Gaines update

[Mongo3451]

Get rid of Bas, and reevaluate AP (yes I said it). I realize AP is a staff favorite, and a good ST leader, but that's not so irreplaceable especially with a fourth HB. To tell you the truth J Will, Wolfe, Izzy, Roach, and Larocque all looked much better on ST last year, IMO, so it's not like losing Dejo who was the clear ST ace. Now we added Freeman, and one of HH or Roach should be constants there, Kellen did an impressive job taking up lanes, as did Steltz, there's countless options from DB to use as gunners, and we just picked another good ST'er in Gaines. So, if you ask me, I have no problem letting AP go, even though I know our staff will probably never make that happen. We could very easily go with 23 on O, but if I was forced to take 25, I'd go with what you have minus Bas, swapped for another OL or maybe sixth WR.

I look for them to decide who they want to give time to between Wolfe and AP. IMO - the odd man out will be cut. My bet is AP will go if all things are equal.

[defiantgiant]

Anyone else think that an improved blocking TE/FB also has the ability to make Wolfe a much more effective runner?

 

Only to the extent that he could consistently get Wolfe into open space completely untouched, which is a lot to ask from any blocker. Wolfe is extremely quick and agile, but he's not as big or as strong as the successful NFL scatbacks (guys like Chris Johnson, Darren Sproles, or Leon Washington.) Wolfe really doesn't have even adequate strength to break tackles, and that severely limits his utility as a runner. In college, he could use his quickness to step away from tackles, but he hasn't been able to do that successfully in the NFL, and the first guy to get a hand on him almost always brings him down.

 

The plays where he's been successful are gadget plays designed to get him into space (like that fake punt where we direct-snapped to him) or little screen passes that accomplish the same thing - getting him the ball without him having to actually run it through the line, since any defender who can get a hand on him in the hole can put him on the ground. There aren't many successful NFL running backs who can only be used on screens, special teams, and trick plays; I really don't see Wolfe as good for more than that at this point.

[Wesson44]

Anyone else think that an improved blocking TE/FB also has the ability to make Wolfe a much more effective runner?

IMHO a blocking TE/FB would make all of our backs better.........can we get one plese! Is maybe Gains the answer?

[AZ54]

I look for them to decide who they want to give time to between Wolfe and AP. IMO - the odd man out will be cut. My bet is AP will go if all things are equal.

 

 

Wolfe was significantly outperforming AP on special teams last year. With Kevin Jones as our backup RB keeping Wolfe around instead of AP, who is a similar style runner albeit with less ability and who now has less value as a special teamer than Wolfe, makes a lot of sense. Keep another young RB on the practice squad (or raid a guy off someone else's practice squad) in case injuries take a toll on Forte and Jones.

[Mongo3451]

Wolfe was significantly outperforming AP on special teams last year. With Kevin Jones as our backup RB keeping Wolfe around instead of AP, who is a similar style runner albeit with less ability and who now has less value as a special teamer than Wolfe, makes a lot of sense. Keep another young RB on the practice squad (or raid a guy off someone else's practice squad) in case injuries take a toll on Forte and Jones.

 

Spot on.

[defiantgiant]

Wolfe was significantly outperforming AP on special teams last year. With Kevin Jones as our backup RB keeping Wolfe around instead of AP, who is a similar style runner albeit with less ability and who now has less value as a special teamer than Wolfe, makes a lot of sense. Keep another young RB on the practice squad (or raid a guy off someone else's practice squad) in case injuries take a toll on Forte and Jones.

 

The reason I like AP better than Wolfe as a 3rd RB is basically this. If we keep Forte, Jones, and Wolfe then, for depth purposes, we're effectively just keeping Forte and Jones. Wolfe can't remotely be expected to carry the load if something happens to the other two - in that situation, he's a wasted roster spot. Peterson can be a starting running back in an emergency: like we saw in 2007, it's not pretty, but he can do it passably. When you're evaluating whether you want Wolfe or AP as the 3rd halfback, look at it this way: if Forte and Jones go down, do we want to be starting Peterson or some guy off the practice squad?

