PDA

View Full Version : Derrick Blaylock and Larry Johnson


keg in kc
07-13-2005, 10:08 PM
Not sure when it was, but an article from a national writer that I read a few days/weeks ago on here mentioned something about how much we were going to miss Derrick Blaylock because he was a better back than Larry Johnson.

Now, first of all, I'm not going to argue that we won't miss Blaylock, but I do wonder what people think about how Johnson performed last season. I did not get to watch many of the games, I was stuck working and listening to KCFX, so I have to deal more with stats than memory.

Looking at the stats...

As a rusher, Johnson had a higher per carry average, 1 more TD, more 20+ yard runs and a longer season best carry of 46 yards (vs. 24 for DB). He had a higher per catch average, 1 more TD, more 20+ yard receptions and a longer season best catch of 40 yards (30 for DB).

So what am I missing, if anything? I can see the numbers, but how did LJ look? And how about Blaylock? I've been a fan since he was drafted, but I've always seen him as a change-of-pace back more than an every down/carry-the-load-all-year type.

Just curious. And bored.

Mr. Laz
07-13-2005, 10:11 PM
johnson started slow but looked better each time he played.

more upside than blaylock imo

Coach
07-13-2005, 10:13 PM
johnson started slow but looked better each time he played.

more upside than blaylock imo

Ditto.

The only drawback is that some of the playcalling that we use for Priest, such as screens and vice versa, would be somewhat restricted when Johnson is on the field.

I remember that one day where we had a discussion that who does Larry Johnson reminds us of. There were quite a few answers that he was like Eddie George, just more faster.

the Talking Can
07-13-2005, 10:14 PM
I love Blaylock, but Johnson is a franchise quality, 25 carries a game RB...and, imho, Blaylock isn't.

Blaylock is quicker lateraly, but straight line speed LJ is deceptively, amazingly fast for his size...he is a home run hitter and I am confident we have a stud RB in the wings chomping at the bit to replace Holmes.

The Chiefs had no choice but to keep LJ.

the Talking Can
07-13-2005, 10:16 PM
Ditto.

The only drawback is that some of the playcalling that we use for Priest, such as screens and vice versa, would be somewhat restricted when Johnson is on the field.

I remember that one day where we had a discussion that who does Larry Johnson reminds us of. There were quite a few answers that he was like Eddie George, just more faster.

he's got a little more wiggle than George and a lot more speed, but he does run similiar...

Phobia
07-13-2005, 10:16 PM
They both looked good, but it's like comparing Barry Word and Joe Delaney - not that Johnson at all resembles Word.... It's just that they're different backs. Blaylock looks a lot more like Holmes without Holmes' patience and vision. Holmes will sting it out, string it out and HIT the hole when it's available. Blaylock tries to use that speed and outrun the pursuit, his blockers be damned. He's improved in that regard, but it's still a weakness.

Johnson is deceptively fast and has more patience than Blaylock, but he's not quite as fluid. He's a bigger dude, obviously.

Completely different backs. I'm sure you already know everything I'm typing.

keg in kc
07-13-2005, 10:17 PM
The only drawback is that some of the playcalling that we use for Priest, such as screens and vice versa, would be somewhat restricted when Johnson is on the field.Just curious, but is it possible that that's a matter of learning the offense and/or the staff's tendency to go with the more veteran guy on the roster. I remember when Blaylock couldn't get on the field when Mike Cloud was here, and people thought he couldn't run certain plays. As it turned out, he ended up pretty much fine doing whatever they wanted. Or is it a matter of Johnson being physically unable to do certain things?

I guess that's really a question we'll really get answered in August and onward, when Johnson is the clear #2 back and there's nobody else going in...

keg in kc
07-13-2005, 10:19 PM
Blaylock looks a lot more like Holmes without Holmes' patience and vision.That's the thing that always stood out to me. He reminded me of Dante Hall early on as a returner (I'm talking circa 2000) where he would just go full-bore straight ahead, rather than wait for a play to develop.

the Talking Can
07-13-2005, 10:19 PM
Just curious, but is it possible that that's a matter of learning the offense and/or the staff's tendency to go with the more veteran guy on the roster. I remember when Blaylock couldn't get on the field when Mike Cloud was here, and people thought he couldn't run certain plays. Or is it a matter of Johnson being physically unable to do certain things?

I guess that's really a question we'll really get answered in August and onward, when Johnson is the clear #2 back and there's nobody else going in...

