The journey of Chris Ivory: Dismissed, discarded and, finally, celebrated (1 Viewer)

[diehardfan]

Traded to Miami, who picked Dion Sims.

If I'm reading this right, we traded the Ivory pick + another 4th for Miami's 3rd (82), which became John Jenkins.

That's right. We used the pick to move up and get Jenkins. I've always kept that in the back of my mind.

Durability was a good part of the reason but I also remember Ivory voiced displeasure in not getting more carries. Ivory was doing more with his touches yet Ingram got the start when healthy. SP has always been more invested in Ingram than the other backs.

 

[mither_rome]

60/40 on 1st down and 60/40 throughout the first half. But the idea that the pass opened up the run that season is not accurate. It was staying balanced that opened up the entire offense. May I suggest you go ahead and download the data yourself from the source. I downloaded it back in 2011 and the latest data I had at the time was 2010.
Armchair Analysis.com - Affordable NFL Data. Daily Updates.

You can use the information to prove your point of view or to get a better understanding. Of course if you go into with preconceived ideas you can query anything to prove yourself correct.

Plenty of times during Sean Payton's career he abandoned the run because he got pass happy. He grew predictable with his personnel packages and formations. Had we stayed as balanced as we did in 2009, we wouldn't have had so many mediocre seasons of 7-9.

The Falcons game last week we stayed balanced. We couldn't run the ball to save our lives, but guess what, we stuck with it. It opened up the passing game, the play action actually worked because Payton wasn't as predictable as he has been the last several years. Staying balanced even with an injured and terrible Oline allows the offense to be efficient.

It's raining green thumbs on the first page of this thread for his initial post, though. Apparently, claiming Payton's Saints have never been particularly good at running the ball, whether accurate or not, is a populist position.

I figured saying "We were awesome at running the ball in 2009 and 2011" would be a real crowd pleaser, but I was horribly wrong. smh

That's not "black and gold" tinted glasses, either. It's a statistical fact, both in rushing numbers and in the win column.

 

[diehardfan]

the Saints knew Ivory was good and everybody expected him to do well if he could stay healthy for a whole season. but K. Robinson made Ivory expendable.

Not true. We didn't have K Rob when we traded Ivory.

 

[kcirdor]

It's raining green thumbs on the first page of this thread for his initial post, though. Apparently, claiming Payton's Saints have never been particularly good at running the ball, whether accurate or not, is a populist position.

I figured saying "We were awesome at running the ball in 2009 and 2011" would be a real crowd pleaser, but I was horribly wrong. smh

That's not "black and gold" tinted glasses, either. It's a statistical fact, both in rushing numbers and in the win column.

That misconception that the Pass came first in 2009 was the reason I first downloaded the data I used to put that spreadsheet together. "But the pass is why we were so successful on offense" Wrong. The answer is Balance. Guess what, a balanced not only opens up the entire offense also helps the defense. It shortens games, the defense isn't as tired all the time.

 

[Domeination]

Trading Ivory was a misevaluation--plain and simple. I thought so at the time, and I still think so. It was all part of the attempt to elevate Ingram, which Payton and the FO felt pressure to do b/c they invested two first-round picks in him. Ingram is a pretty good, but not great back who has not justified his draft cost. Ivory was undrafted and cost us very little salary wise. This is just one of a series of mistakes the FO made over the past few years, which is why they brought in Ireland to try to get player evaluation back on track. It looks like they may have done so based on this year's draft. But there's no need to make excuses for the organization's past mistakes, such as Ivory was injury prone or he wasn't right for our system.

 

[kcirdor]

which Payton and the FO felt pressure to do b/c they invested two first-round picks in him.

What two first round picks? We used ONE first round pick, and had to give up a second round pick to get Ingram.

 

[Shelbywmccarty]

Trading Ivory was a misevaluation--plain and simple. I thought so at the time, and I still think so. It was all part of the attempt to elevate Ingram, which Payton and the FO felt pressure to do b/c they invested two first-round picks in him. Ingram is a pretty good, but not great back who has not justified his draft cost. Ivory was undrafted and cost us very little salary wise. This is just one of a series of mistakes the FO made over the past few years, which is why they brought in Ireland to try to get player evaluation back on track. It looks like they may have done so based on this year's draft. But there's no need to make excuses for the organization's past mistakes, such as Ivory was injury prone or he wasn't right for our system.

He was injury prone....he has still been fairly injury prone. He is running great. Good for him. We didnt need a often injured RB... Does it have to be a gaff on our part? If he is suddenly durable...that doesnt mean we messed up....thats just good luck for him. We got a good pick for a guy that was always banged up. We may have sucked up the pick that we got but thats a different story.

 

[mdharper]

First we're better at passing than running. Have been since at least 2007.

Second, like most teams. we largely abandon the run when we fall behind, run more with a two score lead. Reexamine the stats with that in mind.

Third, Chris Ivory didn't start because of pass protection and we're a pass first team. He could only get significant carries if we had a comfortable lead. It's sad that the Jets couldn't figure that out.

 

[4everSaintsfan]

Health. He could never stay healthy and given his history there was no reason to think that would change.

When they traded him, I had no problem with it because of his lack of durability.

Per nfl.com, from 2010 to 2012, CI only played 12, 6, and 6 games with the Saints. In 2014 and 2015, he played in 15 and 16 games. I was surprised at this sudden increase in durability with a change in teams. I wonder what caused it.

 

[bclemms]

What two first round picks? We used ONE first round pick, and had to give up a second round pick to get Ingram.

We traded our 2012 first round pick, Our 2011 2nd round pick and we used the 2011 first round pick of the Patriots to pick Ingram.

 

[kcirdor]

We traded our 2012 first round pick, Our 2011 2nd round pick and we used the 2011 first round pick of the Patriots to pick Ingram.

So we used one first round pick. Not two.

If I give you one first round pick and you give me one first round pick. I still have one first round pick.

 

[CitySaint]

It's strange that Bush had durability issues until he left, then he went 16 game and racked up 1000+, same durability questions for Ivory. Forget Ingram for a moment, how much does this training staff suck?

 

[TurboWhoDat]

So, sending decent running backs from a Pass Heavy team to a run heavy team has nothing to do with it?

We'll always post mediocre rushing stats. It has nothing to do with the back. It's the system.

Or maybe mark Ingram is a mediocre back who's enjoyed years of favoritism. That's pretty obvious considering khiry and Ingram are statistically close, yet Ingram is the starter every game and gets more opportunities every game. It should be a 50-50 split if it's a real competition. But it's not.

 

[Infoman]

Or maybe mark Ingram is a mediocre back who's enjoyed years of favoritism. That's pretty obvious considering khiry and Ingram are statistically close, yet Ingram is the starter every game and gets more opportunities every game. It should be a 50-50 split if it's a real competition. But it's not.

This... I have been telling anyone who will listen... if we they would give Khiry the opportunities that Marks gets now... and let Mark be the change of pace guy... our running game would improve instantly.

Fact is.. our line is not that good right now... we need a guy back there that can make guys miss, break tackles at the LOS, and create his own running lanes when they don't exist... Mark is not that guy... Khiry is.

 

[kcirdor]

This... I have been telling anyone who will listen... if we they would give Khiry the opportunities that Marks gets now... and let Mark be the change of pace guy... our running game would improve instantly.

If that happened than everyone would be clamoring for Mark to start because he would have some sporadic awesome runs against tired defenses with a piss poor offensive line blocking.