Quote
LMU93
I agree. And the eyeball test says Akers is the better all-around back. Absolutely. I just thought it was notable because it was two analytics sources both rating Henderson highly. And by highly I think it's more accurately "efficient" in that when he's on the field with the ball in his hands he's produced.
Akers was going to be more of a "bell cow" RB, though I still think there was going to be a roughly 75/25 load share regardless. Now with Henderson I look at him and think, "could he play, say, 14 games and average 14+ carries/game?" That would be about 200 carries. I think that's reasonable. So the question then becomes who else can give them 100 or so carries. And then a 3rd RB that gives them maybe 40.
The 3rd RB may not and doesn't have to be a RB. It could be a WR.
Last year in the 1st half of the season when Akers was getting up to speed, McVay had Woods carrying the ball more than normal. And Woods was effective.
In addition, every RB McVay has plugged into his scheme has been effective.
In the first 5 games in 2020 where the Rams piled up 698 rushing yards, which was the most by the team since 1987, McVay got good production from Brown, Henderson, Akers, and Woods. All four of them were effective and efficient despite no one being a clear cut #1.
On top of that you add in Gurley and CJ who was also very effective in McVay's offense. They will have a good running game partly because it's a great scheme.