LJ can do it, but he's better between the tackles...our OL will have to adjust a bit when the time comes, but AS is smart enough to figure that out..LJ would also kill in Denver's blocking scheme....in some ways he's a bigger Portis, just a tad slower....

Coach
07-13-2005, 10:24 PM
Just curious, but is it possible that that's a matter of learning the offense and/or the staff's tendency to go with the more veteran guy on the roster. I remember when Blaylock couldn't get on the field when Mike Cloud was here, and people thought he couldn't run certain plays. As it turned out, he ended up pretty much fine doing whatever they wanted. Or is it a matter of Johnson being physically unable to do certain things?

I guess that's really a question we'll really get answered in August and onward, when Johnson is the clear #2 back and there's nobody else going in...

I don't think it's the matter of learing the offense, since he had almost at least one full year in 2003, where he rarely played. However, when he was a rookie during the 2003 season, most of us would have to imagine that he probably didn't pick up the offense well enough, which it is a complicated offense to learn. Plus, also factor in the staff's tendency to go with the veteran guy on the roster as well as experience and so on. There were times that I'd rather see Johnson on the field than Blaylock during the 2004 season.

I'm not saying Johnson can't do what they want, which is the Chiefs run many of their favorite perimeter plays, such as sweeps and screens. I think of Johnson as more of the North/South runner/running Tackle plays. But as Phil has mentioned, he did show patience during the perimeter plays, which is encouraging.

I guess we'll have to wait and see how that plays out when training camp arrives. He did look very well-conditioned when we went up to the Chiefs mini-camp on the 18th, if I am not mistaken.

Gravedigger
07-13-2005, 10:33 PM
Johnson is a stronger back then Blaylock he runs harder he can hit a wall and keep going and if he gets into an open field he can jet past defenders. Blaylock would constantly get one or two yard rushes cause he would hit the wall from poor running choice and be done. Id have LJ any day.

Pitt Gorilla
07-13-2005, 10:34 PM
Blaylock was much easier to bring down, IIRC.

arrowhead20
07-13-2005, 11:06 PM
im going with Deuce McAllister as his look alike. Big, strong, Fast, and can catch. im not gonna say anything positive about Eddie George like comparing him to Larry Johnson. George is one of the only Running Backs to get crappier with each passing season.

Logical
07-14-2005, 12:03 AM
To me Blaylock reminds me a lot of Priest, and I mean that. Trouble is I am not sure he would be durable enough. Johnson appears to be durable and is a completely different type of back. If we are talking a 25 to 30 carry back I want LJ, if we are talking a backup to Priest I want Blaylock. I do still feel that LJ is a horrible blocker and is likely to get the QB injured. I noticed that after a couple of games the offensive scheme changed to reduce the importance of LJ as a blocker when we were in passing mode. So the good news is Saunders seemed to be able to develop a scheme to compensate for this weakness.

Rausch
07-14-2005, 12:24 AM
johnson started slow but looked better each time he played.

more upside than blaylock imo

Kind of the way I see it.

Blaylock was a more polished, mature, and experienced player. LJ has far more talent and upside though.

I've got a bet going with a buddy on who'll be better: Steven Jackson (Lambs) or LJ...

SoCalBronco
07-14-2005, 12:54 AM
Kind of the way I see it.

Blaylock was a more polished, mature, and experienced player. LJ has far more talent and upside though.

I've got a bet going with a buddy on who'll be better: Steven Jackson (Lambs) or LJ...

I sure hope you didnt get swindled into taking LJ in that bet, Rausch. LJ showed some things last year, but i think Steven Jackson is really far higher in caliber as between the two.

Rausch
07-14-2005, 12:56 AM
I sure hope you didnt get swindled into taking LJ in that bet, Rausch. LJ showed some things last year, but i think Steven Jackson is really far higher in caliber as between the two.

My hatred for the Lambs is only surpassed by that for the Raiders and Donks...

I can't back away from that bet. :shake:

philfree
07-14-2005, 01:32 AM
I sure hope you didnt get swindled into taking LJ in that bet, Rausch. LJ showed some things last year, but i think Steven Jackson is really far higher in caliber as between the two.


I disagree with that. IMO LJ is a super stud RB. Last year after both Holmes and Blaylock went down LJ kicked arse. If he gets the chance he'll prove he's one of the best backs in the league. Case in point is that going into last season Holmes had a goal to have more 30 plus yard runs. When he went out he had like 1 more then he did the year before. He had maybe two such runs. LJ came in and had several long runs. As good as Holmes is he's not really a home run hitter. LJ may not be as good out of the backfield as a reciever as Holmes or Blaylock but IMO he's a better pure runner then either of those guys. And Jackson's all right but something about him....he doesn't impress me as much as LJ or Holmes.


