Did Kamara prove he is a lead back? (1 Viewer)

[dtc]

Neither Kamara nor Ingram needs to be "ready" to be a lead back because Payton hasn't employed a "lead back" system in his 12 seasons as coach. It's been by committee just about the entire time. And more often than not, it's worked.

I think your premise is off. Payton usually has 3 or 4 backs on the roster. With Kamara being as good as he is and Ingram being Ingram, it's given Payton the freedom to only carry 3 if he wants to. But even when we had Deuce or Reggie or Ingram, there was always Sproles, PT, Ivory, Peterson, Cadet and the rest.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

can he do it? probably, yes
is it the smartest way to use him? almost certainly not

remember SP never, ever wants to repeat The seattle playoff game where we're trotting out the 5th or 6th string RB out there
or for that matter what happened in SF playoff when PT went down (or Atl when AK went out)

 

[Whodat GT]

To summarize based on some of the answers you have given: it depends on whether or not the team can retain Ingram next year or if they can design a running game that revolves around Kamara. The thing is, Payton has never had a RB as gifted as Kamara.

 

[Bartyboy]

I disagree. The summary is.
We hope to get Ingram a new contract because it works great with both of them.

 

[MV2]

The committee approach is both good and bad. It preserves their careers and gives defenses more to plan for. However, if someone wants to be great they know it will never happen that way. I wonder if it cause Kamara to explore his options when his contract is up? The only way to get records is to have the ball enough to get the production.

 

[SigFreudianSlip]

Fairly straightforward question. With the four week sample to start the season as a baseline, do you think Kamara is ready to take on exclusive lead back duties whenever the team moves on from Ingram?

Do I think he could? Yes.
Do I think he should? No.
I’d rather he not be the bellcow back. Ever. To me that diminishes his elite gamebreaking ability and also ups his wear and tear.

A haymaker isn’t as effective without a stiff jab. AK is our haymaker and Mark is our stiff jab. Imo.

 

[Heartbreak Kid]

cannot take anything away from Alvin. But I think if he were the lead RB on many other teams he may not look as strong as he does with us.

I think Alvin will be best to play for Sean Payton as long as possible...

 

[Indonesianwhodat]

After reading most of the comments, I agree that I would like to ask a different question.

It is not whether Kamara is a lead back. I think many posts here have it right that both Kamara and Ingram are essentially lead backs. Or as Mike Triplett phrased in a recent article: they are 1A and 1B

The more interesting question to me, is whether the Saints organization considers Kamara a CORE player. I define a core player as someone they would build the team, and the scheme, around. Obviously it follows that a core player is someone they would pay top dollar (in their respective positions) for. Right now, outside of players still in their rookie contracts, I believe Drew Brees and Cam Jordan are the two players they consider core players.

I think the answer to this question is that yes, they consider Kamara to be a core player, due to his elite skills and the fact that they stay reasonably unpredictable with him on the field (he can run between the tackles, outside, can catch passes and can block)

An even more interesting, and ultimately more timely question: do they consider Ingram a core player? Can there even be multiple core players in the same position? Sadly - and I know I'll get lots of grief for this - I dont think they do. Doesnt mean they dont like Ingram, but I think they just wont be the highest bidder for Ingram when FA comes. Let's see - happy to be proven wrong.

 

[Stalwart385]

After reading most of the comments, I agree that I would like to ask a different question.

It is not whether Kamara is a lead back. I think many posts here have it right that both Kamara and Ingram are essentially lead backs. Or as Mike Triplett phrased in a recent article: they are 1A and 1B

The more interesting question to me, is whether the Saints organization considers Kamara a CORE player. I define a core player as someone they would build the team, and the scheme, around. Obviously it follows that a core player is someone they would pay top dollar (in their respective positions) for. Right now, outside of players still in their rookie contracts, I believe Drew Brees and Cam Jordan are the two players they consider core players.

I think the answer to this question is that yes, they consider Kamara to be a core player, due to his elite skills and the fact that they stay reasonably unpredictable with him on the field (he can run between the tackles, outside, can catch passes and can block)

An even more interesting, and ultimately more timely question: do they consider Ingram a core player? Can there even be multiple core players in the same position? Sadly - and I know I'll get lots of grief for this - I dont think they do. Doesnt mean they dont like Ingram, but I think they just wont be the highest bidder for Ingram when FA comes. Let's see - happy to be proven wrong.

