2018: 23 years old; 4 years; 60 Million; 45 GTD

[QuincyCarterEra]

CJ Anderson didn't replace elite production, he had a game where the Dallas DTs were injured and were only on the field because it was a playoff game. In the two playoff games after that he averaged less than 3 yards per carry.

He had poor games in Carolina earlier in the year and then was cut. He had two 100+ yards late in the season against two of the worst teams in the league when he had fresh legs after his time off from being cut. There is no way to consider CJ Anderson elite.

Kaiser he(I'm 99% sure) not anyone else is claiming CJ Anderson is elite. Tbe claim is replacing elite RB production, which he's referring to Gurley in this instance.

In CJ Anderson's five games with the team, he faced the defenses allowing the least YPC in the league, the 5th least, the 6th least, the 25th least(Patriots which he had 7 carries) and 29th least. Or if you prefer rushing yards per game allowed, which I dont, it was against the #2, #7, #8, #12, and #32 teams.

In that time CJ Anderson had 488 rushing yards(98 yards per game) with 4 TDs(.8 rushing TDs per game) on 5.48 yards per carry.

98 yards per game would be the highest in the NFL last year
.8 TDs would be the 3rd highest in the league
And 5.48 ypc would be the 2nd highest in the league

Would you agree that CJ Anderson was able to replace an elite running back, with similar production despite CJ Anderson himself being far from elite?

 

[Kaiser]

Would you agree that CJ Anderson was able to replace an elite running back, with similar production despite CJ Anderson himself being far from elite?

I would agree he had some games with good numbers, but knocking over trashcans isn't something anyone can do. In Anderson's next two games after Dallas he had 16 carries for 44 yards against the Saints and then 7 for 22 yards against the Pats. That isn't production, that is JAGishness that anyone can provide.

 

[Einstein]

Troy Hambrick and Joseph Randall would agree that any RB can produce elite numbers, lol...

 

[QuincyCarterEra]

I would agree he had some games with good numbers, but knocking over trashcans isn't something anyone can do. In Anderson's next two games after Dallas he had 16 carries for 44 yards against the Saints and then 7 for 22 yards against the Pats. That isn't production, that is JAGishness that anyone can provide.

I just showed you he wasn't knocking over trashcans, two of those three games were against very solid competition.

Anderson in those two games: 23 Carries for 66 yards
Gurley in those same two games: 14 carries for 45 yards

And even with those two games I showed you what CJ posted as averages, and that is not something that anybody can do because he ranked 1st, 2nd, and 3rd in the three most important rushing categories. But you do have a point that largely any running back can do the same thing as another.

 

[Future]

Barry Sanders averaged 5.0 YPC in his career. That's with 300+ carries in nearly every season he played. What the hell are you even on about? This debate ended in the late 90s.

There is absolutely no RB in the league like Barry Sanders. Not a single one. He was durable, he was fast, he was shifty, he was incredibly elusive, and he did that all behind a line nowhere NEAR as good as Smith's in the early 90s.

Pretending a guy who played 10 seasons and averaged 5 YPC didn't "move the chains consistently" with a bunch of carries is ridiculous. And even then, Zeke is nowhere near Smith, let alone Sanders.

My god.

What are you talking about? Where did I say they are "as good as Barry Sanders?" lmao. It's just a simile, but you can go right ahead and be mad online.

But the point is that Barry was not a good chain mover, at least not in the way Emmitt was, because he had a ton of negative runs. "Sanders is believed to have had the most negative rushing yards in history at minus-1,114 (on 336 carries)." https://www.profootballweekly.com/2018/07/09/team-for-the-ages-barry-sanders/ag3sbhv/

Lots of teams have guys who can create big plays at the risk of losing yards. Virtually none have a player who can consistently turn what would be negative plays, and get a yard out of them.

 

[Stash]

That is what the Rams signed up for this time last year.

And now....



The point?

RB is the most wasteful position to invest heavily in. Period.

The Rams are 1 year into a new deal for Gurley and in their heart of hearts they're counting down the days until 2022 when they can get out from under the it.

The Todd Gurley situation does serve as a bit of a cautionary tale and a warning against paying big money to the running back position.

