Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Vikings Sign RB Latavius Murray
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
oakdb36


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 17040
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 7:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

They also didn't get enough carries throughout the season to figure out how they'll do if they have to carry a bigger load. Richard's season high was 9 carries. Washington's was 12. They're different from Murray and most definitely more elusive runners but that doesn't mean they'll be more effective given the same workload. So far they've shown they can be good change of pace RBs. That's it.
_________________
Plush wrote:
Papa was a trolling stone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SteelKing728


Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 23505
Location: PGH
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 9:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Murray won't be fine then?

so he's expected to be below average? terrible? if he won't be fine in Minnesota what will he be?
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darbsk


Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 1967
Location: Wales, UK
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Vikings will be fine with Murray, IMHO he'll be a good starter for you guys - though you've been spoilt a little with AP for the last decade Smile
Here are some clips from GypsySafety showing a little of what we got last year:

https://streamable.com/lz2n6
_________________
"The fire that burns brightest in the Raiders organization is the will to win."
Mr. Al Davis RIP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 52612
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Mon Mar 27, 2017 12:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SteelKing728 wrote:
Murray won't be fine then?

so he's expected to be below average? terrible? if he won't be fine in Minnesota what will he be?


I think he will be similar to what Chester Taylor was for us pre-Peterson. Below average starter but better than what McKinnon and Asiata provided last year. We're going from RBs who average around 3 yds/carry to hopefully one that will be at or above 4. Murray is also the more well rounded than Asiata and McKinnon.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SteelKing728


Joined: 23 Aug 2008
Posts: 23505
Location: PGH
PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 9:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

vikingsrule wrote:
SteelKing728 wrote:
Murray won't be fine then?

so he's expected to be below average? terrible? if he won't be fine in Minnesota what will he be?


I think he will be similar to what Chester Taylor was for us pre-Peterson. Below average starter but better than what McKinnon and Asiata provided last year. We're going from RBs who average around 3 yds/carry to hopefully one that will be at or above 4. Murray is also the more well rounded than Asiata and McKinnon.


http://www.nfl.com/player/chestertaylor/2505181/careerstats

in 2006, Taylor posted 1216 rushing yards (4.0ypc), 6 rushing TDs along with 4 fumbles. he also had 42 receptions for 288 yards, 0 TDs and 1 fumble.

a year later he put up great numbers for being mostly a backup to rookie phenom Adrian Peterson.

i wouldn't call that below average. at that time, I'd say that was pretty average.

I think Murray will be a good stopgap for us. hopefully either this year or next year though we can find a long term starter at the position.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MrOaktown_56


Joined: 15 Dec 2013
Posts: 7991
PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Darbsk wrote:
The Vikings will be fine with Murray, IMHO he'll be a good starter for you guys - though you've been spoilt a little with AP for the last decade Smile
Here are some clips from GypsySafety showing a little of what we got last year:

https://streamable.com/lz2n6


I really do appreciate you being positive, but you showed us what we already know:

Murray had a few really good games: Atlanta, KC, Houston (playoffs), and the Denver game.

The problem is that he's never showed consistent power,vision, or elusiveness. I think pretty much every raider fan would agree with me in that regard.

Good implies he's gonna be in the top half of the league in terms of yards/touchdowns, and YPC. Can you really make any kind of assumption like that off of his body of work? Really?

Again, if Minnesota improves their OL to above average, sure, then it's within reason. But I know plenty of vikings fans who have acknowledged that their OL is bottom of the barrel and has held back their team, let alone being able to support a quality run game.
_________________
El ramster wrote:
bertuzzi wrote:
Goff and Gurley are the worst QB-RB combo in history lmfao


Yo buddy quit trolling yeah.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JDBrocks


Joined: 11 Dec 2006
Posts: 7960
Location: Chicago
PostPosted: Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

MrOaktown_56 wrote:
Darbsk wrote:
The Vikings will be fine with Murray, IMHO he'll be a good starter for you guys - though you've been spoilt a little with AP for the last decade Smile
Here are some clips from GypsySafety showing a little of what we got last year:

https://streamable.com/lz2n6


I really do appreciate you being positive, but you showed us what we already know:

Murray had a few really good games: Atlanta, KC, Houston (playoffs), and the Denver game.

The problem is that he's never showed consistent power,vision, or elusiveness. I think pretty much every raider fan would agree with me in that regard.

Good implies he's gonna be in the top half of the league in terms of yards/touchdowns, and YPC. Can you really make any kind of assumption like that off of his body of work? Really?

Again, if Minnesota improves their OL to above average, sure, then it's within reason. But I know plenty of vikings fans who have acknowledged that their OL is bottom of the barrel and has held back their team, let alone being able to support a quality run game.


