daniel is waiting for that perfect season where he's never dealing with injuries so that he can go out there and run decently, he's going to be disappointed, because it's always going to be something. And a few times I heard hints and whispers from people on the team that they didn't like how serious Daniel seemed about taking care of his body and rehabbing correctly.

obviously youve never played. hamstring injuries dont go away in a week. they take time to heal and are easily reinjured without the proper rest, which dt wasnt given

 

[ckparrothead]

Fair enough. In that case, an internal controversy between players could be much worse than a media portrayed controversy. It's certainly going to be interesting to see who ends up winning the spot. The last thing we need is for Moore to win the spot and have a butt hurt Ocho lobbying for Garrard after every int.

My honest opinion, and this is just an opinion, is that if Garrard wins the job then Matt Moore will not be happy about it and he might let his displeasure be known. He might be a distraction. He may even request a trade.

He's been waiting a while for the opportunity he had last year and from his perspective, after the first 3.5 games of suckitude which I'm sure he justifies to himself as reasonable because he was just trying to get used to the system and his players, he hit it out of the park over the last 9 games with 61% completion, 7.7 YPA, 15 TDs and 5 INTs with a 6-3 record and a 97.8 passer rating. He'd probably prefer you not think about the 136 sack yards he lost over that period, or his 10 fumbles, of course. He's 28 years old, in the prime of his career, and the clock is really ticking for him. Losing this competition and sitting third seat to Tannehill since they may want to get the young stud the primary backup's snaps, could be catastrophic to Moore's career.

Garrard on the other hand doesn't have much career left. If he loses, he loses. He seems very mature about it and the bottom line is his losing this competition isn't going to affect the next 7 years of his potential career, unlike Moore. It'll just affect the next 1 or 2 years he has remaining to him.

---------- Post added at 01:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:29 PM ----------

obviously youve never played. hamstring injuries dont go away in a week. they take time to heal and are easily reinjured without the proper rest, which dt wasnt given

Obviously you've never spoken to NFL veterans about injuries.