Lat Murray dropped for d wash

[Armchairwarrior 3]

I understand getting Washington but guy in my league just flat out dropped Murray .

 

I'm tempted to use my waiver to stash him but wonder if that might be a waste considering how his touches have dropped since week 1

 

Even doesn't score a Td then he's very pedestrian.

[Beyond Chaos 75]

He played the Ravens and he has turf toe, it's possible that is why he has not performed as well. I would take the chance.

[Brutal Brutus 182]

Seems a little premature to drop him, but he's already splitting carries and turf toe doesn't sound like much but it can linger for a while. If D Wash shows the explosiveness people claim he has, Murray could come back to an even further reduced role. If you're desperate for an RB and can afford to use a roster spot sure he's worth a flier, but I wouldn't be surprised if more people drop him in the next few weeks.

[Flgatorguy87 160]

I'm not surprised. His usage was alarming before the injury. Factor in turf toe being a horribly nagging injury, especially for a RB...and I suspect more will follow suite in the coming weeks.

[martyj13 1]

I did the exact same thing. 1. I have RB depth 2. Murray wasn't doing much and losing opportunities 3. Now Murray is hurt. Plus Washington looked pretty good.

[Ray_T 752]

He played the Ravens and he has turf toe, it's possible that is why he has not performed as well. I would take the chance.

I have not bothered to confirm what you have told us (turf toe) but going on the assumption this is the case, it is bad news for Murray.

 

Turf toe is a BAD injury for RB's and a bad case of turf toe can linger a long time and can be quite painful.

 

It's rare that Turf toe will keep a player out of the lineup, but it will severely limit what the RB can do in terms of running & making cuts.

[Beyond Chaos 75]

I have not bothered to confirm what you have told us (turf toe) but going on the assumption this is the case, it is bad news for Murray.

 

Turf toe is a BAD injury for RB's and a bad case of turf toe can linger a long time and can be quite painful.

 

It's rare that Turf toe will keep a player out of the lineup, but it will severely limit what the RB can do in terms of running & making cuts.

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/8585/latavius-murray

 

http://www.podiatrytoday.com/article/9063

[Ray_T 752]

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/8585/latavius-murray

 

http://www.podiatrytoday.com/article/9063

thanks. and yes, it is confirmed he is not playing this week. Looks like at least a grade 2 sprain.

 

depending how long he's played with the condition, it would explain a lot about his production.

 

Hopefully the rest does him some good.

[Frozenbeernuts 2,236]

I did the exact same thing. 1. I have RB depth 2. Murray wasn't doing much and losing opportunities 3. Now Murray is hurt. Plus Washington looked pretty good.

He did? He had one long run and then a whole lot of nothing last game.

[The Football Guru 222]

He did? He had one long run and then a whole lot of nothing last game.

A lot of people don't worry too much about the facts or watch the games.

 

If I had to guess, I'd say he suffered the toe injury in Week 3 or even late Week 2. He went from 45 snaps in Week 1 to the mid-30s over the last three, even though he was very efficient over the first two weeks. If a coach is going on production, he's not going to reduce the snaps for a back who averaged 4.6 yards per touch the first week and 7.2 the next week. I highly doubt the Raiders think Washington is a lead back (we know they believe he is a good complementary one), but my question would be why enter the season with Murray as your clear starter only to effectively bench him two weeks later after his best game?

 

Furthermore, Murray is grading out as PFF's 16th-best RB (70) - ahead of players such as Melvin Gordon, Tevin Coleman and Zeke - while Washington (58.4) and Richard (56.4) are well off the pace. Now, I am somewhat skeptical when it comes to PFF's grades on occasion, but that is a fairly significant margin and one that makes it even harder to explain why Murray is losing snaps if PFF is anywhere close to accurate.

[brotherbock 349]

A lot of people don't worry too much about the facts or watch the games.

 

If I had to guess, I'd say he suffered the toe injury in Week 3 or even late Week 2. He went from 45 snaps in Week 1 to the mid-30s over the last three, even though he was very efficient over the first two weeks. If a coach is going on production, he's not going to reduce the snaps for a back who averaged 4.6 yards per touch the first week and 7.2 the next week. I highly doubt the Raiders think Washington is a lead back (we know they believe he is a good complementary one), but my question would be why enter the season with Murray as your clear starter only to effectively bench him two weeks later after his best game?

 

Furthermore, Murray is grading out as PFF's 16th-best RB (70) - ahead of players such as Melvin Gordon, Tevin Coleman and Zeke - while Washington (58.4) and Richard (56.4) are well off the pace. Now, I am somewhat skeptical when it comes to PFF's grades on occasion, but that is a fairly significant margin and one that makes it even harder to explain why Murray is losing snaps if PFF is anywhere close to accurate.

PFF is perfectly fine for some purposes. But I seriously doubt coaches pay any attention to it. "Oh man, our guy isn't grading well with PFF! Let's put in the backup."

 

Murray looks slow, he's not passing the eye test as well as the other two are. And the other two are producing too. It's not so mysterious as you're making it out.

