15 thoughts - free agency

[Solar7]

Solar, where would you place Drake among his NFL colleagues? I think he’s a very good player in that he’s among the 12 best starting RBs in the league. I don’t think he’s a very good player is that means he’s a top 5 RB in the league.

He’s shown enough to me to be find spending $5 million a season with $12 million guaranteed. Anything more than that and you’re looking for trouble.

But it’s hard for me to think of an RB who would be worth much more than that — maybe if McCaffrey can do it another year and Barkley can do it 2 more...

Wow. Among the top 12 starting RBs in the league? That's insane. What about 5 100 yard games in four years makes him a top 12 RB?

Using Ourlads' Depth Chart (https://www.ourlads.com/nfldepthcharts/depthchartpos/RB), here are the guys I would take over Drake. Note - this is not in order of the best RBs, just going down the list of that site.

For sure:
Devin Singletary
Sony Michel
Le'Veon Bell
Mark Ingram
Joe Mixon
Nick Chubb
Marlon Mack
Derrick Henry
Phillip Lindsay
Josh Jacobs
Melvin Gordon
Austin Ekeler
Ezekiel Elliot
Saquon Barkley
Aaron Jones
Dalvin Cook
Christian McCaffrey
Alvin Kamara
Raheem Mostert
Chris Carson


I'd have to think about it, but they're on the same level or slightly better:
Lamar Miller
Leonard Fournette
Kareem Hunt
Damien Williams
Miles Sanders
Devonta Freeman
Todd Gurley

So, at best, the 21st RB I'd rather have, and if you hard pressed me to choose, probably somewhere more around 25.

 

[kerouac9]

Oh, so you don't value him very highly at all. FWIW, Drake's entire 2019 season ranked 5th among RBs in DVOA.

I think that Drake, in the Cards offense, is about as good as Austin Ekeler.

 

[DVontel]

Wow. Among the top 12 starting RBs in the league? That's insane. What about 5 100 yard games in four years makes him a top 12 RB?

Using Ourlads' Depth Chart (https://www.ourlads.com/nfldepthcharts/depthchartpos/RB), here are the guys I would take over Drake. Note - this is not in order of the best RBs, just going down the list of that site.

For sure:
Devin Singletary
Sony Michel
Le'Veon Bell
Mark Ingram
Joe Mixon
Nick Chubb
Marlon Mack
Derrick Henry
Phillip Lindsay
Josh Jacobs
Melvin Gordon
Austin Ekeler
Ezekiel Elliot
Saquon Barkley
Aaron Jones
Dalvin Cook
Christian McCaffrey
Alvin Kamara
Raheem Mostert
Chris Carson


I'd have to think about it, but they're on the same level or slightly better:
Lamar Miller
Leonard Fournette
Kareem Hunt
Damien Williams
Miles Sanders
Devonta Freeman
Todd Gurley

So, at best, the 21st RB I'd rather have, and if you hard pressed me to choose, probably somewhere more around 25.

Sony Michel & Melvin Gordon being on this list, let alone being “for sure” is just.....lol wow.

 

[Solar7]

Sony Michel & Melvin Gordon being on this list, let alone being “for sure” is just.....lol wow.

Michel has better numbers in his two seasons than any of Drake's. Same with Melvin Gordon. Give me the guys who actually get on the field. 23-47 TDs for Gordon over Drake in the past four years.

 

[DVontel]

Oh, so you don't value him very highly at all. FWIW, Drake's entire 2019 season ranked 5th among RBs in DVOA.

I think that Drake, in the Cards offense, is about as good as Austin Ekeler.

Should be obvious, but I guess not.

 

[Solar7]

Oh, so you don't value him very highly at all. FWIW, Drake's entire 2019 season ranked 5th among RBs in DVOA.

I think that Drake, in the Cards offense, is about as good as Austin Ekeler.

Well, I've said in other threads, I don't believe in DVOA. It's too subjective, and focused far too much on individual efficiency rather than a bigger picture. Using DVOA to rank guys, they're telling me Latavius Murray, Gus Edwards, and Jordan Howard were around the middle of the best RBs in the league this season, which is very clearly untrue.

