Jump to content

49ers RB Raheem Mostert requests trade


RaidersAreOne

Recommended Posts

Just now, theJ said:

Scoring efficiency is more closely correlated with passing efficiency/success than rushing efficiency/success.

They both still correlate, just much more strongly with passing numbers.

Of course. I only said RBs matter. I still think they do, but no where even close to QBs and the passing game in general. I also agree with SuperJoe's response to my CMC example - good counter point that I agree with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hunter2_1 said:

Of course. I only said RBs matter. I still think they do, but no where even close to QBs and the passing game in general. I also agree with SuperJoe's response to my CMC example - good counter point that I agree with. 

Every position matters.  Some just matter a lot less than others.  And RB happens to be one of the least important positions (and probably the least, on offense) with the way the game is played today.

 

Consider this:

Going back five years, here are the rushing leaders and their offenses scoring rank

  • 2019 - Henry, TEN - 10th
  • 2018 - Elliott, DAL - 22nd
  • 2017 - Hunt, KC - 6th
  • 2016 - Elliott, DAL - 5th
  • 2015 - Peterson, MIN - 16th

The year that Adrian Peterson went bonkers and rushed for 2100 yards, the Vikings were 14th in points scored.

Going back five years, here are the passing leaders and their offenses scoring rank:

  • 2019 - Winston, TB - 4th in scoring
  • 2018 - Roethlisberger, PI - 8th
  • 2017 - Brady, NE - 3rd
  • 2016 - Brees, NO - 2nd
  • 2015 - Brees, NO - 8th

It's not that it can't help.  It's just that you'll rarely see a top passing offense not in the top 10 for scoring, while the rushing numbers don't tend to always correlate with a good scoring offense.

And then on an individual level, there have been studies that indicate that men in box and blocking efficiency is more predictive of rushing success than the guy who lines up in the backfield.  To the point that you can almost predict a plays result if you only know the first two things.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, iknowcool said:

This is literally true for every offensive position outside of QB.  Should no non-QB be signed to a big contract then? 

I don't know why people still think it's fair to present RB as the only position that won't single-handedly turn around a unit.  No position does, but I don't see anyone ever argue that (as an example) the Cardinals messed up signing Larry Fitzgerald to a fat contract years ago.  

Mostert's problem isn't being a RB.  It's that he's not all that special of one, especially for an offense that won't have any issue running the ball with or without him.  But the idea that a QB doesn't need a quality RB, thus making a RB less important, doesn't make any sense because it's true for every position.  A good QB doesn't need a good RB, or a good WR, or a good LT, but you're not gonna let everyone walk.  

Not that special? Oh yeah, compare the YPC of Mostert's and your RB and tell me he's not that special!!!!

Good RBs definitely have value but they are just easier to find overall than say a good LT or even a good WR. Heck, you will have some on here that will argue that WRs are not all that important and you shouldn't draft one in the first round. They are also prone to breaking down or slipping quicker than other positions which devalues them to a certain extent. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, theJ said:

And then on an individual level, there have been studies that indicate that men in box and blocking efficiency is more predictive of rushing success than the guy who lines up in the backfield.  To the point that you can almost predict a plays result if you only know the first two things.

I was surprised when I was first presented this info - but it does ring true. It leads to another comment about running games. A strong running game influences how many defenders are in the box and if the passing game is getting single high safety vs 2 deep shell. Teams with a strong running game make it easier to pass and vice versa.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

Good RBs definitely have value but they are just easier to find overall than say a good LT or even a good WR.

Where's the proof that good RBs are easier go find than a good WR? 

And yeah, I just don't think Mostert is all that special.  He's solid, yeah, but not worth the 49ers and that Shanny ZBS making a huge effort to retain him.

Edited by iknowcool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, theJ said:

It's not though.  Positions that contribute toward passing efficiency are having an impact on scoring.  Which includes almost every position on offense, except RB.  Yeah some RB's contribute toward the passing game, but in general passing to RB's is the least efficient form of passing as well.

What are examples of teams over the past 5 years that had bad offenses, but were propelled to good because of a good WR or LT?  What are examples of a good LT leading to better passing efficiency in comparison to a good RB?

No offensive position is going to matter in the grand scheme of things without other good players around them, especially if the QB is less than average.  The key to having a good passing game is having a good QB.  Without a good QB, you are going to need more than just one good RB, or one good WR, or one good LT.  A good WR isn't going to make a single difference on (for example) the Panthers offense in 2019.

Hell, the Panthers did have a good WR.  DJ Moore was 9th in the league in receiving yards.  Panthers could have had Calvin Johnson and the offense still would have been bad, because Kyle Allen was bad.  Bad QBs result in bad offenses, and to pretend like it has anything to do with if you have a great RB vs great WR vs great LT is just wrong.  

Edited by iknowcool
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a Seahawks fan, I'm certainly rooting for this holdout to end in Mostert being dealt to another team. Say what you want about Shanahan's system and the overall replacement level of the RB position, but to remove your two highest YPC RBs from the roster year-to-year is going to be felt on the field. I'd have much more confidence facing McKinnon and Wilson than Mostert and Breida. 

As a football fan, Mostert has little to no leverage here. He gambled with his contract last year and the 49ers won that gamble. That doesn't mean it's fair. Teams ask players all the time to take pay cuts if they've had a down year, so why should guys who perform the way Mostert did ask for a raise? Lynch and company have been reasonable about these things in the past, so I could see them ultimately meeting in the middle and giving Mostert a slight raise. He's the best back on their team and they have Super Bowl aspirations.

Edited by SaveOurSonics
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

He's a serviceable RB...but like...serviceable "system backs" with miles on the odometer aren't worth anything at all to teams.  Especially not when they cost assets in trade, and at this point of the year where teams have already mostly sorted their "plan" for the RB position for the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/14/2020 at 10:34 AM, theJ said:

Every position matters.  Some just matter a lot less than others.  And RB happens to be one of the least important positions (and probably the least, on offense) with the way the game is played today

The follow up question has to be: if you’re going to correlate running backs with scoring offenses in order to equate value, where did the Joe Thomas Browns rank? Or the Trent Williams teams? Or the Jake Long teams? Or the Aaron Donald defenses? 

I don’t think anyone believes that running backs come anywhere close to QBs. But if we’re going to use that standard to determine value, I think lots of positions will fail that test. 

Running backs are devalued nowadays because there’s a decent amount of supply. Quality running backs, not elite ones but players who are good enough, are somewhat easy to come by at that position. Especially compared to the pass rusher/left tackle. But there devaluation doesn’t come from their lack of input on the field IMO. It’s just the supply meets the demand.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/24/2020 at 2:15 PM, Tugboat said:

He's a serviceable RB...but like...serviceable "system backs" with miles on the odometer aren't worth anything at all to teams.  Especially not when they cost assets in trade, and at this point of the year where teams have already mostly sorted their "plan" for the RB position for the year.

despite his age, he has very few miles on the odometer due to the fact he was never a starting running back in the NFL nor college until this past season.

That is, unless you count the miles he ran against the packers in the NFCCG!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, N4L said:

That is, unless you count the miles he ran against the packers in the NFCCG!

“Fight on, my men !”

 “A little I’m hurt, but not yet slain...

 “I’ll just lie down and bleed a while,

 “And then I’ll Rise and Fight again...   on Thursday November 5th, 2020.”

 

baby-fist.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...