SB Nation - Vernand Morency

Why Ryan Grant Isn't The Answer

Mitchell_M — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 20:15:18 -0000

Ryan Grant is an enigma of sorts. He is a starting running back in the NFL, yet he is widely regarded as a player with above-average skills at best. He is good at many things, but great at nothing. Even his Scouts Inc. profile from ESPN.com shows how he is simultaneously impressive and limited.

He doesn't have outstanding speed but runs well and has quickness and burst to hit the hole...He has good power to move the pile, but wouldn't be considered an explosive ball carrier...He has adequate hands as a target in the passing game but isn't dangerous in the open field after the catch.

To sum up Ryan Grant's career to this point: "meh." He doesn't have the size of Brandon Jacobs, or the elusiveness of Adrian Peterson, or the power of Michael Turner, or the agility of LaDanian Tomlinson, or the vision of Ronnie Brown, or the afterburner speed of Chris Johnson. He has those things in smaller amounts, but not enough to be considered special.

Despite his rather pedestrian profile, Grant has respectible numbers over his 3-year career: 2654 yards, 15 touchdowns, and a ypc average of 4.3. He has a reputation of being able to produce despite his physical limitations, and that reputation has dubbed him the main rusher on one of the few teams that does not employ a running-back-by-committee.

My question is this: Should Ryan Grant be the lone ball-carrier on the Packers?

In order to explore this question, we first have to look at the state of the running back position in Green Bay since 2007, when Grant burst onto the scene. In 2007, Grant was behind the likes of Brandon Jackson, Vernand Morency, and DeShawn Wynn. It took all the way until Week 8 (the Denver OT game) for Grant to establish himself in the Packer backfield, and even then it was only due to injuries to those in front of him.

In 2008, Grant was the unquestioned starter, and Jackson and Wynn were contributors. That trend continued to this season, with a minor change in personnel. DeShawn Wynn managed to find his way onto the injured reserve list (again), so former Packer Pro Bowler Ahman Green takes his place. Despite his history, Green's addition does little to threaten Grant's job security; the starting job belongs to Ryan Grant until someone is added to the roster that can compete for the position.

While it might be remiss to dismiss Grant's 2007 campaign, I contend that he remained the starter simply because nobody else was good enough to take his place. Brett Favre's 2007 season was as stellar as it was unexpected; defenses had to focus more on the pass, thus opening up running lanes. Almost anybody could have put up decent numbers on that offense so long as they could run without getting winded.

While the story of the undrafted Notre Dame product breaking onto the scene is a popular one, players don't (or at least shouldn't) get paid based on backstory. They get paid for performance; sometimes past, but more often projected. Ryan Grant's major payday during the summer of 2007 was somewhat understated compared to the media frenzy that followed the team (and still does, as we saw from Sunday). But make no mistake, Grant's new contract was based more on the past and less on the future.

From a PR standpoint, I understand why they gave Grant his money. With all the tension pervading the Green Bay fanbase before the 2008 season, the organization needed to do something that the fans could agree upon. What better way to ease that pressure than to extend the contract of a player who had just gained nearly 1,000 yards in half a season? But from a talent and, more importantly, a projected performance standpoint, I think Grant is vastly overpaid.

Let me be clear that I like Ryan Grant and want him on the team. However, I don't think he is being properly used in the offense and the offense is being held back as a result.

Obviously, there's no way I can make these claims without at least attempting to back them up with factual evidence. Therefore, I submit Exhibit A: Ryan Grant's career statistics, supplied by NFL.com. NFL.com has a wonderful feature called "Situational Stats" that breaks down a player's numbers by more in-depth metrics than just per-game or per-carry. These different metrics really show what kind of running back Grant is and why he's being mis-used.

* * *

The first one is dividing Grant's production by the number of attempts he receives. NFL running backs typically carry the ball 20 times in a game. The best way to break down a running back's production is to look at how many yards he gains on attempts 1 through 10, then how much he gains on 11 through 20, and finally anything above carry number 21.

	Attempts	Yards	Average	TDs
1-10	352	1624	4.6	9
11-20	241	992	4.1	8
21+	75	298	4.0	1

As you can see, Grant's numbers start to take a dip once he gets past his tenth carry in a given game. While I like to see coaches stick with the run throughout a game in order to get the back into a rhythm, Grant hasn't demonstrated the ability to maintain a consistent ability to get yards as the game wears on. Another way to show this is to divide Grant's yardage totals by his career number of games.

Carries	Yards per game
1-10	46.4
11-20	28.3
21+	8.5

No wonder Mike McCarthy doesn't stick with the run. Anytime Grant carries more than ten times, his yards gained for the second decuplet of carries is halved. Halved! For a back who's known for explosive gains throughout a game, it sure seems like he can't do much after his tenth attempt.

