View Full Version : What troubles me about McGahee:
The thing that really has me concerned about McGahee, is not his current injury alone as most are concerned about, but rather, the fact that he's sustained a serious enough injury in each of his last 3 seasons played to have to miss very significant playing time or end his season. This past injury, had it happened earlier in the season, would have ended it.
So it's not the recovery from this surgery that has me concerned, it's his overall ability to stay healthy. I mean we all clamored about RJ, but at least most of his injuries were only of the "game or two" variety. Heck, McGahee is making RJ look like a poster boy for health in a sense.
I'm not going to be sold on McGahee until he actually plays out a full season of 350+ carries w/o getting hurt at all! If/when that happens, I'll then be somewhat less concerned going into the following season. Two such seasons will alleviate my concerns for good.
But if Henry even plays the way he did this year as last, assuming he gets more carries, I'm not so sure that he should go. We'd be getting rid of a top NFL RB in the hopes and w/o any proof, that McGahee does several things:
A. Doesn't reinjure his current injury
B. Doesn't continue his current streak of very significant injuries at the rate of one/year over his last three years started, and in far tougher competition and physical stress
C. Plays at a level for which he was drafted and better than that of Henry, quite frankly, a level at which he played only for one season.
Quite honestly, McGahee wasn't having the best game prior to his getting injured. He had 20 carries for 67 yards, less than a 3.5 YPC avg. and only 3 catches for 5 yards in the CG v. OSU.
So while everyone is all but penciling in his greatness as an NFL RB, I really think we need to be cautious before trading away one of the top, if not the top, RB in the NFL for a bucket full of hopes.
The Canes also didn't play the toughest schedule over this past season. They played absolutely not top 10 ranked teams. The best team they played was probably WV and McGahee didn't even average 4 YPC then. 3.5 YPC. The next best team was probably FSU and McG only had a 3.7 YPC avg.
While they played some ranked teams during the season, 13, 16, 19, 20, and 23, they only played teams with final rankings of 14, 20, 23, and 24.
So they didn't have a tough schedule at all w/ only 2 teams finally ranked in the top 20, bottom half at that. They played absolutely no teams in the top 10 except for OSU in the CG and they lost and McG did not have the kind of game worthy of all of the current hoopla in that game prior to getting injured.
The championship game speaks more loudly than playing against a bunch of scrub teams IMO. 3.4 YPC isn't good and McG simply didn't have the type of game that screams out that he'll be the next Walter Payton. The best game, and an outstanding one, that McG played this season was against an overrated VA Tech team. Nevertheless, McG shone. But one game does not greatness make and I think we should look a little closer at why so many think he'll be "the next Walter Payton." I'm a little more skeptical, especially at all the talk about possibly blindly trading what has become one of the league's best RBs in Henry!
I'm quite sure he'd be good, McG that is, but there is no guarantee of that. But I think we need to proceed with caution and not send Henry packing before this season. If he's not happy, he may well say that he wants a trade and given the above, I'm not so sure that would be wise.
Not to mention, he's currently on a three year streak of getting injured in a season, and that has nothing to do w/ this current injury. It's a pattern that has developed independently.
Pride
05-13-2003, 10:51 AM
I agree with you, but noone else does
Clearly. I just find it amazing that people have turned on Henry so when he's at the top of the league. It reminds me of that fable about the dog standing on the bridge w/ the bone in his mouth looking down at the reflection of the "other dog" w/ a bigger bone. The dog barks and then obviously loses the bone it had.
I can see the same situation playing out here. Many will be screaming out to trade Henry at year's end in the hopes of what? Getting an extra 100 yards out of another RB at the risk that he won't play at all due to further injuries of one variety or another.
I just don't get it. Heck, even if Henry fumbles 8 times and loses 5 of them, if he hits 2,000 yards rushing, who cares? Big deal!
Everyone rages about 11 fumbles only one of which altered the outcome of a game from a win to a loss, while completing ignoring the 7 times as many games thrown due to Drew's TOs. Meanwhile, Drew's fine and Henry needs to go.
