PFF Analysis Notebook: Trent Richardson.

[Mr.Debonair]

The way the Packers use Lacy is the way we should try to get Richardson going. I think he will benefit a lot if we do

[Gavin]

The way the Packers use Lacy is the way we should try to get Richardson going. I think he will benefit a lot if we do

we have tried alot of things to get him going,, he was doing alright vs the Broncos until  he fumbled(he was gainging 4 yards per carry pretty regularly or more) so the staff loss some confidence in him, on top of that we ended up throwing it quite a bit in the 4th cause the game was much closer towards the end

[Mr.Debonair]

we have tried alot of things to get him going,, he was doing alright vs the Broncos until he fumbled(he was gainging 4 yards per carry pretty regularly or more) so the staff loss some confidence in him, on top of that we ended up throwing it quite a bit in the 4th cause the game was much closer towards the end

That fumble was huge man. I still have faith that he will continue to improve.

[Gavin]

That fumble was huge man. I still have faith that he will continue to improve.

Not sure if he was trying to go down on that play or not but he lacked patience and vision on the run.  jump stepping into contact, He had 2 creases to choose from upon immediately receiving the hand off, one hole was naturally created because the DE rushed upfield that Castonzo was guarding, The other was not open as long but it was o(nor naturally created)pened by Thornton, He will get better I think

[SteelCityColt]

You and several other believe you shouldn't draft a rb in the first round. Not sure when this fad started but here is a list going back to 2000 and most of those guys are top tier running backs. Not to mention we drafted Edge in the first round, Ricky Williams was a beast also.

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/631329-1st-round-runningbacks-of-this-decade-a-recap-report-card

 

 

Wow, did you go through that list? Top tier RBs? There were way more failures than successes. I think I counted 3 A's and a whole bunch of D's and F's. I bet the average was a C or C minus.

If you accept their grades, the article proves the point. More importantly, the NFL teams believe that too. How many RBs were drafted in the first round the last couple years?

 

I counted 3 A's, 4 B's, 14 C's, 7 D's, 5 F's so I think in fact it shows that drafting a RB In the first is no guarantee that you'll be getting anything other than an average players. I'd argue too that for true comparison we should be doing the same thing for all rounds to see how many "A class" RBs have been found in other rounds. If I really had the time or the inclination I'd love to produce  a Round Picked vs YPC/Total Yards over the last 13 years. 

 

I'd argue too, even in the time since the article came out, there has been more and more recognition that a feature back no matter how good will need spelling or they will be broken and battered pretty quickly. 

 

I do however think you can't lay a hard and fast rule of no RB in the first round ever. If AP is available then of course you would take him, but unless anyone has a crystal ball come draft day your never going to be sure. Look at TRich, he was meant to be that level of player and he hasn't (yet) shown he is anywhere near AP. This won't stop teams from gambling of course so  you will see RBs go in the 1st in future. However given the position has been devalued recently and there is more recognition that a good O line combined with an average back can still be effective I think  you will less and less of teams willing to take that gamble.  

[LockeDown]

There are certain rules like don't take a guard in the first round, but there were some great guards this past draft and teams took them. You should not ever have a hard and fast rule. Take what the draft gives you as they say.

[LockeDown]

What if Vick Ballard had been in the same draft as Werner and we took Ballad in round 1 and Werner in round 5? That sounds crazy, but Ballard would end up playing like a first rounder and Werner would start slow and get hurt. I just think that at the end of the day, we need good players.

[The Old Crow]

My take on this is that maybe Trent Richardson wasn't worth a # 1 pick, but that doesn't mean it was a bad trade for the Colts. You needed a power and blocking back, to compliment your excellent passing game. It is what you needed to make a Super Bowl run, so you have to look at it from that perspective.

For the Browns, they got a 1 , for a back that was a bit disappointing. For the Colts, they got a piece to the puzzle to make a Super Bowl run this year. If you have a chance at the Super Bowl, you have to make some bold moves to get there. They needed an extra running back, so I have no problem with the trade. The next challenge will be replacing Reggie Wayne's production.

I can already see the next Irsay cryptic tweet:

Hickory dickory dock, I have a new receiver prospect that will be a lock. I'm in a dark room, building a monster, and it's only the press that I mock.

[CroatianColtsFan21]

This guy is 22? He runs likes he's 32, looks slow to me, no wonder Cleveland jumped on a chance to get a number 1 draft choice at our expense! Looks like an ordinary back to me, both Ballard and Bradshaw are better than this guy!

 

and both ballard and bradshaw can help this team how?? right, they are on ir, part of why we traded for richardson.. and bradshaw is on a 1 year contract and probably gone after this season..

 

i'm glad richardson is on our team..

[lollygagger8]

Quit running the guy in a power formation, and up the middle. Give him the 3 WR sets that Brown sees.