* * *

The second metric is simpler: it compares Ryan Grant's numbers in the first and second halves of games. While it's more rudimentary, it better shows how consistent (or inconsistent) a back is throughout a game.

	Attempts	Yards	Average	TDs
1st Half	367	1634	4.5	15
2nd Half	300	1278	4.3	3

Surprisingly, this breakdown doesn't show as big of a drop off in any category besides touchdowns. He has fewer yards on fewer carries in the second half, which might be a result of the trailing team focusing more on the pass to ignite the offense. By dividing his totals by his total number of games, however, the discrepancy is a bit more visible.

	Attempts/game	Yards/game
1st Half	10.8	48.1
2nd Half	8.8	37.6

The carries per half are nearly even, but the yardage is not. Again, this might be a result of the Packers being forced into passing on offense, but conventional wisdom suggests that there would be more available on the ground. Grant has not found that room in the second half, even though he's getting the same opportunities.

* * *

The third metric is not available directly on NFL.com, but I went and dug up the stats from each individual box score from 2007, 2008, and 2009 to compile the numbers. I don't have an official name for it yet, but it measures Grant's production based on what percentage of the team's carries he is responsible for. I tried to quantify how well Grant performed when he received a minority of the carries (< 50%), a significant share (51-74%), and a majority (>75%).

% of team carries	Games	Attempts	Yards	Average	TDs
< 50%	5	36	215	6.0	1
51-74%	14	247	1118	4.5	6
> 75%	16	345	1351	3.9	8

While the discrepancies in sample sizes skews the numbers somewhat, it's clear that whenever Grant is more responsible for the rushing offense, he is less effective. Workhorse backs often produce the best whenever they get the bulk of the carries from their offense, and that's how Grant has been treated. However, the numbers simply don't support the notion that Grant needs a large amount of touches to be effective. This is more obvious when you divide the statistical totals by the number of games played.

% of team carries	Games	Attempts/game	Yards/game	Average/game	TDs/game
< 50%	5	7.2	43.0	6.0	0.2
51-74%	14	19.0	86.0	4.5	0.5
> 75%	16	21.6	84.4	3.9	0.5

As you can see, whenever Grant's carries push him into the third category of team carry %, he actually gains fewer yards per game despite the additional opportunities. Conversely, whenever Grant gets minimal opportunities, he seems to do the most with them. He gains yards more efficiently with fewer carries, and he clearly starts to wear down after his twentieth attempt.

* * *

I'm no statistician, but even I'm shocked at how much the numbers back the argument. Ryan Grant simply isn't consistent enough to be the running back that McCarthy wants him to be. Is he effective? In certain situations, yes. But I don't think that he should be a 20+ carry workhorse; he simply isn't that kind of player.

Ted Simmons Speed Camp said it best in response to the question "What happened to Ryan Grant?"

The rest of the league realized he's really a complimentary back.

Shortly thereafter, ktenreb summed up Ryan Grant's football career, how he arrived in Green Bay, why he succeeded, and the circumstances that led to his big payday:

He was a part-time starter in college on a bad Notre Dame team. TT’s plan for finding a f3eature running didn’t work (surprise!), and so at the beginning of the 2007 season it looked like the team needed some depth. TT spent a 6th round pick for what he assumed would be a third-string back who had decent hands (yes, he actually did). Jacobs didn’t work out, Wynne got hurt and lacked toughness, so Grant got his shot. His timing couldn’t have been better, because by that point of the season McCarthy and Favre had abandoned any chance of running the ball (remember, we were so bad on the O-line that we were playing with a gimmick zone-blocking scheme, to cover the lack of talent) and were killing opposing defenses with a 5 WR formation. Defenses adjusted by dropping 5 and 6 into coverage in nickel and dime defenses — against those defenses, Grant was able to run. He killed opposing defenses, and when they countered with putting more men in the box, Favre went back to killing them with slants.

After that season, Grant was a hot commodity to fans, but "real" GMs knew that it was a fluke. In fairness, Thompson knew it too, but he still stubbornly sat on his hands and took no steps to bring in a truly first-rate running back. Grant held out, and Thompson ultimately was forced to give him the big payday.

During that same summer, there was something about a quarterback/GM feud in Packerland that also was prominent, the result being that the quarterback who could run the 5 WR sets was no longer around. As the season began, Grant was not 100 percent healthy as a result of his contract holdout. He seemed to get healthier as the season progressed, and he gained over 1,000 yards, but it was pretty clear that he did not have the vision that first-rate running backs possess. Still, he was the best option on the roster and he got his carries, but at the rate of under four yards-per.

