Fumbling Foreman

[top dawg]

There is the the problem! I put it right out there, up front, and in the title. 

D'Onta Foreman is the type of big, powerful runner with breakaway speed that should get every Panthers fan excited. In fact, the reason why I started the thread is because Foreman keeps popping up in posts as a potential pick by Dave Gettleman (who fancies big men, and not just lineman as some would argue). I must admit that I was super impressed when I checked out some video on Foreman. I mean, like, I was so excited that I was slap-yo-mama-by-mistake-excited, and wondering why Foreman wasn't getting more love from...well...everyone.  And then someone here (sorry, don't remember who, Lasus, StBugs, Nick, somebody) mentioned the fumbles. Upon researching Foreman, I came upon this article by PFF, comparing Foreman to Derrick Henry.

PFF has a couple of qualifiers as to why Henry's college production may have been more meaningful than Foreman's, including playing in the SEC, but the article suggests that Foreman's career from a production standpoint is at least up to par with Henry's, if not outright superior. The thing is though, the fumbles...

 

"While Henry fumbled just three times in his 340 carries last season, Foreman fumbled seven times in his 323. They seemed to always come at critical moments, too."

Foreman just fumbles way too much, and it has rightfully taken a toll on his viability as a legitimate option as a pro.  Butter fingers at the receiver position is bad enough, but at the running back position fumble-itis can be a backbreaker. Fumbling can have serious repercussions to a team's success, especially when they come at "critical moments," which is all the time the way that I look at it.

Now some might say that this is a fixable issue, and maybe it is. But my thing is, why chance it? 

[Swaggasaurus]

I'll tell you a guy who doesn't fumble. Kareem Hunt, I think he's a complete back.

[Snake]

Best way to lose your job is to turn the ball over.

[GoobyPls]

Foreman game tape is not that impressive, he has no wiggle it's just north and south.

 

Plus they ran him into ground at Texas.

[Asurfaholic]

Is 4 more fumbles than the other guy really that significant? Sounds to me like a correctable problem, but hardly a real difference statistically. 

 

[top dawg]

3 minutes ago, GoobyPls said:

Foreman game tape is not that impressive, he has no wiggle it's just north and south.

 

Plus they ran him into ground at Texas.

Yeah, they ran the hell out of him, but he's a big boy. Henry was a horse also.

As for no wiggle and running north-south, I heard the same thing about Henry, and thus far his game has translated well to the pros. Running north-south, is not necessarily a bad thing, especially when you can make the first guy miss, and you have speed enough to get to the edge to keep opposing defenses honest.

[LinvilleGorge]

2 minutes ago, Asurfaholic said:

Is 4 more fumbles than the other guy really that significant? Sounds to me like a correctable problem, but hardly a real difference statistically. 

 

Yeah, it is. Look at it in terms of percentage. He fumbled 233% more. That note about a tendency to fumble I'm critical situations stuck out to me as well.

[GoobyPls]

3 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Yeah, they ran the hell out of him, but he's a big boy. Henry was a horse also.

As for no wiggle and running north-south, I heard the same thing about Henry, and thus far his game has translated well to the pros. Running north-south, is not necessarily a bad thing, especially when you can make the first guy miss, and you have speed enough to get to the edge to keep opposing defenses honest.

Henry is "OK" he's not good enough to be used as a measuring stick. And Henry had more speed than Foreman, you hardly ever saw Foreman run outside the tackles.

[top dawg]

6 minutes ago, Asurfaholic said:

Is 4 more fumbles than the other guy really that significant? Sounds to me like a correctable problem, but hardly a real difference statistically. 

 

As far as in relation to Henry's rate, it's huge. But here is some more perspective. 

"The average fumble rate for the top-10 rushers in the NFL last season was 88.6, which is the same as saying the running back fumbled once every 88.6 offensive touches. Anything above 140.0 fumble rate is generally considered a strong number among running backs.

Last year, Nebraska’s Ameer Abdullah had the highest fumble rate (35.4) in the draft class and his ball security was an issue for him as a rookie with the Detroit Lions. He fumbled four times on 168 offensive touches for a fumble rate of 42.0 in 2015."

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/2016-nfl-draft-closer-look-at-running-back-fumble-rates-ball-security/

Now I'm no math whiz, but I believe Foreman's rate is around 46. Though maybe correctable, it's certainly not what you want---at all---especially for a team that puts a premium on running the ball.