 

When you look at the 2008 teams that had really good RB depth, the 3rd back was usually a guy who could start if he had to. Tashard Choice on the Cowboys, Ahmad Bradshaw on the Giants, Michael Bush on the Raiders - these guys are basically poor-man's feature backs. All those teams have two guys with different skillsets at #1 and #2 (Barber and Jones, Jacobs and Ward, Fargas and McFadden) and then they have kind of a jack-of-all-trades at #3. Forte-Jones-Peterson fits that formula. Forte-Jones-Wolfe doesn't.

[nfoligno]

Not sure I agree w/ this.

 

One, looking at your examples.

 

Dallas - Choice only had 2 games w/ more than 15 carries. He was viewed as a change of pace back, rather than one which could carry the load.

 

Oakland - Yes, they had 3 backs which could all start, yet at the same time, is Oakland really an example we want to follow?

 

Two, while I understand the idea of wanting a depth chart player who could fill in if injuries arise, I also think it valuable to have depth players who can be used even if all are healthy. If Forte stays healthy, AP may never see the field. Heck, for AP to see significant carries, two players need to be out at the same time. On the other hand, if both KJ and Forte are healthy, Wolfe could well still have a role, as he brings a different set of skills than the two in front of him.

 

As a person, I like AP. But I think it is past time to move on. He really just does not offer much by way of offense. His skills are to similar, albeit lesser, than the starters in front of him, which means he only will see the field if both Forte and KJ go down. In the past, he made a big contribution on special teams, but this past year, he was frakly bad. Not only was he no longer making the plays, but he was also making some really stupid mental errors and costing the team.

 

Wolfe is of a style neither Forte, nor KJ possess. At this point, I would much rather keep Wolfe than AP.

 

The reason I like AP better than Wolfe as a 3rd RB is basically this. If we keep Forte, Jones, and Wolfe then, for depth purposes, we're effectively just keeping Forte and Jones. Wolfe can't remotely be expected to carry the load if something happens to the other two - in that situation, he's a wasted roster spot. Peterson can be a starting running back in an emergency: like we saw in 2007, it's not pretty, but he can do it passably. When you're evaluating whether you want Wolfe or AP as the 3rd halfback, look at it this way: if Forte and Jones go down, do we want to be starting Peterson or some guy off the practice squad?

 

When you look at the 2008 teams that had really good RB depth, the 3rd back was usually a guy who could start if he had to. Tashard Choice on the Cowboys, Ahmad Bradshaw on the Giants, Michael Bush on the Raiders - these guys are basically poor-man's feature backs. All those teams have two guys with different skillsets at #1 and #2 (Barber and Jones, Jacobs and Ward, Fargas and McFadden) and then they have kind of a jack-of-all-trades at #3. Forte-Jones-Peterson fits that formula. Forte-Jones-Wolfe doesn't.

[defiantgiant]

Not sure I agree w/ this.

 

One, looking at your examples.

 

Dallas - Choice only had 2 games w/ more than 15 carries. He was viewed as a change of pace back, rather than one which could carry the load.

 

Oakland - Yes, they had 3 backs which could all start, yet at the same time, is Oakland really an example we want to follow?

 

The number of carries he got isn't indicative of his role in the offense; Choice was starting for Dallas the last four games of 2008, when both Barber and Jones were hurt. They used the run sparingly in those four games, because they were literally down to their last back, but he was starting. He was listed as the starter for three games, against Pittsburgh, Philly, and Baltimore. He was effectively a starter for the Giants game as well, since both other backs were injured and Barber was largely ineffective even when he wasn't held out. The four teams Choice faced have four of the NFL's best defenses. As a starter in those four games, this was Choice's stat line: 62 carries for 325 yards (5.2 YPC) and two touchdowns, plus 17 receptions for 163 yards, totalling 488 yards on 79 touches.

 

In short, he put up over 120 yards of offense a game on about 20 touches per game. Granted, they weren't a run-heavy offense when he was starting, but those are pretty good numbers for a starting RB.

 

As far as the Raiders: if there's one area where I wouldn't mind the Bears emulating Oakland, it's RB depth. I'm not saying the Raiders are a good team by any stretch of the imagination, but you have to concede that they have three very talented running backs. A competently coached team would be able to get a lot of production out of that platoon.