They have made improvements to the line, and it should be markedly better than last year. It isn't going to jump into the top 10, but definitely will be a drastic improvement over the horror show that was last year.
_________________

Josh Ritter wrote:
I became a thin blue wire, that held the world above the fire
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Darbsk


Joined: 21 Oct 2008
Posts: 1967
Location: Wales, UK
PostPosted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 4:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

MrOaktown_56 wrote:
Darbsk wrote:
The Vikings will be fine with Murray, IMHO he'll be a good starter for you guys - though you've been spoilt a little with AP for the last decade Smile
Here are some clips from GypsySafety showing a little of what we got last year:

https://streamable.com/lz2n6


I really do appreciate you being positive, but you showed us what we already know:

Murray had a few really good games: Atlanta, KC, Houston (playoffs), and the Denver game.

The problem is that he's never showed consistent power,vision, or elusiveness. I think pretty much every raider fan would agree with me in that regard.

Good implies he's gonna be in the top half of the league in terms of yards/touchdowns, and YPC. Can you really make any kind of assumption like that off of his body of work? Really?

Again, if Minnesota improves their OL to above average, sure, then it's within reason. But I know plenty of vikings fans who have acknowledged that their OL is bottom of the barrel and has held back their team, let alone being able to support a quality run game.


I can totally understand your point here Oaktown, but I think we're a little crossed up, I'm thinking specifically of the individual player rather than the running game as a whole - sure, the RB is made more effective (rather than better) by a good to great OL but he's still the same RB. Murray actually performed well in our system before we imported KO and while our OL was pretty average in 2014 and 2015. As I've said, I really like Richard especially and Washington too (I actually advocated for Washinton in our draft threads as I thought he'd be a perfect compliment) but I view them as complimentary and like Murray as a player, though of course I'm not claiming he'll make Vikings fans forget Peterson any time soon. We're not so far apart in terms of opinion here I don't believe, I just think Murray will be a good back for the Vikings - IF they use him to his strengths Smile
_________________
"The fire that burns brightest in the Raiders organization is the will to win."
Mr. Al Davis RIP
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MrOaktown_56


Joined: 15 Dec 2013
Posts: 7991
PostPosted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 5:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

JDBrocks wrote:
MrOaktown_56 wrote:
Darbsk wrote:
The Vikings will be fine with Murray, IMHO he'll be a good starter for you guys - though you've been spoilt a little with AP for the last decade Smile
Here are some clips from GypsySafety showing a little of what we got last year:

https://streamable.com/lz2n6


I really do appreciate you being positive, but you showed us what we already know:

Murray had a few really good games: Atlanta, KC, Houston (playoffs), and the Denver game.

The problem is that he's never showed consistent power,vision, or elusiveness. I think pretty much every raider fan would agree with me in that regard.

Good implies he's gonna be in the top half of the league in terms of yards/touchdowns, and YPC. Can you really make any kind of assumption like that off of his body of work? Really?

Again, if Minnesota improves their OL to above average, sure, then it's within reason. But I know plenty of vikings fans who have acknowledged that their OL is bottom of the barrel and has held back their team, let alone being able to support a quality run game.


They have made improvements to the line, and it should be markedly better than last year. It isn't going to jump into the top 10, but definitely will be a drastic improvement over the horror show that was last year.


I'm not disagreeing, but until I see the line gel, I can't make any definitive statements there. I mean Seattle has been trying for years and its remained terrible. Not saying Minnesota won't but i think there's a possibility it could remain pretty bad.
_________________
El ramster wrote:
bertuzzi wrote:
Goff and Gurley are the worst QB-RB combo in history lmfao


Yo buddy quit trolling yeah.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vikingsrule


Joined: 15 Nov 2005
Posts: 52612
Location: Land of 10,000 Lakes!
PostPosted: Wed Mar 29, 2017 8:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SteelKing728 wrote:
vikingsrule wrote:
SteelKing728 wrote:
Murray won't be fine then?

so he's expected to be below average? terrible? if he won't be fine in Minnesota what will he be?


I think he will be similar to what Chester Taylor was for us pre-Peterson. Below average starter but better than what McKinnon and Asiata provided last year. We're going from RBs who average around 3 yds/carry to hopefully one that will be at or above 4. Murray is also the more well rounded than Asiata and McKinnon.


http://www.nfl.com/player/chestertaylor/2505181/careerstats

in 2006, Taylor posted 1216 rushing yards (4.0ypc), 6 rushing TDs along with 4 fumbles. he also had 42 receptions for 288 yards, 0 TDs and 1 fumble.

a year later he put up great numbers for being mostly a backup to rookie phenom Adrian Peterson.

i wouldn't call that below average. at that time, I'd say that was pretty average.

I think Murray will be a good stopgap for us. hopefully either this year or next year though we can find a long term starter at the position.


Taylor was 28th in yards per carry in the one year he was a starter. That's why he was replaced. He wasn't a very effective rusher but he received a bulk of the carries in 2006. When he was a backup, like in 2007, he was much more effective. As a starter, Taylor was below average. That 2006 and 2007 OL was pretty good too, McKinnie, Hutch and Birk were all in their prime.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> NFL News All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 10, 11, 12
Page 12 of 12

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group