This year is the same as last year, except that Grant doesn’t have an injury excuse (at least not that I know of). The offensive line has regressed from last year, but Grant still does not show that he is truly a feature back. That was the knock against him in college, and that’s why the Giants were happy to dump him for a 6th round pick. 2007 was a fluke occasioned by a perfect storm of opportunity. It won’t happen again, and Ryan Grant is not going to turn into a genuine feature back in the NFL (unless he plays a very bad team with horrible injuries at a time when its roster is decimated by the flu).

That, my friends, is a great comment that should have been turned into a FanPost. But is he right?

For what it's worth, I think so. I think Grant can be very effective as a member of a committee, instead of a lone workhorse. Remember how the Giants used Brandon Jacobs, Ahmad Bradshaw, and Derrick Ward with great success? That's the type of setup I'd like to see Grant in, with Brandon Jackson playing the role of the change-of-pace back. Then again, this is all assuming that the real problem isn't with Grant, but with his blocking, which is a very real possibility.

Man, the Thompson haters are going to have a field day with this one...and the sad thing is that they may have a point.

San Francisco 49ers vs. Houston Texans: A Prospector's Guide

Fooch — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 15:00:22 -0000

Hallelujah, we've made it through the bye week and we can finally bring you another edition of the "Prospector's Guide." The 49ers face one heck of a challenge coming out of the bye, heading down deep int he heart of Texas to take on the Houston Texans. It's been a rather eventful bye week for the 49ers as they've made multiple lineup changes, potentially culminating in the starting debut of Michael Crabtree. Even if Crabtree doesn't start the game, he'll still get to make his playing debut in his home state. The Texans on the other hand remain a bit of an enigma this season. They're coming off a bit win over the surprising Bengals, but up to this point, the Texans have alternated wins and losses.

The 49ers travel to Houston to face the Texans in what will be the second meeting between the two teams, dating back to 2005. In the only contest played in the series, the 49ers defetated the Texans 20-17 in overtime at Candlestick Park in the 2005 season finale. Prior to 2005, the last time the 49ers had played a regular season game in Houston was in 1996 against the Houston Oilers.

While Houston might not be a familiar place to many current 49ers, Mike Singletary knows the city very well. The 49ers head coach was born there and has a large contingent of family and friends in the area. The 49ers will look to make Singletary’s homecoming a special one after coming off a bye week. San Francisco went 3-0 in the division to start the season and maintains a 3-2 overall record. In each of the past two years, the 49ers have gone 2-2 against AFC opponents. San Francisco enters this week’s game with a current streak of seven consecutive games with at least one interception and has won 8 of its past 12 games, dating back to 2008.

49ers-Texans Connections
Coaching Connections
• 49ers offensive coordinator Jimmy Raye coached alongside Texans assistant head coach/offense Alex Gibbs with the Kansas City Chiefs for two seasons (1993-94).
• 49ers QB coach Mike Johnson coached Texans QB Matt Schaub for two seasons (2004-05) with the Atlanta Falcons.
• Texans head coach Gary Kubiak started his coaching in career in the NFL as a QB coach with the 49ers in 1994.
• Texans WR coach Larry Kirksey served in the same capacity with the 49ers from 1994 – 99.
• Texans TE coach Brian Pariani was a 49ers scouting assistant in 1990 and then a offensive coaches assistant from 1991-94.
• Texans senior defensive assistant Ray Rhodes was an assistant secondary coach with the 49ers from 1981-82 before being promoted DBs coach from 1983 - 91. Rhodes also served as defensive coordinator for the 49ers 1994 World Championship team.
• Texans Assistant OL Coach Frank Pollack was a 6th-round pick by the 49ers in 1990 and played for SF from 1990-91, 1994-98

Players
FORMER TEXANS - 49ers FB Moran Norris played with the Texans from 2002-05.

FORMER 49ERS - Texans Director of Pro Personnel Brian Gardner spent 10 seasons as a scout with the 49ers from 1995-05.

HOUSTON TIES – 49ers head coach Mike Singletary, S Michael Lewis and FB Moran Norris are originally from Houston, TX.

RE "U" NITED – 49ers RB Frank Gore ran behind lanes cleared by Texans T Rashad Butler, C Chris Myers, and T Eric Winston when they were all teammates at The University of Miami (Fla.) from 2002-04.

Series Highlights
The 49ers and Texans have only played once. The 49ers lead the series 1-0, with a recap below.

SAN FRANCISCO 20, ST. LOUIS 17 (OT)
At San Francisco, CA, January 1, 2006

The San Francisco 49ers rallied from a 10-0 1st quarter deficit for a 20-17 overtime victory over the Houston Texans to close out the 2005 campaign with two consecutive wins for a 4-12 record. The 49ers dominated the line of scrimmage, gaining 182 rushing yds. and controlling the clock for 44:03. The 49ers used a combination of RB Frank Gore (108 yds.) and RB Maurice Hicks (64 yds.) to take control on the ground.