 

[Solar7]

@DVontel

What I will say, as an avid fantasy football player, I will admit a bit of a bias to immediately prioritizing usage. Not that it's what I'm necessarily looking for, it's just how my brain frames statistics by default. You're more focused on efficiencies, it seems.

This also applies to my real life job, where efficiencies aren't going to get me any praise if I didn't succeed by volume.

 

[kerouac9]

@DVontel

What I will say, as an avid fantasy football player, I will admit a bit of a bias to immediately prioritizing usage. Not that it's what I'm necessarily looking for, it's just how my brain frames statistics by default. You're more focused on efficiencies, it seems.

This also applies to my real life job, where efficiencies aren't going to get me any praise if I didn't succeed by volume.

Well, okay, but if you project his volume with the Cards last season, he'd have almost 1300 yards and 16 rushing TDs. I don't think you can or should pay him as a guy who you expect to get 4 TDs every game for the next 5 years, but I think you can price in some of that production.

 

[Solar7]

Well, okay, but if you project his volume with the Cards last season, he'd have almost 1300 yards and 16 rushing TDs. I don't think you can or should pay him as a guy who you expect to get 4 TDs every game for the next 5 years, but I think you can price in some of that production.

I've been harping on that 80 yard TD run. Drop it, and the numbers change dramatically. Now it's just over 1100 yards. 70 yards a game. But in reality, he only broke 70 yards a game with us three times.

Those Tampa, SF #2, LA, and PIT games were brutal.

Also, edited this because I accidentally grabbed a 7 game slate instead of the full 8 when I originally crunched the numbers.

 

[kerouac9]

I've been harping on that 80 yard TD run. Drop it, and the numbers change dramatically. Now it's just over 1100 yards. 70 yards a game. But in reality, he only broke 70 yards a game with us three times.

Those Tampa, SF #2, LA, and PIT games were brutal.

Also, edited this because I accidentally grabbed a 7 game slate instead of the full 8 when I originally crunched the numbers.

Well, that's going to happen when you're facing the 2nd (SF), 3rd (PIT), 5th (TB) and 9th (LARM) ranked defenses by DVOA. 1100 rushing yards would still put him #11 on the year.

Now, take away the longest run from the other 10 backs ahead of him, and I'm guessing you'll get something similar.

 

[Solar7]

Well, that's going to happen when you're facing the 2nd (SF), 3rd (PIT), 5th (TB) and 9th (LARM) ranked defenses by DVOA. 1100 rushing yards would still put him #11 on the year.

Now, take away the longest run from the other 10 backs ahead of him, and I'm guessing you'll get something similar.

I started to dive into the longs of each guy but can't quickly find their 2nd longest. But, only 3 RBs in the top 10 had any rushes equaling or above 80 yards.

 

[kerouac9]

I started to dive into the longs of each guy but can't quickly find their 2nd longest. But, only 3 RBs in the top 10 had any rushes equaling or above 80 yards.

Well, it seems like 80 yards is a pretty tough gauge to use, since you have to get the ball on your own 20 in order to have one, which is a rare event.

What I was able to do is look at Derrick Henry's plays from 2019, and I can see runs of 68 yards (against KC), 53 yards (against HOU) — both were TDs. Maybe he would have been caught on an additional 12 or 27 yards, respectively. Maybe not.

I find it very strange that you're treating explosive plays by an RB as being Actually Bad.

 

[Solar7]

Well, it seems like 80 yards is a pretty tough gauge to use, since you have to get the ball on your own 20 in order to have one, which is a rare event.

What I was able to do is look at Derrick Henry's plays from 2019, and I can see runs of 68 yards (against KC), 53 yards (against HOU) — both were TDs. Maybe he would have been caught on an additional 12 or 27 yards, respectively. Maybe not.

I find it very strange that you're treating explosive plays by an RB as being Actually Bad.

Explosive plays are of course, great. But plays that go 80+ yards are by nature, a little fluky. Especially ones where the player wasn't touched at all. Every one of our RBs should have been able to take that one to the house. It's like the one Tim Hightower took against the Saints back in 2009 - it's not really representative of the player's more standard YPC.

For all of the talk about extrapolating these stats, you're also taking into consideration giving Drake 246 carries, more than 100 more attempts than he's ever had in a season up until 2019, and 76 more than that. Can he carry that kind of workload?

