Week 8 Random NFL Musings, and why NFL RB's are all the same

[Warner2BruceTD]

Except for the drop in rushing, receiving, scoring, and efficiency...Bell and Thomas are equals.

Again, Bell averages over 5.0 p/c when he starts (2 games). He had a 143 yard game & an 86 yard game.

Thomas has 4 starts, with one 100+ yard game. He has a whopping 6 receptions, so i'm not sure where that great edge in receiving comes into play.

For the year:

Bell - 343 yards, 2 TD's, 85 ypg
Thomas - 314, 3 TD's, 63 ypg

Thomas played mimimally in one game while hurt, which drops his ypg, so that stat iosnt really fair, but please show me where you see this significant drop in production from Thomas to Bell. It isnt there.

 

[Senser81]

Again, Bell averages over 5.0 p/c when he starts (2 games). He had a 143 yard game & an 86 yard game.

Thomas has 4 starts, with one 100+ yard game. He has a whopping 6 receptions, so i'm not sure where that great edge in receiving comes into play.

For the year:

Bell - 343 yards, 2 TD's, 85 ypg
Thomas - 314, 3 TD's, 63 ypg

Thomas played mimimally in one game while hurt, which drops his ypg, so that stat iosnt really fair, but please show me where you see this significant drop in production from Thomas to Bell. It isnt there.

I already did. See post #15. TY

 

[Senser81]

I'm not talking about Peterson's and Jackson's. I'm talking about Derrick Wards and Pierre Thomas's and Ryan Grant's and Matt Forte's and Willie Parker's and Darren McFadden's....

If you can't see a difference between Matt Forte and Darren McFadden, then God help you.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

If you can't see a difference between Matt Forte and Darren McFadden, then God help you.

Deviating from the basic point.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

I already did. See post #15. TY

Mike Bell's mop up work last year is irrelevent to the debate.

Is that a ghost behind Yogi in that pic?

 

[Senser81]

Mike Bell's mop up work last year is irrelevent to the debate.

Is that a ghost behind Yogi in that pic?

Yes, its a pre-steroid Roger Clemens.

This RB debate reminds me of a Football Outsiders article from a few years ago. The conclusion was that the Saints woefully overpaid for Deuce McCallister, because if a $500k RB could gain 800 yards in a season, then it made no sense for to pay Deuce $2 million for 1300 yards of rushing (I'm paraphrasing). My response was, by that logic, EVERY elite player in the NFL is overpaid. You have to understand that the differences in performances aren't linear. I would say that Pierre Thomas' performances have been superior to Mike Bell, because he catches the ball more and has more power between the tackles. You don't think the statistical differences are significant...I do.

 

[wr50l]

Peterson, as great of a breakaway threat as he is, is not a great pass catcher, has an elite backup to spell him (Chester Taylor), and fumbles on an almost weekly basis.

Peterson has 19 catches, 189 yards and a long of 44. Jackson has 24 catches, 186 yards and a long of 39. Peterson isn't a great catcher or route runner but with the ball is just as dangerous as he ever is. This isn't me putting him on Jackson's level as a route runner and pass catcher though, just pointing out that he's doing a sufficient job.

Chester Taylor barely gets a touch on any down except 3rd and long.

Peterson this season has 2 fumbles, as does Jackson. Jackson has had 2 more attempts. I still shit myself every time he touches the ball however.

I really like Jackson but find this a bit ridiculous. Peterson can go through linebackers and around DBs. He has an unmatched combination of speed, agility, power and running vision right now. He proved last year and the year prior without the passing game how good he is.

 

[Senser81]

For his career, Peterson averages over 100 yards rushing per game.

Jackson has never had a season in which he averaged over 100 yards rushing per game.

Sorry, but comparing Jackson to Peterson is like comparing Matt Forte to Walter Payton.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

Yes, its a pre-steroid Roger Clemens.

This RB debate reminds me of a Football Outsiders article from a few years ago. The conclusion was that the Saints woefully overpaid for Deuce McCallister, because if a $500k RB could gain 800 yards in a season, then it made no sense for to pay Deuce $2 million for 1300 yards of rushing (I'm paraphrasing). My response was, by that logic, EVERY elite player in the NFL is overpaid. You have to understand that the differences in performances aren't linear. I would say that Pierre Thomas' performances have been superior to Mike Bell, because he catches the ball more and has more power between the tackles. You don't think the statistical differences are significant...I do.

The last thing I would want to be accused of, is being on the FO side of any argument.

But yeah, again, i'm not saying Bell is better than Thomas (insert just abount any starter and his backup here), or that he even produces better. It's just amazing sometimes how you see such little dropoff, at least in raw numbers.

