Evan Silva has something cooking - Re: Daryl Richardson

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
[tweet]https://twitter.com/evansilva/status/354779149304463362[/tweet]
<a class="postlink" href="https://twitter.com/evansilva/status/354779149304463362" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">https://twitter.com/evansilva/status/354779149304463362</a>
 

A55VA6

Legend
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
8,208
Should be positive, I'm thinking. I'm a Richardson fan for sure.
 

libertadrocks

Hall of Fame
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
2,224
Here's his article:

Daryl Richardson

A little-known seventh-round pick out of Abilene Christian, Richardson outplayed more highly touted Rams second-rounder Isaiah Pead in training camp and entered his rookie year as the primary change-of-pace back for Steven Jackson. After a handful of early-season long runs, there were whispers Richardson might steal Jackson's job. (That may sound silly now, but it really did happen.) Richardson's usage faded down the stretch, earning 16 combined carries over the last five games. He averaged a paltry 1.53 YPC on his final 17 runs.

Earlier this offseason, I asked a high-ranking Rams official why Richardson's usage dwindled. He explained that the team simply wanted to get Jackson the football more in what they internally anticipated would be the all-time franchise rushing leader's final season with the organization.

The Rams' tailback job is now wide open to competition, with Richardson, Pead, and fifth-round pick Zac Stacy as the top three options. Richardson stands in at just 5-foot-10 and 192 pounds, and I want to know whether he has a realistic shot to be an NFL feature back. My opinion wavered on that topic while watching him play week to week as a rookie. So I took all day Tuesday to re-watch Richardson's 122 rookie-season touches. I emerged with the following thoughts:

One thing I've learned over the past several years is that watching a football player week to week in small doses -- like how change-up back Richardson was used -- provides a different perspective than watching him repetitively all at once. I think you get a much stronger feel for a player watching him over and over at a voluminous clip in one extended sitting. My opinion of Richardson as last season closed was less favorable than it is now. It's also possible I sort of subconsciously held Richardson's late-season usage reduction against him.

Following this one-fell-swoop review of his 122 touches, I think Richardson stands a legitimate chance to be the foundation of St. Louis' rushing attack, if given that opportunity. I think he can be a go-to, lead NFL runner in a spread-type offense the Rams are expected to implement this season.

So why was Richardson's late-season yards-per-carry average so low? It was 4.85 on the year, and 5.54 before those final 17 runs. On game tape, Richardson didn't look gassed or like he'd hit a rookie wall. He looked like the same player. I think a number of factors were at work. For one, the Rams played a murderer's row of stretch-run rush defenses, facing San Francisco, Tampa Bay, Minnesota, and Seattle at their place. The 17-run sample size was small. Injuries piled up on St. Louis' offensive line, which allowed a ton of backfield penetration. Richardson still flashed big-play ability on receptions and toss sweeps. He just didn't get any room to run on those final few carries.

Save arguably David Wilson, Daryl Richardson is the single most explosive second-year back I've reexamined for this series, superior in this area to Lamar Miller, Bryce Brown, Ronnie Hillman, and Bernard Pierce. He runs with urgency, high energy and suddenness, and displays outstanding first-step burst. Again, again, and again, Richardson's acceleration jumped off the screen. He has big-play speed both on inside runs and plays to the edge. Richardson consistently demonstrated natural explosion whenever his shoulder pads were pointed north-south or at a 45-degree angle. He routinely won footraces to the corner. Richardson runs with an incredible amount of juice.

What I found even more encouraging than Richardson's straight-ahead burst and speed was his toughness between the tackles. His sheer velocity on inside running plays was outstanding and extremely impressive for a back his size. Richardson never shied from contact and finished runs with authority. He kept his feet moving through traffic and consistently fell forward to max out plays.

While this all made Richardson an exciting watch, there were concerns. Fumbling is one of the most fixable running back flaws, but Richardson had rookie-year ball-security issues. He fumbled three times, losing two. The most critical lost ball came in clock-killing mode with St. Louis leading Washington 31-28 late in Week 2. The fumble almost cost the Rams the game. Richardson was inconsistent in pass protection, and it stood out more than once. I did think he showed plus receiving skills, securing the football with his hands rather than body and converting 24-of-26 (92.3 percent) catchable targets.

