Time To See More Saine

by BlackPack-fan on Dec 3, 2011 9:21 AM CST

I was one of the people in full support of retaining Ryan Grant on the roster. Remember that pre-season debate? I was on his side because I was still recovering from the first 13 games of last season, when it was a backfield of Brandon Jackson, FB John Kuhn, and Dmitri Nance (whom we signed off Atlanta's PS). Injuries happen quick to running backs, and injuries hampered Starks all season. Finally, he was ready to play, and wow, he did play or what. He really saved our season.

Grant is looking slow coming off ankle surgery and a long layoff.

I was a bit concerned that Grant was going to be sluggish coming off the surgery and a long layoff, and I surely he was. But I then thought it was just rust. Turns out it wasn't.

Ryan Grant simply looks slow on the field. He's not making hard cutbacks, not accelerating through the hole, and hasn't gotten the edge one time all season. That shows in his 3.6 YPC average (for comparison Starks is at 4.5, Leaue leader is Murray at 5.7). That's good for 7th worst average for backs who qualify on ESPN.com. Also, his longest rush of the season is 14 yards. That says something about what's happened to his burst and speed.

And just for kicks, a more advanced stat from Football Outsiders shows Grant's DVOA (defense-adjusted value over average) that shows running backs' production in similar situations against similar defenses. Under backs with 18-95 rushes, Grant is -2% while mediocre backs like Earnest Graham and Joseph Addai are +18.8 and +6.5% (a negative % means below average, positive obviously is above average).

Grant was "the man" in the backfield for us 2 years ago, but now I'm saying we can't really use him that much. I'm ready to start giving the rookie Brandon Saine the workload that Grant currently carries. Don't give it to him all at once, but we've seen Saine get a few touches last week and he can get a few more on Sunday. He looks a heck of a lot faster than Grant out there, he certainly has far more playmaking ability.

Saine, an undrafted free agent from Ohio State, should get in increased workload down the stretch of the season.

I think this is the right time to do it, because it's not yet the playoffs where he would be nervous being put in for the first time, but it's late in the season, around the time we brought Starks on. Saine will have fully fresh legs now, and will still be fresh if we're once again in the Super Bowl.

What do you guys say? More Saine, Less Grant?

Poll

How do you feel about who should be getting carries behind Starks?

Grant should be getting the same carries he currently is, Saine should stay in his current role.

13 votes

Grant and Saine should be splitting carries after Starks.

62 votes

Give Saine grant's current workload, Grant can get just a few snaps per game.

42 votes

117 votes | Poll has closed

Tweet Comment 23 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I really feel

that if Grant was getting consistent carries he’d have solid numbers. It is just hard for ANY running back to do well in this system, and I don’t think Saine getting 3-4 carries per game is going to be significantly better than Grant with the same amount.

A samurai sword collection. If you can do it. I don’t know if you’re allowed.

by TwoShoesMcGooze on Dec 3, 2011 11:39 AM CST reply actions

Which actually means you might as well play him, and get him some experience.

But if you do that, he’d have to take over ALL of Grant’s carries to succeed.

A samurai sword collection. If you can do it. I don’t know if you’re allowed.

by TwoShoesMcGooze on Dec 3, 2011 11:40 AM CST up reply actions

I'm satisfied with the way it looks like they're gonna use him.

A few draw/screen plays here and there is enough for me.

A samurai sword collection. If you can do it. I don’t know if you’re allowed.

by TwoShoesMcGooze on Dec 3, 2011 11:41 AM CST up reply actions

Grant averaging 8 rushes per game

Plus one or two receptions. I see what you mean about him getting consistent carries, but I think 8 per game is enough to get in a bit of a rythm, and with the way we pass the ball, the safeties aren’t at the line of scrimmage very often. I think there’s space for Grant he’ just not hitting the holes quickly and he’s going down quickly as well. I think Saine would be more effective with those 8-10 touches per game, and there’s big play potential because he is faster.

Montee Ball for Heisman.
Tajh Boyd and Dre' Ellington are the future.

by BlackPack-fan on Dec 3, 2011 3:12 PM CST up reply actions

I guess maybe his ineffectiveness makes it look like less carries ;p

A samurai sword collection. If you can do it. I don’t know if you’re allowed.

by TwoShoesMcGooze on Dec 4, 2011 11:18 AM CST up reply actions

He hasn’t shown me anything to make me want to see him get a larger share of the carries.

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 5, 2011 8:39 AM CST up reply actions

In that preseason debate,

I was with those saying that Grant should/would be the starter in the beginning, with Starks getting the bulk of the work by season’s end, which is the way it has worked out.

I voted for the second option, and, after this season,
I’m in favor (at this time) of letting Grant go, and going with Starks, Saine and Green next year.

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

"It's a great day to be great, baby!"

Skol is a four-letter word.

The Munsters of the Midway still suck!

by NorthStarr on Dec 3, 2011 3:14 PM CST reply actions

Both of us...

