Mark Ingram's role becoming clear

Shoe. · 11-29-2012, 04:30 PM

I guess I see it this way-

If you were another team's GM looking at our stable of backs, who would you want/not want, and why?

Personally, I would want either PT or Ivory. Sproles is too old and is no longer workhorse material, but a great checkdown option nonetheless. Ingram just doesn't have a supporting body of work that makes him desirable, (unless you're counting college, which really falls into the 'what have you done for me lately' category, IMO) and worth picking up his contract.

PT is good, but too expensive for his age/recent production to warrant any poaching worries. And he'll probably restructure after this year anyway, so his cap hit probably won't be as bad as it looks right now

So if anybody is worried about losing a back, worry about losing Ivory because he's cheap, runs hard, and is a UFA next year with a good supporting body of work over more than one season (minus a few untimely fumbles, which he seems to have corrected this season, and injuries, which also have not been a problem so far. He looks a little better in the blocking game as well, but I only saw him a lay a couple of decent blocks in the 9ers game).

Talk about return on investment, he makes a strong case for better value in a trade IMO, much more so than any of our other backs

But again, I just don't see us getting rid of these guys. SP was setting something up, and I wanna see what it was

Danno · 11-29-2012, 04:53 PM

Originally Posted by Shoe.

I guess I see it this way-

If you were another team's GM looking at our stable of backs, who would you want/not want, and why?

Personally, I would want either PT or Ivory. Sproles is too old and is no longer workhorse material, but a great checkdown option nonetheless. Ingram just doesn't have a supporting body of work that makes him desirable, (unless you're counting college, which really falls into the 'what have you done for me lately' category, IMO) and worth picking up his contract.

PT is good, but too expensive for his age/recent production to warrant any poaching worries. And he'll probably restructure after this year anyway, so his cap hit probably won't be as bad as it looks right now

So if anybody is worried about losing a back, worry about losing Ivory because he's cheap, runs hard, and is a UFA next year with a good supporting body of work over more than one season (minus a few untimely fumbles, which he seems to have corrected this season, and injuries, which also have not been a problem so far. He looks a little better in the blocking game as well, but I only saw him a lay a couple of decent blocks in the 9ers game).

Talk about return on investment, he makes a strong case for better value in a trade IMO, much more so than any of our other backs

But again, I just don't see us getting rid of these guys. SP was setting something up, and I wanna see what it was

Almost a perfect post, except Ivory is a RFA so we can tender him and possibly get some kind of draft pick for him.

I keep forgetting the new tender levels tho, we may not get jack squat for him.

This is all I found...

RFAs -- "Restricted Free Agents" -- are players who have accrued three years' experience in the NFL. They are eligible for a new contract, but teams can restrict their access by requiring draft-pick compensation for them to move on and receiving the right to match any deal a player receives. Rare is the case when a third-year player is valuable enough to merit a lucrative contract and a draft pick, and a result, RFAs usually don't change teams.

So the only news when it comes to RFAs is typically whether they were issued a tender or not. The level of the tender is mostly an issue of the salary cap.

In 2012, according to NFL.com, there are three levels of RFA tenders. A player who requires a first-round compensation will get a tender (and cap number) worth $2.742 million, according to NFL.com.

Second-round tenders are worth $1.927 million in cap and cash, and...

tenders that include right to match only are worth $1.26 million.

The NFL typically announces tender levels on the day free agency begins, and we'll pass along what we find out before then.

TheOak · 11-29-2012, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by Shoe.

I guess I see it this way-

If you were another team's GM looking at our stable of backs, who would you want/not want, and why?

Personally, I would want either PT or Ivory. Sproles is too old and is no longer workhorse material, but a great checkdown option nonetheless. Ingram just doesn't have a supporting body of work that makes him desirable, (unless you're counting college, which really falls into the 'what have you done for me lately' category, IMO) and worth picking up his contract.

PT is good, but too expensive for his age/recent production to warrant any poaching worries. And he'll probably restructure after this year anyway, so his cap hit probably won't be as bad as it looks right now

So if anybody is worried about losing a back, worry about losing Ivory because he's cheap, runs hard, and is a UFA next year with a good supporting body of work over more than one season (minus a few untimely fumbles, which he seems to have corrected this season, and injuries, which also have not been a problem so far. He looks a little better in the blocking game as well, but I only saw him a lay a couple of decent blocks in the 9ers game).

Talk about return on investment, he makes a strong case for better value in a trade IMO, much more so than any of our other backs

But again, I just don't see us getting rid of these guys. SP was setting something up, and I wanna see what it was

In that aspect yes. In reality,you are a team looking for a solid workhorse RB and Ingram is about as good as you are going to get.

Loomis is not going to open up a Buffett and let a team pick who they want.

He is going to put whom ever he wants on the market.

SaintsBro · 11-29-2012, 05:48 PM

Just as an aside, I don't even think a lot of teams out there would be interested in Pierre Thomas, if he was offered up for trade....would they give anything for him.... I am of the conclusion that a lot of people out there in football STILL don't really know who he is, or how good he is. You can kinda tell from reading the coverage in other newspapers and websites of the teams we play, or the B-team announcers and what they say about him - the non-Gruden types don't really seem to know that much about him. He wasn't from a big school and wasn't a high draft pick, and even when he makes amazing plays happen, he doesn't really make "Sports Center" highlights type shows very often or get much attention. Unless you actually see him run , and catch, to know how good he is, his numbers are always kind of small and unimpressive on paper, to somebody just looking at them from far away. He's totally a sleeper, off the radar, and I honestly think the whole world STILL under estimates him sometimes, or doesn't really know who he is. Just my opinion.

Ingram is the only one with a "name" that other people might want, IMHO. Not that I think he is going anywhere, but we'll see.

TheOak · 11-29-2012, 08:57 PM

That's why Sproles is not going anywhere.

11-29-2012, 04:30 PM	#1
Shoe. 500th Post Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Hub City Posts: 576	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear I guess I see it this way- If you were another team's GM looking at our stable of backs, who would you want/not want, and why? Personally, I would want either PT or Ivory. Sproles is too old and is no longer workhorse material, but a great checkdown option nonetheless. Ingram just doesn't have a supporting body of work that makes him desirable, (unless you're counting college, which really falls into the 'what have you done for me lately' category, IMO) and worth picking up his contract. PT is good, but too expensive for his age/recent production to warrant any poaching worries. And he'll probably restructure after this year anyway, so his cap hit probably won't be as bad as it looks right now So if anybody is worried about losing a back, worry about losing Ivory because he's cheap, runs hard, and is a UFA next year with a good supporting body of work over more than one season (minus a few untimely fumbles, which he seems to have corrected this season, and injuries, which also have not been a problem so far. He looks a little better in the blocking game as well, but I only saw him a lay a couple of decent blocks in the 9ers game). Talk about return on investment, he makes a strong case for better value in a trade IMO, much more so than any of our other backs But again, I just don't see us getting rid of these guys. SP was setting something up, and I wanna see what it was

11-29-2012, 04:53 PM	#2
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,756	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear Originally Posted by Shoe. I guess I see it this way- If you were another team's GM looking at our stable of backs, who would you want/not want, and why? Personally, I would want either PT or Ivory. Sproles is too old and is no longer workhorse material, but a great checkdown option nonetheless. Ingram just doesn't have a supporting body of work that makes him desirable, (unless you're counting college, which really falls into the 'what have you done for me lately' category, IMO) and worth picking up his contract. PT is good, but too expensive for his age/recent production to warrant any poaching worries. And he'll probably restructure after this year anyway, so his cap hit probably won't be as bad as it looks right now So if anybody is worried about losing a back, worry about losing Ivory because he's cheap, runs hard, and is a UFA next year with a good supporting body of work over more than one season (minus a few untimely fumbles, which he seems to have corrected this season, and injuries, which also have not been a problem so far. He looks a little better in the blocking game as well, but I only saw him a lay a couple of decent blocks in the 9ers game). Talk about return on investment, he makes a strong case for better value in a trade IMO, much more so than any of our other backs But again, I just don't see us getting rid of these guys. SP was setting something up, and I wanna see what it was Almost a perfect post, except Ivory is a RFA so we can tender him and possibly get some kind of draft pick for him. I keep forgetting the new tender levels tho, we may not get jack squat for him. This is all I found... RFAs -- "Restricted Free Agents" -- are players who have accrued three years' experience in the NFL. They are eligible for a new contract, but teams can restrict their access by requiring draft-pick compensation for them to move on and receiving the right to match any deal a player receives. Rare is the case when a third-year player is valuable enough to merit a lucrative contract and a draft pick, and a result, RFAs usually don't change teams. So the only news when it comes to RFAs is typically whether they were issued a tender or not. The level of the tender is mostly an issue of the salary cap. In 2012, according to NFL.com, there are three levels of RFA tenders. A player who requires a first-round compensation will get a tender (and cap number) worth $2.742 million, according to NFL.com. Second-round tenders are worth $1.927 million in cap and cash, and... tenders that include right to match only are worth $1.26 million. The NFL typically announces tender levels on the day free agency begins, and we'll pass along what we find out before then.