As a runner, Richardson lacks great balance, on several occasions slipping in the hole or behind the line of scrimmage before attempts at upfield cuts. This resulted in yards left on the field. Richardson's vision was shaky and somewhat unpredictable from snap to snap. I counted several plays on which a cutback lane was opened by his offensive line, but Richardson failed to identify. Again, he left too much yardage on the field.

If Richardson didn't diagnose an alley early in his rushing attempt, he sometimes got into trouble. I'd describe him as sudden and explosive, but not elusive. Richardson is not a shake-and-bake runner, and rarely made defenders outright miss. He ran into too many piles. And because of his size, Richardson did not break tackles with leg drive. He can run through arm tackles when sprung into space -- I saw him do this often, in fact -- but I wouldn't say he's a particularly effective after-contact-yardage back. He ran with toughs and physicality, but did not run with power.

Here were some comments on Richardson made by NFL Network's Mike Mayock during the Rams' Week 5 game against the Cardinals:

"I kinda like this kid. Seventh-round pick, not a lot of publicity generated about him. Richardson has consistently outplayed Isaiah Pead to the point where he's getting almost equal snaps in the backfield now with Steven Jackson. ... And he's a lot quicker than Steven Jackson is at this point in his career. He's got burst to him."

Whether it was Mayock, Gus Johnson, or Ian Eagle, I noticed announcing crews covering Rams games continuously mistake Richardson for Steven Jackson. I took this as a good sign for Richardson, and more evidence of his combination of burst, inside toughness, and rushing velocity.

An observation I recall making during the season -- when Richardson was operating as a pace-change back behind Jackson -- was that the Rams preferred using him on the perimeter as opposed to inside. While this reexamination did reconfirm Richardson’s frequent handling of screens, swings, off-tackle sprints, and stretch runs, the coaching staff certainly wasn't averse to letting Richardson attack opponents on interior handoffs. In my snap-by-snap chart of Richardson's 98 carries, I marked 55 (56.1 percent) as designed to travel inside. And whereas Bryce Brown and David Wilson were prone to run-bouncing outside, Richardson did a commendable job of staying inside on between-the-tackles runs, playing within the design of the offense.

My pre-draft analysis of Zac Stacy can be found at this link. And in this second-year running back series, I still have Isaiah Pead left to go. But while I fully acknowledge some (mostly correctable) flaws in his game, my preliminary conclusion after re-watching Richardson is that he will likely be the Rams' best backfield option in 2013. I'm changing my opinion of him and bumping him up my fantasy rankings.

http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/43649/260/2nd-year-rbs-daryl-richardson

Definitely a good read, although I havent seen many opinions in opposition to his comments. I think the biggest take away are that Silva believes DR did not hit a rookie wall and that DR can be the foundation of our rushing attack.
 

albefree69

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
4,512
Name
Alan
So why was Richardson's late-season yards-per-carry average so low? It was 4.85 on the year, and 5.54 before those final 17 runs. On game tape, Richardson didn't look gassed or like he'd hit a rookie wall. He looked like the same player. I think a number of factors were at work. For one, the Rams played a murderer's row of stretch-run rush defenses, facing San Francisco, Tampa Bay, Minnesota, and Seattle at their place. The 17-run sample size was small. Injuries piled up on St. Louis' offensive line, which allowed a ton of backfield penetration. Richardson still flashed big-play ability on receptions and toss sweeps. He just didn't get any room to run on those final few carries.

A couple of things here.
As I remember it, this was the period during which we actually had most of our starters back. Although Wells was apparently playing through a knee injury for which he later had an operation and is now rehabbing. The author's perception (in green) of the performance of our O-line is at odds with many. Was our O-line performing well as many assert or was it not performing well and it's deficiencies were simply being masked by our offensive scheme and extra blockers as I've contended? This is another person who, after extensive viewing of tape, came to the same conclusion as I did concerning the performance of our O-line. This has much more relevance to our O-line discussion in another thread but I just wanted to point it out.

I agree with him totally about the small sample size. I think Pead replaced him mostly because of him finally getting up to speed and the Rams wanting to see what they had. I think DR should in no way be counted out in this battle.
 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #7
albefree69 said:
So why was Richardson's late-season yards-per-carry average so low? It was 4.85 on the year, and 5.54 before those final 17 runs. On game tape, Richardson didn't look gassed or like he'd hit a rookie wall. He looked like the same player. I think a number of factors were at work. For one, the Rams played a murderer's row of stretch-run rush defenses, facing San Francisco, Tampa Bay, Minnesota, and Seattle at their place. The 17-run sample size was small. Injuries piled up on St. Louis' offensive line, which allowed a ton of backfield penetration. Richardson still flashed big-play ability on receptions and toss sweeps. He just didn't get any room to run on those final few carries.

