Would you trade LJ to the Texans/Raiders/Lions for a 1st and 3rd rounder?

[BigRedChief]

King Carl would never make that trade but for the sake of a good conversation lets say its possible.............

We are old. We need fresh legs. We have at least 5-6 spots to fill to make us a contender. Do we step back before we go foward? Do we just do the best with what we got and try to add in as best as we can?

The root point (as I see it) is do you believe we can compete for a division title and or a legitamate Super Bowl run in the next two years?

If you think we are not going to be ready in two years you make the trade.

If you think we are going to be ready in two years don't make the trade.

[KurtCobain]

We should trade our asses off and rid ourselves of any player worth consideration for a trade, and try to get atleast 4-5 first round picks, maybe 2 in the top ten. Then we go find the best highschool coach in the country, sign him, and wait for the SB.

[BWillie]

How about 5 #1 picks next year and I'd think about it. LJ is the second best running back in the league. He's the best player on our team. He may be a complete dickhead, but he's worth more than that.

[Easy 6]

No.

Way.

Why throw away the #2 RB in the League, at present anyway... this guy is something to TRULY build on for atleast 5 more years. He has yet to even hit his peak, he's got some growing up to do, but so do i.

He loves & studies the game, plays with fire & a VERY grim attitude. Blocking & hands need work, but i think his desire to be mentioned with the Great Ones will drive him to improve those areas.

And he isnt being called the next Jim Brown by just 'ol Joe Scott, the guys a KEEPER......carried us ALL year long.

This clubs history of pounding the rock is the single biggest reason i'm a fan, LJ is the Crown Jewel of that legacy IMVVHO.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by scott free

No.

Way.

Why throw away the #2 RB in the League, at present anyway... this guy is something to TRULY build on for atleast 5 more years. He has yet to even hit his peak, he's got some growing up to do, but so do i.

He loves & studies the game, plays with fire & a VERY grim attitude. Blocking & hands need work, but i think his desire to be mentioned with the Great Ones will drive him to improve those areas.

And he isnt being called the next Jim Brown by just 'ol Joe Scott, the guys a KEEPER......carried us ALL year long.

This clubs history of pounding the rock is the single biggest reason i'm a fan, LJ is the Crown Jewel of that legacy IMVVHO.

Because..........history says he probably only has 1 year left if that.

[Easy 6]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Because..........history says he probably only has 1 year left if that.

He's only played about a year & 1/2 in the NFL & did a LOT of watching in college. No way he's gonna just fall apart after 1 full, heavy season.

If he goes 400 carries into a 9 man front NEXT year......then i will worry.

He's a low-mileage Classic, hard to find.

[Mecca]

Originally Posted by scott free

He's only played about a year & 1/2 in the NFL & did a LOT of watching in college. No way he's gonna just fall apart after 1 full, heavy season.

If he goes 400 carries into a 9 man front NEXT year......then i will worry.

He's a low-mileage Classic, hard to find.

I'm just going by the numbers here.......Jamal Anderson was actually younger when he did it and wasn't heavily worked prior and he was done after his big carry year.

[Easy 6]

Originally Posted by Mecca

I'm just going by the numbers here.......Jamal Anderson was actually younger when he did it and wasn't heavily worked prior and he was done after his big carry year.

Did he sit for 2 years in college???

& then sit 2+ years coming out???

A guy like Trent is a perfect example of how little early playing time can extend a career.

Larry will be fine.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by scott free

Did he sit for 2 years in college???

& then sit 2+ years coming out???

A guy like Trent is a perfect example of how little early playing time can extend a career.

Larry will be fine.

I believe that Anderson spent two years at Moorpark Jr. College before attending Utah.

The level of talent at the Jr. College level is only slightly above high school, so it's unlikely he took the kind of pounding there, and at Utah, that he would have at a major conference school for 4 years.

He wasn't used much for his first couple of NFL seasons.

So he probably was relatively fresh prior to that '98, 410 carry season.

[PastorMikH]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Because..........history says he probably only has 1 year left if that.

Runningbacks are only good now for 2 1/2 years of play?


That's news to me. What history are you refering too?


As for Jamal Anderson, he had 2 16 game/1,000 yards seasons before the season where he got 410 carries. He also went down the following year because of an ACL injury. I'm not exactly sure how the carries the year prior is related to the ACL. ACLs happen to rookies just like they do veterans. High-use players and those that come off the bench. In games and in practice.


Faulk got 400+ touches in Indy before going to StL - and he continued to produce in StL for 5-6 more years.

Tiki saw 400+ touches last season in NY and has produced well this year - and iwas criticized earlier in the season for leaving the game with years left in the tank.

Edgerin James put up over 400 touches last season, got traded to the cards this year and is producing this year.

Jamal Lewis had 400+ touches in '03 and has continued to produce



LJ is a big, young back without a lot of gameday mileage on him yet. I think he has a lot of years in his tank.

[Mecca]

Touches and carries are 2 different things........400+ carries almost always equals a down turn in production. All the backs that carried over 400 times dealt with injury issues following it...that's how the ACL is relatd to his 410 carries.

Jamal Lewis isn't half the player he once was and he's blown both his ACL's.....that might be the comparison of what LJ will be in 2-3 years.