S Mike Adams was the star of the game on defense after finishing with 2 INTs, one that was returned for a TD and the other that led to the game-winning FG in overtime. Adams, who made his first NFL start at cornerback, intercepted QB Tony Banks at the end of the 3rd quarter and returned it 40 yds. for a TD to tie the game at 17-17. Then in overtime, Banks went deep, but Adams intercepted the pass and lateraled to S Ben Emanuel, who ran 35 yds. to the Houston 21-yd. line. After two short runs, K Joe Nedney nailed a 33-yard FG to give the 49ers a 20-17 victory.

QB Alex Smith helped lead the 49ers to a TD at the end of the 1st half by converting a key 3rd-and-13 situation with a 14-yd. strike to WR Brandon Lloyd, and then three plays later ,threw his first NFL TD pass when he rolled to his right and found Lloyd in the back of the end zone for a 14-yard score. The 49ers took the 2nd half kick and went on a 14-play, 56-yd. drive that ended with a 42-yard FG by Nedney to tie the game at 10-10. Houston responded when Banks fired a 31-yd. pass to WR Corey Bradford to get into San Francisco territory followed by a 25-yd. TD pass to Bradford to retake the lead at 17-10. Houston took advantage of good field position in the 1st quarter to take the 10-0 lead. P Andy Lee struggled in the 30-mile per hour winds, shanking a punt that allowed Houston to start a drive at the San Francisco 21-yd. line to set up a FG. The 49ers next drive ended when Lee’s punt from his own 25-yd. line was blocked, allowing Houston to begin a drive at the 49ers 17-yd. line. Houston responded with a 3-yard TD run by RB Vernand Morency.

2009 Statistics

49ERS (rank)		TEXANS (rank)
3-2 (t-1st NFCW)	Record	3-3 (t-2nd AFCS)
22.4 (t-15th)	Points per game	23.8 (t-12th)
267.0 (29th)	Total Offense	369.5 (8th)
106.2 (16th)	Rushing Offense	77.3 (30th)
160.8 (28th)	Passing Offense	292.2 (3rd)
29:32 (18th)	Possession Avg	31:23 (8th)
19.6 (t-12th)	Points allowed/gm	22.8 (22nd)
322.6 (15th)	Total Defense	351.8 (20th)
88.6 (7th)	Rushing Defense	125.0 (24th)
234.0 (20th)	Passing Defense	226.8 (19th)
11 (t-21st)	Sacks	7 (t-29th)
47.5 (5th)	Punting Avg (Gross)	41.5 (28th)
+4 (t-8th)	Turnover Differential	+2 (t-11th)

Shaun Alexander Works Out; Cedric Benson Just Visits

Sean Yuille — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 12:57:19 -0000

After finding out that Shaun Alexander and Cedric Benson visited the Lions on Tuesday, we are now learning more details about what exactly happened. Specifically, Alexander actually worked out for Detroit, whereas Benson simply visited. Another free agent running back, Vernand Morency, also visited the Lions and apparently worked out for them as well.

When asked why these players were brought in, Tom Lewand gave an answer similar to the one we heard when Rudi Johnson came in to work out right before the season started.

Lions CEO Tom Lewand said the Lions brought in Alexander and other players to check on their physical condition.

"We were just doing our due diligence just in case," Lewand said.

The Lions said the workout is part of a series of weekly workouts they have with free agents. They said no negotiations were in place.

Looking back at what Lewand said about the Rudi Johnson situation, this line sounds very familiar: “When we bring guys in for workouts and physicals and those kinds of things, it doesn’t necessarily mean that anything’s imminent. It means that we’re doing our due diligence.”

Considering that due diligence apparently can result in a signing, I'm a little worried as an Austin TV station is reporting (HT: Free Press) that Benson was in Detroit to sign a contract, which is why he missed an event for his charity.

Benson wasn't in town for the big announcement, but Martinez said there was a good reason.

"Unfortunately, but fortunately, Cedric Benson is not here today,” he said. “He is actually signing a contract today to get back in the game with the Detroit Lions and the reason why that's a good thing is that the foundation will continue to grow as long as Cedric continues to do what he does on the field."

It would surprise me if the Lions did sign Cedric Benson since he only visited and didn't actually work out for the team. On top of that, Tom Kowalski reports that a signing is not imminent, although we also heard that about Rudi Johnson and he did end up joining the team.

I don't really understand why the Lions are so worried about running backs as that position is the least of this team's problems. The Lions haven't even had a chance to run the ball very much since they've been playing from behind in the first two games, and there is only so much a running back can do behind a mediocre offensive line anyways.