Sanders isn’t McCaffrey. But can’t you see what a difference it is with McCaffrey than just a decent gUY? That’s going to be a problem for us. 

Cowboys vs Niners game…when Pollard went down it pretty much killed the Cowboys chances

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I don’t think he’s HOF level. He isn’t resetting the market. That’s at 16 mil. Always going up.

Don't have to reset the market...I'm making the point where he isn't worth top ten money.   Simply for rushing stats.  Chris Carson did it twice...I'm not paying him either.  

Having the weapon in Pollard was the difference 

38 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

You aren't resting elite players now.  They will be out there on the field.  Even if it's blocking. 

Sanders isn’t a good blocker. So you put the best out there you can.

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

Sanders isn’t McCaffrey. But can’t you see what a difference it is with McCaffrey than just a decent gUY? That’s going to be a problem for us. 

Cowboys vs Niners game…when Pollard went down it pretty much killed the Cowboys chances

Yes...because CMC offers an excellent receiving option.  That matters...that's a game changer having another receiving option...instead of a guy like Sanders who the defense doesn't even have to account for in the passing game.

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

Sanders isn’t a good blocker. So you put the best out there you can.

And so you don't pay him.

We knew giants suck against our rushing. So Pascal got the nod more than Quez

Same idea

15 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Chris Carson was 5th in rushing both in 2018 and 2019.  Philip Lindsey was 9th in 2018.      Elite or not? 

I already backed off elite for sake of argument. Very good 

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Having the weapon in Pollard was the difference 

Yes..  the things he does as a receiver makes the difference.  Not the fact he was like 16th in rushing. 

14 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

So if we had a RB that was one of these other guys.... you don't think the play calling or Hurts would throw to them more?   It has to be check down?   

Nope, no need.

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

I already backed off elite for sake of argument. Very good 

Very good one dimensional.   I agree. Not worth top ten $$ for that.  

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

Nope, no need.

No need to throw to CMC?

13 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Right...don't want to force him to throw to Sanders.

The players have something to do with what happens on the field.  No way you could think CMC wouldn't get a bunch of receptions on the Eagles...or Eckler or Pollard. 

Sanders bucked the myth rookie year receiving.

13 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

That makes sense... if you are of the mindset that the RB is strictly " check down"    with Sanders...that would absolutely be how I would think. 

So Sanders works even more in our O with Hurts

10 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

So this particular year...we go back to the play charts of each game...you expect to see the results showing Sanders running setting the tone?  

Yes absolutely. Wasn’t Scott or Gainwell

11 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

So this particular year...we go back to the play charts of each game...you expect to see the results showing Sanders running setting the tone?  

Absolutely what’s gone on. Sanders hits the fresh D and gets us downfield. Then we bring in a backup around the twenty.

6 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

Sanders isn’t McCaffrey. But can’t you see what a difference it is with McCaffrey than just a decent gUY? That’s going to be a problem for us. 

Cowboys vs Niners game…when Pollard went down it pretty much killed the Cowboys chances

Ok so you don't see how you are making my point. 

These 2 specific guys make a difference.  In these matchups you aren't going to win by completely dominating the game running.   These guys make a difference because they are factors in the passing game.

A guy like Sanders...what difference do you expect from him?  You expect him to set the tone dominating in the run game vs SF?

The game will come down to key plays..  3rd down, short yardage etc.  You think Sanders will make a difference there where he is worth 8 million? 

10 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Because in theory , I totally 100% agree with you.... in reality I see Sanders differently.   And the main point... I don't think it will be hard to replace him.  Other guys given the chance to carry as much behind this line,  I would expect the same if not more... plus the ability to stay on the field during key downs.

I think you’ll have to invest to replace him. He isn’t good at blocking. But is a very quality rusher. Good hands also.

3 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

So Sanders works even more in our O with Hurts

Yes absolutely. Wasn’t Scott or Gainwell

Agree....it was absolutely the passing game most of the time.

He gave up a bit of looking for the home run and keeps us on schedule more with his adapted style to please Siri

Saw him punish LB and S this year.

Just now, cunninghamtheman said:

I think you’ll have to invest to replace him. He isn’t good at blocking. But is a very quality rusher. Good hands also.

We see the quality rushers come and go all the time.   Jordan Howard was a quality rusher, Chris Carson.  Etc.

Now some games our Oline dominates. So many guys could rock it.

That’s why I don’t like the per game stats and such. If our Oline is dominating completely I agree with you. But those aren’t the games I need the better RB. Not the games that are the most important frankly either

13 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Don't have to reset the market...I'm making the point where he isn't worth top ten money.   Simply for rushing stats.  Chris Carson did it twice...I'm not paying him either.  

I like your argument here. This is a smart way to go for your point. But I see through this. Because there is a giant dropoff from market setting and tenth….just right now. 

1 minute ago, cunninghamtheman said:

He gave up a bit of looking for the home run and keeps us on schedule more with his adapted style to please Siri

Saw him punish LB and S this year.

Again....I'm not saying he isn't a good rusher.   I'm not saying he didn't improve.  I'm not saying he isn't the best rusher on the team. I'm not saying Bradberry, CGJ and others won't cost more...  I'm not disagreeing with anything you are saying.

I'm simply saying one thing...he isn't worth paying that much because he doesn't do enough other things to warrant that amount. You will still need other RBs to do the other stuff. 

You can replace him for much cheaper...if it needs to be a late 2nd round pick so be it.   Then you have the position locked in again for cheap. You can spend the $$ elsewhere to keep a DB or even Edwards.  Or upgrade the RG spot.  

$8 mil is a lot for " a good rusher"

15 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Don't have to reset the market...I'm making the point where he isn't worth top ten money.   Simply for rushing stats.  Chris Carson did it twice...I'm not paying him either.  

So though you are using a good argument here. The market is 16 mil for a RB. Half that is what it is. Like any position. But money always going up.

13 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Yes..  the things he does as a receiver makes the difference.  Not the fact he was like 16th in rushing. 

It’s his playmaking ability

2 minutes ago, cunninghamtheman said:

I like your argument here. This is a smart way to go for your point. But I see through this. Because there is a giant dropoff from market setting and tenth….just right now. 

$8 mil would be top ten RB money. 

16 minutes ago, joemas6 said:

Yes...because CMC offers an excellent receiving option.  That matters...that's a game changer having another receiving option...instead of a guy like Sanders who the defense doesn't even have to account for in the passing game.

And so you don't pay him.

Most guys aren’t perfect and the best most complete at their position. Doesn’t mean every nonAll Pro shouldn’t be paid.