 

The extra lineman and TE give away the power formation (which should only be used on goal line situations anyways)

 

Get Trent in space. He is deadly in the open field. Throw him some passes already. Play to his strengths!  

[OffensivelyPC]

My take on this is that maybe Trent Richardson wasn't worth a # 1 pick, but that doesn't mean it was a bad trade for the Colts. You needed a power and blocking back, to compliment your excellent passing game. It is what you needed to make a Super Bowl run, so you have to look at it from that perspective.

For the Browns, they got a 1 , for a back that was a bit disappointing. For the Colts, they got a piece to the puzzle to make a Super Bowl run this year. If you have a chance at the Super Bowl, you have to make some bold moves to get there. They needed an extra running back, so I have no problem with the trade. The next challenge will be replacing Reggie Wayne's production.

I can already see the next Irsay cryptic tweet:

Hickory dickory dock, I have a new receiver prospect that will be a lock. I'm in a dark room, building a monster, and it's only the press that I mock.

hahaha, I don't think I'd ever seen you make a joke or sarcastic comment on here before.  So this was hilarious.  Kinda like Silent Bob, the man never talks, but when he does, they are often some of the funniest or most memorable lines in his movies.

[OffensivelyPC]

I've said it in a few threads, but it bears repeating. Trent has had a new offensive scheme every 7.5 games he's played. Such a talent needs adequate coaching. I believe that as the year progresses, the doubters will be forced to reckon with the truth, much the same way that the Donald Brown doubters are now having to stare at the reality of his production. 

Not to mention, 3 different head coaches, 3 different offensive coordinators, and 3 different running backs coaches.

[Smonroe]

I counted 3 A's, 4 B's, 14 C's, 7 D's, 5 F's so I think in fact it shows that drafting a RB In the first is no guarantee that you'll be getting anything other than an average players. I'd argue too that for true comparison we should be doing the same thing for all rounds to see how many "A class" RBs have been found in other rounds. If I really had the time or the inclination I'd love to produce  a Round Picked vs YPC/Total Yards over the last 13 years. 

 

I'd argue too, even in the time since the article came out, there has been more and more recognition that a feature back no matter how good will need spelling or they will be broken and battered pretty quickly. 

 

I do however think you can't lay a hard and fast rule of no RB in the first round ever. If AP is available then of course you would take him, but unless anyone has a crystal ball come draft day your never going to be sure. Look at TRich, he was meant to be that level of player and he hasn't (yet) shown he is anywhere near AP. This won't stop teams from gambling of course so  you will see RBs go in the 1st in future. However given the position has been devalued recently and there is more recognition that a good O line combined with an average back can still be effective I think  you will less and less of teams willing to take that gamble.  

 

Nice job.  The other point to consider is the career for the average RB.  How many of those actually see a second contract?  It's almost as easy to draft another RB at that time.  I think if someone scoured the draft, they'd find the 2nd round RB picks grade out just as well as the first.

 

Yes, it's not a hard and fast rule to NEVER draft one in the first round, same as a G or a S, because there's always that anomalie or the guy that fits your system perfectly.  And some teams are in good enough shape that they can use a first rounder on a luxury pick.

 

I loved TRich at Bama, I thought he was better than Ingram (another first rounder not grading out very well).  To me, it doesn't matter that we gave up our first, that's over.  If he helps to improve the passing game, he's worth it.  Especially if that pick is #30+.

[OffensivelyPC]

Nice job.  The other point to consider is the career for the average RB.  How many of those actually see a second contract?  It's almost as easy to draft another RB at that time.  I think if someone scoured the draft, they'd find the 2nd round RB picks grade out just as well as the first.

 

Yes, it's not a hard and fast rule to NEVER draft one in the first round, same as a G or a S, because there's always that anomalie or the guy that fits your system perfectly.  And some teams are in good enough shape that they can use a first rounder on a luxury pick.

 

I loved TRich at Bama, I thought he was better than Ingram (another first rounder not grading out very well).  To me, it doesn't matter that we gave up our first, that's over.  If he helps to improve the passing game, he's worth it.  Especially if that pick is #30+.

I'd venture to say that even if he was overvalued at the #3 pick, he was probably still worth a late first round pick (20's overall).  I mean, I'm no Mike Mayock, but even he said that Trent was easily top 10 - and in fact, as he watched mroe film on him, he said Trent was a great pick at the #3 pick to the Browns.  So value wise, it's not bad as long as we make the playoffs IMO. 

[ruksak]

I'd venture to say that even if he was overvalued at the #3 pick, he was probably still worth a late first round pick (20's overall).  I mean, I'm no Mike Mayock, but even he said that Trent was easily top 10 - and in fact, as he watched mroe film on him, he said Trent was a great pick at the #3 pick to the Browns.  So value wise, it's not bad as long as we make the playoffs IMO. 