I just don't get it sometimes. People read the front page hype and don't look under the hood or check out the background of a situation.
It's a good point. We drafted a lot of players this year who have been injured. I think this draft will go down as the worst overall (NFL wide) crop of talent ever.
Originally posted by Travis Hunter
It's a good point. We drafted a lot of players this year who have been injured. I think this draft will go down as the worst overall (NFL wide) crop of talent ever.
Wow! I agree w/ that too. The [/i]only[/i] positions drafted that fill immediate needs, other than McG, were Kelsay and Sobieski, both of whom have injury issues.
I agree as well. I think this will end up having been the Bills' worst draft since prior to the Butler/Polian eras. If McGahee ends up doing anything else than being spectacular, it has the propensity to be what you say, it will go down as one of the worst drafts NFL wide ever.
The proof of the drop off in talent to me was, is that you never see anyone, regardless of talent, spend a first round draft choice on a player that may not play the next year. It just never happens. When I saw that happen, it told me that TD and the crew didn't like the talent pool and figured there was only upside in taking a risk because everyone else fell out in the middle.
Personally I think McGahee will pan out well in spite of it all.
He may. I'm not saying he won't. But what I am saying is that "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush", eh. If Henry continues on at his level of play from last year while getting the number of carries that a RB playing as he did should actually get, namely 22-30 carries/game instead of over half the games well below that, he'll lead the league or come very close to it in rushing yardage and TDs.
I just cannot fathom trading him in the simply hopes that McGahee works out on several fronts. It just makes no sense to me to risk that much for such a marginal gain in productivity. And there might possibly be no gain in productivity. If Henry reaches 2,000 rushing yards, how much more is reasonable to expect? 2,500 rushing won't happen and McGahee has not shown that he's even capable of achieving 2,000 judging by the way he played v. the top 3 opponents at Miami. He averaged well below 4 YPC in those three games.
If in fact, McG's really perceived as such a budding star in spite of his total unproveness at this level, especially regarding being able to make it through 16 games w/o hurting himself somewhere, then we should be able to get at least a 2nd rounder for him, maybe a first. I can't see us getting much more except for possibly a player of not top caliber.
I just cannot imagine that there wasn't any player available who wouldn't have been able to contribute this season and still be a future contributor. Water under the bridge. But McG's status is not water under the bridge. It's a very real risk for us now. The way many fans and media are talking is as if they are ready to trade Henry away and pin all our hopes on McGahee regardless that he'll not have shown a thing this season. Again, if he were to get injured in limited action this season, I doubt we would get much more than a 2nd rounder for him, and maybe not even that. He'll have "risen" to the injury status of RJ.
This season will be very interesting. It will really bear out where TD knew what he was doing and where he didn't.
I'm clearly not happy w/ Posey and have very little faith that players like Fletcher, Teague, Bledsoe, are only about average and are all getting paid more than they're worth.
I also think that TD's draft reputation is at stake given last year's marginal draft outside of our top two picks at #4 and #36 overall. I don't think that Kelsay was a justifiable pick where we got him, nor do I think many if any of the subsequent picks will work out to anything other than depth and STs players.
The two biggest moves made this year were Spikes and trading Price for a first rounder. BUT, if McG doesn't work out, then that pick will have been wasted.
Shaw, Reese, Posey, just don't do much for me right now.
Indeed, this season will reveal much!
lunatic_bills_fan
05-13-2003, 12:03 PM
I really cant agree with with your Kelsay tyheory Wys. This kid was not supposed to be around where we got him and from what everyone is saying at camp, he is a workaholic. I think he will do just fine.
justasportsfan
05-13-2003, 12:05 PM
I'm not going to be sold on McGahee until he actually plays out a full season of 350+ carries w/o getting hurt at all! If/when that happens, I'll then be somewhat less concerned going into the following season. Two such seasons will alleviate my concerns for good.
With that statement I am not ready to count him out as well.
As far as I am concerned McG is a non-factor with this team this year. He does not exist. Henry is our no.1 rb and our future rb until McG proves otherwise.