11-29-2012, 05:23 PM	#3
TheOak 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Cypress Tx. Posts: 19,047	Originally Posted by Shoe. I guess I see it this way- If you were another team's GM looking at our stable of backs, who would you want/not want, and why? Personally, I would want either PT or Ivory. Sproles is too old and is no longer workhorse material, but a great checkdown option nonetheless. Ingram just doesn't have a supporting body of work that makes him desirable, (unless you're counting college, which really falls into the 'what have you done for me lately' category, IMO) and worth picking up his contract. PT is good, but too expensive for his age/recent production to warrant any poaching worries. And he'll probably restructure after this year anyway, so his cap hit probably won't be as bad as it looks right now So if anybody is worried about losing a back, worry about losing Ivory because he's cheap, runs hard, and is a UFA next year with a good supporting body of work over more than one season (minus a few untimely fumbles, which he seems to have corrected this season, and injuries, which also have not been a problem so far. He looks a little better in the blocking game as well, but I only saw him a lay a couple of decent blocks in the 9ers game). Talk about return on investment, he makes a strong case for better value in a trade IMO, much more so than any of our other backs But again, I just don't see us getting rid of these guys. SP was setting something up, and I wanna see what it was In that aspect yes. In reality,you are a team looking for a solid workhorse RB and Ingram is about as good as you are going to get. Loomis is not going to open up a Buffett and let a team pick who they want. He is going to put whom ever he wants on the market.

11-29-2012, 05:48 PM	#4
SaintsBro Site Donor Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: in line with my ridiculous CLEAR PLASTIC BAG Posts: 3,650 Blog Entries: 3	Re: Mark Ingram's role becoming clear Just as an aside, I don't even think a lot of teams out there would be interested in Pierre Thomas, if he was offered up for trade....would they give anything for him.... I am of the conclusion that a lot of people out there in football STILL don't really know who he is, or how good he is. You can kinda tell from reading the coverage in other newspapers and websites of the teams we play, or the B-team announcers and what they say about him - the non-Gruden types don't really seem to know that much about him. He wasn't from a big school and wasn't a high draft pick, and even when he makes amazing plays happen, he doesn't really make "Sports Center" highlights type shows very often or get much attention. Unless you actually see him run , and catch, to know how good he is, his numbers are always kind of small and unimpressive on paper, to somebody just looking at them from far away. He's totally a sleeper, off the radar, and I honestly think the whole world STILL under estimates him sometimes, or doesn't really know who he is. Just my opinion. Ingram is the only one with a "name" that other people might want, IMHO. Not that I think he is going anywhere, but we'll see.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/53148-mark-ingrams-role-becoming-clear.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
The Latest Chris Ivory News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	11-23-2012 08:37 PM	2
The Latest New Orleans Saints News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	11-23-2012 07:59 PM	7
The Latest Darren Sproles News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	11-23-2012 06:55 PM	1
Mark Ingram's role becoming clear	This thread	Refback	11-23-2012 06:35 PM	2

11-29-2012, 08:57 PM	#5
TheOak 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Cypress Tx. Posts: 19,047	That's why Sproles is not going anywhere.