Promote your business or product on 700level.com. For
more information about advertising with us CLICK HERE!

Hey, I tried defending Westbrook's durability last year, only to be told by you he wasn't.

So I must have sold you pretty successfully if another full year and 375 touches later you still believe his durability is a huge concern.

He missed more than one game in 2004 b/c of injury, too

No...just one.

He sat the final 2 games with the rest of the starters, but he wasn't hurt.

No, i just think one year (in which he missed a game b/c of injury) is a small sample size.

BTW, you didn't sell me, it's b/c my idiot brother heard an announcer wrong about a stat.

Huh?

When I was arguing about his durability, it was b/c my brother was telling me he heard some stat about how many games he missed in relation to other RB's. He was completely wrong.

What stat? That's what I was trying to say. You said durability would be the reason you'd choose LT, mentioned something about me telling you he wasn't durable last year, and now we're talking about some stat you're brother told you that was wrong.

I'm just confused and trying to work back.

The one I just mentioned: missed games compared to other RB's

Well, NOW he is, but durability over a small sample size isn't exactly a fair way to use it, is it?

Not really fair, no. That's why I wouldn't say Westbrook is the better career player and I'm not trying to take anything away from LT...a guy who will go down as one of the best ever statistically.

I'm just saying that 2 years is a pretty good sample size and he's been basically healthy in 3 of the last 4 years. He's still not as durable as LT, but given his more recent trend of durability (assuming you believe it will hold up) and his play this year, I think you could make a case for Westbrook.

They're both the same age, Westbrook has a lot less wear on the tires, and watching them play I think Westbrook is a better receiver, better blocker, and quicker with the ball in his hands.

History will remember LT as the better player, but I'm not sure which one I'd take if I was starting a team right now and had to choose between the 2.

The one I just mentioned: missed games compared to other RB's

Yeah...What was the actual stat?

I'm not understanding where your brother or the stat had to do with what we're talking about so I'm trying to ask you what the stat was (the actual statistic, not the name of it) so I can figure put what you're trying to say.

I'm not sure how you measure wear and tear, but Westbrook has had several season ending injuries (going back to high school, and including college and the pros). Those kinds of injuries are the kinds of injuries that can take their toll on a RB over a career.

With LT, he's like Eric Dickerson in the way he's been able to amass the carries he's had and not had it affect his career. So, the wear and tear on him is not typical to the way it is to other RB's

Wow. The stat was saying he's missed a comparable amount of games to other leading RB's. You pointed out it wasn't true.

I think you could make a case for Westbrook.

They're both the same age, Westbrook has a lot less wear on the tires, and watching them play I think Westbrook is a better receiver, better blocker, and quicker with the ball in his hands.

History will remember LT as the better player, but I'm not sure which one I'd take if I was starting a team right now and had to choose between the 2.

With RB comparisons, you have to factor in the offensive line and the offense in which they play. I don't know too much about how the Chargers offensive line, but it's silly to compare RBs without evaluating the talent around them and the coaching.

That's a good point. To say LT "led" his team to a 4-12 record is kind of silly.

Wow. The stat was saying he's missed a comparable amount of games to other leading RB's. You pointed out it wasn't true.

Dude...calm down. I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm just not understanding what you;re trying to say.

I'm not excited at all. I just feel like I'm taking crazy pills, b/c it's pretty clear what the stat is, and I don't know how else to explain it. He missed more games, which means it's not comparable, than most other starting RB's.

Whats the number KB lol

I'm not sure how you measure wear and tear, but Westbrook has had several season ending injuries (going back to high school, and including college and the pros). Those kinds of injuries are the kinds of injuries that can take their toll on a RB over a career.

With LT, he's like Eric Dickerson in the way he's been able to amass the carries he's had and not had it affect his career. So, the wear and tear on him is not typical to the way it is to other RB's

Fair point. LT takes a lot of big hits and has a lot of carries under his belt, but he might be the kind of guy who isn't ever really affected by the them.

