Browns trade Trent Richardson to Colts

davyjose · 21-09-2013 7:32pm

Wonder what changed for Lombardi.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82885edd/article/nfl-draft-forecast-chandler-jones-up-courtney-upshaw-down

HigginsJ · 21-09-2013 9:53pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

That's fine, but after 298 NFL carries for 1,055 yards is he still worth a first round pick? Is he still this huge talent? Certainly hasn't looked like it thus far.

People underestimate the value of low first round draft picks tbh.

Add in 12 td's (breaking Jim Brown's franchise rookie record) & 460 receiving yards

Syferus · 21-09-2013 11:06pm

HigginsJ wrote: »

Add in 12 td's (breaking Jim Brown's franchise rookie record) & 460 receiving yards

And mostly within broken ribs and on against teams that were stacking the box. Richardson is for real.

Emperor1989 · 22-09-2013 11:52am

Syferus wrote: »

And mostly within broken ribs and on against teams that were stacking the box. Richardson is for real.

2 Broken ribs and expected to rush with little help from the offensive line and a stacked box.

Richardson is going to be a star with the Colts....Great move for him he can finally fulfill his potential at the highest level.

LuckyLloyd · 23-09-2013 10:08am

35 yards on 13 carries last night.

Chucky the tree · 23-09-2013 10:09am

Syferus wrote: »

And mostly within broken ribs and on against teams that were stacking the box. Richardson is for real.

That's not very accurate. Richardson only faced 8 in the box 17% of the time, league average was 23%.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/09/20/3tfo-jaguars-seahawks-week-3/

davyjose · 23-09-2013 10:22am

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

35 yards on 13 carries last night.

First game on a new team. Hardly a fair judgement.

Anyway, ill take it if Bradshaw plays like that.

raven136 · 23-09-2013 10:28am

Emperor1989 wrote: »

2 Broken ribs and expected to rush with little help from the offensive line and a stacked box.

Richardson is going to be a star with the Colts....Great move for him he can finally fulfill his potential at the highest level.

Isnt the Line actually good,especially Joe Thomas?

mikemac1 · 23-09-2013 10:42am

raven136 wrote: »

Isnt the Line actually good,especially Joe Thomas?

Alex Mack the center will be a probowler for years to come, beast.

Oneil Cousins the right guard is a liability and should never see the field ever again. Not even worthy of a backup roster spot.

The left guard Greco and right tackle Schwartz are decent.

Yes it's a decent line, certainly top 15 imo

TO. · 23-09-2013 12:28pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

35 yards on 13 carries last night.

Not forgetting his touchdown. Sure Richardson has a lot to prove and sure he could fail in Indy but has he become your new Tebow? First game with the Colts and only in for selected plays. Yet to full grasp the playbook and sharing carries with Bradshaw who was a beast yesterday. But hey not surprised you are writing Richardson off already. Colts may have overpaid for him in many eyes but writing him because of that is just nonsense at this point especially after 1 game with the Colts.

Chucky the tree · 23-09-2013 2:09pm

Probably writing him off based on what he has done so far in his career. He's a great goal-line back, but you'd be nuts to give up a first round for one. I think he'll turn out to be a solid back, nothing more though. Browns got a steal by trading him for a first imo.

Bateman · 23-09-2013 4:44pm

I think it's very amusing for people to suggest that the Colts didn't weigh this up carefully.

To suggest that the Colts don't have armies of scouts and metrics people who are already putting together various possibilities of what they could have gotten in the first round next year, versus what they might get deeper in later rounds.

To almost suggest that every first round pick turns out to be a resounding success.

On balance only time will tell and there's a case to be made for the prediction that Cleveland will do better out of it. But to suggest that the Colts are mugs who've allowed a steal here, give me a break

davyjose · 23-09-2013 5:55pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Probably writing him off based on what he has done so far in his career. He's a great goal-line back, but you'd be nuts to give up a first round for one. I think he'll turn out to be a solid back, nothing more though. Browns got a steal by trading him for a first imo.

