Current RB outlook

[Doomsday101]

A back who got a bunch of garbage time runs might be seeing more bunch formations as well. The goal at that point is just to eat clock. Yet garbage time runs are cited as evidence of poor productivity.

He may but that was not the case with Randle, Dallas did not use him to close out game or in so called garbage time.

 

[xwalker]

What is indicative is all those backs were better than Dmac. Minus MJD who was done three years ago and still started over Dmac last season when they were both healthy.

No, the sample sizes were too small to judge those backups. Consider that with the Cowboys Randle had a 6.7 ypc compared to a 4.7 ypc for Murray. Was Randle better?

In the final 3 games of 2014, Latavius Murray started and had a 4.0 ypc while McFadden as the backup in those games had a 5.33 ypc.

 

[AbeBeta]

He may but that was not the case with Randle, Dallas did not use him to close out game or in so called garbage time.

In the Indy game - the one so widely referenced in this thread as evidence, 7 of Randle's carries came after we'd taken a 35-0 lead late in the 3rd. Murray didn't get a carry from mid-third quarter on. We even put Weeden in the game for a few of those series.

Clearly, that is garbage time.

 

[KJJ]

You can play this silly game with any back. You took carries out of performances for TWO games, removing 2 of 11 carries and then computed an average.

Gee, I wonder what happens with someone like Murray if we take out 1 of every 5.5 carries?

Let's take the Jax game - Murray had 19-100. A good game a bit over his season average at about 5.3 YPC. If I remove his top three carries, blammo, now we've go 16 carries for 44 yards. Is that above 3 YPC. Nope. I took out fewer than 1 per 5.5 carries as well.

You haven't discovered any meaningful truths about Randle here. You are simply describing how the YPC statistic is skewed. This isn't something unique. Every back's stats look worse when you remove their best runs.

The only thing that's made Randle look appealing is the long runs he's had through gapping holes. You take those runs away and he's averaged under 3 yards per carry. There's a lot of carries where he doesn't gain much he certainly hasn't broken many tackles or moved many piles. He needs some space to make plays. When his workload increases so will the hits he takes and we'll see what kind of toll that takes on him throughout the course of a game. He's not going to have the fresh legs unless the Cowboys feel he's better suited in the same role he had last season. With the committee of backs we're likely to use maybe keeping Randle fresh is the best way to go with him. We'll find out this summer how effective he is with more carries.

The Cowboys will experiment to see what back fits a certain role. There's a lot of things we haven't discovered about Randle because he hasn't seen enough carries but up to this point he's looked a lot better with limited carries than he has with more carries. His YPC average has been skewed much like Felix Jones' YPC average was skewed due to the number of long runs each player has had. I'm not saying Randle will end up like Felix and some of the other backup RB's the Cowboys had who fizzed out with heavier workloads. If Randle is going to be a back the Cowboys lean on he's going to have to show he can run between the tackles with some authority and manufacture some plays when not much is there. We can keep going on this I'll be happy to continue driving my point until it sinks in.

 

[dallasdave]

The only thing that's made Randle look appealing is the long runs he's had through gapping holes. You take those runs away and he's averaged under 3 yards per carry. There's a lot of carries where he doesn't gain much he certainly hasn't broken many tackles or moved many piles. He needs some space to make plays. When his workload increases so will the hits he takes and we'll see what kind of toll that takes on him throughout the course of a game. He's not going to have the fresh legs unless the Cowboys feel he's better suited in the same role he had last season. With the committee of backs we're likely to use maybe keeping Randle fresh is the best way to go with him. We'll find out this summer how effective he is with more carries.

The Cowboys will experiment to see what back fits a certain role. There's a lot of things we haven't discovered about Randle because he hasn't seen enough carries but up to this point he's looked a lot better with limited carries than he has with more carries. His YPC average has been skewed much like Felix Jones' YPC average was skewed due to the number of long runs each player has had. I'm not saying Randle will end up like Felix and some of the other backup RB's the Cowboys had who fizzed out with heavier workloads. If Randle is going to be a back the Cowboys lean on he's going to have to show he can run between the tackles with some authority and manufacture some plays when not much is there. We can keep going on this I'll be happy to continue driving my point until it sinks in.

Dallas cannot bet the house on Randle, they will get another RB before the season starts.

 

[KJJ]

Dallas cannot bet the house on Randle, they will get another RB before the season starts.

They're clearly not betting the house on him which is why they signed McFadden. They can't bet the house on any of the backs they have so it's going to take a committee and hope someone steps up who we can lean on in critical situations. The Cowboys may add another back but barring a trade or an injury the starter is currently on the team.

 

[dallasdave]

They're clearly not betting the house on him which is why they signed McFadden. They can't bet the house on any of the backs they have so it's going to take a committee and hope someone steps up who we can lean on in critical situations. The Cowboys may add another back but barring a trade or an injury the starter is currently on the team.

There will be another back before game day.

 

[KJJ]

There will be another back before game day.

Possibly but not a "starter" unless there's a trade or we get hit with a rash of injuries at RB forcing the team to have to start a scrub who's been cut.

 

[AbeBeta]

The only thing that's made Randle look appealing is the long runs he's had through gapping holes. You take those runs away and he's averaged under 3 yards per carry. There's a lot of carries where he doesn't gain much he certainly hasn't broken many tackles or moved many piles. He needs some space to make plays. When his workload increases so will the hits he takes and we'll see what kind of toll that takes on him throughout the course of a game. He's not going to have the fresh legs unless the Cowboys feel he's better suited in the same role he had last season. With the committee of backs we're likely to use maybe keeping Randle fresh is the best way to go with him. We'll find out this summer how effective he is with more carries.