Extensions for running backs seldom work out well for all parties, and more often than not, the player ends up getting cut before the end of the contract.

 

[PAPPYDOG]

Yeah. Jerry screwed up by resigning Emmitt to big money back in 93.

Ya that "screw up" gave Jerry and us another 2 Superbowl trophies.....ya what a bad call....lol

 

[ghst187]

That is what the Rams signed up for this time last year.

And now....



The point?

RB is the most wasteful position to invest heavily in. Period.

The Rams are 1 year into a new deal for Gurley and in their heart of hearts they're counting down the days until 2022 when they can get out from under the it.

The above is true for most teams and most RBs but not for Zeke and our team.
If we can’t run it and control the clock, then our HUGE investment in the OL is mostly wasted, Dak can’t pass us to victory exclusively, and JG can’t scheme or manage a game.
Zeke is worth about 12 points per game by himself. He is special just like emmitt was.
Zeke is so good that you don’t take him off the field ever bc he’s one of the best players in the nfl at any position. He does everything well (on the field anyway) and even if you aren’t having him run it, catch it, or block, he is a great decoy. Zeke finds yards other backs can’t. He creates. He runs over, around, past, hurdles, spins, and changes games. Zeke is worth a payday, at least one.

 

[Kaiser]

I just showed you he wasn't knocking over trashcans, two of those three games were against very solid competition.

IMO Gurley's numbers were because he was playing with a knee injury while Anderson had fresh legs from being out of the league for 7 of the last 9 games of the season.

BTW, my trashcans comment was his numbers in the last two games against the Cards and 49ers, who were literally the worst two teams in the NFL last year.

 

[tyke1doe]

Zeke's problem isn't that he has a major injury, it's that the wear and tear from 2016 to 2018 has obviously taken a toll. Go watch his speed from his rookie year to now. It's worse yet that it seems his workout routine never got back to what it was before the 2017 season, he's never gotten back into that shape and he's still really young - this isn't a good sign for the future.

The fact he's choosing to stuff his face with hot dogs and drown himself with alcohol in the offseason isn't exactly helping things either.

I got cha.
I'm just saying that knee injuries aren't as controllable as eating and ballooning to fattenous (my made up word) proportions.

 

[mattjames2010]

What are you talking about? Where did I say they are "as good as Barry Sanders?" lmao. It's just a simile, but you can go right ahead and be mad online.

But the point is that Barry was not a good chain mover, at least not in the way Emmitt was, because he had a ton of negative runs. "Sanders is believed to have had the most negative rushing yards in history at minus-1,114 (on 336 carries)." https://www.profootballweekly.com/2018/07/09/team-for-the-ages-barry-sanders/ag3sbhv/

Lots of teams have guys who can create big plays at the risk of losing yards. Virtually none have a player who can consistently turn what would be negative plays, and get a yard out of them.

Why are you quoting an article that says "Sanders is believed to have had the most negative rushing yards in history" - he either does or he doesn't, this isn't an opinion - this is based on numbers. Does he or doesn't he?

The guy still averaged 5.0 YPC, you don't get that just by having a long run here and there. He was consistently moving the freakin' chains and, I will repeat, Barry didn't have the O-Line in the early to mid-90s Smith had.

And nothing here has shown that Zeke is turning "negative yards" into positive. Where are you getting that from? There is a difference between getting hit behind the line for negative yards, but still finding ways to turn negative into a positive, and already picking up positive yards and adding to it.

I haven't seen any stat that says Zeke was getting hit behind the line much or at any abnormal rate. I could be wrong, but I just haven't seen it.

The simple fact is, there are no RBs in the league right now that look like Sanders. Smith wasn't an elite runner, what made him elite was his legendary durability - in that regard, Frank Gore is becoming this generations Smith.

 

[Future]

Why are you quoting an article that says "Sanders is believed to have had the most negative rushing yards in history" - he either does or he doesn't, this isn't an opinion - this is based on numbers. Does he or doesn't he?

And nothing here has shown that Zeke is turning "negative yards" into positive. Where are you getting that from? .

B/c it's not regularly tracked

Watch the games.