Colts haven't had a 1,000 yard rusher since 2007. I would say that's the mark of a solid rusher. So I'll take that. Plus we have Bradshaw. We have more needs than RB, but if the running game can help us out the way it did on Sunday (our most convincing win in the Pagano/Luck era), then it's worth a first round pick. No questions asked.

Chucky the tree · 23-09-2013 6:06pm

Bateman wrote: »

I think it's very amusing for people to suggest that the Colts didn't weigh this up carefully.

To suggest that the Colts don't have armies of scouts and metrics people who are already putting together various possibilities of what they could have gotten in the first round next year, versus what they might get deeper in later rounds.

To almost suggest that every first round pick turns out to be a resounding success.

On balance only time will tell and there's a case to be made for the prediction that Cleveland will do better out of it. But to suggest that the Colts are mugs who've allowed a steal here, give me a break

Yea, because scouts and GMs have never been wrong.

davyjose wrote: »

Colts haven't had a 1,000 yard rusher since 2007. I would say that's the mark of a solid rusher. So I'll take that. Plus we have Bradshaw. We have more needs than RB, but if the running game can help us out the way it did on Sunday (our most convincing win in the Pagano/Luck era), then it's worth a first round pick. No questions asked.

If the Colts wanted a 1,000 yard rusher so badly they should have just handed the ball to Ballard more often last year.

Son Of A Vidic · 23-09-2013 6:09pm

davyjose wrote: »

We have more needs than RB, but if the running game can help us out the way it did on Sunday (our most convincing win in the Pagano/Luck era), then it's worth a first round pick. No questions asked.

If ever a game illustrated the vital importance of a strong running game. It certainly was that game against the 49er's.

eagle eye · 23-09-2013 6:23pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

No my argument is based around relative value and talent scarcity in the position. I accept that it's hard for you to understand, but spending money on a highly drafted running back or signing a running back with ~3 years experience to a huge deal is a really inefficient use of limited player acquirement resources. Get the other stuff right and it really isn't hard to find a couple of lads who can run into holes for 4ypc+ and ~1200 yards which is all you need to balance things out.

What exactly is hard for me to understand?

The fact of the matter is that when it comes to drafting you can go two ways and thats pick the best fit for your team or pick the best player available. In either of those instances that player might be a RB as early as the top of the draft.
In Richardson's case there was a huge majority saying he was worthy of being a top draft pick, I'm talking NFL scouts, media and fans and posters on this site. I wasn't one of them btw.

Thats not too long ago either so its far too early to predict how good or not so good he will be. I think even at the level he is at now that he was a better bet than a rookie out of college given that he has a lot of potential upside and is a proven performer at NFL level even though he has not achieved the standard yet that was expected of him from the get go.

davyjose · 23-09-2013 9:23pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

If the Colts wanted a 1,000 yard rusher so badly they should have just handed the ball to Ballard more often last year.

New OC this year. Much as I like Ballard (despite his injury) Richardson is an upgrade.

LuckyLloyd · 24-09-2013 7:33am

TO. wrote: »

Not forgetting his touchdown. Sure Richardson has a lot to prove and sure he could fail in Indy but has he become your new Tebow? First game with the Colts and only in for selected plays. Yet to full grasp the playbook and sharing carries with Bradshaw who was a beast yesterday. But hey not surprised you are writing Richardson off already. Colts may have overpaid for him in many eyes but writing him because of that is just nonsense at this point especially after 1 game with the Colts.

Did I write him off? He's performing averagely since he got into the league in and around replacement level. He deserves to be an NFL player, the question is about being very clear headed on whether he is still worth a first round pick.

davyjose wrote: »

Colts haven't had a 1,000 yard rusher since 2007. I would say that's the mark of a solid rusher. So I'll take that. Plus we have Bradshaw. We have more needs than RB, but if the running game can help us out the way it did on Sunday (our most convincing win in the Pagano/Luck era), then it's worth a first round pick. No questions asked.

16 backs in the NFL ran for over 1000 yards last season. You don't need to spend a first round pick to achieve an increasingly average production standard.

davyjose · 24-09-2013 10:17am

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

16 backs in the NFL ran for over 1000 yards last season. You don't need to spend a first round pick to achieve an increasingly average production standard.

