NFL 2013 Week 2 - Week 3: Running Back Graveyard

[Maithanet]

Meanwhile, the Browns aren't going anywhere without a QB. Now they have an extra draft 1st-round pick to either trade up or trade down.

Agreed on this. The Browns are being realistic in accepting that their chances of passing either the Bengals or the Ravens this year is very very low. Having an extra first round pick can really help you make an aggressive move to get the guy you need. The problem is that there's no guarantee that there will be a solid #2 prospect available in the draft, and Jacksonville looks to have the #1 pick on lockdown.

HOWEVER, that doesn't change the fact that Richardson is a valuable young player for the franchise, and you don't just trade those away even if you're tanking. I'm sure that teams would be happy to give up a 2nd round pick for Haden or Thomas, but the Browns would destroy themselves if they start having a fire sale.

It's tough to say whether Richardson is worth the #15-25 pick that the Colts just gave up to get him. Coming out of college, that would have seemed like a steal, but thus far he has failed to live up to his billing. We'll see if he can stay healthy and be effective in Indy. But the Colts did not get "fleeced". They're gambling. A lot of people said that Richardson would be the best rb in the league in a couple of years. He could still do that, although it looks less likely now than when he was drafted. But if he does (or even is just a top 3 back, with productivity like MJD or Ray Rice for 6 years), the Colts got a bargain.

[Jace, Extat]

Agreed on this. The Browns are being realistic in accepting that their chances of passing either the Bengals or the Ravens this year is very very low. Having an extra first round pick can really help you make an aggressive move to get the guy you need. The problem is that there's no guarantee that there will be a solid #2 prospect available in the draft, and Jacksonville looks to have the #1 pick on lockdown.

HOWEVER, that doesn't change the fact that Richardson is a valuable young player for the franchise, and you don't just trade those away even if you're tanking. I'm sure that teams would be happy to give up a 2nd round pick for Haden or Thomas, but the Browns would destroy themselves if they start having a fire sale.

It's tough to say whether Richardson is worth the #15-25 pick that the Colts just gave up to get him. Coming out of college, that would have seemed like a steal, but thus far he has failed to live up to his billing. We'll see if he can stay healthy and be effective in Indy. But the Colts did not get "fleeced". They're gambling. A lot of people said that Richardson would be the best rb in the league in a couple of years. He could still do that, although it looks less likely now than when he was drafted. But if he does (or even is just a top 3 back, with productivity like MJD or Ray Rice for 6 years), the Colts got a bargain.

Haha! Even a Washington fan agrees (for the most part). When's the last time a Colts and Washington fan agreed on anything besides the fact that WE got the better QB? :leaving:

[Independent George]

But the difference between what the Richardson and what the Browns could get with, say, the 24th pick in the draft, versus Thomas/Haden and the 24th pick, is much smaller. Even if Richardson turns into an all-pro in Indy, that's not as valuable as shoring up their defense and picking up a Kevin Faulk-type in the 3rd round.

To me, when you have a franchise QB like Indy does, a RB's roles in descending order of importance are:

1. Blitz pickup
   
2. Draw plays
   
3. Outlet passes in the flat
   

If your QB's good enough, the money a franchise RB costs is better spent elsewhere. If your QB's not good enough, the RB isn't going to matter anyway.

[Jaxom 1974]

:leer:

Wait, wait, wait... People buy Browns season tickets?

For what it's worth, watching Browns football helps the people of Cleveland forget that they're in CLEVELAND... :P

[Littlefingers In The Air]

For what it's worth, watching Browns football helps the people of Cleveland forget that they're in CLEVELAND... :P

It can't help me forget about Akron though :-(

[Jaime L]

Haha! Even a Washington fan agrees (for the most part). When's the last time a Colts and Washington fan agreed on anything besides the fact that WE got the better QB? :leaving:

First of all, you clearly missed my post on the subject.

Second, only one of our two franchise QBs isn't required to wear a helmet long after he leaves the stadium.

But the difference between what the Richardson and what the Browns could get with, say, the 24th pick in the draft, versus Thomas/Haden and the 24th pick, is much smaller. Even if Richardson turns into an all-pro in Indy, that's not as valuable as shoring up their defense and picking up a Kevin Faulk-type in the 3rd round.

To me, when you have a franchise QB like Indy does, a RB's roles in descending order of importance are:

1. Blitz pickup
   
   
2. Draw plays
   
   
3. Outlet passes in the flat
   

If your QB's good enough, the money a franchise RB costs is better spent elsewhere. If your QB's not good enough, the RB isn't going to matter anyway.

