Originally posted by ckparrothead
Saintsalive, you are correct. Coaches all would like a back that can carry the load with 30+ carries, stay healthy, and still break off homeruns in his first 10 carries of the game. But I guess they can't ALL be Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, etc.
As I said before I wouldn't put too much stock in a yardage or ypc comparison. Every team is different and every week is different. I will merely say this...
1. Deuce getting 31 carries in a game is not something that should be strived for...and even if Brooks DID have a good game, the offensive coordinator still felt that the best way to win the game was to take the game out of Brooks' hands and put the hands of a runningback that the head coach very loudly proclaimed should be able to do his damage in 20-25 touches a game. If you're averaging 25-30+ carries a game, would you rather have Ricky or Deuce?
I must say, I dont understand the criticism that its somehow a bad thing that Deuce carried the ball 31 times. I doubt he will do that a lot, but its sure nice to know he can. FWIW, he got a few extra carries in OT, and also got some extra work b/c of terrible field position - several times in the 2nd half Deuce was called on to get us from outside the shadow of the goalline just to get the punter some breathing room.
Anyway, I'd rather have Deuce, based on what I've seen, because he can do more than ricky, and he doesnt have a major fumbling problem (my biggest beef w/Ricky). Of course, Decue is an unknown still, he's only started one game, so there's no reason for anyone to choose him over Ricky. At least anyone that is not among those that have seen them both side by side -- our coachng staff.
2. The obvious answer to that is Ricky. But that does not make the trade a bad move on the Saints part (or the Phins...) Why? Because what a LOT of Saints fans seem to forget is that the price of getting Jim Haslett to part ways with Ricky Williams, was NOT ZERO. It was 1st and 2nd round picks! This is a rather steep price, and if we did not pay it, they would not have done it. SO basically the Saints said it is only worth it to dump Ricky and feature Deuce, if they can get 1st and 2nd round picks in exchange.
as I said above, I would take Deuce, but he's basically a rookie, so its a risk, an unknown. Ricky is an established back, and a very good one.
But, I think this trade will work out very well for both sides. I like Deuce, obviously, plus Grant looks like he can be a good player in the NFL, and I expect to get that 1st rounder next year. Which is really the point, from the Saints side -- even if Ricky puts up better numbers, if Deuce does well, and we get 2 other starters out of the deal, how is that not a great deal?
On the flip side, the Dolphins got what they've wanted for forever, so everyone wins. Ricky will be a Top 5 rusher for the Fins, I think.
3. Though I'm the first to say don't compare the damage the two did against their respective oppositions, some of ya'll are taking this Detroit vs Tampa defense thing WAY too seriously. If someone could please find individual defense stats from 2001 that would help. All I can find is Total D but lets put it this way. Last year Tampa's D averaged 290 yards let up. Detroit's D averaged 350 yards let up. An average of 60 yards per game. And I know that most of those 60 yards per game were passing yards per game. So if you ARE going to delve into a comparison of Deuce vs Tampa against Ricky vs Detroit, please do keep in mind that the difference in rush D between the two teams is not THAT INCREDIBLY BIG, that Ricky did an average job while Deuce did a superb job....
rush defense -- 2001
TB gave up 8 rushing TDs, Detroit gave up 15.
TB allowed 106 ypg, Det gave up 125 ypg.
TB gve up 9 plays of 20+ yards, Det. gave up 15.
They are much worse at run defense than the Bucs, but its a new year. Maybe the Bucs d will continue to get gashed (I certainly hope so!).
