Even the guys who do that the most only actually do it a handful of times a year and even Lacy is good for a couple. "taking it to the house on any given play" is more of a myth than anything. Give me a guy whose getting it done on 90% of his 800 snaps than just making a big play on 2% of them.

Originally Posted by: steveishere 

I love Lacy. The perfect teammate and a great man; he’s 100% about the team. And you can keep your Petersons and Murrays; Lacey is a complete back; though he’s not as “dangerous” a back as those others. When players see him go in beast mode; it makes every other player on both D and O play just a bit harder.

But here’s the reality. Signing Lacy means we lose someone else; it’s not just about having Lacy; its about having Lacey and Boyd or a not injured Starks-like RB and Daniels.

Long ago, Ted and I learned to devalue RBs; their cap cost was way out of whack with their importance to winning football games; especially with rules favoring passing. And ya can get a good one in rounds 4-UDFA of any draft. It’s only in the last few years the rest of the league has now come around to our plateau of thinking.

It is 100% against TT’s and my religion [and sounds like against Tex's too, LOL] to pay a RB; but dammit if there’s an exception, it’s gotta be Lacy. Perhaps his mileage [beast mode runners rarely last as long as Lynch] and asthma might keep the $$ down might make a hometown discount palatable. If he practiced in, for example, AZ, and came to an icy GB on game day; his asthma would wreck his ability to produce.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 

Lacy 40 time : 4.44
Starks 40 time : 4.5

Lacy in two seasons has a long of 60 yards
Starks in five seasons has a long of 41 yards


I thought Starks had the speed to go 50+ yard runs and that's just not in the cards for him. He's pretty much a plodder and punishing back who has nice cut backs.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

I was curious so I looked at that stats, in terms of breaking long runs Lacy isn't on par with the best in the league, that's for sure. Here's a random sample:

Barry Sanders
20+ 4.4%
40+ 1.6%

Adrian Peterson
20+ 4.5%
40+ 1.4%

Jamaal Charles
20+ 3.7%
40+ 1.2%

Demarco Murray
20+ 3.7%
40+ 1.0%

Eddie Lacy
20+ 2.0%
40+ 0.5%

Interesting notes, Peterson breaks a lot of 20-40 yard runs, probably more than any other back in the league (I didn't extensively research this), but even then, Jamaal Charles has a better career average (5.5 vs 5.0 yards), which means Charles is a more consistent back, constantly getting positive yards, while Peterson likely has a lot more negative or 0-2 yard runs.

The 40+ numbers are interesting as well, none of these guys breaks 40 yard runs more than 1.6% of the time. Peterson at 1.4% breaks on average 4 40+ runs a season, or once every 4 games.

For perspective, Aaron Rodgers throws a 20+ yard pass 10.7% of the time (53 times a season), and a 40+ pass 2.2% of the time (12.5 times a season). If you want someone to "take it to the house" you use the passing game, not the running game.

Lacy's stats have the smallest sample size which may not be entirely representative, though he's been a starter essentially since he's been drafted and RB's typically have good numbers when young.

Originally Posted by: earthquake 

Peterson's numbers being lower than charles are a direct result of the idiot playcallers hes dealth with his whole career, not a good representation of his actual skill level

Originally Posted by: gbguy20 

I love Lacy. The perfect teammate and a great man; he’s 100% about the team. And you can keep your Petersons and Murrays; Lacey is a complete back; though he’s not as “dangerous” a back as those others. When players see him go in beast mode; it makes every other player on both D and O play just a bit harder.

But here’s the reality. Signing Lacy means we lose someone else; it’s not just about having Lacy; its about having Lacey and Boyd or a not injured Starks-like RB and Daniels.

Long ago, Ted and I learned to devalue RBs; their cap cost was way out of whack with their importance to winning football games; especially with rules favoring passing. And ya can get a good one in rounds 4-UDFA of any draft. It’s only in the last few years the rest of the league has now come around to our plateau of thinking.

It is 100% against TT’s and my religion [and sounds like against Tex's too, LOL] to pay a RB; but dammit if there’s an exception, it’s gotta be Lacy. Perhaps his mileage [beast mode runners rarely last as long as Lynch] and asthma might keep the $$ down might make a hometown discount palatable. If he practiced in, for example, AZ, and came to an icy GB on game day; his asthma would wreck his ability to produce.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 

I was curious so I looked at that stats, in terms of breaking long runs Lacy isn't on par with the best in the league, that's for sure. Here's a random sample:

Barry Sanders
20+ 4.4%
40+ 1.6%

Adrian Peterson
20+ 4.5%
40+ 1.4%

Jamaal Charles
20+ 3.7%
40+ 1.2%

Demarco Murray
20+ 3.7%
40+ 1.0%

Eddie Lacy
20+ 2.0%
40+ 0.5%

Interesting notes, Peterson breaks a lot of 20-40 yard runs, probably more than any other back in the league (I didn't extensively research this), but even then, Jamaal Charles has a better career average (5.5 vs 5.0 yards), which means Charles is a more consistent back, constantly getting positive yards, while Peterson likely has a lot more negative or 0-2 yard runs.

The 40+ numbers are interesting as well, none of these guys breaks 40 yard runs more than 1.6% of the time. Peterson at 1.4% breaks on average 4 40+ runs a season, or once every 4 games.

For perspective, Aaron Rodgers throws a 20+ yard pass 10.7% of the time (53 times a season), and a 40+ pass 2.2% of the time (12.5 times a season). If you want someone to "take it to the house" you use the passing game, not the running game.

Lacy's stats have the smallest sample size which may not be entirely representative, though he's been a starter essentially since he's been drafted and RB's typically have good numbers when young.

Originally Posted by: earthquake