I think this overstates the case. Even the upper tier of franchise QBs, which Luck isn't even in yet, benefits greatly from a strong running game. There's a reason both NE and GB, the two biggest "we can pass all the time with impunity" franchises, in recent years invested 2nd and 3rd round picks for the former, 2nd and 4th round picks for the latter on RBs. I think they've come to the conclusion that against the elite defenses they'll face in the playoffs, in the cold, in the bad weather they need that balance to reasonably threaten the defense to keep them from treating their running games with disdain and loading up 100% against that passing game. Even the best QBs get beat when defenses can focus exclusively on them.

People forget this but the only time Peyton Manning ever won a Superbowl was when his running game caught fire and started churning out 200 yard games in the playoffs. The running game is frequently the difference maker and has been for Manning, Brees and Brady. I know RB is only one part of the equation but you can say that about any position except QB.

[sperry]

Agreed on this. The Browns are being realistic in accepting that their chances of passing either the Bengals or the Ravens this year is very very low. Having an extra first round pick can really help you make an aggressive move to get the guy you need. The problem is that there's no guarantee that there will be a solid #2 prospect available in the draft, and Jacksonville looks to have the #1 pick on lockdown.

HOWEVER, that doesn't change the fact that Richardson is a valuable young player for the franchise, and you don't just trade those away even if you're tanking. I'm sure that teams would be happy to give up a 2nd round pick for Haden or Thomas, but the Browns would destroy themselves if they start having a fire sale.

It's tough to say whether Richardson is worth the #15-25 pick that the Colts just gave up to get him. Coming out of college, that would have seemed like a steal, but thus far he has failed to live up to his billing. We'll see if he can stay healthy and be effective in Indy. But the Colts did not get "fleeced". They're gambling. A lot of people said that Richardson would be the best rb in the league in a couple of years. He could still do that, although it looks less likely now than when he was drafted. But if he does (or even is just a top 3 back, with productivity like MJD or Ray Rice for 6 years), the Colts got a bargain.

Do we know it's a 15-25 pick? I think making assumptions that the Colts are going to be good is a little iffy. They needed a come from behind victory to beat the Raiders at home, and they just lost to the Dolphins. Outside of the two auto wins against the Jags, they play one of the toughest schedules in football. They're matched up with the best divsion in the NFC and probably the best division in the AFC for their non-con matchups. They even drew @ Cinci as one of their two grab bag games. They look like a sub .500 team to me, even with Trent Richardson.

[Nights Watchman Cometh]

LeSean McCoy, Stephen Jackson, LaDainian Tomlinson

Add Frank Gore . He's a 1000yd plus back.

[Independent George]

Even the upper tier of franchise QBs, which Luck isn't even in yet, benefits greatly from a strong running game. There's a reason both NE and GB, the two biggest "we can pass all the time with impunity" franchises, in recent years invested 2nd and 3rd round picks for the former, 2nd and 4th round picks for the latter on RBs. I think they've come to the conclusion that against the elite defenses they'll face in the playoffs, in the cold, in the bad weather they need that balance to reasonably threaten the defense to keep them from treating their running games with disdain and loading up 100% against that passing game. Even the best QBs get beat when defenses can focus exclusively on them.

This is true, but I'd add the following:

1. Those are late 2nd & 3rd round picks, which is vastly different from mid-late 1st round pick. To use your own examples, Lacy was the 61st overall pick, Vereen the 56th, Ridley the 73rd. That's a big difference from the 25th overall pick, and a huge difference from the 15th.

2. New England had two picks each in the 2nd and 3rd round when they took Vereen and Ridley.

3. They are tasked with being 'good enough' backs: sell play action, catch short passes, don't let their very expensive QBs get hit, and grind clock in the 5-minute drill. In other words, more Kevin Faulk than Adrian Peterson.

4. James Ingram's primary effect on the Saints is to bog down the offense and steal carries from the much more efficient, undrafted Pierre Thomas.

5. Here's a list of RBs taken the first round since 2004 (10 years). Even the good backs in that list were largely a mistake for the teams that took them. Peterson is the only one I can say was worth the pick, and even then, the Gabbert experience is effectively squandering his prime.

I think the main reason the trade is getting so much attention is that Richardson was taken #3 overall just a year ago; if you ignore that (and you should), the Colts just traded away a mid-late 1st round pick for a talented RB who will improve their team marginally while ignoring the gaping holes on the defense.

