What a Tuel Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 So after factoring out Taylor and looking at ypc by backs. Gillislee, karlos, etc had longer runs. And their ypc wasn't that bad, either. So what's McCoys value? I think Jamaal Charles is a better back than McCoy, but I wonder if there are Chiefs fans out there calling for the dumping of Charles and putting Spencer Ware in there. He had more YPC's, and 50% more TDs than the sluggish, oft-injured 29 year old Charles! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BUFFALOKIE Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 The SI guys have Shady tied for 4th best NFL RB with Jamaal Charles. I had Lynch, Charles and McCoy all on the same fantasy team last year. It did not turn out like I expected, to say the least. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 (edited) I think Jamaal Charles is a better back than McCoy, but I wonder if there are Chiefs fans out there calling for the dumping of Charles and putting Spencer Ware in there. He had more YPC's, and 50% more TDs than the sluggish, oft-injured 29 year old Charles! Probably......the Chiefs were unquestionably a much better team last year when he was out due to injury..........but like you said, what has to be kept in perspective is that Charles is a much better player. To the tune of a yard per attempt more than McCoy for his career. McCoy has become a 4.3 ypa RB who doesn't score TD's while Charles is now a 5.0 ypa back who still scores TD's. Jamal Charles also has a much less burdensome contract. Charles signed a two year $18M extension last year while the Bills gave Shady an ill-advised(to be kind) 5 year $40M extension. Edited June 9, 2016 by #BADOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorkington Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 Team averages with and without Shady w/ Shady 29 rush/158 yds/5.4 ypc/1.2 TD w/o Shady 34 rush/133 yds/3.9 ypc/1.3 TD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted June 9, 2016 Share Posted June 9, 2016 @JoeBuscaglia Next up on the #Bills Top 20 Talents countdown at No. 7: the man they hope will stay a lot healthier this year: https://t.co/meOWhI5mbu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdand12 Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Apparently 0 because his hamstring got a little tight early in preseason. it really is this simple...... BTW anyone consider Rex is the one holding him back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 I have already shown you that attributing Buffalo's rushing prowess to QB yards is untrue. They rank 5th in YPC and 6th in total yards when QB rushing yards are removed across the league Yes. But the subject being discussed is "leading the league in rushing" again... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Yes. But the subject being discussed is "leading the league in rushing" again... Does the league leading team n rushing yards never have QB yards included? The Seahawks led the league in rushing yards in 2014. Should we remove RW's rushing yards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
What a Tuel Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Probably......the Chiefs were unquestionably a much better team last year when he was out due to injury..........but like you said, what has to be kept in perspective is that Charles is a much better player. To the tune of a yard per attempt more than McCoy for his career. McCoy has become a 4.3 ypa RB who doesn't score TD's while Charles is now a 5.0 ypa back who still scores TD's. Jamal Charles also has a much less burdensome contract. Charles signed a two year $18M extension last year while the Bills gave Shady an ill-advised(to be kind) 5 year $40M extension. Ugh, I don't want to get into the Chiefs amazing turnaround from 1-5, to 10-0, even though I brought the Chiefs up, suffice to say it was not because Charles was out. Correlation does not imply causation. But they can feel free to give him to us if he is such a detriment to them winning. As for the contract, the Chiefs paid $9 million a year to extend a back into his "twilight" years (29-30), which people tell me is an awful idea because RB's expire around 27-28. The Bills sign LeSean McCoy at age 26 for a 5 year contract worth $8 million a year, and it's ill-advised. We already discussed McCoy becoming a "4.3 ypc" player. You chose to ignore the years he wasn't out of convenience. They were "too far away, or long ago". McCoy is a 4.6 ypc player who tends to do better when he isn't injured. Proven by subsequent and consistent upswings in his ypc when he has an injury free season (2010, 2011, 2013). When he was injured and missed at least a quarter of the season his ypc's declined to 4.2 on average. Then he had his last year with Chip Kelly which he had notable disagreements with, and we can observe an increased use of Sproles, and Polk in their backfield. (Yet still had a 1,319 yard season, but only 4.2 ypc) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Does the league leading team n rushing yards never have QB yards included? The Seahawks led the league in rushing yards in 2014. Should we remove RW's rushing yards? No you should not. But whether the Bills lead the league in rushing will depend only on the rushing production of TT (2nd in the league beside Newton), not that of McCoy and Karlos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 No you should not. But whether the Bills lead the league in rushing will depend only on the rushing production of TT (2nd in the league beside Newton), not that of McCoy and Karlos. Not necessarily. A healthy Shady could produce another 300-400 yards while a healthy Karlos or the addition of Jonathan Williams could do the same. That would eclipse TT's 568 yards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BADOLBILZ Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Ugh, I don't want to get into the Chiefs amazing turnaround