The value of our 1st round pick is crucial here. When the trade was made, we were 1-1, having barely beaten the lowly Raiders and having lost to the Dolphins at home. 

 

I would assume the Browns hoped for a 15th pick or better. Since the singing, the Colts have displayed the ability to degrade the value of that 1st round pick to 24th-28th, with a little luck, even worse so for them. 

[luckyblue]

and both ballard and bradshaw can help this team how?? right, they are on ir, part of why we traded for richardson.. and bradshaw is on a 1 year contract and probably gone after this season..

 

i'm glad richardson is on our team..

I didn't say they could help our team this year, just stating that they are better runners than Richardson. Your glad Richardson is on the team? Get realistic man have you not watched the last 4 games, he totally sucks!

[Le Neon]

I didn't say they could help our team this year, just stating that they are better runners than Richardson. Your glad Richardson is on the team? Get realistic man have you not watched the last 4 games, he totally sucks!

 

C'mon man.  I'll give you Bradshaw, that guy is a warrior.  But what has Ballard shown us that's any better than Richardson in his 17 games?

 

[The Old Crow]

hahaha, I don't think I'd ever seen you make a joke or sarcastic comment on here before. So this was hilarious. Kinda like Silent Bob, the man never talks, but when he does, they are often some of the funniest or most memorable lines in his movies.

I love jokes , but I'm usually under a bit of duress defending positions on the forum to get some jokes in. Glad you enjoyed it.

[cbear]

Interesting article.  When you watch TR, you can see the physical potential.  He has strength, great feet, burst, yet he does seem to always run into a bunch of tacklers.  The line definitely has a hand in this, but does he have difficulty in "feeling" where the hole should be?  That's just hard to figure from a fans perspective watching on TV, but either way, he has the physical tools to be a star back IMO.

[cbear]

I'd venture to say that even if he was overvalued at the #3 pick, he was probably still worth a late first round pick (20's overall).  I mean, I'm no Mike Mayock, but even he said that Trent was easily top 10 - and in fact, as he watched mroe film on him, he said Trent was a great pick at the #3 pick to the Browns.  So value wise, it's not bad as long as we make the playoffs IMO. 

 

Bottom line to me is that you got value here.  You are simply not going to get a back with TR talent in the mid 20s.  And with Ahmad and DB on a one year contract, Ballard coming off ACL surgery, there were enough unkowns that it was a no brainer for Grigson to make the trade.

[CroatianColtsFan21]

I didn't say they could help our team this year, just stating that they are better runners than Richardson. Your glad Richardson is on the team? Get realistic man have you not watched the last 4 games, he totally sucks!

 

and next year? bradshaw is gone.. donald brown probably too..

 

than it's like you're comparing t-rich with lesean mccoy.. or adrian peterson.. they are better backs, but they won't help the colts this year or the next year either..

 

i have watched every game live for more than a few years now, and just for reassurance the rewind next day also.. but you can vent at this statement also if you like..

[Gabriel Alexander Morillo]

and next year? bradshaw is gone.. donald brown probably too..

 

than it's like you're comparing t-rich with lesean mccoy.. or adrian peterson.. they are better backs, but they won't help the colts this year or the next year either..

 

i have watched every game live for more than a few years now, and just for reassurance the rewind next day also.. but you can vent at this statement also if you like..

No he's just comparing how good 1 player is to another. He's arguing that he is the 3rd best back on the Colts roster soley. Hardly worth a early or late 1st pick. 

[Gavin]

Quit running the guy in a power formation, and up the middle. Give him the 3 WR sets that Brown sees.

 

The extra lineman and TE give away the power formation (which should only be used on goal line situations anyways)

 

Get Trent in space. He is deadly in the open field. Throw him some passes already. Play to his strengths!  

we have been doing all  those things

[BOTT]

Bottom line to me is that you got value here.  You are simply not going to get a back with TR talent in the mid 20s.  And with Ahmad and DB on a one year contract, Ballard coming off ACL surgery, there were enough unkowns that it was a no brainer for Grigson to make the trade.

There are plenty of excellent backs taken in the 20's and beyond. Doug Martin was taken #31 the year Richardson went #3...although Martin is having a tough season with a team that is a dumpster fire.

[luckyblue]

and next year? bradshaw is gone.. donald brown probably too..

 

than it's like you're comparing t-rich with lesean mccoy.. or adrian peterson.. they are better backs, but they won't help the colts this year or the next year either..

 

i have watched every game live for more than a few years now, and just for reassurance the rewind next day also.. but you can vent at this statement also if you like..

I'm not comparing Richardson to anybody, all I'm saying is that the way he has looked so far, we could have probably grabbed someone off the practice squad that could have run as poorly as he has so far. And he certainly was not worth giving up our number 1 draft choice, the guy hasn't shown anything either this year or last to prove that he is a quality NFL back PERIOD!

[Guest TeamLoloJones]

I'm not comparing Richardson to anybody, all I'm saying is that the way he has looked so far, we could have probably grabbed someone off the practice squad that could have run as poorly as he has so far. And he certainly was not worth giving up our number 1 draft choice, the guy hasn't shown anything either this year or last to prove that he is a quality NFL back PERIOD!

How about the fact that TRich is one of the best blocking RBs in the NFL.

[luckyblue]

How about the fact that TRich is one of the best blocking RBs in the NFL.

OMG give me a break lol

[Guest TeamLoloJones]

OMG give me a break lol

Obviously you don't watch enough film if that is your opinion.  That would then exclude you from being able making rational critiques of TRich.  Good day.

[Gavin]

Obviously you don't watch enough film if that is your opinion.  That would then exclude you from being able making rational critiques of TRich.  Good day.

I dont have numbers to back it up but I watch plenty of film, I'd say one of the best blocking Backs in the NFL is a stretch, He is bigger then Brown and (thicker) stronger but Brown still is a better blocker at this point, Brown dont miss assignments very often, His problem comes from being  smaller of build and that makes it harderr for him, Richardson has missed a few

[luckyblue]

Obviously you don't watch enough film if that is your opinion.  That would then exclude you from being able making rational critiques of TRich.  Good day.

What is your problem man! Who cares if he's a good blocker, I'm sure you could find someone off the practice squad who is a good blocker, that's not what we need, we need someone who can run the ball effectively. The guy hasn't shown anything even close to being worthy of giving up our number 1 draft choice, are you going to deny that man?

[NewEra]

Obviously you don't watch football at all if that is your opinion. That would then exclude you from being able making rational critiques of TRich. Good day.

Fixed

[NewEra]

What is your problem man! Who cares if he's a good blocker, I'm sure you could find someone off the practice squad who is a good blocker, that's not what we need, we need someone who can run the ball effectively. The guy hasn't shown anything even close to being worthy of giving up our number 1 draft choice, are you going to deny that man?

Obviously if we could we wouldn't have traded our first round pick for him. With your comments you come off as not knowing a lick about football or flat out trolling.

[ponyboy]

C'mon man.  I'll give you Bradshaw, that guy is a warrior.  But what has Ballard shown us that's any better than Richardson in his 17 games?

 

Actually, Ballard's production has been every bit as good, if not slightly better, than Richardson's so far in their NFL careers-- and Ballard's production was ascending before his injury.  Vick even has a higher Pass Blocking Efficiency rating than Trent per PFF (Donald Brown does too BTW).

 

Don't sell Ballard short.  I'd actually rather have a healthy Ballard at the moment.

[luckyblue]

Obviously if we could we wouldn't have traded our first round pick for him. With your comments you come off as not knowing a lick about football or flat out trolling.

I know a heck of a lot more football than you troll!

[Sova!]

Trent Richardson would win if he was on Dancing with the Stars.

[NewEra]

I know a heck of a lot more football than you troll!

Lol, yeah I can tell

[ColtsFreak]

It would be a nightmare for a guy like AP to run behind Satele and Mcglynn.   TR is solid in 1 back formation.

[BleedBlu8792]

I know a heck of a lot more football than you troll!

 

... Says the guy who said this:

 

"Who cares if he's a good blocker, I'm sure you could find someone off the practice squad who is a good blocker, that's not what we need"

 

Umm no, no sir, you don't know very much about football with the statement YOU made above...

[BleedBlu8792]

I dont have numbers to back it up but I watch plenty of film, I'd say one of the best blocking Backs in the NFL is a stretch, He is bigger then Brown and (thicker) stronger but Brown still is a better blocker at this point, Brown dont miss assignments very often, His problem comes from being smaller of build and that makes it harderr for him, Richardson has missed a few

Hmm must be why Brown couldn't make it back to the line of scrimmage when he was running out of those power formations. He just doesn't have the size or strength to get defenders off of him and gain anything. Its amazing what he can do when he has a hole the size of a bus to run through.

[Gavin]

Hmm must be why Brown couldn't make it back to the line of scrimmage when he was running out of those power formations. He just doesn't have the size or strength to get defenders off of him and gain anything. Its amazing what he can do when he has a hole the size of a bus to run through.

Richardson has been ran from different formations as well, Maybe if he figured out Anthony Castonzo is easily our best blocker (all around this year) and not go looking for contact (jump cutting directly into a pile vs the Broncos that led to his fumble instead of showing patience and reading 1 of 2 holes that were open on that play....1 by Castonzo........The other by Linkenbach and Thornton which Richardson stopped and looked at but continued on turned his back to the pile and tried to churn out yards with his legs before fumbling