Richardson seems like a talented back, but I just don't see him as the 'missing piece' for the Colts or the Browns. He will probably be productive, but he's not going to make the Colts into a Super Bowl contender, and the Browns won't be competitive anyway until they get a real QB.

The 1st round pick increases the probability of resolving the Browns' biggest hole far more than it resolves the Colts' biggest hole.

People forget this but the only time Peyton Manning ever won a Superbowl was when his running game caught fire and started churning out 200 yard games in the playoffs. The running game is frequently the difference maker and has been for Manning, Brees and Brady. I know RB is only one part of the equation but you can say that about any position except QB.

And the RBS who 'caught fire' were... Dominic Rhodes and Joseph Addai. This was the year after they'd released perennial Pro-Bowler Edgerrin James (whose signing made Arizona the offseason Champions, yet ended up being who we thought they were).

I also think you're forgetting that the more pertinent fact was that this was also the year in which the Colts defense suddenly stopped allowing the opposing team to churn out 200-yard games. In the regular season, the defense gave up an average of 173 yards/game (including an astounding 375 vs Jacksonville in week 14); in the playoffs, they cut that in half to 83.

[Maithanet]

I think the main reason the trade is getting so much attention is that Richardson was taken #3 overall just a year ago; if you ignore that (and you should), the Colts just traded away a mid-late 1st round pick for a talented RB who will improve their team marginally while ignoring the gaping holes on the defense.

Why should we forget that? Richardson isn't "just another guy", he was the most touted running back prospect since AP. The Colts are betting that it was the lack of a quarterback threat that was the big problem for Richardson in Cleveland, and that he develops into a top 5 guy. If Richardson is only an average back, then this was a huge waste of a pick. Even if Richardson is the 10th best runner in the league for the next eight or so years, that still isn't worth it. But if he's a genuine top 5 back for much of his career, then this is a very good trade. The Colts still see that kind of quality in him. Only time will tell whether they were right.

[Bronn Stone]

Even if Richardson is the 10th best runner in the league for the next eight or so years, that still isn't worth it.

Disagree. That is good enough for this deal. An eight year back is great use of a latter-half of the first round pick. And even better if it is a future pick - a pick that would do nothing this year otherwise. And a pick that history says is almost 50% likely to be a flop.

Richardson is also a great fit for the style the Colts want to play. Big power back with speed is not an easy slot to fill. They aren't the guys you find in rounds 2-4.

[Ferrum Aeternum]

Richardson is also a great receiver. I think the Colts envision him becoming Ray Rice 2.0, and given his skill set I can see it happening.

[Howdyphillip]

5. Here's a list of RBs taken the first round since 2004 (10 years).

The majority of names on that list was a solid and productive player. When you compare that to a list of first round busts in the last ten years, this is a gold mine.

In my opinion, a proven commodity in the NFL is worth a first round pick any day of the week regardless of position. As long as the Colts draft out of the top ten, they got the better end of this deal.

[Maithanet]

Disagree. That is good enough for this deal. An eight year back is great use of a latter-half of the first round pick. And even better if it is a future pick - a pick that would do nothing this year otherwise. And a pick that history says is almost 50% likely to be a flop.

It's just that finding a running back who can be "average" has never been that hard. And if you have a good quarterback and a good O line, it gets much easier still. How much better is the 10th best running back going to be than the 30th? Not all that much, and a lot of guys in the top 10 were late round/undrafted anyway.

Richardson is also a great fit for the style the Colts want to play. Big power back with speed is not an easy slot to fill. They aren't the guys you find in rounds 2-4.

You mean like Arian Foster? :P

In my opinion, a proven commodity in the NFL is worth a first round pick any day of the week regardless of position. As long as the Colts draft out of the top ten, they got the better end of this deal.

What do you mean by proven? He has proven to be no better than average thus far, and there usually isn't much of a learning curve for running backs, aside from pass protection. Doug Martin and Alfred Morris were both picked well after him and have been MUCH more productive so far. Bernard Pierce is averaging 1.2 ypc higher than Richardson. If he can't "prove" himself beyond what he's already done, he'll be out of a job in a couple of years.

[Rhom]

I have not read the entire thread since the travesty of the Richardson trade, so forgive me if I'm repeating something...

But I think it bears pointing out that for Richardson's one year in the league, the Browns have never been a threat to throw the ball. Defenses have been able to stack the line and prevent the run with no fear of retribution from Whedon and the receiving core.