 

[dckid]

CJ Anderson didn't replace elite production, he had a game where the Dallas DTs were injured and were only on the field because it was a playoff game. In the two playoff games after that he averaged less than 3 yards per carry.

He had poor games in Carolina earlier in the year and then was cut. He had two 100+ yards late in the season against two of the worst teams in the league when he had fresh legs after his time off from being cut. There is no way to consider CJ Anderson elite.

You guys love diving into the minutia of a post. I was making an overarching point, not just CJ anderson. I was saying last year teams lost so called Elite RB's and their production was replaced without missing a beat.
What did Conner do in Pittsburgh? No one commented on that? Bell was All-Pro, and his production was replaced. Facts hurt sometimes.

 

[Little Jr]

The above is true for most teams and most RBs but not for Zeke and our team.
If we can’t run it and control the clock, then our HUGE investment in the OL is mostly wasted, Dak can’t pass us to victory exclusively, and JG can’t scheme or manage a game.
Zeke is worth about 12 points per game by himself. He is special just like emmitt was.
Zeke is so good that you don’t take him off the field ever bc he’s one of the best players in the nfl at any position. He does everything well (on the field anyway) and even if you aren’t having him run it, catch it, or block, he is a great decoy. Zeke finds yards other backs can’t. He creates. He runs over, around, past, hurdles, spins, and changes games. Zeke is worth a payday, at least one.

Lol 12pts? Maybe 1. 2 on a good day

 

[Trendnet]

That is what the Rams signed up for this time last year.

And now....



The point?

RB is the most wasteful position to invest heavily in. Period.

The Rams are 1 year into a new deal for Gurley and in their heart of hearts they're counting down the days until 2022 when they can get out from under the it.

I always did wonder why there so many posters who lament the decision to trade down and draft Julius Jones and not take Steven Jackson when he was right there.

With running backs being so interchangeable and easily replaced an all.

I mean, who can forget that stellar two game stretch of Derrick Lassic in the 1993 season when Emmitt was holding out!

 

[Corso]

Troy Hambrick and Joseph Randall would agree that any RB can produce elite numbers, lol...

KABOOM!

 

[Kaiser]

You guys love diving into the minutia of a post. I was making an overarching point, not just CJ anderson. I was saying last year teams lost so called Elite RB's and their production was replaced without missing a beat.
What did Conner do in Pittsburgh? No one commented on that? Bell was All-Pro, and his production was replaced. Facts hurt sometimes.

Damien Williams had 50 carries. Conner averaged 4.5 yards per carry and got less than 1000 yards, both of which are far below the league's good RBs. Chris Carson was the team's feature back and got most their carries, who was he replacing? I've already shown CJ Anderson is a poor example.

You can get good production from a cheap pickup at RB, like Dallas did with Darren McFadden. But to say you can "easily" replace a Zeke or Gurley is completely wrong, especially from the examples you listed.

 

[Corso]

Ya that "screw up" gave Jerry and us another 2 Superbowl trophies.....ya what a bad call....lol

My personal mummy-meat... @Ranching was being a tad bit, how do you say - sarcastic?

 

[Toruk_Makto]

he is injured...and that's the risk with football as it has the most number of injuries. if not injured, is he a difference maker? absolutely. you can't deny that. its like saying lets pay a QB, and then he gets injured and we say what a waste of money. he got paid, what at the time was market for high end RBs. market determines that.

Well.....that's kind of the point. RBs get injured at a higher rate and wear down more quickly than any position in football. It's exactly why you should throw low cost quantity at the position and not high cost all eggs in one basket at the position.

 

[Toruk_Makto]

Apples and oranges. Maybe you're too young to remember Emmitt Smith.

If your argument is Zeke will be one of the best players to ever play the position and have legendary longevity then yes the pick was justified.

For those of us who look at probability and likelihood....the pick was wasteful.

I'll be write much more often than you are. And that's what football is all about. The teams who consistently make the best investments shockingly do the best over time.

Drafting Zeke at 4 was a negative expected value move. Giving him a big contract will be a negative expected value move. Praying that you get lucky and he's everything you want him to be and he stays healthy for a decade would be lucky. If you don't own a team and your team building strategy is be lucky...you won't be team building for long.