[The Football Guru 222]

PFF is perfectly fine for some purposes. But I seriously doubt coaches pay any attention to it. "Oh man, our guy isn't grading well with PFF! Let's put in the backup."

 

Murray looks slow, he's not passing the eye test as well as the other two are. And the other two are producing too. It's not so mysterious as you're making it out.

I didn't say coaches were drawing their conclusions from PFF (that should have been obvious based on my comment about being a skeptic of some of their grades). I was using it to strengthen the argument that Murray shouldn't have lost work based on his overall body of work, seeing as how PFF does use game charters that do this (at least partly) to pay their bills.

 

I'm also not saying there is a great deal of mystery to this situation. It appears Del Rio & Co. have made up their mind about the RBBC. It's easy to say Washington and Richard look more explosive because they are 20 pounds lighter, so that is kind of their game - to be more explosive. They were drafted/signed to be complementary backs. I'm also not saying Murray hasn't looked a bit slower than he did last year at this time, but what are you basing that on? Last season? The preseason? The last two weeks? His box scores? If it is the last two weeks, don't you think his toe injury might have something to do with that?

 

Also, I'm not accusing you of being a box-score-only guy, but there are a lot of people that are. Even though there are lot of occurrences in the NFL that seem to defy logic, most of them can be explained if we do a fair amount of research/tape study. All I think I'm saying is that while there was probably never any doubt Murray would lose some carries this season as soon as the Raiders started gushing about Washington, I'm not exactly sure there much logic (other than injury) to suggest how quickly Murray went from clear lead back to strict committee back. The fact Murray hasn't so much as made a peep about it (through the press or otherwise) also tells he's either the ultimate team guy or understands his toe is bothering him too much to be of much use. I'll let you guess which one I think it is.

[Ray_T 752]

I didn't say coaches were drawing their conclusions from PFF (that should have been obvious based on my comment about being a skeptic of some of their grades). I was using it to strengthen the argument that Murray shouldn't have lost work based on his overall body of work,

 

I agree, I suspect that is when the injury occurred. It is likely the injury got worse since and its now to the point where they have decided to sit him.

 

This is not an endorsement of any raider RB one way or another. Just a statement of opinion based on the data.

 

Whether you like it or not, Washington is about to get his shot to prove he can cut it as a starter. It may be a 1 game audition, it may be a 2 or even a 3 game stint, but we will see one way or another what this kid can do.

 

Personally, I like his talent, and my belief was that Oakland would like to see what the kid can do before the end of the season. (I am pretty sure Latavius is a free agent at end of year and they wanna know how much leverage they have when entering negotiations)

 

so for those reasons, I think he will get a legitimate shot. Whether he does anything with that remains to be seen, but he will get that shot starting tomorrow.

[The Football Guru 222]

 

I agree, I suspect that is when the injury occurred. It is likely the injury got worse since and its now to the point where they have decided to sit him.

 

This is not an endorsement of any raider RB one way or another. Just a statement of opinion based on the data.

 

Whether you like it or not, Washington is about to get his shot to prove he can cut it as a starter. It may be a 1 game audition, it may be a 2 or even a 3 game stint, but we will see one way or another what this kid can do.

 

Personally, I like his talent, and my belief was that Oakland would like to see what the kid can do before the end of the season. (I am pretty sure Latavius is a free agent at end of year and they wanna know how much leverage they have when entering negotiations)

 

so for those reasons, I think he will get a legitimate shot. Whether he does anything with that remains to be seen, but he will get that shot starting tomorrow.

All good points. I have Murray in one of 11 leagues, so I'm not overly invested in him. I think Richard is more lead-back material, but Oakland doesn't care what I think.

 

What cracks me up is that so many of these "new studs" that pop up every year tend to get a very soft matchup in their first game (Jordan Howard last week, for example), almost as a way for the coach to prove he was right. I'm so glad I've learned my lesson about building RB-centric teams. This kind of BS (such as Del Rio saying right before the season he hopes to get Murray MORE carries this year) made last year an absolute disaster for some of my teams. Fortunately, all of my teams are strong enough at WR so far this year to withstand it.

[Ray_T 752]

All good points. I have Murray in one of 11 leagues, so I'm not overly invested in him. I think Richard is more lead-back material, but Oakland doesn't care what I think.

 

What cracks me up is that so many of these "new studs" that pop up every year tend to get a very soft matchup in their first game (Jordan Howard last week, for example), almost as a way for the coach to prove he was right. I'm so glad I've learned my lesson about building RB-centric teams. This kind of BS (such as Del Rio saying right before the season he hopes to get Murray MORE carries this year) made last year an absolute disaster for some of my teams. Fortunately, all of my teams are strong enough at WR so far this year to withstand it.

I have noticed this too. They often do it with rookie QB's too.

 

if the team plays Seattle and Denver prior to the bye, and a weaker or average D after the bye, the rookie wont start against Seattle or Denver. but if the Vet plays badly against those teams, that will be the excuse to move to the rookie after the bye.

 

happens all the time.