D-cleater

Pound for pound, Revis vs Mccourty is close. I've been high on McCourty long before the bandwagon came to town, but I'm not sure he's unseated Revis yet. I think Revis has gotten a little softer since his contract resigning, and Ryan has pumped him up just a bit too much. There is no question that McCourty has arrived and if he continues to shut it down in the playoffs, and comes up with a few big plays, he equal standing with Revis.

Elsewhere, Shawn Ellis in the Jets system probably wins over most of our two gap DE's, Pace and Thomas are better than our OLB's, but Ninkovich and Cunningham are closing the gap, and Eric Moore may be better than all of them next year. Finally, I'd take mangold over Koppen, possibly moore over Connoly but its close, and Moore still hasn't proven that he can return kicks.

Kasmir

Well, we would have given you Mangold over Koppen, but Easterbrook talked us out of it

Tuesday Morning Quarterback Non-Quarterback Non-Running Back NFL MVP: Dan Koppen - ESPN

D-cleater

First of all, talent and value are completely subjective, and should only be considered in the context of how they fit in the team. Thats why Woodhead is more valuable, and in his role, more talented, then LT, and vice versa. It's got nothing to do with some cooked up stat listed next to the chick with her legs spread. LMAO. But anyway:

By definition, it seems like they are measuring Woodhead against... morris? OK, I'll give you that Woodhead looks a lot better vs Morris than Tomlinson does vs Greene, but that doesn't mean that Woodhead is "better" than Tomlinson. I can already guess that Woodhead gets more YPC and more first downs than tomlinson, but he is on an offense that is a hundred times better.

I'll say it again, on the Patriots offense I'd take Woodhead 7 days a week and twice on Sunday...ask LT to do what Woodhead does and he won't be nearly as effective. Ask Woodhead to do what LT does for the Jets and he won't just be less effective, he'll be on IR.

By the way, this conspiracy crap you are talking about is just that...conspiracy crap.

tests

imo LT, is > but woody is perfect for the pats offense.

PatsFanSince74

It's a tough comparison because Tomlinson got a lot more use, week in and week out. But, there was a significant fall off in his production in the latter part of the season. The Tomlinson who played the first nine games was a lot like the Tomlinson of old; explosive at the line of scrimmage and able to turn tiny seams into running lanes. But, the LT who showed up for the last month or more of the season was noticeably slower.

In his first nine games, Tomlinson rushed for an average of 73 yards per game, or 4.7 yards per rush with an average 15.7 rushes per game. In his last six games (he sat out Week 17), he rushed for an average of 43 yards per game, or 3.3 yards per rush with an average of 13 rushes per game. Over the season, he averaged 4.2 yards per rush, with 14.6 rushes and 60.9 average yards per game (he carried the ball 219 times).

Over the entire season, Woodhead had fewer rushes (97 for 6.9 per game on average) and yards per game (39.1), but made a lot more of his opportunities with an average of 5.6 yards per rush.

In addition, Woodhead was a more productive receiver, catching 34 passes for a total of 379 yards (11.1 yards per catch). Tomlinson caught 52 passes for a total of 368 yards (7.1 yards per catch).

So, to answer your question, I think you have to say that Tomlinson was the more "talented" producer given his production over a lot of carries, but given what he did with the chances he had, I'd say that Woodhead was more "valuable" to the Patriots.

__________________
It is what it is. It wasn't what it wasn't.

Triple-T

Ladainian = >31years old, ~3600 career touches, excuse making, can't show up in a big game *******
Woodhead = not those things

RBs at that age, with that wear and tear in the NFL are just not going to last much longer. Woodhead has had an awesome year, is just under 25, has 150 NFL touches and should only improve.

2010 stats: advantage woodhead
age: advantage woodhead
wear and tear: advantage woodhead
salary: advantage woodhead
pusses out when it really matters: advantage ladainian
HOF status: irrelevant

__________________
Do. Your. Job. Don't try to take care of somebody else's responsibilities and all that. Just take care of your assignment. Know what it is, execute it and get it taken care of. Do your job...and you'll be champions tonight

Aenima0810

What? Did you not read anything? OP was comparing 2010 value.

__________________
Black Label Society = no.1
Mark Ingram is the truth.

Aenima0810

Man, you guys all made very good points, but you're missing the obvious when it's staring you in the face. Through all the rambling (kidding, intelligent points, but still rambling) its as simple as: One produced way more than the other, but with a good bit less touches. So, it's all guesswork of what Woodhead would have done with those imaginary touches. I won't be one to assume he would have kept up with those crazy production numbers, but at the same time I still think it would have been a good bit better than LT's (considering Woodhead would already have a signinficant head-start).

__________________
Black Label Society = no.1
Mark Ingram is the truth.

Aenima0810

To get exactly the Att-Yds Stats that LT had this season, Woodhead would have to average a hair over 3.0 yds/carry over his last 122 carries. And he only has 1 less Touchdown on 122 less carries. He has 11 more rec yds on 18 less catches than LT, and 1-0 edge on finding paydirt. I think given Woodhead's ability to take it to the house on any given play, from any formation, in any situation, it's safe to say he would still have more yds/touch than LT. (More end zone trips as well)

__________________
Black Label Society = no.1
Mark Ingram is the truth.

TruthSeeker

Well, when you take into account that one player holds out with 3 years left on his contract and immediately after signing for more money indicates that he plans on holding out again soon and the other seems to be a humble, team player, the choice may not be quite as obvious as you think.