As far as our draft goes, it's easy to harp on the negative. What about the positives? What if Kelsay does turn out to be another Hansen? Thing is we have a good starting corp and I'd rather concentrate on that for now. Healthy or not any draft would be a project unless of cousre we were drafting w/in the 1st ten in the draft w/c we didn't.
I hope there's someone out there after June 1st that we can grab. I'm not sold on the wr department yet.
BillsNYC
05-13-2003, 12:05 PM
i haven't turned on henry at all...this is a simple case of having two great athletes and whoever comes out on top wins..i don't understand how you guys don't understand that?
justasportsfan
05-13-2003, 12:12 PM
For as long as Drew doesn't have to carry the load on his shoulders, I think he is perfect. If you force the team to depend on him, he tends to blow the game. The running game has to be dominant for Drew to lessen his (big) mistakes.
Last years game against Miami @ Buffalo was picture perfect as far as I'm concerned. Henry ran well and when Miami concentrated on him, wham Drew's arm came inro play and killed them.
Tatonka
05-13-2003, 01:42 PM
list his injury history please wys..
date and injury..
McGahee tore his LCL (the only ligament that didn't tear this time BTW) during his senior year of HS. I don't know how it happened then, but I guess you could argue that McGahee MIGHT have a propensity for having guys tackle him at his knees with their helmets. In much the same way, you could say that Bledsoe is an injury risk because of that torn artery he suffered in 2001.
Originally posted by Tatonka
list his injury history please wys..
date and injury..
You can go find it. It's out there and no secret and I've gotta run out the door now. He got hurt his Sr. year in H.S. and missed I think half the season or so.
He was reshirted in his true freshman season at Miami and didn't play at all.
In his RS freshman year he suffered an injury, knee I think, different than now, in which he missed half the season as well. The first half I think. It was the opposite half as his Sr. H.S. season.
Then of course last year he suffered his current injury in his Sophomore season in the CG.
Originally posted by Doc
McGahee tore his LCL (the only ligament that didn't tear this time BTW) during his senior year of HS. I don't know how it happened then, but I guess you could argue that McGahee MIGHT have a propensity for having guys tackle him at his knees with their helmets. In much the same way, you could say that Bledsoe is an injury risk because of that torn artery he suffered in 2001.
All I know is that RJ was criticized as "injury prone" for injuries that were far less serious and only slightly more frequent.
No matter how you slice it, it's a huge risk.
HenryRules
05-13-2003, 02:31 PM
Wys, you summed up the differences perfectly. RJ's problem was that he never finished games even though he'd come back and start next week or the week after. He didn't leave games because of serious injuries, he left them because of minor ailments.
Take a look at Culpepper ... he played when his teammates sometimes carried him up the field because his leg was so sore. If RJ showed that type of toughness, it wouldn't have been a problem.
McGahee only comes out for serious injuries. IMO, those type of injuries are fluke things. Due to odds, some guys will get hit with them more often then others, but its nothing inherent to the player, and they're just as likely in upcoming seasons to receive a bad hit as anyone else.
Once McGahee completely recovers, I think he's just as likely/unlikely to suffer a serious injury as anyone else ... co-relation does not indication causation ... nor do some #'s even indicate a co-relation. Saying McGahee is prone to knee injuries is just like saying that the stock market responds to which conference wins the Super Bowl (I believe that in history, when the NFC wins the Super Bowl, the Stock market goes up something like 75% of the time and when the AFC wins, the market goes down something like 60% of the time). Its just a coincidence.
McGahee is probably prone to arthritis in his knee down the road, but that's something that a lot of guys can play through and if we don't overload him with something stupid like 350+ carries per year, it shouldn't be a problem.
lordofgun
05-13-2003, 02:34 PM
I don't see anyone turning their back on Henry. Did I miss something?
BillsNYC
05-13-2003, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by Wys Guy
All I know is that RJ was criticized as "injury prone" for injuries that were far less serious and only slightly more frequent.
slightly? :lol:
HenryRules
05-13-2003, 02:39 PM
In the 2001 season, McGahee suffered a knee sprain ... if Miami didn't have another back by the name of Clinton Portis on the team, he might have been able to play.