A better question might be this: Are there less quality starting RB's in the league right now than other times, or are the backups that much better than they've ever been?

I think everyone would agree there is a definate lack of quality QB's. Is the same true for RB's? And If the talent pool is diluted for RB's, wouldnt this affect the backups as well?

IMO less guys stand out above the pack than in the past. Maybe it's fuzzy memories, but I cant recall backups stepping in and producing at similar levels to the starters at such a high rate.

 

[Senser81]

A better question might be this: Are there less quality starting RB's in the league right now than other times, or are the backups that much better than they've ever been?

I honestly think its because the backups are that much better. Last year, teams like Carolina and Miami succeeded with 2 RBs and minimal output from their QB position.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

For his career, Peterson averages over 100 yards rushing per game.

Jackson has never had a season in which he averaged over 100 yards rushing per game.

Sorry, but comparing Jackson to Peterson is like comparing Matt Forte to Walter Payton.

In one thread, you've managed to not only throw Matt Forte under the bus, but also back it over him before pulling off.

As far as Jackson/Peterson, you can't ignore Jackson's receiving. Again, he leads the NFL in yards from scrimmage per game over the last 4 years.

He also dosent run behind Steve Hutchinson (ask Shaun Alexander about that), and has built whatever resume he has on what could be reasonably argued as the worst team of all time (the 07-09 Linehan/Spags Rams).

I take no issue if someone prefers Peterson, but your analogy is obviously wacky.

 

[theMINI]

I agree with all of this.

The crux of my argument is that the league lacks a large number of "Good RB's."

To me, a vast majority of them are essentially the same. Different skill sets, but at the end of the day, you'd get similar production, because production is dictated by situation unless you are elite.

I agree.

 

[theMINI]

Geez senser... Warner made his basic point. What point are you trying to make?

 

[Senser81]

In one thread, you've managed to not only throw Matt Forte under the bus, but also back it over him before pulling off.

Huh? Payton > Forte, Forte > McFadden. I thought this was common sense.

As far as Jackson/Peterson, you can't ignore Jackson's receiving. Again, he leads the NFL in yards from scrimmage per game over the last 4 years.

I am ignoring Jackson's receiving. He catches about 40 passes a year, for about 7 -8 yards per reception. He had one aberration in 2006 when he caught 90 passes! Weird how a guy could have a progression of 19-43-90-38-40-48 (pace) in receptions...perhaps that 90 receptions wasn't an accurate reflection of Jackson's skill...it was moreso a reflection of the Rams dumping him the ball more?

Peterson has more yards per scrimmage than Jackson every year he's played (the past 3 years), and he has more receiving yards than Jackson this year! DOH!

 

[theMINI]

What's your point Senser?

 

[Senser81]

Geez senser... Warner made his basic point. What point are you trying to make?

That you can't just plug in anyone at RB and get the same production.

UHHHHHHHH................

 

[theMINI]

Obviously the production might drop a little but I think Warner is trying to argue that the difference is so slight that it really doesn't matter that much. You can basically just plug and play anyone and get the same kind of production (unless they are elite RBs).

You can keep arguing about different RBs and differences in production if you want.. go for it.

 

[theMINI]

Warner: You can plug and play anyone with no drop in production.
Senser: You can't plug and play anyone without a drop in production.

I think reality reflects more the middle ground: You can plug and play anyone and expect only a minimal drop in production.

Of course, this doesn't apply to the elite RBs.

 

[Senser81]

Obviously the production might drop a little but I think Warner is trying to argue that the difference is so slight that it really doesn't matter that much. You can basically just plug and play anyone and get the same kind of production (unless they are elite RBs).

You can keep arguing about different RBs and differences in production if you want.. go for it.

And I am trying to argue that these alleged "slight differences" are what separate RBs from each other. For instance, Pierre Thomas' 54 receptions and 17 TDs might only be slightly better than Mike Bell's 2 receptions and 3 TDs, but it is a difference nonetheless.

ROLLEYES!

:bike:

 

[theMINI]

And I am trying to argue that these alleged "slight differences" are what separate RBs from each other. For instance, Pierre Thomas' 54 receptions and 17 TDs might only be slightly better than Mike Bell's 2 receptions and 3 TDs, but it is a difference nonetheless.

ROLLEYES!

:bike:

Pierre Thomas also played more and has had more opportunities.

Warner would argue that we can't tell for certain but if Bell's and Thomas' role would have been exchanged (Bell in Thomas' shoes and Thomas was in Bell's shoes) then Bell would be the one with 50+ receptions and Thomas would only have 2 or 3...