[PastorMikH]

Originally Posted by Mecca

Touches and carries are 2 different things........400+ carries almost always equals a down turn in production. All the backs that carried over 400 times dealt with injury issues following it...that's how the ACL is relatd to his 410 carries.

Jamal Lewis isn't half the player he once was and he's blown both his ACL's.....that might be the comparison of what LJ will be in 2-3 years.

Yeah, the heavy load Kimble Anders was forced to carry the year before is why his achiles tendon went out too.

Not to mention Sylvester Morris and his ACL.

And touches aren't the same as carries? So that means a RB doesn't get hit when he catches a pass?

Like I said, explain to me exactly how a player is more prone to injury after 1 big year? It seems to me that he would be more prone due to hits in his knees, not carries in general. It would also seem to me that the player would be more prone to injury towards the end of the season with all the carries - when his body is tired and beat up rather than in the seasons following.

There is no doubt that the longer a RB plays, the more inclined he is to injury. But to say that history, stats, or whatever indicate that a player's career is ALMOST ALWAYS over within a year or two of a big seaso is a bit of a stretch IMO. One name isn't going to support the "almost always" arguement IMO.







Here's a site I found about ACL injuries...

http://www.stockton.edu/ospreys/ACL/NflAcl.htm


Interestingly the most ACLs occur in the summer months when players are in the poorest condition.

Also, RBs are the one position with the highest number of incidents - I'm sure the denver chop blocking is taking a toll on DL though.

[milkman]

Originally Posted by PastorMikH

Yeah, the heavy load Kimble Anders was forced to carry the year before is why his achiles tendon went out too.

Not to mention Sylvester Morris and his ACL.

And touches aren't the same as carries? So that means a RB doesn't get hit when he catches a pass?

Like I said, explain to me exactly how a player is more prone to injury after 1 big year? It seems to me that he would be more prone due to hits in his knees, not carries in general. It would also seem to me that the player would be more prone to injury towards the end of the season with all the carries - when his body is tired and beat up rather than in the seasons following.

There is no doubt that the longer a RB plays, the more inclined he is to injury. But to say that history, stats, or whatever indicate that a player's career is ALMOST ALWAYS over within a year or two of a big seaso is a bit of a stretch IMO. One name isn't going to support the "almost always" arguement IMO.







Here's a site I found about ACL injuries...

http://www.stockton.edu/ospreys/ACL/NflAcl.htm


Interestingly the most ACLs occur in the summer months when players are in the poorest condition.

Also, RBs are the one position with the highest number of incidents - I'm sure the denver chop blocking is taking a toll on DL though.

They aren't necessarily more prone to injury, so much as nagging ailments, and declining numbers.

Eddie George, Earl Campbell, James Wilder, Barry Foster, Jamal Lewis, along with Anderson, all had big carry years, and none them were ever as productive the following seasons.

[PastorMikH]

Originally Posted by milkman

They aren't necessarily more prone to injury, so much as nagging ailments, and declining numbers.

Eddie George, Earl Campbell, James Wilder, Barry Foster, Jamal Lewis, along with Anderson, all had big carry years, and none them were ever as productive the following seasons.

Milkman, I understand the concept and I do agree. The more carries a RB has, the more likely he is to run into problems. However, Mecca's assumption that history dictates that "Almost Always" after a RB puts up 1 big carry season he's done isn't exactly accurate.


Eddie George played 4 full years after that big year, 2 of them over 1k yards and less than half a yard difference per carry.

Earl Campbell played 5-6 more years and almost duplicated his high mark two years later - missed 2 games or he may have surpassed. '81 the oilers in general tanked.

James Wilder did have the dropoff

Barry Foster was a smaller back that didn't do much before his one big season either. Basically, he had one excellent season in 5 years of play.

Jamal Lewis had Justin Taylor seeing more reps after his big year.


'Course there's also Eric Dickerson who kept putting up yards for several years after that big season.

LT has carried some real loads and is still going.

As I stated earlier, Faulk is another.

Ricky Williams did have a "joint" problem after his 2 highly productive seasons, but it was a different kind of "joint"

Walter Peyton is another that cranked out several more years after a high carry season.




Like I said, I understand the concept and I do agree.

There are also other variables to consider - what happened to the rest of the team? Did the coaching staff stay intact? How many years did the player play before they had "the big year"?

Also, as I tried to explain, some of those injuries happened because the player was hit, fell, etc a certain way. There are lots of players every year that take hits that either hamper or end their careers - some are rookies with high prospects that never get to prove themselves, others are up-coming players that never get to reach their full potential, while others, get the hits after they reach the top. And yes, the more a player plays, the more apt they are to take one of those hits. But, those hits can come to any player, irrigardless of how many carries they had the year before. For example, what would Bo Jackson have done if he hadn't taken that hit?

[Tribal Warfare]

Originally Posted by milkman

Eddie George, Earl Campbell, James Wilder, Barry Foster, Jamal Lewis, along with Anderson, all had big carry years, and none them were ever as productive the following seasons.

Jim Brown had high carry situations throuhout the year, and is still considered the best RB ever

[Extra Point]

The Centaur will need some line help, to turn these carries into wins.