All of this wrapped in with a guy whose number one goal is getting paid, and the risk of handing him a multi-year deal, and I just can't get behind him.

As I said previously, we'll see. Not a long time to go until free agency starts and we find out if he's even part of the team. At the end of the season I'll crack a beer with ya'll and admit I was wrong if he's a dynamic starting RB.

 

[gimpy]

Well, I could see you cracking that beer and admitting your wrong, buuttt.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Explosive plays are of course, great. But plays that go 80+ yards are by nature, a little fluky. Especially ones where the player wasn't touched at all. Every one of our RBs should have been able to take that one to the house. It's like the one Tim Hightower took against the Saints back in 2009 - it's not really representative of the player's more standard YPC.

For all of the talk about extrapolating these stats, you're also taking into consideration giving Drake 246 carries, more than 100 more attempts than he's ever had in a season up until 2019, and 76 more than that. Can he carry that kind of workload?

All of this wrapped in with a guy whose number one goal is getting paid, and the risk of handing him a multi-year deal, and I just can't get behind him.

As I said previously, we'll see. Not a long time to go until free agency starts and we find out if he's even part of the team. At the end of the season I'll crack a beer with ya'll and admit I was wrong if he's a dynamic starting RB.

Drake typically has had a good YPC...which kind of defeats your argument.

Isnt every it every NFL players goal to get paid?

Many backs have had over 246 carries. Literally hundreds

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rush_att_single_season.htm

I remember when you questioned whether Murray would crush Rosen's numbers. How did that prediction work out for ya?

 

[Solar7]

Drake typically has had a good YPC...which kind of defeats your argument.

Isnt every it every NFL players goal to get paid?

Many backs have had over 246 carries. Literally hundreds

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rush_att_single_season.htm

I remember when you questioned whether Murray would crush Rosen's numbers. How did that prediction work out for ya?

It doesn't defeat my argument. He can be as efficient as he wants as someone who somehow only sees the field for half or less of his games. He's had four years and three coaches to prove some measure of NFL consistency and you guys are going nuts over 3 100 yard games. I could care less about his YPC that's boosted by three anomalous performances.

Every NFL player wants to get paid, Drake doesn't care about winning or where he goes over getting paid. There's a difference. That kind of mercenary will kick his legs up once that sweet guarantee comes in.

And way to miss my point about Drake and his amount of carries. He didn't every carry the load himself in college, he didn't do it in Miami, and I have no reason to believe he'll be able to do it here.

There are plenty of backs whose role in the NFL is simply not catered to being a starting player, but instead a complementary part of a platoon. Like Giovani Bernard. That's probably a good comp for Drake.

 

[Krangodnzr]

It doesn't defeat my argument. He can be as efficient as he wants as someone who somehow only sees the field for half or less of his games. He's had four years and three coaches to prove some measure of NFL consistency and you guys are going nuts over 3 100 yard games. I could care less about his YPC that's boosted by three anomalous performances.

Every NFL player wants to get paid, Drake doesn't care about winning or where he goes over getting paid. There's a difference. That kind of mercenary will kick his legs up once that sweet guarantee comes in.

And way to miss my point about Drake and his amount of carries. He didn't every carry the load himself in college, he didn't do it in Miami, and I have no reason to believe he'll be able to do it here.

There are plenty of backs whose role in the NFL is simply not catered to being a starting player, but instead a complementary part of a platoon. Like Giovani Bernard. That's probably a good comp for Drake.

Not going nuts bro. I'm just not dumb enough to believe that you can easily replace what Drake did. That's monumentally stupid. It's always easy to say that you knew it was going to work out when it does, but it usually doesnt work.

I'm out on Drake if he costs more than $7 mil per. Maybe more than $6 mil.

But its ridiculous to think what he showed can be replaced with ease.

 

[Solar7]

Not going nuts bro. I'm just not dumb enough to believe that you can easily replace what Drake did. That's monumentally stupid. It's always easy to say that you knew it was going to work out when it does, but it usually doesnt work.

I'm out on Drake if he costs more than $7 mil per. Maybe more than $6 mil.

But its ridiculous to think what he showed can be replaced with ease.

Chase Edmonds literally had a 3 TD, 100 yard plus game and was running at a more consistent YPC than Drake did right before we acquired him. It doesn't make replacing that "easy," but I think we're giving Drake too much credit here.