from 1-5, to 10-0, even though I brought the Chiefs up, suffice to say it was not because Charles was out. Correlation does not imply causation. But they can feel free to give him to us if he is such a detriment to them winning. As for the contract, the Chiefs paid $9 million a year to extend a back into his "twilight" years (29-30), which people tell me is an awful idea because RB's expire around 27-28. The Bills sign LeSean McCoy at age 26 for a 5 year contract worth $8 million a year, and it's ill-advised. We already discussed McCoy becoming a "4.3 ypc" player. You chose to ignore the years he wasn't out of convenience. They were "too far away, or long ago". McCoy is a 4.6 ypc player who tends to do better when he isn't injured. Proven by subsequent and consistent upswings in his ypc when he has an injury free season (2010, 2011, 2013). When he was injured and missed at least a quarter of the season his ypc's declined to 4.2 on average. Then he had his last year with Chip Kelly which he had notable disagreements with, and we can observe an increased use of Sproles, and Polk in their backfield. (Yet still had a 1,319 yard season, but only 4.2 ypc) 1) So you are saying that the Chiefs were 10-0 without a "franchise" RB and only 1-5 with one? I don't know if that's accurate but you think that somehow supports your opinion? 2) So Jamal Charles, who has been at or over 5 yards per attempt for EVERY year in his career, is in his twilight years and unworthy of a two year extension?.......while another finesse RB in Shady McCoy.......who has only ran for 4.2, 5.0, 4.2 and 4.4 averages in the past 4 seasons and needs everyone else to score the TD's for him and has 300+ more career NFL carries of mileage than Charles........was worthy of a FIVE year extension? 3) I'm sorry I don't go back 5 years for you......but as Kirby says, in the NFL you are what your record says you are........five years ago Charles was a 5.9-6.4 ypa RB.......is he still that same guy too? Thanks for bringing up Jamal Charles. As you said........a much better player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Not necessarily. A healthy Shady could produce another 300-400 yards while a healthy Karlos or the addition of Jonathan Williams could do the same. That would eclipse TT's 568 yards. McCoy does not have another 1200-1300 season in him. And the two backups would be splitting the remaining carries, not adding total carries. Unless you think the staff is going to tell TT "do not run anymore", the play mix is likely to be the same this season as last. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 McCoy does not have another 1200-1300 season in him. And the two backups would be splitting the remaining carries, not adding total carries. Unless you think the staff is going to tell TT "do not run anymore", the play mix is likely to be the same this season as last. That's pure conjecture. And the play mix might be the same (hopefully not since I want them to pass a lot more so we can see if TT is a franchise QB or not). But they very well could run more if the ground game is working and the defense is dominating. We'll see. But just a quick glance at the past 2 season shows that the top rushing had a little of rushing yards by the QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FireChan Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 That's pure conjecture. And the play mix might be the same (hopefully not since I want them to pass a lot more so we can see if TT is a franchise QB or not). But they very well could run more if the ground game is working and the defense is dominating. We'll see. But just a quick glance at the past 2 season shows that the top rushing had a little of rushing yards by the QB. No more conjecture than Easley can put up Hogan's numbers, eh Doc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 No more conjecture than Easley can put up Hogan's numbers, eh Doc? Nope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 That's pure conjecture. And the play mix might be the same (hopefully not since I want them to pass a lot more so we can see if TT is a franchise QB or not). But they very well could run more if the ground game is working and the defense is dominating. We'll see. But just a quick glance at the past 2 season shows that the top rushing had a little of rushing yards by the QB. Top rushing teams past 2 seasons had little rushing yards by the QB? 2015: needed the top rushing QB in the NFL's 636 yards to get to the number 2 spot behind the Bills. In fact the top 3 rushing teams were only the top 3 because their second leading rusher was their QB. 2014: Seattle, even with a 1300 yard RB in the roster, still needed over 800 yards from the QB to get to number one. No more conjecture than Easley can put up Hogan's numbers, eh Doc? And how many Bills coaching personnel have now concluded Easley isn't an NFL WR since they drafted him as such? Yet they threw the lacrosse player in there at WR.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Top rushing teams past 2 seasons had little rushing yards by the QB? 2015: needed the top rushing QB in the NFL's 636 yards to get to the number 2 spot behind the Bills. In fact the top 3 rushing teams were only the top 3 because their second leading rusher was their QB. 2014: Seattle, even with a 1300 yard RB in the roster, still needed over 800 yards from the QB to get to number one. Phone autocorrected "a lot" to "little." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. WEO Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 Phone autocorrected "a lot" to "little." The point remains. Past two seasons, it hasn't been done without the QB as the #2 RB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted June 10, 2016 Share Posted June 10, 2016 The point remains. Past two seasons, it hasn't been done without the QB as the #2 RB True. So why remove their yards? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts