He's not got 4 years of none production. He has 3.5 years of misuse.
What he had was 3.5 years with an average of 4.9 yards per carry. That's the only thing he can control.
If Gase wants to waste him that's on him.
He came him with 3 days practice and ran for what was it? 175 yards? That take some doing.
He's not done enough to earn top money but he's certainly not lacking talent.
You guys keep saying it's misuse, but what if it's not? This is so similar to the Kliff Kingsbury stuff that I have to keep eyerolling at. The cream tends to rise to the top, and I'm going to use past history to define a guy unless there's a
huge extenuating circumstance. But the fact that Drake has never started a full season, and has been sitting on the bench even when healthy, says something to me. I'm guessing it's his practice habits, desire to put in the work, some kind of a bad attitude (and you can be a good person with a bad football attitude), or something else.
This all screams bias to me because we're Cardinals fans and want to believe he's going to be something wildly different than he's always been. In college, in the pros, he's a complementary back.
Very few guys take the Wes Welker or Raheem Mostert route. Most of them are what they are.
Also, he ran for 110 yards against SF in that game, not 175. He did contribute 52 more yards receiving. A good game, but there's just a ridiculous amount of backs in NFL history that have had a couple of good games and have flamed out.
To be this excited over someone with 5 career 100 yard rushing games just makes me laugh. The "no tread on his tires" thing is applicable to plenty of backs who didn't see the field because they weren't very good.