In Indy, sure the line is still weak at best; but defenses have already learned to respect Andrew Luck. Richardson will be played more honestly and will have a chance to run against teams that are having to drop defenders back.

I think its a great move for the Colts. And while its admittedly a slap in the face to Browns fans, I can at least see what they are hoping to do with the situation.

[Independent George]

The majority of names on that list was a solid and productive player. When you compare that to a list of first round busts in the last ten years, this is a gold mine.

Only until you compare them to the list of RBs taken in the 2nd-4th round over the same time period. More than any other position, quality RBs can be found throughout the draft, every year.

The point is, if all you're looking for are 'solid and productive' RBs, you can find that in rounds 2-4. Especially when you consider how much of that 1st-round production comes down to 'keep giving him carries because we drafted him in the 1st need to keep him on the roster'.

There are two reasons to take a 1st round RB:

1. He's a game-changing talent destined for multiple All-Pro honors.

2. You're already a deep team, and need one more piece of the puzzle to put you over the edge.

#2 does not apply to the 2013 Colts; #1 remains to be seen.

To me, the problem for Browns fans shouldn't be that they traded Richardson; it should be that last year they took him #3 overall, then immediately panicked and took Weeden to cover the fact that they lowballed the Rams and missed out on RG3.

The Browns could (and, let's be honest, probably will) blow the new draft pick anyway, but it's still the right decision.

[Jaime L]

3. They are tasked with being 'good enough' backs: sell play action, catch short passes, don't let their very expensive QBs get hit, and grind clock in the 5-minute drill. In other words, more Kevin Faulk than Adrian Peterson

The counter-example, a team that followed your "Kevin Faulk" strategy, was the Broncos this past year. With their late first round pick last year the Broncos could've taken Doug Martin, a guy they were linked to in a lot of the mock drafts. Instead they decided DT was the biggest need so with their first pick they took Derek Wolfe and circled back in the third round for Ronnie Hillman, who coincidentally became the workhorse back during their playoff game against the Ravens.

There is zero question in my mind that if Martin played that game instead of Hillman, the Broncos win the game and the Ravens aren't our defending Superbowl champs. The right RB matters.

4. James Ingram's primary effect on the Saints is to bog down the offense and steal carries from the much more efficient, undrafted Pierre Thomas.

They clearly picked the wrong guy. But New Orleans is well aware that one of the biggest differences between the team that won the title and those that have followed is run game. It was best in the league, now it's among the worst.. It's why they used a first round pick even though they had Thomas and Sproles.

5. Here's a list of RBs taken the first round since 2004 (10 years). Even the good backs in that list were largely a mistake for the teams that took them. Peterson is the only one I can say was worth the pick, and even then, the Gabbert experience is effectively squandering his prime.

Keep in mind, I'm not advocating taking any RB in round one. Just the special ones. Cedric Benson and Knowshon Moreno looked like huge reaches even at the time. Mark Ingram got way too much hype from the Heisman (even back then people were saying TR was the far superior talent).

I'd be leery of taking a RB top 15 unless I have strong reason to believe he will be special. Good college stats or a versatile skillset aren't enough. He needs to be freakish in some very visible way.

And the RBS who 'caught fire' were... Dominic Rhodes and Joseph Addai. This was the year after they'd released perennial Pro-Bowler Edgerrin James (whose signing made Arizona the offseason Champions, yet ended up being who we thought they were).

Joseph Addai, the first round pick who was drafted to replace an Edgerrin James everyone but the Cardinals agreed had no tread left on the tires.

(But I do have to give you bonus points for fitting a Denny Green reference into the very season he flipped out. That is well played, sir)

I also think you're forgetting that the more pertinent fact was that this was also the year in which the Colts defense suddenly stopped allowing the opposing team to churn out 200-yard games. In the regular season, the defense gave up an average of 173 yards/game (including an astounding 375 vs Jacksonville in week 14); in the playoffs, they cut that in half to 83.

Absolutely. You're pointing to an even bigger factor. And yet don't you think a Colts team that was controlling the ball and time of possession through the running game also was a huge aid to the defense? There's a symbiotic relationship at work here. It's not just the Colts either. I don't think it's just coincidence that the Packers, Patriots and Saints all have seen huge regressions in overall defense in the seasons when they're the most one dimensional on offense. There's other factors at play, sure, but I'd be willing to bet there's a statistically significant relationship between a team's effectiveness running the ball and its effect on that team's defense.