 

[Phrazbit]

Chase Edmonds literally had a 3 TD, 100 yard plus game and was running at a more consistent YPC than Drake did right before we acquired him. It doesn't make replacing that "easy," but I think we're giving Drake too much credit here.

Drake can block, he averaged more yards per carry and Edmonds can't even stay on the field. Outside of that Giants game (against possibly the worst defense in the league) Edmonds hardly played.

I'm not willing to break the bank for Drake, 6 mil a year is a stretch, but I also think that if he leaves we're going to hope to cash in a cheap lotto ticket or our RB situation is going to blow hard.

 

[Krangodnzr]

Chase Edmonds literally had a 3 TD, 100 yard plus game and was running at a more consistent YPC than Drake did right before we acquired him. It doesn't make replacing that "easy," but I think we're giving Drake too much credit here.

What's hilarious is you keep bemoaning all of the holes on the roster, and you're advocating:

1) Creating another hole (starting RB)
2) Using another draft pick

Drake was a real good player over the course of the second half of the season. Even games you discount and said he played poorly could be chalked up to team performance since a RB is so reliant on situation and blocking to be successful.

If Drake walks, the Cardinals likely need to use a day two pick on RB because David Johnson is now running scared and while Edmonds is a solid back up, it would be pure folly to count on him as a starter.

Guys I would look at: Cam Akers or Joshua Kelly.

 

[Dr. Jones]

I think it should be noted that not many RB's get 80 yard TD's because they get caught from behind so often. Another reason Drake is a top 12 (for sure) RB in our offense.

 

[slanidrac16]

You can provide stats , highlights, analyticals, teammate endorsements and anything else and you will never change Solars mind.

We could resign Drake and he could yin for 1300 yards, 400 yards in receiving and score 12 touchdowns and Solar would respond, yeah but.

 

[Solar7]

What's hilarious is you keep bemoaning all of the holes on the roster, and you're advocating:

1) Creating another hole (starting RB)
2) Using another draft pick

Drake was a real good player over the course of the second half of the season. Even games you discount and said he played poorly could be chalked up to team performance since a RB is so reliant on situation and blocking to be successful.

If Drake walks, the Cardinals likely need to use a day two pick on RB because David Johnson is now running scared and while Edmonds is a solid back up, it would be pure folly to count on him as a starter.

Guys I would look at: Cam Akers or Joshua Kelly.

1) Start DJ and Edmonds. This isn't ideal, but it's not a hole like the other spots where we don't have a single player to man the spot.
2) A pick on a player that is cost controlled at a point in the draft where we are drafting him to be part of a committee, not the unquestioned starter. In the third or fourth round you're not guaranteed to be drafting a starter anyways, and RB has been shown to have a ton of value in recent years.

I think it should be noted that not many RB's get 80 yard TD's because they get caught from behind so often. Another reason Drake is a top 12 (for sure) RB in our offense.

Please tell me the RBs you rank him over, like I did.

You can provide stats , highlights, analyticals, teammate endorsements and anything else and you will never change Solars mind.

We could resign Drake and he could yin for 1300 yards, 400 yards in receiving and score 12 touchdowns and Solar would respond, yeah but.

Ridiculous. Of course if he goes out and balls out, I'll be happy. The stats, highlights, and analytics barely back him up as a mid-tier RB.

Where are all of the articles claiming he's such a great RB that teams should be paying for him? He's the third best RB available on every list. Drake barely makes it into the top 100 available free agents on most rankers. PFF has him at 94.

Again, only Cardinals fans valuing him as some kind of 1300 yard RB. No one else.

 

[Krangodnzr]

You can provide stats , highlights, analyticals, teammate endorsements and anything else and you will never change Solars mind.

We could resign Drake and he could yin for 1300 yards, 400 yards in receiving and score 12 touchdowns and Solar would respond, yeah but.

I mean he wasnt just wrong on Murray, he was epically wrong.

I remember when he was saying Murray would put up similar stats to Rosen. That was funny.

 

[slanidrac16]

I mean he wasnt just wrong on Murray, he was epically wrong.

I remember when he was saying Murray would put up similar stats to Rosen. That was funny.

I get it. We all have our points of view. I don’t use analytics. I use the old eyeballs.