 

Two, while I understand the idea of wanting a depth chart player who could fill in if injuries arise, I also think it valuable to have depth players who can be used even if all are healthy. If Forte stays healthy, AP may never see the field. Heck, for AP to see significant carries, two players need to be out at the same time. On the other hand, if both KJ and Forte are healthy, Wolfe could well still have a role, as he brings a different set of skills than the two in front of him.

 

As a person, I like AP. But I think it is past time to move on. He really just does not offer much by way of offense. His skills are to similar, albeit lesser, than the starters in front of him, which means he only will see the field if both Forte and KJ go down. In the past, he made a big contribution on special teams, but this past year, he was frakly bad. Not only was he no longer making the plays, but he was also making some really stupid mental errors and costing the team.

 

Wolfe is of a style neither Forte, nor KJ possess. At this point, I would much rather keep Wolfe than AP.

 

I disagree with this line of reasoning, but I can see where you're coming from. Wolfe's skillset is certainly different from Forte's or Jones' - my question is first whether it's both different and useful, then whether that utility outweighs his lack of utility as an emergency starter.

 

As I've said before, I think Wolfe's role is extremely limited by his lack of size and strength, such that we basically have to design plays around the one or two things that he can do well. It's true that Wolfe offers the screen/toss/trick play value when the other backs are healthy, but if Forte is healthy, he's a better receiver on screen passes. As for the tosses and fake punts and whatever, I'm not a fan of those to begin with. Compare Wolfe's value on the occasional trick play to his dramatic lack of value as an emergency back, and I question whether it's worth keeping him over a guy who can be an insurance policy, even if that guy would be on the bench under ideal circumstances.

 

I think it's unwise to downplay the importance of a third receiver who can start if needed: Peterson may not sniff the field unless Forte and Jones get hurt, but running backs get injured all the time. As we saw with the Cowboys last season, it's definitely possible for your first two running backs to go down. How many RBs did Denver lose in 2008?

 

Ultimately, I think it's a question of which is more valuable: the niche value that Wolfe has, or an insurance policy against injuries at a position where they're commonplace. In an ideal world, I'd like to have complementary skill sets between the first two backs on the depth chart, and I think if Jones is healthy, he can be a slashing, Derrick Ward-type back. Even if your first two backs are similar skill-wise, however, I think you still need an all-around back as your third guy. Injuries are just too common to move forward without a real emergency back.

[nfoligno]

The number of carries he got isn't indicative of his role in the offense; Choice was starting for Dallas the last four games of 2008, when both Barber and Jones were hurt. They used the run sparingly in those four games, because they were literally down to their last back, but he was starting. He was listed as the starter for three games, against Pittsburgh, Philly, and Baltimore. He was effectively a starter for the Giants game as well, since both other backs were injured and Barber was largely ineffective even when he wasn't held out. The four teams Choice faced have four of the NFL's best defenses. As a starter in those four games, this was Choice's stat line: 62 carries for 325 yards (5.2 YPC) and two touchdowns, plus 17 receptions for 163 yards, totalling 488 yards on 79 touches.

 

One, I would point out, as you said yourself, when Dallas had to start Choice, they effectively became a passing team and ran the ball less. Would that not put into question Choice being a RB capable of carrying the load? To put the example on Chicago, if we kept AP and Forte/KJ went down, could you not see AP getting 20 carries? But when Dallas was forced to use Choice as a starter, they had to alter their offense because he isn't that sort of back. Choice was very much considered a change of pace back. They simply were forced to start him. I am not sure I see how that is so different than if we had Wolfe as our #3.

 

Two, I live here in Dallas, and have to say, I think you have to look past the simple stat lines here. W/ Choice starting, Dallas went 1-3, and choice was part of the reason for that. Sure, his stats look impressive on paper, but on the field, he was simply not as productive. In each of those games, he showed off his speed (which is why the team liked him in the first place) and broke off a long run or two, which enhances the stats, but at the same time, his overall runs were less than great. Take the last game, for example. stat sheet shows 13 carries for 56 yards and a 4.3 ypc avg. That looks solid enough. However, he had one long run which sent his ypc avg from around 3.1 to 4.3. Not trying to take away the credit for the long run, but I think it worth pointing out he was not effective on the majority of his runs.