Were good w/ Grant being the defacto starter at the beginning. He’s proven during the course of the season that he is pretty much what he’s always been… A very average RB. Starks is much better, which I was preaching when he was still on the PUP last year. I like Green alot more than Saine as the #2 RB next year. No problems whatsoever letting Grant walk after this year. Appreciate the effort that Grant gave us, but he is a backup at best now. I really like the young talent the Packers have at RB for the next few years.

You've been Stroh'd™!!!

by Strohman on Dec 3, 2011 3:25 PM CST up reply actions

I hope Green recovers from that...torn ACL I think.

I already told you! I deal with the god damn receivers so the linebackers don’t have to! I have coverage skills; I’m good at covering people! Can’t you understand that? What the hell is wrong with you people?!

by msc32887 on Dec 3, 2011 11:12 PM CST up reply actions

BTW Green is hilarious on Twitter.

Although a bit immature, it seems.

A samurai sword collection. If you can do it. I don’t know if you’re allowed.

by TwoShoesMcGooze on Dec 4, 2011 11:14 AM CST up reply actions

i'm not dissatisfied with the trio of Starks, Saine, and Green.....

but i really want LeMichael James of Oregon

by StevieV17 on Dec 5, 2011 9:25 AM CST reply actions

Absolutely

I could see him dropping into the 3rd round, I’d trade up and grab him. A speed demon like him really helps the offense, when he’s out on the edge he’s a handful. Starks and Grant are cutting it but I think we need more speed in the backfield, which is why I wrote this post about getting Saine more snaps.

Montee Ball for Heisman.
Tajh Boyd and Dre' Ellington are the future.

by BlackPack-fan on Dec 5, 2011 1:23 PM CST up reply actions

and the beauty of it:

James provides big play opportunities out of the backfield. the offense is already unstoppable with A-Rod throwing it to seemingly every eligable receiver on the Packers. imagine making opposing teams gameplan for a guy like James who isn’t only fast but knows what to do when he has space in front of him!?!? we would score on every drive!! which would make Mason Crosby’s job the most coveted in the NFL. but, if he does fall to round 3, gotta get him……first 2 rounds gotta be on D, though. more specifically d-line or a rush linebacker opposite the Claymaker

by StevieV17 on Dec 5, 2011 4:42 PM CST up reply actions

Won't happen!

Or haven’t you been paying attention? Green and Saine both look like they could become the 3rd down RB next year. And the other reason it won’t is that McCarthy clearly wants a RB who is physical and big enough to actually block someone. James would be neither! So you can give up your dreams of that quick LITTLE scat back thay you think would make us soo much better! He doesn’t fit what McCarthy wants for a 3rd down RB! Would have thought you guys would have realized this a long time ago… Its pretty obvious its not gonna happen. Sorry to end your pipedream!

You've been Stroh'd™!!!

by Strohman on Dec 5, 2011 9:51 PM CST up reply actions

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A samurai sword collection. If you can do it. I don’t know if you’re allowed.

by TwoShoesMcGooze on Dec 7, 2011 2:41 PM CST up reply actions

Get F'en Over it!

Its the way I chose to type and its not nearly as bad as it used to be, and as good as its gonna get! Don’t like, don’t freakin read it! I don’t give a damn if you do or don’t!!!

You've been Stroh'd™!!!

by Strohman on Dec 7, 2011 6:55 PM CST up reply actions

Why

are you trying to start something?

Because, clearly, you are!

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

"It's a great day to be great, baby!"

Skol is a four-letter word.

The Munsters of the Midway still suck!

by NorthStarr on Dec 8, 2011 2:03 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs

Absolutely right, Stroh.

Can’t find the source, anymore, but, on May 14, 2010, I copied, and saved to my computer (because, I knew it would come up eventually), this quote from McCarthy.

I always like the size. I like bigger backs.

"Perfection is not attainable,
but if we chase perfection we can catch excellence."

"It's a great day to be great, baby!"

Skol is a four-letter word.

The Munsters of the Midway still suck!

by NorthStarr on Dec 8, 2011 2:22 AM CST up reply actions

MONTEE BALL!!!!!

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 8, 2011 8:06 AM CST up reply actions

What about Montee Ball!?! :-)

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 5, 2011 1:51 PM CST up reply actions

Ding, Ding Ding...

Montee would look great in a Packer uniform!

You've been Stroh'd™!!!

by Strohman on Dec 5, 2011 9:51 PM CST up reply actions

I think he’d be a nice fit for us. We have some nice receiving backs, we need a guy who can just go at people and overpower them. Ball should be what, a second rounder? I’d be willing to spend a 2nd or 3rd on him for sure!

The Green Bay Packers...Putting bad coaches out of their misery since 2010

by TrevorR on Dec 6, 2011 1:17 PM CST up reply actions

Guessing.

But I would rate him as a 2nd or 3rd rounder. Has very good elusiveness and instincts and shows great power for his current size, just lacks the deep speed to take it the distance. If Shonn Greene was a 3rd Montee Ball has to be higher! If I were him I would put abut 10 lbs on so he could be a more powerfull version. Get to 215 or so and he would be an every down RB.

You've been Stroh'd™!!!

by Strohman on Dec 6, 2011 9:42 PM CST up reply actions