ETA: Just saw your last post and looks like we're closer to being of the same mind on this than I thought.

[Howdyphillip]

Only until you compare them to the list of RBs taken in the 2nd-4th round over the same time period. More than any other position, quality RBs can be found throughout the draft, every year.

The point is, if all you're looking for are 'solid and productive' RBs, you can find that in rounds 2-4. Especially when you consider how much of that 1st-round production comes down to 'keep giving him carries because we drafted him in the 1st need to keep him on the roster'.

There are two reasons to take a 1st round RB:

1. He's a game-changing talent destined for multiple All-Pro honors.

2. You're already a deep team, and need one more piece of the puzzle to put you over the edge.

#2 does not apply to the 2013 Colts; #1 remains to be seen.

To me, the problem for Browns fans shouldn't be that they traded Richardson; it should be that last year they took him #3 overall, then immediately panicked and took Weeden to cover the fact that they lowballed the Rams and missed out on RG3.

The Browns could (and, let's be honest, probably will) blow the new draft pick anyway, but it's still the right decision.

Even using your own list as an example, there are far more running back busts in the 2nd and 3rd round than in the first. There are great individual names there, but overall, it is not nearly as productive as a set of players.

Trent Richardson is not a gamble. Even if he is just a slightly better than average RB, he is worth a prospect. It could get monumentally ugly for the Browns if he starts living up to the hype at where he was drafted

[Independent George]

Reading my own posts over again, I clearly overstated things when I said the Browns had fleeced the Colts. I think it's more accurate to say the following:

From the Colts Perspective

1. Richardson is definitely better than Goddammit Donald, so they are improved by the trade.

2. Nevertheless, unless Richardson is a Peterson-level talent, it's a reach for a 1st round pick

3. The smarter strategy would have been to take a serviceable RB later in the draft, and use the 1st rounder to shore up their many other holes

4. If the Colts wanted to shore up the offense (a perfectly legitimate objective), they would have been better off searching for either Reggie Wayne's successor or an above-average lineman instead of a stud RB. An above-average RB + (good WR or good lineman) > Pro Bowl RB.

5. The reason I don't like the trade for the Colts is due to the opportunity cost of that 1st round pick.

From the Browns perspective

1. The Browns are paying for their decision to lowball the Rams last year. For a team bad enough to have the #3 pick, Richardson was a reach at best, and Weeden was a panic move to placate fans rightfully angry at losing out on RG3.

2. Richardson being taken at #3 is irrelevant to the trade. It's a sunk cost that has no bearing on the future of the team.

3. As long as the Browns don't have a QB, their upper limit with Richardson, Thomas, Haydon, & co. is the Minnesota Vikings - 10 wins and a 1st-round playoff exit against a soft schedule, 7-9 against a tough schedule. Just being close enough to tantalize you into believing success is right around the corner.

4. The Browns are in a catch-22 with Richardson: he is only valuable to the Browns if they hit the QB jackpot in 2014 or 2015, but the extra 1st rounder increases chance of of hitting the QB jackpot in 2014 or 2015.

5. They made the right decision even if they totally blow the draft again and have to blow up the team in 2016. Unlike before, though, the new CBA means that another Tim Couch won't cripple them.

I know how it looks for a Browns fan. I understand the the skepticism of yet another rebuilding project. But it had to be done. And even if they blow the execution with that extra pick, the process is right.

[trickster]

A RB who can get a few tough yards in playoff game is very important. The Colts lost a few playoff games that were eminently winnable if they could pick a couple of tough 1st downs.

In 2010 against the Jets (the last game Manning played for the Colts), the Colts had to settle for a FG when the offense failed to covert a third and 5. So they kicked a 50 Yd field goal and gave the ball back to the Jets with about a minute and 7 ticks left up by 2 . (Never mind the ensuing 47 yds punt return and the Caldwell timeout fiasco etc.) Manning could not connect to Blair White (was a catchable ball ). One more first down or a more run oriented last drive would have won the game.

In 2009 against SD, the non existent running game resulted in a 4th Q shut out and an overtime loss.

Jaime's point about last year's playoff game between Broncos and Ravens is spot on.

A RB who could get 3.5 YPC to give us short 2nd/third down would have been great to have. I'm not asking for AP, a RB who can grind out tough 3, 4 yards in the playoffs. In January/February in the outdoors, it is great if the passing game can get supported by (semi)dependable running game. So yeah, as a Colts fan I am happy.