PhilFree:arrow:

philfree
07-14-2005, 01:39 AM
To me Blaylock reminds me a lot of Priest, and I mean that. Trouble is I am not sure he would be durable enough. Johnson appears to be durable and is a completely different type of back. If we are talking a 25 to 30 carry back I want LJ, if we are talking a backup to Priest I want Blaylock. I do still feel that LJ is a horrible blocker and is likely to get the QB injured. I noticed that after a couple of games the offensive scheme changed to reduce the importance of LJ as a blocker when we were in passing mode. So the good news is Saunders seemed to be able to develop a scheme to compensate for this weakness.

I don't remember him missing any blocks that got Green knocked around when he played last year. I thought our O was actually better the last half of the season when he was the starter.


PhilFree:arrow:

Logical
07-14-2005, 01:52 AM
I don't remember him missing any blocks that got Green knocked around when he played last year. I thought our O was actually better the last half of the season when he was the starter.


PhilFree:arrow:Game Points Passing Yds Priest's RYards RuTDS Rec TDS
Den 24 151 3 0
Car 17 66 1 0
Hou 21 134 0 0
Bal 27 125 2 0
Jax 16 75 0 1
Atl 56 139 4 0
Ind 45 143 3 0
Tam 31 59 1 0 (injured out for season)

Priest Totals 208 892 14 1 over 7.25 games 187 rec yards

Game Points Passing Yds Blaylock's RYards RuTDS RecTDS
Tam 56 398 90 4 0
NOr 28 311 186 1 0
NeP 19 381 58 0 0
SDC 31 208 57 2 0
Oak 34 340 37 0 1
Ten 49 244 51 1 0

Blaylock Totals 217 539 8 1 over 5.25 games 246 rec yards

Game Points Passing Yds Johnson's RYards RuTDS RecTDS
SDC 31 43 1 0
Oak 34 116 1 1
Ten 49 104 2 0
Den 45 151 2 0
Oak 31 79 2 0
SDC 17 46 1 1

Johnson Totals 207 581 9 2 over 5.5 games 278 rec yards

philfree
07-14-2005, 01:59 AM
Game Points Passing Yds Priest's RYards RuTDS ReTDS

Den 24 174 151 3 0
Car 17 187 66 1 0

I'm not sure what what you are trying to illustrate.


PhilFree:arrow:

J Diddy
07-14-2005, 02:01 AM
I'm not sure what what you are trying to illustrate.


PhilFree:arrow:


That, indeed, KFC is better when you go with original recipe.



Hello

Logical
07-14-2005, 02:13 AM
I'm not sure what what you are trying to illustrate.


PhilFree:arrow:

Sorry I hit the wrong key and it submitted I am in the process of submitting all the rest but it is a lot of data so I am going to add a little , then submit add some more submit until I am done. When finished I will quote it and say my piece.

Logical
07-14-2005, 02:52 AM
Game Points Passing Yds Priest's RYards RuTDS Rec TDS
Den 24 151 3 0
Car 17 66 1 0
Hou 21 134 0 0
Bal 27 125 2 0
Jax 16 75 0 1
Atl 56 139 4 0
Ind 45 143 3 0
Tam 31 59 1 0 (injured out for season)

Priest Totals 208 892 14 1 over 7.25 games 187 rec yards

Game Points Passing Yds Blaylock's RYards RuTDS RecTDS
Tam 56 398 90 4 0
NOr 28 311 186 1 0
NeP 19 381 58 0 0
SDC 31 208 57 2 0
Oak 34 340 37 0 1
Ten 49 244 51 1 0

Blaylock Totals 217 539 8 1 over 5.25 games 246 rec yards

Game Points Passing Yds Johnson's RYards RuTDS RecTDS
SDC 31 43 1 0
Oak 34 116 1 1
Ten 49 104 2 0
Den 45 151 2 0
Oak 31 79 2 0
SDC 17 46 1 1

Johnson Totals 207 581 9 2 over 5.5 games 278 rec yards


Point wise yes the Chiefs did not score as many per game when Priest was playing but be honest those defenses are a little tougher than the 2nd half defenses

Rushing yard wise no comparison Priest hands down

TD rushing again pretty good advantage Priest

Receiving TD wise got to go with LJ

Receiving Yds pretty much a tie between LJ and Blaylock

chop
07-14-2005, 04:23 AM
Not sure when it was, but an article from a national writer that I read a few days/weeks ago on here mentioned something about how much we were going to miss Derrick Blaylock because he was a better back than Larry Johnson.