A couple of things here.
As I remember it, this was the period during which we actually had most of our starters back. Although Wells was apparently playing through a knee injury for which he later had an operation and is now rehabbing. The author's perception (in green) of the performance of our O-line is at odds with many. Was our O-line performing well as many assert or was it not performing well and it's deficiencies were simply being masked by our offensive scheme and extra blockers as I've contended? This is another person who, after extensive viewing of tape, came to the same conclusion as I did concerning the performance of our O-line. This has much more relevance to our O-line discussion in another thread but I just wanted to point it out.

I agree with him totally about the small sample size. I think Pead replaced him mostly because of him finally getting up to speed and the Rams wanting to see what they had. I think DR should in no way be counted out in this battle.
Yeah, that caught my eye too. The 2nd half of the season was when we got out starters back healthy. I think it has much more to do with the level of competition at the time and not so much about injuries. Those defenses we played down the stretch ranked very high against the run.
 

Faceplant

Still celebrating Superbowl LVI
Rams On Demand Sponsor
2023 ROD Pick'em Champion
Joined
Aug 11, 2010
Messages
9,614
This confirms what I saw with my own peepers last year. Richardson was the BEST RB ON THE ROSTER. Yep. I said it and I stand by it.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2
 

albefree69

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
4,512
Name
Alan
X commented:
Yeah, that caught my eye too. The 2nd half of the season was when we got out starters back healthy. I think it has much more to do with the level of competition at the time and not so much about injuries. Those defenses we played down the stretch ranked very high against the run.

Yeah I agree about the caliber of the defenses we faced during this period.
Here are the top 7 defenses against the run when looking at yards per attempt.
TB 3.5 YDS/A
Denver 3.6 YDS/A
SF 3.7 YDS/A
Pittsburgh 3.7 YDS/A
SD 3.8 YDS/A
New England 3.9 YDS/A
Minnesota 4.0 YDS/A

Are you of the opinion that this statement was in error?
"which allowed a ton of backfield penetration"
Or was that mainly a function of the great defenses we faced and not the quality of the O-line?
 

Thordaddy

Binding you with ancient logic
Joined
Apr 5, 2012
Messages
10,462
Name
Rich
Faceplant said:
This confirms what I saw with my own peepers last year. Richardson was the BEST RB ON THE ROSTER. Yep. I said it and I stand by it.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2
blasphemer thou hath sinned DR was good and is IMO the best now,but better than SJ? Throw away the pipe FP
 

BonifayRam

Legend
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
13,435
Name
Vernon
Here's what I observed on the later half of the Ram 2012 OL ...

The period of time that we saw with the return of the left wall about approx 11 wk. Saffold-Turner-Wells improved the pass protection was a instant upgrade over the Barksdale-Smith-Turner left wall.

OLG Shelley Smith is a much better run blocker than Robert Turner was & the same can be said in reverse Turner was better @ pass protection than Smith. Wells was much better @ pass protection too but his ability to move and make the run blocks was deplorably weak & was lost & missed many blocks. Turner however played his best when he was @ center.

Saffold was a serious upgrade @ run blocking from Barksdale & Hunter. Saffold was also the much better pass blocker too. It was Saffold's return that seemed to spark the OL performance more than the insertion of Wells & Turner in @ OLG & Center.

When Dahl went out Shelly Smith & Chris Williams moved in this right side with ORG Williams playing more as the games went on.... played hard and great when involved in pass protection from that ORG post. It should also be mentioned it was the first time in CW 4 yr career that he played ORG. Smith did not play as well @ ORG but still run blocked OK.

Early in the season Harvey Dahl & Barry Richardson made some very good run blocks on springing RB Richardson on those outside runs. I also thought that Shotty seemed to run the small Richardson way too much up the middle & into the teeth of the defense instead of running outside as he did earlier in the yr.
 