However, LT is on pace to pass Dickerson in career carries in about 1.5 years. If you count receptions and go with the "touches" category, LT will pass Dickerson in career touches sometime next year.

You can define wear and tear a lot of different ways and he may be better off than Westbrook by simply having better genetics, but there is another school of thought that says RBs only have a finite number of carries in them until they start breaking down (whatever that number is) and a player like Westbrook may last in the league longer than Tomlinson because hasn't absorbed as much punishment.

I don't now which definition is more accurate, though, and we won't know until we see how it plays out over the coming years.

History will remember LT as the better player, but I'm not sure which one I'd take if I was starting a team right now and had to choose between the 2.

Depends on what you're looking for. Both players excel in their current offenses, but would you prefer Westbrook if your mindset is to pound the rock 25 times a game?

Depends on what you're looking for. Both players excel in their current offenses, but would you prefer Westbrook if your mindset is to pound the rock 25 times a game?

Another fair point. However, LT averaged 19.7 carries per game this year and Westbrook averaged 18.5.

Their career averages are far apart because Westbrook was used very sparingly early, but at least this season, they ran about the same number of times and touched the ball about the same number of times per game (27.6 touches per game to 27.1 touches per game for Westbrook).

That's a good point. The evidence suggests that rushing carries are the ones that take more toll, and it's why they're not included in that stat that shows when RB's break down (370 carries or whatever it is).

So Westbrook has amassed these injuries, with under 200 carries in 3 of these years.

That's a good point. The evidence suggests that rushing carries are the ones that take more toll, and it's why they're not included in that stat that shows when RB's break down (370 carries or whatever it is).

Sorry, meant to say why recieving touches aren't mentioned in that "370" stat.

So Westbrook has amassed these injuries, with under 200 carries in 3 of these years.

Or Westbrook's injuries, none have been wear and tear, though.

He has a "chronic" knee, but he seems to play fine with it week in and week out.

The other injuries he's suffered as a pro (that I can remember) were:

- Cracked ribs falling awkwardly on the ball while being tackled (freak injury).

- Torn tricep from slipping backward and catching himself awkwardly on his arm.

- Sprained foot from a tackler falling on his heal awkwardly when he jogged out of bounds.

When I think of wear and tear injuries, I think of bum shoulders, chronic ankles, chronic groins, hammy's etc.

His knee may fall into that category, but his other injuries were freak kinds of things, IMO.

Now, he may have a brittle body succeptable to freak kinds of injuries, which in an entirely different unprovable argument. However, he hasn't broken down due to overuse yet.

I'm not saying the injuries are the result of wear and tear. I said these injuries can factor into the wear and tear.

I knew that was your point before, but this quote:

So Westbrook has amassed these injuries, with under 200 carries in 3 of these years.

Made me think you were saying both. My bad.

So back on the Divisional game lines ...

According to the lines, we have 4 romps on our hands this weekend. I can't believe somebody isn't gonna be in a FG game this weekend. I know the risk of looking at a team that played well last weekend, and get sucked up in that, only to watch them go down in flames against the rested 1 and 2 seeds, but I see some covers. I think at least 2 of them will be 3 point games.

Seahawks plus 8.5 - forecast is for cold (mid 20s) but no precip. As great as Favre is, he still has a pass or two left in him that make you say "Dude?!"

Pats minus 11.5 - Jags are a media darling pick that everybody hopes will beat NE. They won't. Belicheater will find a way to stop the run and force Garrard to beat them. He won't.

SD plus 8.5 - They won't get 6 INTs or a missed 29 yarder from Vinitieri this time, but I think they keep it close. Thye played lousy against Tennessee - nowhere to go but up?

NY plus 7.5 - Cowturds have looked like shit recently, and they haven't played well either. One problem - the Vagiants do not handle success that well, and they think they're on top of the world after beating up on Tampon Bay. I still think they keep it close though. Hopefully Bruce Dern won't fuck it up this time.

1 2  3