Question 2, in re this paragraph: "I have a lot more to come in the micro-focused HHG articles on these newly-shaped backfields, but this is a classic narrative trap. Just because short yardage work is the one remaining area Elliott is viable, does not necessarily mean he will be subbed in above Rhamondre Stevenson to play a specific goal-line back role the team never even had last season. (Stevenson and Harris rotated by drive, and whomever started the drive generally saw the goal-line series. The only consistent situational substitution was Stevenson playing third down and long on both players’ drives)" --- This might be covered in the "a lot more to come" part, but, while i agree w/your overall low impact/low level of meaning take on the Zeke signing, does the part of the argument about rotating by drive get weakened at all by "well, we have a new OC now" ?
Question 1, re this paragraph: "Analysts who proclaim this move to hurt Hall’s ceiling either don’t understand how ceilings work or don’t understand how running backs work. This sounds glib, but it’s an utterly ridiculous position to hold and I’ve seen it all over my feed. You don’t start to project one player’s ceiling by locking their backfield mate into 12 touches per game. You don’t ever start outlining scenarios for a backfield by locking in a floor of touches for its second most talented player. This process indicates an analyst who takes a static rather than dynamic approach to viewing the game, and this is an extremely dynamic game." --- i tend to agree, but (and maybe i'm defining ceiling too broadly) i think the idea that, since they have a seemingly better alternative to Izzy/Bam/Carter/Dye, they would (especially early in the season) be more likely to give that alternative touches (whereas they might give them to Hall otherwise rather than to the other guys?), which, while inviting that volume to be inefficient, could also be an opportunity Hall loses to house one for 67 yards, isn't a completely wrong one, no? i think in that way of saying it, "capping a ceiling" can make sense... i think what you're saying is Hall's ceiling outcome (the top 25%ile outcomes, say) includes basically him being so good and healthy those touches aren't on the bubble, and/or he's so efficient in the touches he does get and/or Cook is dust, etc. that it won't matter, and that's truly how we define "ceiling"... how am i doing?
Yes that's right. Basically I'm saying that Hurt/Defective Hall is probably still > Carter/Izzy/Knight so even if Hall was defective, he could limped around to 13-14 PPG or so (See: 2021 Barkley). But he may not be > Cook so if Hall can't hack it they may just treat Cook as the lead back.
But if he's at full force it doesn't really matter much the degree to which he's better than Cook vs. better than the rest of this gang. He'll still be better. So he'll be getting the vast majority of touches and then Cook would just be the compliment
Question 2, in re this paragraph: "I have a lot more to come in the micro-focused HHG articles on these newly-shaped backfields, but this is a classic narrative trap. Just because short yardage work is the one remaining area Elliott is viable, does not necessarily mean he will be subbed in above Rhamondre Stevenson to play a specific goal-line back role the team never even had last season. (Stevenson and Harris rotated by drive, and whomever started the drive generally saw the goal-line series. The only consistent situational substitution was Stevenson playing third down and long on both players’ drives)" --- This might be covered in the "a lot more to come" part, but, while i agree w/your overall low impact/low level of meaning take on the Zeke signing, does the part of the argument about rotating by drive get weakened at all by "well, we have a new OC now" ?
Question 1, re this paragraph: "Analysts who proclaim this move to hurt Hall’s ceiling either don’t understand how ceilings work or don’t understand how running backs work. This sounds glib, but it’s an utterly ridiculous position to hold and I’ve seen it all over my feed. You don’t start to project one player’s ceiling by locking their backfield mate into 12 touches per game. You don’t ever start outlining scenarios for a backfield by locking in a floor of touches for its second most talented player. This process indicates an analyst who takes a static rather than dynamic approach to viewing the game, and this is an extremely dynamic game." --- i tend to agree, but (and maybe i'm defining ceiling too broadly) i think the idea that, since they have a seemingly better alternative to Izzy/Bam/Carter/Dye, they would (especially early in the season) be more likely to give that alternative touches (whereas they might give them to Hall otherwise rather than to the other guys?), which, while inviting that volume to be inefficient, could also be an opportunity Hall loses to house one for 67 yards, isn't a completely wrong one, no? i think in that way of saying it, "capping a ceiling" can make sense... i think what you're saying is Hall's ceiling outcome (the top 25%ile outcomes, say) includes basically him being so good and healthy those touches aren't on the bubble, and/or he's so efficient in the touches he does get and/or Cook is dust, etc. that it won't matter, and that's truly how we define "ceiling"... how am i doing?
Yes that's right. Basically I'm saying that Hurt/Defective Hall is probably still > Carter/Izzy/Knight so even if Hall was defective, he could limped around to 13-14 PPG or so (See: 2021 Barkley). But he may not be > Cook so if Hall can't hack it they may just treat Cook as the lead back.
But if he's at full force it doesn't really matter much the degree to which he's better than Cook vs. better than the rest of this gang. He'll still be better. So he'll be getting the vast majority of touches and then Cook would just be the compliment