I think you are referring to the information that Sheldon Brown posted after running into Frank Gansz Jr. in the grocery store.

Help me out if I put down the wrong name here.

Bob Dole
07-14-2005, 05:27 AM
[broken record]Blaylock's contribution on ST is going to be missed.[/broken record]

Skip Towne
07-14-2005, 06:04 AM
LJ looks like another John Riggins.

the Talking Can
07-14-2005, 06:10 AM
Kind of the way I see it.

Blaylock was a more polished, mature, and experienced player. LJ has far more talent and upside though.

I've got a bet going with a buddy on who'll be better: Steven Jackson (Lambs) or LJ...

I'll take LJ in that bet...Jackson doesn't have the home run gear.

htismaqe
07-14-2005, 06:20 AM
Point wise yes the Chiefs did not score as many per game when Priest was playing but be honest those defenses are a little tougher than the 2nd half defenses

Rushing yard wise no comparison Priest hands down

TD rushing again pretty good advantage Priest

Receiving TD wise got to go with LJ

Receiving Yds pretty much a tie between LJ and Blaylock

You're using the quality of the opposing defense to illustrate why Priest was better?

I was informed while using the SAME ARGUMENT in bashing Maz, that such and argument was stupid.

Chiefnj
07-14-2005, 06:47 AM
I think the biggest problem with LJ is that the coaching staff doesn't have faith in him. They didn't want him from the start. They have a preconceived notion of him and any weakness he exhibits is probably magnified in their eyes. He definately has more upside than Blaylock and was the fastest back on the field; faster than Holmes.

Phobia
07-14-2005, 06:59 AM
I think the biggest problem with LJ is that the coaching staff doesn't have faith in him. They didn't want him from the start. They have a preconceived notion of him and any weakness he exhibits is probably magnified in their eyes. He definately has more upside than Blaylock and was the fastest back on the field; faster than Holmes.

Are you saying LJ was faster than Holmes? I agree with that. But if you're saying LJ was the fastest out of the 3, I disagree. Blaylock is a burner. He put up a 4.3 at the combine.

Chiefnj
07-14-2005, 07:07 AM
Are you saying LJ was faster than Holmes? I agree with that. But if you're saying LJ was the fastest out of the 3, I disagree. Blaylock is a burner. He put up a 4.3 at the combine.

Solely my opinion:
LJ has the fastest football speed in pads. It's the old track time vs. football time. You put someone in pads and stick a ball under their arm that they have to protect and the track time goes out the window. What was Blaylock's longest run last year? I'd imagine under 25 yards.

In his limited playing time LJ was able to pull away from defenders moreso than Holmes or Blaylock. Holmes has a great initial burst and is money in the bank for runs of 10-20 yards, but he just doesn't seem to break the big ones that much.

In short, yes I'm saying that on the football field LJ is faster than Holmes and Blaylock as a HB. (Although Holmes showed tremendous speed chasing down that corner on the pick that one time).

Coach
07-14-2005, 07:17 AM
Solely my opinion:
In short, yes I'm saying that on the football field LJ is faster than Holmes and Blaylock as a HB. (Although Holmes showed tremendous speed chasing down that corner on the pick that one time).

I remember that incident, even though I forgot what team it was when that happened (I'm guessing the Carolina game, but I do know that it was a home game, for sure). Almost everyone gave up, except for Priest, who was hauling ass, and made the tackle. IIRC, he was on one side of the field, and just practically almost ran the whole football field, just to make that tackle.

That was effort and heart, right there.

Crush
07-14-2005, 07:25 AM
We'll be fine.

Claynus
07-14-2005, 07:58 AM
LJ was ripping off long runs like he was falling off a log. When was the last time we had a RB that can do that? For all his speed, Blaylock rarely got to rip a long one.

KCTitus
07-14-2005, 07:58 AM
You know, if KC gets Ty Law, all of this will be moot.

keg in kc
07-14-2005, 08:01 AM
You know, if KC gets Ty Law, all of this will be moot.It's just too bad that we didn't sign Corey Dillon when we had the chance. That would have nipped all this lunacy in the bud.

keg in kc
07-14-2005, 08:06 AM
It's still weird seeing Jim write positive stuff about Blaylock. I remember yo those years ago when he thought I was nuts saying Blaylock could play. Although I agree about the size issue. And when I say that, I'm talking more about his physique/build than I am about his raw numbers. His 210 doesn't look anything like Priest's 210, at least not from what I've seen over the years.

Regarding the blocking thing, I do believe that's the most difficult aspect of this system for a RB, and I'm not suprised it's taking him time to grasp it. And it's not like Penn State was Air Paterno....

KCTitus
07-14-2005, 08:07 AM
It's still weird seeing Jim write positive stuff about Blaylock...

You mean Johnson, dont you?

keg in kc
07-14-2005, 08:08 AM
You mean Johnson, dont you?No, I meant Blaylock. He was almost as harsh on DB as he was on LJ the first couple of years, back when DB was stuck behind Magnificant Mike Cloud.

StcChief
07-14-2005, 08:13 AM
Kind of the way I see it.

Blaylock was a more polished, mature, and experienced player. LJ has far more talent and upside though.

I've got a bet going with a buddy on who'll be better: Steven Jackson (Lambs) or LJ...

Agree.

LJ - hugh up side, different style runner than Blaylock.

Blaylock will be fine where ever he goes, smart runner quick.
Ran good here behind the best Oline in NFL.

Steven Jackson - could be good, but with Rams line please. His advantage is playing in the awful NFC W conf. Let's see what kinda numbers he puts up against good D.

jynni
07-14-2005, 08:36 AM
I was really impressed with LJ's speed. There were a few times that it looked like the defender was going to catch him and LJ just took off. Several of our WRs have been chased down when it looked like they should have had a break for the endzone. LJ just burned whoever was chasing him.

HC_Chief
07-14-2005, 08:37 AM
Writer was probably a Jets fan.... they're idiots.

keg in kc
07-14-2005, 08:39 AM
Writer was probably a Jets fan.... they're idiots.I think it was someone from out of new york, now that you mention it. :hmmm:

Saul Good
07-14-2005, 09:03 AM
If Johnson learns to be patient and run with his eyes open, he can be a superstar. I don't think I've ever seen a back run into the back on one of his own linemen as often as LJ. That being said, once he gets into the secondary, it's over. The guy looks like a freight train moving down the field. It's almost comical watching the DBs act like they want to tackle him. That guy plowed over DBs and didn't even lose speed doing it. I really hope he is able to learn how to be patient from Priest, because he has all the tools to be great.

tiptap
07-14-2005, 09:04 AM
There was not much difference in the production of all three backs last year for KC. And it is better to have two different running style of backs if your offensive line can adjust. I think LJ is a great compliment to Holmes. The lost, though LJ might prove me wrong, is in the passing game sets. However the deficit, if it exists, will be remedied by having Wilson play in those passing situations that saw Blaylock playing last year. My big concern in the running game is the play at RT and not the running backs.

keg in kc
07-14-2005, 09:04 AM
I don't think I've ever seen a back run into the back on one of his own linemen as often as LJ. How quickly we forget Mike Cloud.

HC_Chief
07-14-2005, 09:04 AM
What never ceases to amaze me is seeing LJ go flying downfield, leaving defenders in his wake. That dude has some serious speed... which is very surprising considering how large a RB he is.

Logical
07-14-2005, 09:14 PM
You're using the quality of the opposing defense to illustrate why Priest was better?

I was informed while using the SAME ARGUMENT in bashing Maz, that such and argument was stupid.Well I tend to be stoopid, but I try to hide it unlike some other posters.:D

keg in kc
07-14-2005, 09:22 PM
The lost, though LJ might prove me wrong, is in the passing game sets.I'm not sure I get that, based on the stats:

Blaylock 2002 (his 2nd season) 5 receptions for 47 yards (9.4 ypc).
Blaylock 2003 (3rd): 15 receptions for 181 yards (12.1 ypc) and 1 TD.
Blaylock 2004 (4th): 25 receptions for 246 yards (9.8 ypc) and 1 TD.

Johnson 2004 (2nd): 22 receptions for 278 yards (12.6 ypc) and 2 TD.

That's a better output in yards, yards/catch and TDs in his 2nd season than Blaylock had at any time in his 4 years. And I'd assume like Blaylock, Johnson will gain a greater grasp of the system the longer he's in it.

Brock
07-14-2005, 09:26 PM
LJ proved a lot of suckas wrong, me included.

jspchief
07-14-2005, 09:27 PM
I don't think I've ever seen a (player) run into the back on one of his own linemen as often as....

When did the conversation switch from RBs to Kawika Mitchell?

keg in kc
07-14-2005, 09:29 PM
LJ proved a lot of suckas wrong, me included.
I didn't think many of us liked the pick at the time.

I don't think he's quite proven yet, though.