A55VA6

Legend
Joined
Mar 9, 2013
Messages
8,208
Faceplant said:
This confirms what I saw with my own peepers last year. Richardson was the BEST RB ON THE ROSTER. Yep. I said it and I stand by it.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2
Yep same here.
 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #13
Thordaddy said:
Faceplant said:
This confirms what I saw with my own peepers last year. Richardson was the BEST RB ON THE ROSTER. Yep. I said it and I stand by it.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2
blasphemer thou hath sinned DR was good and is IMO the best now,but better than SJ? Throw away the pipe FP
That's the way I saw it *last year* too. Nobody is questioning Jackson's abilities. Just that he wasn't as dynamic as Richardson was *last year*. Because of that, *last year* Richardson was the better back.
 

PrometheusFaulk

Starter
Joined
May 25, 2013
Messages
618
I still think Pead's the guy when the dust settles. But competish is good for everybody.

PS for anyone taking Silva's word as gospel, I'm just gonna leave this here...

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/40586/260/mathews-can-be-no-1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/4 ... an-be-no-1</a>
 

albefree69

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
4,512
Name
Alan
BonifayRam analyzed O-line performance:
Early in the season Harvey Dahl & Barry Richardson made some very good run blocks on springing RB Richardson on those outside runs. I also thought that Shotty seemed to run the small Richardson way too much up the middle & into the teeth of the defense instead of running outside as he did earlier in the yr.

Good analysis. It's generally what I saw but in much greater detail. :lol:

The part that I'm quoting is what I noticed too. I thought the run blocking and run play calling was better early on in the season. One thing that I did notice about DR is that when a play was designed to go up the middle and there was nothing there he didn't seem to be able to recover and bounce it to the outside. Too small of a sample for me to see whether Pead is better at that.
 

Mojo Ram

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Feb 3, 2013
Messages
22,905
Name
mojo
I think another small factor for why DRich wasn't as productive late could be the whole "gamefilm" factor. He definately took defenses by surprise.

Rookies,late rd picks and unknowns have a bit of an advantage in the early going sometimes. I think a lot of times this is a big reason for the sophomore slump we see from time to time.

My hope is that the gamefilm factor will render Kaep and Wilson less effective in 2013 too. :amped:
 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #17
PrometheusFaulk said:
I still think Pead's the guy when the dust settles. But competish is good for everybody.

PS for anyone taking Silva's word as gospel, I'm just gonna leave this here...

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/40586/260/mathews-can-be-no-1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/4 ... an-be-no-1</a>
Shoot. I thought Ryan Mathews was gonna be a great back too last year.
The year prior he looked really explosive to me. Fabiano was on his bandwagon too from what I remember.
 

albefree69

Hall of Fame
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
4,512
Name
Alan
X wrote:
Just that he wasn't as dynamic as Richardson was *last year*.


I agree with that but I also thought that SJ was better at moving the pile and fighting for extra yardage. I'm not sure that if I didn't know who each one was I would have been able to say who was the best.
 

PrometheusFaulk

Starter
Joined
May 25, 2013
Messages
618
X said:
PrometheusFaulk said:
I still think Pead's the guy when the dust settles. But competish is good for everybody.

PS for anyone taking Silva's word as gospel, I'm just gonna leave this here...

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/40586/260/mathews-can-be-no-1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/4 ... an-be-no-1</a>
Shoot. I thought Ryan Mathews was gonna be a great back too last year.
The year prior he looked really explosive to me. Fabiano was on his bandwagon too from what I remember.

I did not. But I have been wrong on a multitude of other things. All's I'm saying is that Silva's endorsement isn't necessarily a guarantee of future success.
 

-X-

Medium-sized Lebowski
Joined
Jun 20, 2010
Messages
35,576
Name
The Dude
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #20
PrometheusFaulk said:
X said:
PrometheusFaulk said:
I still think Pead's the guy when the dust settles. But competish is good for everybody.

PS for anyone taking Silva's word as gospel, I'm just gonna leave this here...

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/40586/260/mathews-can-be-no-1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/4 ... an-be-no-1</a>
Shoot. I thought Ryan Mathews was gonna be a great back too last year.
The year prior he looked really explosive to me. Fabiano was on his bandwagon too from what I remember.

I did not. But I have been wrong on a multitude of other things. All's I'm saying is that Silva's endorsement isn't necessarily a guarantee of future success.
IT IS TOO!

Hissy-Fit-Girl-Crying.jpg