 

In short, he put up over 120 yards of offense a game on about 20 touches per game. Granted, they weren't a run-heavy offense when he was starting, but those are pretty good numbers for a starting RB.

 

Honestly, I am not sure Wolfe couldn't be that different. Wolfe, like Choice, would be very capable of breaking off a long run, which would enhance his stats. But more, I think Wolfe could be very effective, like Choice, as a receiver.

 

As far as the Raiders: if there's one area where I wouldn't mind the Bears emulating Oakland, it's RB depth. I'm not saying the Raiders are a good team by any stretch of the imagination, but you have to concede that they have three very talented running backs. A competently coached team would be able to get a lot of production out of that platoon.

 

Honestly, is their depth that much better than ours?

 

Though Fargas got the bulk of carries last year, I would argue McFadden is their #1 RB. Would you not take Forte over McFadden?

 

Fargas is their #2, and is he really that different from KJ? Fargas has been injury prone, and only moderatly effective, with one 1,000 yard season in his 7 seasons. Sounds a lot like KJ to me. Fargas may get a slight nod, but I honestly do not believe it is a big nod. The only awful year for KJ was last year, but that was also one he wasn't healthy and saw minimal action. Now that he is healthy, I wonder if Fargas is even better.

 

Then there is Michael Bush, but he is a fairly different example too. Bush is sort of a change of pace back in a sense, though opposite of traditional thinking. He is nearly FB in size, and is seen as a power runner who compliments their speed rushers. So he is opposite from Wolfe, but similar in that neither are really viewed as everydown backs, but more change of pace (just different paces)

 

I disagree with this line of reasoning, but I can see where you're coming from. Wolfe's skillset is certainly different from Forte's or Jones' - my question is first whether it's both different and useful, then whether that utility outweighs his lack of utility as an emergency starter.

 

And I would ask this. What is more important. Having a 3rd RB who may only see the field if two other RBs go down w/ injury, or having a 3rd RB who may have a role, regardless of the health of the other RBs. Heck, i would argue that if Wolfe gets more touches, it could improve the chance for the #1 and #2 RBs to stay healthy. Having insurance is nice, but so is having something that works for you regardless of the situation.

 

As I've said before, I think Wolfe's role is extremely limited by his lack of size and strength, such that we basically have to design plays around the one or two things that he can do well. It's true that Wolfe offers the screen/toss/trick play value when the other backs are healthy, but if Forte is healthy, he's a better receiver on screen passes. As for the tosses and fake punts and whatever, I'm not a fan of those to begin with. Compare Wolfe's value on the occasional trick play to his dramatic lack of value as an emergency back, and I question whether it's worth keeping him over a guy who can be an insurance policy, even if that guy would be on the bench under ideal circumstances.

 

Not to knock Forte, but is Forte really better as a receiver? I know he has the stats, but I would argue that is more because of his ability to block, thus our staff keeping him on the field in such situations. Wolfe was always known as a great receiver, with great hands, and due to his pure athleticism and quickness, may actually offer after the catch ability than Forte.

 

Regardless, I question the idea Wolfe is so limited. I do not believe he is limited to screens and trick plays. One, I would argue RBs can be used as receivers for far more than screens. Two, I would argue that if we have an OL which can create a hole, and our new OL may well be capable of such, Wolfe may be effective as a runner, even inside. No, I would not use him on 3rd and short, and run him inside, but I do believe he can bring something as a RB in general.

 

I think it's unwise to downplay the importance of a third receiver who can start if needed: Peterson may not sniff the field unless Forte and Jones get hurt, but running backs get injured all the time. As we saw with the Cowboys last season, it's definitely possible for your first two running backs to go down. How many RBs did Denver lose in 2008?

 

I understand this. But while I am not discounting the importance of such insurance, at the same time, I also feel there is significant value in a player who can play in any game. In Wolfe, you have a player who could have a role in every game, regardless of the health of your starters. In AP, you have a player who really is only useful as insurance.