[top dawg]

13 minutes ago, GoobyPls said:

Henry is "OK" he's not good enough to be used as a measuring stick. And Henry had more speed than Foreman, you hardly ever saw Foreman run outside the tackles.

What are you talking about? That's not what I see on tape. Plus, Foreman is appreciably faster than Henry.

 

http://247sports.com/Article/Texas-Longhorns-football-DOnta-Foreman-makes-his-case-as-CFBs-to-48611672

"Foreman presents particular issues for a defense because of his NFL blend of size and speed. At 249 pounds, Foreman takes pleasure at violently attacking defenders – he broke through multiple arm tackles Saturday. But he’s also almost unfairly fast. Foreman runs away from people at his size because he runs a 4.4 40-yard dash.

"He's got pretty good foot-speed," Baylor head coach Jim Grobe said. "He gets out on the perimeter and so you have to make a decision defensively to try and hunker down inside to stop the run."

 

[top dawg]

16 minutes ago, stbugs said:

I'm not sold on Foreman unless he goes later. I think there are so many decent RBs in this class, that unless we are getting a transcendent talent like Fournette, I'd rather go after the best folks at the other deep positions (DE, TE, S and CB) and get RBs later.

If someone says he might be as good as Henry, I'll take a hard pass on him unless he's available at our comp 3rd/4th. Picks 40 and 72 are too much of a premium to get an OK RB.

Henry was more than solid his rookie year. I don't quite understand why you and Goobs are downplaying him. Plus, Foreman may turn out to be even better.

 

[GoobyPls]

15 minutes ago, top dawg said:

What are you talking about? That's not what I see on tape. Plus, Foreman is appreciably faster than Henry.

 

http://247sports.com/Article/Texas-Longhorns-football-DOnta-Foreman-makes-his-case-as-CFBs-to-48611672

"Foreman presents particular issues for a defense because of his NFL blend of size and speed. At 249 pounds, Foreman takes pleasure at violently attacking defenders – he broke through multiple arm tackles Saturday. But he’s also almost unfairly fast. Foreman runs away from people at his size because he runs a 4.4 40-yard dash.

"He's got pretty good foot-speed," Baylor head coach Jim Grobe said. "He gets out on the perimeter and so you have to make a decision defensively to try and hunker down inside to stop the run."

 

Foreman is not faster than Henry they are about the same in speed and Henry actually was able to get around the edge more often in college.

 

Weighing 250 pounds in college is not good a thing. Your supposed to put on weight in the NFL not shed which what teams are most likely gonna ask him to do.

[top dawg]

26 minutes ago, GoobyPls said:

Foreman is not faster than Henry they are about the same in speed and Henry actually was able to get around the edge more often in college.

 

Weighing 250 pounds in college is not good a thing. Your supposed to put on weight in the NFL not shed which what teams are most likely gonna ask him to do.

Look, you can deny what you see (if you even looked) if you like. You can also say that 4.4 and 4.5 are the same. The fact is that Foreman is faster than Henry. 

Furthermore, I never said that Henry never ran to the perimeter. The only reason I even mentioned Henry is because of PFF, who suggests that Foreman's college career is favorable to Henry's from a production perspective. 

Regardless of weight and speed, which has obviously not hindered either one of them, Foreman's production is impressive. The only negative that stands out like a sore thumb, which adversely affected his grade according to PFF, is his fumbling.

Debating things that just aren't true is pretty useless, but that's your right.

[GoobyPls]

25 minutes ago, top dawg said:

Look, you can deny what you see (if you even looked) if you like. You can also say that 4.4 and 4.5 are the same. The fact is that Foreman is faster than Henry. 

Furthermore, I never said that Henry never ran to the perimeter. The only reason I even mentioned Henry is because of PFF, who suggests that Foreman's college career is favorable to Henry's from a production perspective. 

Regardless of weight and speed, which has obviously not hindered either one of them, Foreman's production is impressive. The only negative that stands out like a sore thumb, which adversely affected his grade according to PFF, is his fumbling.

Debating things that just aren't true is pretty useless, but that's your right.

4.4 according to who? Henry ran a 4.54 lasered time at the combine, any thing clocked by hand time should not be taken with high regard. 

 

I never said that that you said Henry never ran outside the perimeter, I said Foreman hardly runs outside the tackles, which is true. Also taking PFF as scripture is a bad a look, they have constantly been proven wrong. 

 

Foreman has been productive same way Monte Ball was productive. Productivity doesn't mean you will translate to the NFL. Either way I'm not sold in him or Henry as pro bowl featured backs. Foreman is more Ingram than Henry FYI.