The Cowboys will experiment to see what back fits a certain role. There's a lot of things we haven't discovered about Randle because he hasn't seen enough carries but up to this point he's looked a lot better with limited carries than he has with more carries. His YPC average has been skewed much like Felix Jones' YPC average was skewed due to the number of long runs each player has had. I'm not saying Randle will end up like Felix and some of the other backup RB's the Cowboys had who fizzed out with heavier workloads. If Randle is going to be a back the Cowboys lean on he's going to have to show he can run between the tackles with some authority and manufacture some plays when not much is there. We can keep going on this I'll be happy to continue driving my point until it sinks in.

You keep saying the same thing and it remains meaningless.

I just showed you how if you apply the same approach to Murray's runs, his average also drops precipitously. Same thing holds for claims that for there being a lot of carries where he doesn't gain much. Taking Murray's best game last year - a 32 rush 179 yard game against Chicago, we find that 15 of his rushes - that's almost half of his carries went for three or fewer yards. He managed to lose some many yards on a couple of those carries that his average for those 15 runs is near zero.

YPC is always inflated by big runs - your argument still holds no water. This applies to ANY back. You can make your Randle-like claims about ANY back and they would look similarly weak.

 

[KJJ]

You keep saying the same thing and it remains meaningless.

I just showed you how if you apply the same approach to Murray's runs, his average also drops precipitously. Same thing holds for claims that for there being a lot of carries where he doesn't gain much. Taking Murray's best game last year - a 32 rush 179 yard game against Chicago, we find that 15 of his rushes - that's almost half of his carries went for three or fewer yards. He managed to lose some many yards on a couple of those carries that his average for those 15 runs is near zero.

YPC is always inflated by big runs - your argument still holds no water. This applies to ANY back. You can make your Randle-like claims about ANY back and they would look similarly weak.

I keep saying the same thing in hopes that it will sink into your head but apparently it's not. You haven't shown me anything that puts Randle on par with Murray which is what you seem to be trying to do. I'm comparing Randle to other backups the Cowboys have had who could run through holes but not much else while you're trying to compare him to Murray who's clearly the better back which is why he received 341 more carries than Randle last season. Murray runs powerfully between the tackles moving piles and breaking arm tackles. I've seen none of the above from Randle so far. Murray picks up the tough yards far better than Randle who could never abuse a defender like Murray did Kiwanuka on this play. The Cowboys don't have a back on their roster that could make this play. This is what the Cowboys are going to miss not having Murray unless the OL can open up holes all day.

 

[AbeBeta]

I keep saying the same thing in hopes that it will sink into your head but apparently it's not. You haven't shown me anything that puts Randle on par with Murray which is what you seem to be trying to do. I'm comparing Randle to other backups the Cowboys have had who could run through holes but not much else while you're trying to compare him to Murray who's clearly the better back which is why he received 341 more carries than Randle last season. Murray runs powerfully between the tackles moving piles and breaking arm tackles. I've seen none of the above from Randle so far. Murray picks up the tough yards far better than Randle who could never abuse a defender like Murray did Kiwanuka on this play. The Cowboys don't have a back on their roster that could make this play. This is what the Cowboys are going to miss not having Murray unless the OL can open up holes all day.

Oh, so now - once I've totally destroyed your statistical argument - it is a different argument you come up with.

Nice.

 

[DallasEast]

 

[KJJ]

Oh, so now - once I've totally destroyed your statistical argument - it is a different argument you come up with.

Nice.

The only thing that's been destroyed is your insight on this topic. Go dust yourself off and look for an easier target you're boring me.

 

[5Stars]

The only thing that's been destroyed is your insight on this topic. Go dust yourself off and look for an easier target you're boring me.

lmao KJJ getting schooled big time today and when he does, he has nothing but a smart *** retort then slinks off!

Well, at least AbeBeta is not on his ignore list...yet!

 

[AbeBeta]

The only thing that's been destroyed is your insight on this topic. Go dust yourself off and look for an easier target you're boring me.

Yeah - go show us again how when you take out an RBs best runs, his YPC is destroyed. These are basic statistical lessons most learn in high school.

 

[5Stars]

Yeah - go show us again how when you take out an RBs best runs, his YPC is destroyed. These are basic statistical lessons most learn in high school.

And 1,2,3....you are now on his "ignore" list! lol

 

[KJJ]

Yeah - go show us again how when you take out an RBs best runs, his YPC is destroyed. These are basic statistical lessons most learn in high school.

Go show point to all of Randle's 4-8 yard runs in the 105 carries he's had it's been feast or famine with him. He averaged 3.0 a carry his rookie year because he didn't have holes big enough for a truck to drive through. Comprehension skills should start taking hold by the time one enters the 4th grade.

 

[DallasEast]

 

[Alexander]

I think the talk of removing long runs is a bit silly what also gets left out is when using YPC is that some runs are designed only to pick up the 1 to 2 yards, needed to move the chain or put it over the goal line. Seldom in a bunch formation is the RB going to have a 20 yard or more run, the play is designed to pick up the needed short yardage and that 1 or 2 yards does not help your YPC but it does affect the outcome of a game

Not much is being weighed into the situation. If someone could say there was no significant difference between Randle carries in the first versus the fourth quarter, I might be convinced.

Thing is, I doubt there is enough to actually make a relevant comparison.

 

[AbeBeta]

Go show point to all of Randle's 4-8 yard runs in the 105 carries he's had it's been feast or famine with him. He averaged 3.0 a carry his rookie year because he didn't have holes big enough for a truck to drive through. Comprehension skills should start taking hold by the time one enters the 4th grade.

As the numbers, i presented for Murray showed, it is feast or famine with any back if you define things as you have.