 

Ultimately, I think it's a question of which is more valuable: the niche value that Wolfe has, or an insurance policy against injuries at a position where they're commonplace. In an ideal world, I'd like to have complementary skill sets between the first two backs on the depth chart, and I think if Jones is healthy, he can be a slashing, Derrick Ward-type back. Even if your first two backs are similar skill-wise, however, I think you still need an all-around back as your third guy. Injuries are just too common to move forward without a real emergency back.

 

One. I think an initial disagreement is in the belief Wolfe is no more than a niche player. While I agree he is not one I want on 3rd and short, at the same time, I believe he can be used for more than screens and trick plays.

 

Two. I agree that a large part of the question is value of an insurance player vs a player who may be useful in every game, though on a more limited basis. We simply disagree on the answer of his question.

 

Three. In a perfect world, I would say this. Neither Wolfe, nor AP, would be my ideal #3 RB. In a perfect world, I would want a #3 which (a) offers attributes than your starter and #2 and ( would be capable of starting if the need arrises. To me, a more ideal #3 RB would be a "bigger" RB. While Forte proved solid as a 3rd down RB, I think there would be value in having a big RB who could take some of the punishment away from him. That could also lengthen his career.

 

Ultimately, I likely am biased here. I have never been a huge Wolfe fan, going back even to the draft, but I have just so soured on AP. I never thought he was that good in terms of RB play. I always felt he was a great special teams player, and good enough in a pinch. But in the last couple years, I have seen his RB play slip, as well as his special teams play. At RB, I felt he was an awful blocker the last two years, and even talked about how I felt Benson was a better blocker than AP. As a runner, I just do not believe he gives us that much. And as a special teams player, last year, he was more of a liability than an asset, and that really hurts his value. I have felt for a while it was time to move on from AP, and while I like him as a person, I just believe he holds us back from upgrading our depth chart.

[AZ54]

Somewhat left out of the debate, or minimized, was the value that Wolfe gives us a cover guy on special teams. He made some outstanding plays for us last year. We can debate the value of the third RB but the fact is a good KR/PR cover guy is worth a lot in this game and he will be in for a lot of plays. Perhaps we could have a better pure RB at the third slot but if he can't play special teams like Wolfe then the overall value to the team for 16 games drops. If he did play special teams and couldn't tackle well you'd be giving up yards on returns and that alters field position.

 

As far as AP goes, I think it's entirely likely we could keep a guy on the practice squad that had equally good RB skills. He might not be as good in pass protection since he wouldn't have the practice but as Nfol pointed out and I agree, AP was pretty bad in that role last year. Having a QB like Cutler who can get rid of the ball quicker means we don't necessarily have to go to deep drops, we can also go the other direction and use more of a spread offense. With players like Hester, Bennett, Wolfe, Olsen I think we could make it work for a few games. No matter what, if you lose your top two RBs you are signing players to fill the void.

[Wesson44]

Somewhat left out of the debate, or minimized, was the value that Wolfe gives us a cover guy on special teams. He made some outstanding plays for us last year. We can debate the value of the third RB but the fact is a good KR/PR cover guy is worth a lot in this game and he will be in for a lot of plays. Perhaps we could have a better pure RB at the third slot but if he can't play special teams like Wolfe then the overall value to the team for 16 games drops. If he did play special teams and couldn't tackle well you'd be giving up yards on returns and that alters field position.

 

As far as AP goes, I think it's entirely likely we could keep a guy on the practice squad that had equally good RB skills. He might not be as good in pass protection since he wouldn't have the practice but as Nfol pointed out and I agree, AP was pretty bad in that role last year. Having a QB like Cutler who can get rid of the ball quicker means we don't necessarily have to go to deep drops, we can also go the other direction and use more of a spread offense. With players like Hester, Bennett, Wolfe, Olsen I think we could make it work for a few games. No matter what, if you lose your top two RBs you are signing players to fill the void.

