I Have No More Excuses for Christian McCaffrey

[Chairman Wow]

3 minutes ago, Borat said:

That's well and good that you believe that, but there isn't a single stat backing your conjecture up. Even the normalizing (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/rb) stats have them near the bottom of the pile in terms of rushing production. Difference between the two is that Stewart has given you a decade of excellent service, whereas the likelihood of McCaffrey doing the same seems slight. 

As for the receiving stats, the idea was not the juxtapose the two, but to make the point that McCaffrey isn't exactly lighting the world on fire, from a per play standpoint, in the receiving game either. 

It does not take a genius to figure out that when every RB on a team is averaging less than 3 yards a carry, something is amiss outside of the running backs. 

We have a very poor run blocking offensive line and no one respects our downfield passing game. 

McCaffery's YPC is relatively low for the same reason. He is catching the ball on what are basically long hand-offs against stacked boxes. He also rarely has the luxury of catching a well placed ball in stride. 

Personally, I would start using him almost exclusively as a wide receiver where he would garner immediate attention. Hopefully, our ability to complete short and intermediate passes will improve.

 

[Borat]

4 minutes ago, Chairman Wow said:

It does not take a genius to figure out that when every RB on a team is averaging less than 3 yards a carry, something is amiss outside of the running backs. 

We have a very poor run blocking offensive line and no one respects our downfield passing game. 

McCaffery's YPC is relatively low for the same reason. He is catching the ball on what are basically long hand-offs against stacked boxes. He also rarely has the luxury of catching a well placed ball in stride. 

Personally, I would start using him almost exclusively as a wide receiver where he would garner immediate attention. Hopefully, our ability to complete short and intermediate passes will improve.

 

Potentially, but is something so "amiss" that it's causing a couple 'plus' guys to rank at or near the bottom of the pile in terms of production? Occam's razor says the ancient RB and his unproven (and probably over-drafted), compatriot have much more to do with the running game's overall lack of success. 

[Chairman Wow]

4 minutes ago, Borat said:

Potentially, but is something so "amiss" that it's causing a couple 'plus' guys to rank at or near the bottom of the pile in terms of production? Occam's razor says the ancient RB and his unproven (and probably over-drafted), compatriot have much more to do with the running game's overall lack of success. 

Actually, Occam's razor says the exact opposite...

[Borat]

6 minutes ago, Chairman Wow said:

Actually, Occam's razor says the exact opposite...

Occam's razor says that fault for the running game's futility lies somewhere other than with the running backs? May want to re-check that Wikipedia page. 

[Chairman Wow]

1 minute ago, Borat said:

Occam's razor says that fault for the running game's futility lies somewhere other than with the running backs? May want to re-check that Wikipedia page. 

In a nutshell, Occam's razor says that the most likely explanation for a given event is usually the correct one.

Is it more likely that all 3 of our running backs are complete garbage, or that the lack run of blocking is leading to the failure of all 3 ?

Anyone with eyes can see our running backs have basically no chance on virtually every running play at this point.

 

[Borat]

2 hours ago, Chairman Wow said:

In a nutshell, Occam's razor says that the most likely explanation for a given event is usually the correct one.

Is it more likely that all 3 of our running backs are complete garbage, or that the lack run of blocking is leading to the failure of all 3 ?

Anyone with eyes can see our running backs have basically no chance on virtually every running play at this point.

 

Close, but it's actually that the simplest -- i.e. relying upon the fewest assumptions -- should be used. Attributing poor running to poor running backs requires zero. 

"The most likely explanation for a given event is usually the correct one" is circular reasoning, totally dependent upon your starting point.