Yeah but waiting til the 3rd doesn't automatic ally guarantee you a good RB. The ones expected to do well go early but it doesn'talways work out. You only hear about guys like Alfred Morris, but where's Kenjon Barner or Lamichael James right now?

LuckyLloyd · 24-09-2013 10:56am

davyjose wrote: »

Yeah but waiting til the 3rd doesn't automatic ally guarantee you a good RB. The ones expected to do well go early but it doesn'talways work out. You only hear about guys like Alfred Morris, but where's Kenjon Barner or Lamichael James right now?

There were 16 guys doing it last year, another five or so moving the rock well relative to volume of carries. To put it another way, last year:

- 17 guys ran for more yards than Richardson;
- 34 guys ran for more yards per attempt than Richardson;

Loads of ways to pick up a guy on the cheap who'll give you Richardson type production.

davyjose · 24-09-2013 11:03am

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

There were 16 guys doing it last year, another five or so moving the rock well relative to volume of carries. To put it another way, last year:

- 17 guys ran for more yards than Richardson;
- 34 guys ran for more yards per attempt than Richardson;

Loads of ways to pick up a guy on the cheap who'll give you Richardson type production.

Yeah but my point is, it gets much more hit and miss the further down the draft you go.
Sure you might get the next Arian Foster, but you probably won't. At least TRich is a lock to give a reaaonably high level of production.

LuckyLloyd · 24-09-2013 11:05am

davyjose wrote: »

Yeah but my point is, it gets much more hit and miss the further down the draft you go.
Sure you might get the next Arian Foster, but you probably won't. At least TRich is a lock to give a reaaonably high level of production.

He is? He's replacement level thus far.

Bateman · 24-09-2013 12:12pm

Can we please end the "cost/value" argument? Whatever people's opinions are on the lad's ability and/or potential...
Read elsewhere:
Indianapolis is acquiring a guy who would never have fallen out of the top five just a year ago for a pick that will almost surely not fall into the top five in 2014. That's the definition of buying low.

The Colts are also getting Richardson at a greatly reduced price. While they do miss out on one year of a cost-controlled Richardson by trading for him during his sophomore season, they're not forced to repay any of Richardson's already paid $13.3 million signing bonus to the Browns, who will see the remaining unassigned (in terms of the salary cap) $10.1 million of that bonus accelerate onto their cap in 2013 ($3.5 million) and 2014 ($6.7 million). Instead, the Colts basically have Richardson signed to a guaranteed three-year deal for an average of about $2.2 million per season. If Richardson succeeds in his new digs, the Colts will get a franchise running back at less than half of his original price and at pennies of his true market value.

matthew8 · 24-09-2013 12:23pm

Even if Richardson's ypc is a bit low he can still catch, block, score and handle a large load. Besides, apart from Peyton Hillis for a few weeks, practically no recent Cleveland rusher has been able to rack up the yards, for one reason or another.

davyjose · 24-09-2013 12:25pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

He is? He's replacement level thus far.

I believe so. Time will tell I suppose. The Colts front office believe so too. Every trade is a risk, but he's 19 games into his career.
Plenty of time to make good on his undoubted potential.

Bateman · 24-09-2013 12:26pm

The blocking is a big thing - especially with Ballard now injured and Brown not being a great protector, plus Bradshaw's dodgy foot.

taidghbaby · 24-09-2013 2:34pm

At the end of the day the Colts want to play power football! You may not agree that that's the best way to go about winning (I have my reservations) but Richardson fits into the type of back you want for this!

Bradshaw can be very good, but he has durability issues! The other two backs on the roster (Browne and Williams) are smaller and don't fit the offence Hamilton is trying to run!

I think someone mentioned earlier about drafting for need against drafting the BPA! Richardson is an example of drafting for need! For me I might not 100% agree with the trade but I can see the logic behind it!