IMHO AP is still the man. Wolfe has skills but what you ask him to do is limited as with AP. AP can run up the middle and outside. Wolfe can't run up the middle without getting killed. Wolfe is good on special teams, some what better than AP but the size of Wolfe is the biggest concern. Can he handle the blitz like AP can...no can he run up the middle like AP.....no, so the choice is that....AP. We are a running team....but if Jones and or Forte go down Wolfe can not be that back to carry the ball in the middle like the way we run Wolfe will be hurt after the third game when team figure his style out. Just like Forte and Jones, AP can run over you and through arm tackles. Wolfe not so.

[nfoligno]

Sorry, but while I have no idea what Wolfe's blocking ability is, I have to really question when you say AP can handle the blitz. That isn't what I have seen.

 

I remember when Benson was on the team talking about this. Benson struggled in blitz protection due to a lack of knowledge. Too often, he would get caught out of position. When he was in position though, he was actually a damn good blocker. He literally stood up the blitzers when I watched. AP was the opposite. AP seemed to better have the knowledge, and knew where his responsibility was. The problem was, he did little to even slow the progress of the blitzer. I remember watching his getting flat out blown backward. Once, he was literally thrown into the QB. Other times he was dismissed like a rag doll. Then AP began to dive at the blitzers knees, which was even more ugly. I remember several times the blitzer just leaping over AP and proceed to the QB w/ little to no break in stride.

 

AP is a "decent" runner. No more. He is a pretty good receiver. He was an awful blocker. He used to excel on special teams, but last year was flat out bad, and even beyond sheer ability, was making boneheaded, rookie-esq brainfart mistakes.

 

Wolfe is a solid outside runner, and very unproven/questionable inside runner. While unproven on the NFL level, is considered an excellent pass catcher, and that was a key reason he was drafted. Likely a poor blocker, and IMHO, the A#1 reason he hasn't seen the field more. He proved an excellent special teams player last year.

 

To me, AP not only peaked, but has started to regress, and I just do not see much upside there. In Wolfe, we can question numerous areas of his game, but at the end of the day, I see Wolfe simply having far greater potential, both on offense and special teams.

 

IMHO AP is still the man. Wolfe has skills but what you ask him to do is limited as with AP. AP can run up the middle and outside. Wolfe can't run up the middle without getting killed. Wolfe is good on special teams, some what better than AP but the size of Wolfe is the biggest concern. Can he handle the blitz like AP can...no can he run up the middle like AP.....no, so the choice is that....AP. We are a running team....but if Jones and or Forte go down Wolfe can not be that back to carry the ball in the middle like the way we run Wolfe will be hurt after the third game when team figure his style out. Just like Forte and Jones, AP can run over you and through arm tackles. Wolfe not so.

[Mongo3451]

Ultimately, I think it's a question of which is more valuable: the niche value that Wolfe has, or an insurance policy against injuries at a position where they're commonplace. In an ideal world, I'd like to have complementary skill sets between the first two backs on the depth chart, and I think if Jones is healthy, he can be a slashing, Derrick Ward-type back. Even if your first two backs are similar skill-wise, however, I think you still need an all-around back as your third guy. Injuries are just too common to move forward without a real emergency back.

Gotta go with Wolfe on value. He's younger and proving valuable on special teams. Here's where the difference is: his unique ability vs our other RB's. The staff must be salivating at Cutlers ability to stretch the field to give Wolfe more room to work. And as a 3rd down back, he will not be asked to be a power back or a blocker. The only scenario in which I see AP having more value is if Forte and KJ go down, which is not likely. In that case, you have a guy on the practice squad come up to supplement. You may have a more solid floor with AP, but Wolfe raises the ceiling.

[Connorbear]

Gotta go with Wolfe on value. He's younger and proving valuable on special teams. Here's where the difference is: his unique ability vs our other RB's. The staff must be salivating at Cutlers ability to stretch the field to give Wolfe more room to work. And as a 3rd down back, he will not be asked to be a power back or a blocker. The only scenario in which I see AP having more value is if Forte and KJ go down, which is not likely. In that case, you have a guy on the practice squad come up to supplement. You may have a more solid floor with AP, but Wolfe raises the ceiling.

As much as I love AP, I agree wholeheartedly. Time to move on.

 

Peace