Ingtar33
05-13-2003, 02:41 PM
Well... I think you (wys) might be a little too harsh about your critique of the last draft. TD, drafting WM in round 1 was a function of the poor quality in the draft (overall). Our draft board had only 5 DL with sure 1st round grades, and only 13 players carried those grades on our whole board.
QB-Leftwich, Palmer
RB-McGahee (yes even with the injury)
WR-Rogers, Johnson
TE-none
OT-Gross
OG-none
C-none
DE-Suggs, McDougal
DT-Kennedy, Sullivan, Williams
OLB-none
MLB-none
CB-Newman, Trufant
SS-none
FS-none
-those were the only players who made out 1st round certain grades (a 9.3 or above)...
When you consider that, you begin to realize why this was such a poor draft. When you are in a poor draft, it is not uncommon for the only big names to come out of it are the guys in the later rounds, or the risky picks. The Bills took McGahee because (I highly suspect) he was the only guy worth a 1st round pick left on their board.
Kelsay, does not have a history of injuries, and has improved steadily since his Freshman season... last year he missed 5 games with an injury, yet still was able to get 7 sacks in 7 games, and wrack up more tackles than his previous full year... he is not Denney, I know because I hated the Denney pick last year (Although, I have a rule of thumb to the NFL draft that basically equates to never draft from Brigham Young so you should take that for what it was worth).
My main point is that in a shallow draft, you find yourself taking flyers on guys who you normally wouldn't, because there simply isn't anyone else worth the pick.
(BTW: Kelsay was the 4th rated DE on our draft board, and rated higher than Joseph and Pace who went before him, and was nearly equal to our no.3, Haynes, in the evaluation)
Does any of this mean that TD was right? No, only time will tell, but to spend time debating the merits of this draft before they have even played a game is a little bit premature. We can talk about the team needs, and if this draft addressed them (with bodies), or we can talk about guy's college careers, but we really can't debate the quality of this draft with any sort of knowledge, as there is always a surprise, or always a player who translates better or worst to the pros than his college career would indicate.
I've been wrong before, and will be wrong again about players, as has my team. Think, if 20 or so (depending on the team) dedicated football guys, studying tape and watching tryouts can screw up an evaluation, there certainly is a certain immeasurable factor that translates into success in the NFL. It is that unknown which makes the draft so interesting, and makes the player selection process such an enjoyable one to be a part of.
LtBillsFan66
05-13-2003, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by lordofgun
I don't see anyone turning their back on Henry. Did I miss something?
No.
It's some sort of delusion.
Let the nicknames begin...
Who is a Henryite? Who is a Henry hater? Who is a Willisite? A McGahater?
The emotional pendulum swings.
DraftBoy
05-13-2003, 03:12 PM
I only see McGahee-Henry really being a big problem until 2005. B/c we all knwo TD isnt stupid he wont deal one back without the guarantee that the other is gonna be better. So McGahee will first have to beat out Henry, and IF that happens it will in the 2004 season. So to argue now is almost futile since its purely speculation. But I do agree with the fact that Im not sold on Shaw, Posey, or Reese. I will go as far as to say I can see Crowell beating out Posey mid-season for a starting job and having Posey be our pass rush specialist.
The_Philster
05-13-2003, 03:15 PM
Originally posted by Pride
I agree with you, but noone else does
I probably would...if I had all night to read through all these posts.
:eek: :dizzy:
My point Wys was that ANY player would have had their knee destroyed by the hit McGahee took. RJ OTOH got injured on routine-looking plays.
Also what's there not to be sold on WRT Shaw and Posey? Shaw had a good season for a #3 WR in Pgh back in 2000 and last year considering the lousy passing games and Posey is coming off a 9 sack season. Don't give me that "Posey did nothing his first 4 years" line because it's not a valid argument.
I think Posey was a good value and find. 8 or 9 sacks last year is pretty impressive for a LB who didn't start every game as I recall.