LuckyLloyd · 30-09-2013 6:19am

20 carries for 60 yards in rout
1 catch for 6 yards

eagle eye · 30-09-2013 12:17pm

Isn't it mad when you think about it?

Since the Colts signed Richardson they have looked almost unstoppable, I'm not saying thats mutally exclusive to the signing of Trent obviously.

At the same time the Browns have won two in a row and sit joint top of their division. :eek:

LuckyLloyd · 07-10-2013 12:23pm

18 carries for 56 yards in win

Squidgy Black · 07-10-2013 12:48pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

18 carries for 56 yards in win

Not bad considering the Hawks crowded the box most of the time, and he got a couple of big first downs.

Definitely a big asset to the team, opens up the play downfield where Luck is just bombing the ball down to Hilton and Wayne.

taidghbaby · 07-10-2013 1:00pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

18 carries for 56 yards in win

Did you watch the game?

LuckyLloyd · 07-10-2013 1:16pm

taidghbaby wrote: »

Did you watch the game?

Nope, his stat line very consistent thus far this season though.

taidghbaby · 07-10-2013 2:02pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Nope, his stat line very consistent thus far this season though.

Yeah but of course the stats don't mention the fact the Seahawks d-line dominated the Colts o-line in the 1st half, or that he made a great pass block on the 80 yard TD pass to TY that got the colts back into the game! Nor does it mention the fantastic 5 yard run he had on third down late in the 4th quarter which set up a field goal that forced the Seahwaks to attempt to go 80 yards in under 2 mins!

But if were gonna judge a player solely on statistics taken off NFL.com then that's fair enough I suppose!

LuckyLloyd · 07-10-2013 3:00pm

taidghbaby wrote: »

Yeah but of course the stats don't mention the fact the Seahawks d-line dominated the Colts o-line in the 1st half, or that he made a great pass block on the 80 yard TD pass to TY that got the colts back into the game! Nor does it mention the fantastic 5 yard run he had on third down late in the 4th quarter which set up a field goal that forced the Seahwaks to attempt to go 80 yards in under 2 mins!

But if were gonna judge a player solely on statistics taken off NFL.com then that's fair enough I suppose!

He's a high first round running back. He's paid to run the rock. No doubt he'd be a hell of a fullback though by the sounds of things!!

eagle eye · 07-10-2013 9:46pm

Both teams are 3-0 since the trade.:eek:

07-10-2013 10:12pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

He's a high first round running back. He's paid to run the rock. No doubt he'd be a hell of a fullback though by the sounds of things!!

Yes because a back that can do multiple jobs well is pointless
in the modern nfl pass blocking is huge in a half back

HigginsJ · 07-10-2013 10:16pm

Zahir Delicious Historian wrote: »

Yes because a back that can do multiple jobs well is pointless
in the modern nfl pass blocking is huge in a half back

It's a huge reason why David Wilson is struggling to make an impact with us

LuckyLloyd · 07-10-2013 10:17pm

Zahir Delicious Historian wrote: »

Yes because a back that can do multiple jobs well is pointless
in the modern nfl pass blocking is huge in a half back

He doesn't run the ball well though

07-10-2013 10:49pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

He doesn't run the ball well though

I disagree he's not Adrian Peterson but he's cost the colts a late first round pick I feel he's better runner than most late first round picks in recent years

Well see how he is by the end if thus year but I think he's gona be huge for Andrew luck

padraig_f · 08-10-2013 12:02am

Probably too early to tell about Richardson, but had a look at the game from last night on condensed view, and my opinion was he didn't do anything that wasn't given to him.

Had one 15-yard run in the 3rd quarter, but the o-line opened a huge gap for him. The 5-yard run he had in the 4th quarter looked more like a missed tackle to me. Apart from that, he looked like a liability, never gaining any yards he wasn't given (other 16 carries = 36 yards).

Finished the game with 56 yards on 18 carries (3.1 ypc). Donald Brown, the second-string RB, had 37 yards on 6 carries (6.2 ypc), including a goal-line carry for a TD.

Haven't followed Richardson's career so don't have a strong position on the debate, but they were my impressions watching that particular game.

