The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community

The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/index.php)
-   Orange Mane Central Discussion (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   Let's Talk Turbin (http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showthread.php?t=103760)

RaiderH8r 02-26-2012 04:45 PM

Let's Talk Turbin
 
Robert Turbin, RB Utah State

He's got tremendous size and runs well downhill. Good character but has durability and ball protection issues. He clocked 4.44 today (they bumped the official to 4.5) and at 225 that's a lot of man to bring down. His knock is that there is uncertainty that he can be an every down back which is good, we don't need an every down back. We need a worker with size to wear down Ds and spell McG. Turbin can break off the 80 harder as well,something we have lacked in our game. I am a buyer in round 4.

TheReverend 02-26-2012 04:55 PM

Tremendous size?

225 is about 2% above average...

Heyneck 02-26-2012 04:58 PM

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5d5VdZ9PWUg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Dude looked like a beast to today!!! I have never seen him play (don't fallow College football much). What was his competition like? Did he go against good defenses?

If we could get him in the 3rd-4th I am all for it!!! His fanaticism for the Hulk sure explains how he looked today at the combine.

rugbythug 02-26-2012 04:59 PM

he destroyed my Cowboys. I have been wishing he was a Bronco since then. Still he does have injury issues I don't think he gets taken before late 3rd.

RaiderH8r 02-26-2012 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rugbythug (Post 3498407)
he destroyed my Cowboys. I have been wishing he was a Bronco since then. Still he does have injury issues I don't think he gets taken before late 3rd.

That's what I am talking about. 4th or later and he starts presenting real value. And with the short shelf life of the position in the nfl I would like to see us grab a guy or two through the draft. One is likely all we'll grab, if any.

Archer81 02-26-2012 05:18 PM

Watching him today he seemed kind of top heavy. Looked like it limited his flexibility a bit when they had him running routes.

Just what I saw, anyway.

:Broncos:

Bronco Boy 02-26-2012 05:18 PM

Durability and ball control issues? Sounds like a winner!

RaiderH8r 02-26-2012 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bronco Boy (Post 3498413)
Durability and ball control issues? Sounds like a winner!

He's not a fumbling menagerie but an extra drop or two in a season makes a world of difference. And if he didn't have issues we wouldn't get a whiff at the guy. After today we may not anyway.

02-26-2012 05:48 PM

I ****ing love this man. That is all. No other player I'd rather see in orange and blue. Same durability issues that McGahee had coming out of college. You do NOT get a better blend of power and speed in this draft with anyone else but TR.

02-26-2012 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RaiderH8r (Post 3498399)
I am a buyer in round 4.

We won't make it past the 2nd, mark my words.

02-26-2012 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend (Post 3498402)
Tremendous size?

225 is about 2% above average...



That's blatantly wrong, and you're going to trick maners into thinking it's true when it's just not.

The average weight of 28 backs who weighed in at the 2012 combine was 206 lbs.... 2% of 225 is 220 1/2...

You're only off by 15.5 pounds!

TheReverend 02-26-2012 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jameson (Post 3498426)


Well, that's just flatout wrong, and you're going to trick maners into thinking it's true when it's just not.

The average of the 28 backs who went to the combine was 206.... 2% of 225 is 220 1/2... You're only off by 15 pounds!

The average size for an NFL running back is 219.6 lbs.

225 is 2.4% larger.

Wow...

Kids a good player but his size is far from "tremendous".

razorwire77 02-26-2012 05:57 PM

I don't want 4.5 ish power back with durability concerns. We have a decent power back to split carries with in McGahee. What I want is a sub 4.5 40 speed back with vision that's able to cut and go and catch an edge and get those 10, 15, 20 yard runs on 3rd and 3. I basically want prime Clinton Portis without the flavor.

02-26-2012 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend (Post 3498427)
The average size for an NFL running back is 219.6 lbs.

225 is 2.4% larger.

Wow...

Kids a good player but his size is far from "tremendous".



Average of the top 25 backs in 2012 was 218.9, essentially what you said. Those numbers are obviously inflated in both height and weight.

Also, we're clearly talking about the averages of prospects, not rookies. NPretty much every running back puts on 5 pounds of muscle in their first NFL offseason, there's a reason why the NFL average is so much bigger...

So... Robert Turbin is 2.4% bigger than the average back despite never having been on an NFL weight lifting regiment/diet/never had an offseason to put on weight...

But if you don't want to take into account the fact that the average back puts on 10 pounds (your numbers, not mine) from combine to the NFL, that's fine...

wow...?

TheReverend 02-26-2012 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jameson (Post 3498435)
Avearage of the top 25 backs in 2012 was 218.96, and those numbers are obviously inflated in both height and weight. Most guys tack on an inch and 5 pounds to their actual measurements.

lol... once again, reference my original post on the subject that you called "blatantly wrong":

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend (Post 3498402)
Tremendous size?

225 is about 2% above average...


Quote:

Originally Posted by Jameson (Post 3498435)
Also, we're clearly talking about the averages of prospects, not rookies. NPretty much every running back puts on 5 pounds of muscle in their first NFL offseason, there's a reason why the NFL average is so much bigger...

But if you don't want to take into account the fact that the average back puts on 10 pounds (your numbers, not mine) from combine to the NFL, that's fine...

I'll take "Made up stats" for $1,000, Alex.

02-26-2012 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend (Post 3498437)
lol... once again, reference my original post on the subject:






I'll take "Made up stats" for $1,000, Alex.

Okay, so what do you attribute to the magic 10 pounds of weight that seems to fall onto nfl backs overnight?

02-26-2012 06:15 PM

Clearly it's impossible that larger backs tend to have more success in the league, while smaller backs fail or are not drafted.

RaiderH8r 02-26-2012 06:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jameson (Post 3498425)
We won't make it past the 2nd, mark my words.

Yeah, he probably beasted his way out of our reach.

RaiderH8r 02-26-2012 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by razorwire77 (Post 3498430)
I don't want 4.5 ish power back with durability concerns. We have a decent power back to split carries with in McGahee. What I want is a sub 4.5 40 speed back with vision that's able to cut and go and catch an edge and get those 10, 15, 20 yard runs on 3rd and 3. I basically want prime Clinton Portis without the flavor.

He's sub 4.5. He ran 4.44 and 4.47.

02-26-2012 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheReverend (Post 3498437)
I'll take "Made up stats" for $1,000, Alex.

once again, deflecting my arguments with jokes instead of facts.

RB weight averages at nfl combine by year, using espn insider, and importing data to excel to find the average.

2012- 206 Lbs
2011- 203 Lbs
2010- 209 Lbs
2009- 209 Lbs
2008- 209 Lbs
2007- 212 Lbs
2006- 207 Lbs

So the 7 year average of RB's at the combine was 208 Lbs, but the average NFL rb weight is a full 10 pounds heavier...

http://1mut.com/wp-content/uploads/2...1mut.com-8.jpg

but you're right.. these guys don't put on weight...

02-26-2012 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shananahan (Post 3498453)
Who cares what the average for players at the combine is? By that logic, the best of a really terrible bunch would be considered a good prospect.

The people that understand that players at the combine become the players who make the rb weight average 218 lbs...

also... when in this discussion was "really good" anything brought up?

The discussion is the average weight of an nfl running back, not the average weight of a really good running back...

02-26-2012 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shananahan (Post 3498453)
Using that kind of logic, I could argue that because the average height of college basketball players is shorter than that of NBA players, the athletes must become taller after they're drafted.

I'm adding you to my ignore list, my man.

Weight is possible to put on... (my main argument...) Height isn't.... Your logic is terrible.

02-26-2012 06:44 PM

Well I deleted that post to edit it and then you quoted me.

And weight is possible to put on, yes. That doesn't help the fallacy in your thinking that just because NFL RBs are heavier on average they must have gained that weight after being drafted. Had you even considered that perhaps the ones who had success were the ones who were above the combine average, and then stuck around in the league thereby raising the average NFL RB weight?

It's silly logic, dude.

Bronco Boy 02-26-2012 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jameson (Post 3498457)
I'm adding you to my ignore list, my man.

Weight is possible to put on... (my main argument...) Height isn't.... Your logic is terrible.

Actually if you watched 20/20 this weekend you would know that it's possible to add about 6 inches to one's height. Just sayin'.

02-26-2012 06:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shananahan (Post 3498459)
Well I deleted that post to edit it and then you quoted me.

And weight is possible to put on, yes. That doesn't help the fallacy in your thinking that just because NFL RBs are heavier on average they must have gained that weight after being drafted. Had you even considered that perhaps the ones who had success were the ones who were above the combine average, and then stuck around in the league thereby raising the average NFL RB weight?

It's silly logic, dude.

I can still quote you to show how ironic it is that you question my logic and call it silly...

I have and I'm going to go back to that espn inside website, and do the same excel average, this time using only the top 15 prospects (instead of the 50 i did before)

If I'm wrong, I will own up. If this number is 210-214 lbs like i think it will be, these guys clearly put on at least 5 pounds


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:35 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.