HenryRules
05-13-2003, 06:30 PM
It was also his first time playing LB ... the first years he was playing a different position and are thus irrelevant as to how successful he can be as an LB. Its like saying a DB will be a crappy FS because he sucked at CB. The positions are similar (as are rush LB and DE) but they're not the same.
Posey made the switch to LB midway through his 3rd season and as expected, was unsuccessful. He was cut before the next season and didn't latch on with anyone until the season started, and played for 2 teams his 4th year. In his 5th year the Texans took him and made him a player, and despite being a backup to the "name" player Keith Mitchell for 6 games during the season, still managed to rack up 9 (8 full and 2-1/2) sacks. Seeing as how Capes and LeBeau are cut from the same mold, and that Don Blackmon is an excellent LB'er coach, I'm not worried about Posey, and I think the Bills will get players out of Crowell and Haggan.
Tatonka
05-13-2003, 08:48 PM
posey is a concern because the SSLB in a 3-4 is basically a DE.. not a true LB.. like kevin green..
but we are not running a 3-4.. and he is the same type player that Newman was, who they completely misused.. so why would posey be any different than newman?
Frankly I wouldn't mind seeing Posey up on the line at LDE, along with Sam, Pat, and Aaron. I guess the question would be who would play SLB? Spoon perhaps?
justasportsfan
05-13-2003, 09:28 PM
Didn't Williams say once that Posey was the type of player that would do well in our D scheme? I remember he and Donahoe were watching(scouting) him play when we played the bengals last year.
I don't know about you guys but I think TD has done a great job so far and I'm not ready to call this years draft a bust.
Tatonka
05-13-2003, 09:58 PM
how would they scout posey while they are playing the bengals?? he played for the texans.
Ingtar33
05-13-2003, 11:53 PM
T...
I think you're being a bit too paranoid... SLB in a 3-4 is unlike any position in football (although it is borderline similar to RDE in a 4-3 if the team uses their RDE as both a pass rusher and a pass defender) outside of the SLB in the 46. That is why I was so puzzled about Newman's failure at the conversion, of all of the defenders who would have had problems with the switch, I would have figured Newman to be one of the last...
Tatonka
05-14-2003, 08:30 AM
do you think newman's failure was him or coaches or both?
Ingtar33
05-14-2003, 10:10 AM
I'm not sure why he couldn't make it... It might be nothing more complicated than his one good year was a fluke... When I saw him play, it looked like he was too slow and weak to make a difference, as the SLB in the 46 pass rushes (normally) from farther away on the edge than he would in a 34. Newman never was able to beat the RT around the edge, and as a result provided little to no pressure from that side. Throw in his inability to fight off blockers, or even to take one up field during a running play and you get poor performance from your Sam...
Was this Newman's fault? Was he being put into bad places by a poor coaching staff? When I cast my mind back to the review of the Bills defense me and my pals went over, I recall thinking out loud that Newman wasn't to blame for his poor performance in this D... I was corrected by both of my friends who pointed out play after play where Newman was put in the position to make the play (by the coaching staff) and was unable to due to his physical limitations (poor tackler in space, unable to fight off a block, couldn't get to the QB fast enough...).
Maybe the 3-4 covered up Newman's weaknesses (kept him closer to the end of the line, didn't have to work his way up field, just hold the point...) which were exposed in the 46.
Does Posey have those same weaknesses? Not the one I saw on tape... the Posey I saw on tape was much faster and quicker than Newman; but best yet he was strong enough to bulrush when he needed too. How will he translate to the 46? Who knows... before the Bills pulled the switch, I was convinced that Newman would have worked out fine, just as I'm now convinced that Posey will too. On the bright side, we did pick up two LBers who might be able to work their way into the SLB if Posey is a disaster (as well as we do have both Polk and Spoon on the roster).
The difference in pass-rush ability ostensibly comes from Posey's background as a DE versus Newman's which was a LB'er. Thanks for the analysis Ingtar.
justasportsfan
05-14-2003, 05:59 PM
Originally posted by Tatonka
how would they scout posey while they are playing the bengals?? he played for the texans.
that's what I meant :scratch:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.