I think you are right. Ingram started slow and worked within the system to get better until he fit exactly what they wanted. What you have with Ingram is years of work and patience that paid off. You can replace that in a way, but it will take a while before they will be at his level.

Payton's offense shifts to features talents. It shifted to feature Kamara. Just like it shifted to feature Cooks, Graham, Sproles and Reggie. Even Thomas's screen game was featured.

I'm not 100% sure "core" is the right word but the offense changed for Kamara. Ingram grew within the various changes.

 

[ThrowbackSaintXXL]

The committee approach is both good and bad. It preserves their careers and gives defenses more to plan for. However, if someone wants to be great they know it will never happen that way. I wonder if it cause Kamara to explore his options when his contract is up? The only way to get records is to have the ball enough to get the production.

I don't think that'll be a problem with Kamara @ all. He touches the ball way too much n gets way too many all purpose yrds for it to be

 

[Noble Saint]

I disagree. The summary is.
We hope to get Ingram a new contract because it works great with both of them.

I agree. Early in Ingram’s career I thought he was a waste of a pick and money. I actually wished we could’ve dealt him over Ivory. Eventually I accepted him as our workhorse. Around the TNF game in Carolina 3 or 4 years ago. But even last year I felt we would be dumb to re-sign him and now I’m scared that we might not. I hope he is down for a home town discount.

 

[lvsaintsfan57]

The Saints have 2 RBs that would easily be listed as the starter on at least half the teams in the league. On the other hand, if I were an NFL RB, I'd rather have 10+ years of 1000+ yards than 3-6 years of 1500 year seasons

 

[insidejob]

Fairly straightforward question. With the four week sample to start the season as a baseline, do you think Kamara is ready to take on exclusive lead back duties whenever the team moves on from Ingram?

Yes, he's proved that he can be the #1 back, but will never be in a 1 man backfield. As long as he's a Saint, there will be a thunder to his lightning, whether it's Ingram or someone else. He'll never be in an "AD in Minny for a decade" role with this team.

 

[insidejob]

Well the Saints have changed their MO since last year. I agree that the team used a committee approach when they had at least three backs playing separate roles (Sproles, PT, Ingram being I guess, the standard), but the Kamara Ingram tandem is definitely different than what we saw in previous years. So let me rephrase: what are the chances of seeing them maintain a 1A and 1B type of running scheme? Does it depend on them keeping Ingram?
Can they build a running game centered around Kamara's abilities if Ingram is not retained?

Yes, he's proved that he can be the #1 back, but will never be in a 1 man backfield. As long as he's a Saint, there will be a thunder to his lightning, whether it's Ingram or someone else. He'll never be in an "AD in Minny for a decade" role with this team.

I'd posted my thoughts before reading the thread. See my above reply which basically addresses your post.

 

[insidejob]

It's popular theory that we'll walk away from Ingram after this year. I don't think so... or at least I sure hope not. I love the 2 RB system with the 2 RBs we have, and barring a guy like Sequan Barkley falling in our lap... Our offense needs both of these guys. If one goes down, you have the other for a few games which we proved is fine this year. With only one... we're one injury away from being in trouble.

Can we keep Ingram? I think so. Yeah, RBs capable of the the one-all end-all are going at a premium price these days. But not 30 year olds. Ingram will turn 30 next season. He IS a low-miles RB, so it's possible somebody offers him a lot. But I like our chances offering him a little more than we'd like to of retaining his services. He will undoubtedly play the field. But I think his age will keep him in affordable range for us, and that he's important enough to this team for us to give that extra bit to keep him.

Couldn't agree more. I think Payton and the FO know how much more Ingram brings to this team besides the awesome stats he puts up. He's the team's energy leader. He's on the field celebrating with the defense when they create a turnover. In the endzone when someone scores and he wasn't even in on the play, just watching from the sidelines. And he carries this emotion through the team and locker room all week long. Brees seems to be the team's/offense's brains while Ingram is the heart.