LuckyLloyd · 15-10-2013 7:33am

10 carries for 40 yards in loss
1 catch for 13 yards

Silver-Tiger · 15-10-2013 12:14pm

It's hard to understand.

He was playing better with cracked ribs.

How long would it take for a RB to be up to date with a playbook?
I would have thought that would be the most "feel" position on offence.

TO. · 15-10-2013 12:22pm

Silver-Tiger wrote: »

It's hard to understand.

He was playing better with cracked ribs.

How long would it take for a RB to be up to date with a playbook?
I would have thought that would be the most "feel" position on offence.

Biggest problem with the Colts and Gruden mentioned it last night is that they are like the Pats and Broncos right now with Luck. Luck like Manning and Brady has the ability to use audibles efficiently and effectively often. Not only does Richardson have to learn the playbook which is probably a few hundred pages long he has to learn new terminology and on top of that know what every single audible is. Gruden and more than a few other ex coaches and pundits reckon it will be next season before he in anyway effective as a Colts player. The Colts offense is a lot more complex than people think it is and a lot more complex than he was used to at the Browns.

Right now he looks lost and of course people will point out his flaws now and continue to make the case he is not worth what the Colts paid for him because it is easy for the naysayers to pick on him when he isnt doing anything.

HigginsJ · 15-10-2013 1:17pm

I have been one of Richardson's biggest fans since he came out but I am getting slightly worried about the lack of production.

The low number of carries isnt too much of a worry but his ypc is still quite low. He also doesnt appear to be running at the sub 4.5 speed we know he possesses.

That being said his 13yd reception last night was top class stuff

LuckyLloyd · 15-10-2013 1:27pm

TO. wrote: »

Biggest problem with the Colts and Gruden mentioned it last night is that they are like the Pats and Broncos right now with Luck. Luck like Manning and Brady has the ability to use audibles efficiently and effectively often. Not only does Richardson have to learn the playbook which is probably a few hundred pages long he has to learn new terminology and on top of that know what every single audible is. Gruden and more than a few other ex coaches and pundits reckon it will be next season before he in anyway effective as a Colts player. The Colts offense is a lot more complex than people think it is and a lot more complex than he was used to at the Browns.

Right now he looks lost and of course people will point out his flaws now and continue to make the case he is not worth what the Colts paid for him because it is easy for the naysayers to pick on him when he isnt doing anything.

Stat trends have dropped off somewhat, but - rushing wise at least - it's not a dramatic disimprovement:

Browns: 17 Games; 298 Carries; 1055 Yards; 3.5 YPC; 11 TD
Colts: 4 Games; 61 Carries; 191 Yards; 3.1 YPC; 2 TD

Browns: 17 Games; 81 Targets; 58 Receptions; 418 Yards; 7.2 YPR; 1 TD
Colts: 4 Games; 7 Targets; 2 Receptions; 19 Yards; 9.5 YPR; 0 TD

Thing is, not only does he need to get back to Browns level production - he has to way exceed that again to end up where he's expected to be.

Only a quarter of a season under his belt with the Colts though yet. Plenty of time to turn things around.

eagle eye · 15-10-2013 1:50pm

And the run of wins for both teams since the trade ended this week. Weird how they are both 3-1 and both lost the same week since it happened.

LuckyLloyd · 21-10-2013 7:51am

14 carries for 37 yards in emotional victory

Chucky the tree · 21-10-2013 12:40pm

Just wondering what was the difference between Trent Richardson and Eddie Lacey from a draft prospective? Richardson was a bit quicker but what set them apart for one to be considered a top 5 pick compared to a second round pick?

Dohnny Jepp · 21-10-2013 1:25pm

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Just wondering what was the difference between Trent Richardson and Eddie Lacey from a draft prospective? Richardson was a bit quicker but what set them apart for one to be considered a top 5 pick compared to a second round pick?

I don't watch too much college football, and it's only after the superbowl that I start researching players and watching some tape but I remember looking at Richardson and thinking he was the second-coming of beast-mode.

Browns trade Trent Richardson to Colts

Comments